Why was POP/FO the only team going wrong way?

[TJastal]

Spurs didn't have to go out and get any one. They already had Ian and Splitter. The fact that they re-signed Bonner and had Splitter rotting on the bench emphasized the mis-calculation (insanity, lunacy, whatever you want to call it) of Pop giving up on size. A line-up of Duncan, Splitter, Dice and Ian would have looked a damn sight better against MEM than TD, Dice, Bonner and Blair.

Oh ya... THREE 7 footers + Dice (who can guard bigger guys) .. yah that would have worked nicely.

[ChumpDumper]

lol Ian

[SenorSpur]

As if the current rotation of bigs is getting it done.

[ChumpDumper]

As if Ian is playing games.

[TJastal]

It's funny. You can't really find any posts of mine actively lobbying for Bonner to play the amount he played. Most of the time I was making fun of insane haters like you who couldn't get their facts straight or just outright lied in their "objective takes."

You're a joke.

Seems to me your the one who actively lobbied against Ian playing and/or resigning, scoffed at ppl who were critical of the Bonner / RJ contracts, scoffed when people suggested earlier in the year that Pop wasn't using Splitter enough.

Now that its all blown up in your face you still strut around here like your hot nit-picking everyone's posts you don't like. ing pathetic really.

[ChumpDumper]

Seems to me your the one who actively lobbied against Ian playing and/or resigning, scoffed at ppl who were critical of the Bonner / RJ contracts, scoffed when people suggested earlier in the year that Pop wasn't using Splitter enough.

Sure it "seems" that way to you because you are blinded by hate. You simply believe what you want to believe.


Ian gets a few minutes this season, then is left off the playoff roster and you formulate a grand conspiracy to try to bolster your belief that Ian is a better basketball player than he actually is.

That's how you work. You're delusional. I scoff at you because you are a fool who fools yourself.

[TJastal]

Sure it "seems" that way to you because you are blinded by hate. You simply believe what you want to believe.


Ian gets a few minutes this season, then is left off the playoff roster and you formulate a grand conspiracy to try to bolster your belief that Ian is a better basketball player than he actually is.

That's how you work. You're delusional.

A few? Try 487 minutes, approx 3X as many minutes as he got in SA. And that's with Chandler & Brenda on the team.

If I were a gambling man, I'd say Ian Mahinmi will be a good chance to become a reliable backup/rotation/starter in this league sometime within the next couple years.

[ChumpDumper]

A few? Try 487 minutes, approx 3X as many minutes as he got in SA. And that's with Chandler & Brenda on the team.

Right. Then he didn't play.

If I were a gambling man, I'd say Ian Mahinmi will be a good chance to become a reliable backup/rotation/starter in this league sometime within the next couple years.

WTF kind of bet is that? You certainly aren't a gambling man when you hedge that ridiculously.

[TJastal]

Right. Then he didn't play.
WTF kind of bet is that? You certainly aren't a gambling man when you hedge that ridiculously.

You all say Ian sucks and isn't deserving of a roster spot. Should be easy money for y'all.

[ChumpDumper]

You all say Ian sucks and isn't deserving of a roster spot. Should be easy money for y'all.

I understand why you have to lie.

[rmt]

SenorSpur, you forgot to mention (in your long post) that even with LA's great length, they went out and got even more length, Ratliff, who Pop shipped out mid-season and who played well for the Bobcats.

Imagine - TD, Splitter, Dice, Ian, Ratliff instead of TD, Dice, Bonner and Blair.

[jjktkk]

SenorSpur, you forgot to mention (in your long post) that even with LA's great length, they went out and got even more length, Ratliff, who Pop shipped out mid-season and who played well for the Bobcats.

Imagine - TD, Splitter, Dice, Ian, Ratliff instead of TD, Dice, Bonner and Blair.

So what you would like is for players like Ratliiff and Mahimni to sit at the end of the Spurs bench? Is that cause it looks real cool and impressive to have 7 footers on the bench, regardless if the 7 footers can play?

[jjktkk]

A few? Try 487 minutes, approx 3X as many minutes as he got in SA. And that's with Chandler & Brenda on the team.

If I were a gambling man, I'd say Ian Mahinmi will be a good chance to become a reliable backup/rotation/starter in this league sometime within the next couple years.

8 years and counting. You and objective really do have a keen eye for talent.

[jjktkk]

You're mising the point, as usual. I'm not suggesting the Spurs had a chance at any of these players. Those are all merely just examples of the how the other contenders responded to the Western Conference "arms" race, that was spurred on by the Gasol trade.

Trades and free agency are not the only ways to upgrade roster size.

And as usual, you never answer my question when you go off about the Spurs FO's inability to obtain a quality big, to pair with Duncan. I'll ask again, who could of the Spurs realistically obtained, giving the restrictions that are in place for the Spurs?

[DesignatedT]

[/B]

8 years and counting. You and objective really do have a keen eye for talent.

Same all over again. In 2009 he was also the #1 roger mason fan on the web and continuously trashed Pop for playing Bogans claiming "Bogans wouldn't play or contribute on any other team in the NBA, only for a senile Popovich" While Pop held the golden key on the bench in Roger Mason.

[ploto]

The Spurs made the decision a few years ago that the league was going away from the traditional center and so they built a line-up accordingly. Unfortunately, they failed to notice that the pendulum had swung back and the top teams have size again.

[Obstructed_View]

I guess what I can't understand is how do you forget the recipe for success when you were the ones who created it?

You answered your own question. The Spurs didn't create the concept of size and defense, but they certainly seem to think they did. When suffering from that kind of hubris, it's probably easy to think you can just come up with a new "formula" for winning. Unfortunately there's only been one.

[TJastal]

8 years and counting. You and objective really do have a keen eye for talent.

Mahinmi was a stick thin 19 year old when he was drafted 6 years ago, and he's barely 24 years old now. Essentially he's the same age as a rookie now. He's going to be an impact player very soon and the spurs should have held onto him because he's exactly what the team needs at a fraction of the cost of a big man with his size/skillset.


(pic of jjktkk talkin' buckets with his cousin Cletus)

[Hoops Czar]

What asset do the Spurs have (or have they had) that even closely resembles a 25 year old lottery pick who averaged 15 ppg and 6 rpg?

George Hill. He might not average 15 and 6 a game, but he is more than capable. If the Spurs can package him for a bigger piece, then its time to send Hill packing. His defense has progressively gotten worst each season and his offense output is sporadic at best. He's peaked.

[ElNono]

My point is that you have to have something to get something and short of the Big 3, the Spurs haven't had much of anything to entice teams to deal with them -- not players, not picks, not space, not prospects.

To be completely honest, they had the chance to trade RJ before last season ended, and also the option not to resign him and retain the cap space to find another piece midway through the season. Same thing with Bonner, who was an expiring last season. McDyess was another asset that could've been moved. They're not huge numbers, but they're decent numbers that put together would have given them some flexibility if that's what they wanted.

The Spurs should also blame themselves up to an extent for the lack of flexibility, when they started offering player options on the last year of quite a few vet contracts (Finley, McDyess, RJ) instead of what the bulk of teams do which is to have partially guaranteed/team options.

All in all, I'm fairly convinced the Spurs just simply thought that what they had was the best they could get at the time, for the style of play they wanted to put out there.

[rmt]

So what you would like is for players like Ratliiff and Mahimni to sit at the end of the Spurs bench? Is that cause it looks real cool and impressive to have 7 footers on the bench, regardless if the 7 footers can play?

The 5 pts/ 4 rebs/ 1.5 blks in 22 mins with intimidation in the lane that Ratliff gave the Bobcats surely looked a damn sight better than Bonner's 6.3 pt/ 3.2 reb/ .2 blk and his "give it to whoever Bonner is guarding" in 21 mins against MEM. He is #18 on the NBA all-time block leader - that's 1 spot ahead of KG.

And yes, I'd take Ian's 3.1pts/ 2.1 rebs/ 0.3 blk in only 8.7 mins over Bonner.

You surely can't think that either Ratliff or Ian would do a worse job defending Randolph/Gasol than Bonner did.

The Spurs made the decision a few years ago that the league was going away from the traditional center and so they built a line-up accordingly. Unfortunately, they failed to notice that the pendulum had swung back and the top teams have size again.

Bingo. Such short-sightedness - the moment Gasol was traded to LA they should have started stock-piling bigs but no, they were stuck on Dirk and PHX.

LA - Gasol/Bynum/Odom/Ratliff
OKC - Ibaka/Perkins/Nazr
DAL - Chandler/Dirk/Heywood/Ian
MEM - Randolph/Gasol/Arthur

Notice the difference.

SAS - TD/Dice/Bonner/Blair

What a disservice to TD to go up against those kinds of big men without any "real" (size) help. What's really sad is that Splitter/Ratliff/Ian are all big men that the Spurs had in their hands and didn't use in favor of Bonner.

[portnoy1]

Their are 2 reasons why the Spurs haven't gotten a Solid shot blocking center or a have played mobile tall PF.

1 - Defensively, Tim cant play against PF's today like Dirk, Odom, Bosh since those guys are mobile and put the ball on the floor. But if he did their would have to be a traditional 7-1 300lb center in the lane taking up space and blocking shots to cover when Duncan or anyone from the Spurs gets beat. Thats pretty much common knowledge though. Look at the Lakers, its worked well for them

2 - This reason gets overlooked alot. If you get a solid bynum-sized center, or play a mobile defensive PF (Splitter) to play next to duncan then that hurts parker on the offensive end since those type players normally cant shoot. Since the 08-09 season, the offense has revolved more and more around Parker and less on Duncan. Parker can get into lane alot easier with space, and his passing game is only effective when he is in the lane, because as we all know he is not a pure playmaker. Because of that Guys like Bonner,Dice will get alot of playing time with Parker because they allow him room to operate without having to work to hard and it also simplifies the offense for him so he doesnt have to work to hard to make decisions. In the Championship years Duncan was alot more involved and could do more damage. Parker however is now the Spurs most consistent scorer and alot of the lineups put on the floor with him make it possible for him to score without too much work.

If the Spurs upgrade at that position (tall order since Pure pgs are gold in a scoring pg league) then all the other positions can play naturally. And the spurs can get a wing defender,a true shotblocking center+Splitter all with Duncan instead of worrying about whether these guys can hit from beyond 17ft.

[FromWayDowntown]

George Hill. He might not average 15 and 6 a game, but he is more than capable. If the Spurs can package him for a bigger piece, then its time to send Hill packing. His defense has progressively gotten worst each season and his offense output is sporadic at best. He's peaked.

If you know all of that, what makes you think that an NBA GM wouldn't think exactly the same things about Hill? And, thinking those things, why on Earth would an NBA GM give up players of the quality discussed earlier in this thread (Kendrick Perkins, Brendan Haywood, Tyson Chandler, Marcus Camby) for that guy?

[rmt]

Their are 2 reasons why the Spurs haven't gotten a Solid shot blocking center or a have played mobile tall PF.

1 - Defensively, Tim cant play against PF's today like Dirk, Odom, Bosh since those guys are mobile and put the ball on the floor. But if he did their would have to be a traditional 7-1 300lb center in the lane taking up space and blocking shots to cover when Duncan or anyone from the Spurs gets beat. Thats pretty much common knowledge though. Look at the Lakers, its worked well for them

2 - This reason gets overlooked alot. If you get a solid bynum-sized center, or play a mobile defensive PF (Splitter) to play next to duncan then that hurts parker on the offensive end since those type players normally cant shoot. Since the 08-09 season, the offense has revolved more and more around Parker and less on Duncan. Parker can get into lane alot easier with space, and his passing game is only effective when he is in the lane, because as we all know he is not a pure playmaker. Because of that Guys like Bonner,Dice will get alot of playing time with Parker because they allow him room to operate without having to work to hard and it also simplifies the offense for him so he doesnt have to work to hard to make decisions. In the Championship years Duncan was alot more involved and could do more damage. Parker however is now the Spurs most consistent scorer and alot of the lineups put on the floor with him make it possible for him to score without too much work.

If the Spurs upgrade at that position (tall order since Pure pgs are gold in a scoring pg league) then all the other positions can play naturally. And the spurs can get a wing defender,a true shotblocking center+Splitter all with Duncan instead of worrying about whether these guys can hit from beyond 17ft.

2. Blair averaged 21.4 minutes (mostly playing with Duncan) this year and he doesn't have a jump shot. Duncan and the perimeter players can take the jump shots. Surely the Spurs can get by with only 1 player on the floor not being able to hit a jump shot. Besides, MEM (and LA if we had gotten there) clogged the lane and Parker didn't get in the lane to dish out (m)any jump shots.

Spurs are not going to trade TP or get a pure PG.

[JonNOKC]

You answered your own question. The Spurs didn't create the concept of size and defense, but they certainly seem to think they did. When suffering from that kind of hubris, it's probably easy to think you can just come up with a new "formula" for winning. Unfortunately there's only been one.

Good take - and while obviously size & defense have long won championships (especially defense) the 99' Spurs moved the league back that direction after the Jordan Bulls had won (6 of 8), of course the Bulls were good defensively and had decent size from a defensive standpoint.