If you are saying that losing by 30 was an indication of how the traditional lineup was going to fare against the Mavericks over a seven game series, we'll have to agree to disagree. The Spurs not showing up for that game had a of a lot more to do with the final score than AJ pulling Griffin from the starting lineup.
You need to go back and look at Duncan's stat lines for the series against the Mavericks. Nobody was double or triple teaming him. The Spurs didn't hit open jumpers because there were no open jumpers to be had. Another jump shooter was not what the Spurs needed in that series. There's already a formula to beat the 2005 Phoenix Suns, and at least the Suns were smart enough to figure that out.
Sorry, but I started the thread discussion to figure out what to do in the future with personnel decisions, with the assumption of the move of Tim to center. That's a done deal in my opinion based on his recent performance and current physical abilities.
We can't worry about what happened last year since the players have changed already--and basing arguments for next year on last year's roster or performance in the playoffs is a waste of time.
Duncan leaving the game at the 6 minute mark in the 2nd quarter due to foul trouble was the primary culprit.
Apples and Oranges. Dirk is too good of a perimeter offensive player for that to work defensively.
You misunderstand what I mean. I'm talking about the defense the Mavs used against the Spurs. The Spurs turned themselves into a jump shooting team with a dominant big man. The Mavs didn't double and let the big man get his numbers, while limiting the opportunities of the three point shooters.
Duncan left the game due to an offensive foul. You aren't making any headway here.
interesting. with the new rule can we still play one of our big on howard and let him shoot? the way we played phoenix with TD on one of their permieter player? i wish it's possible because Spurs seem to search another big center..
What new rule?
He's saying if Duncan didn't get into foul trouble the big lineup would have done better in game 2. I think we also came out somewhat flat in game 2.
Oh come on, we all know that once you take a center besides Duncan out of the lineup, every lineup is the same.
Rasheed Wallace = Earl Boykins.
I'd like to get off the obsession with last year's Mavs WCF series for a moment. I think we all agree that if a few calls had gone our way or Manu hadn't had a brain fart, we would've won with whatever lineup we used against them. OK?
But let's look at what Tim now brings to the table. Is he really the same PF he used to be? Or is he going to be playing the 5 more and more next year and the remainder of his career?
If you agree with that, then we have a useful starting place for a discussion of who plays the 4. The 3 position is another discussion and has been picked to death, but we've really never had a serious forum on replacing Tim at the 4.
Some folks might want a small 4 and go small ball. That's not my preference. Basketball is still a big man's game because whoever gets the most rebounds wins. So what kind of PF do we want? And who could we get?
But he's implying that Duncan getting into foul trouble is somehow due to Nazr and Rasho being in the game, even though Duncan committed a charge and Horry was the other big in the second quarter, which blows holes in the whole stupid argument. The truth is that any lineup with Duncan in it would have done better at any time, but especially in game 2, when NOBODY but Duncan decided to show up for the game.
You said that you want Duncan to have more outside shooters around him after the Spurs were bounced out by an inferior team due to the fact that all Duncan had around him were outside shooters. Those who refuse to pay attention to history are doomed to repeat it. There's already an established way to defend Duncan and four shooters in a seven game series, because the Spurs did it against Amare and four shooters the year before. And, no we don't all agree with the "if some calls had gone our way" bull . I believe that if the Spurs had played the basketball that won them 63 games no amount of bad calls or bad bounces or anything would have been enough to turn the series.
Saying that you would like a "Rasheed Wallace" type to stand at the ing perimiter is the logic that allowed the Pistons to watch the Finals from home. Rasheed Wallace is one of the best post players in the league when he decides to play there. The one coach that got him to do it won a ring. But by all means, let's abandon the defense that won three championships for the Spurs and one for the Pistons in favor of the philosophy that can't get them to the conference finals.
When you say "assume Duncan moves to center," do you mean that the Spurs organization and the NBA give him the le of "CENTER" and Tim plays the same exact way he has his entire career?
Because basically that is what would be the effect of Tim playing center. He already plays center.
He still doesn't start in the all star game.
Then tell the United States to stop sending computers over to China.
Good point Yao Ming's got too many fans.. as if he's really that good
Exactly. But he was more of a true forward early on, facing up to the basket and working from about 15 feet out. But no longer. So what's our future?
If your two traditional styled centers (Rasho and Nazr) don't play much in the playoffs, you can be sure the move of Tim to the center of the floor is a done deal. Any traditional center we trade for or acquire is going to be his backup, not the starter.
I'd like to explore what kind of player we put beside him on the wing at the 4--and who that player might be since I dont think we have a good PF replacement right now.
Duncan at center isn't small ball at all.
Duncan at center with a legit PF (and not Finley) is way better than Duncan at PF with a legit center.
Why do you say that?
I think one of the main reasons for going that way is that legit centers are a lot harder to come by. But given an equal quality center and PF, I'd rather have the center.
Duncan can't defend well against quick or perimeter oriented PF.
And against quick or perimeter oriented PF, you can't put a center on them.
I'm not going to make any headway because you seem incapable of understanding why having Duncan unable to spend any time guarding the Mavs' 5 is preferable to him not. Duncan would foul out of the game in the 1st half if he started on Dirk. Otherwise you have to count on Rasho or Nazr to guard Dirk or, worse, Howard.
It wouldn't have worked, man. Now either enjoy your day or continue to delude yourself.
Right. We have the legit center now in Tim. He's gonna play there for the rest of his career. Why fight that and settle for some slow-footed oaf that no one else wants? Bring in Javtokas and let him fight for minutes with Oberto at backup.
Now find a legit PF. There's always a lot more of them out there and that makes them easier to find and acquire.
I doesn't matter.
It's all about the matchups and Timmy being at PF still can be put on Centers.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote