Reply With Quote
FWD, once again, a fantastic post.
Did you just sleep through that Sacramento series where Rasho and Nazr were completely useless to the Spurs? Pop's decision to go small was as much about the fact that Rasho and Nazr did little or nothing that was worthwhile against Sacramento and carried that through the first two games against Dallas.
Honestly -- do you really believe that Rasho and Nazr were just going to flip a switch after Game 2 and suddenly shut down the paint after they had basically failed as a tandem to do that in pretty much every significant game for last year's team?
I'm not entirely convinced that Pop wanted to go small during the Dallas series; I'm almost completely convinced that Pop believed that he had no choice but to go small at that juncture, because his centers were so amazingly ineffective.
FWD, once again, a fantastic post.
It's been a while, but from what I remember it was Shareef attacking Tim in the post that did most of the damage for the Kings.
How exactly were Nazr/Rasho getting schooled, other than not putting up big stats...which isn't something they're expected to do really.
Malik Rose was not a starter on either of the 2 champioship runs...... so your tellin me if the trade never happened the fith or sixth best player after finnley woulda made a differnce in a one point game aginst the mavs, oh and he and Rasho(who woulda been the starter by the way without getting Nazr) woulda beat the Pistons last year and grabed first in the west this year ? I dont think so.. Look lets face it it wasnt Pops small ball or a trade 3 years ago that lost the game 7 aginst the mavs, I hate to say it but Manu and the refs cost us the championship last year
No, I didn't sleep through that Sac series. I also remember Bonzi Wells and Kevin Martin getting to the rack whenever they wished during that series.
The defensive concept is simple. Either the guards have to stay in front of their man to cut off offensive penetration or the bigs have to help out closing off the lane. There's no question the tandem of Rasho and Nazr were ineffective during the entire playoffs. This exposed weaknesses with the Spurs perimeter defense.
All I'm saying is that is wasn't just the interior defense that was suspect during the playoffs - the weaknesses in perimeter defense (save for Bowen) were exposed as well. I wished the Spurs could have somehow gotten help there during the offseason.
What was killing the Spurs in that series was the fact that they didn't rebound the basketball. Bonzi Wells, Ron Artest, Kevin Martin, Kenny Thomas owned the glass in large parts of that series and the Spurs were on the ropes because of it. As the series progressed, Nazr and Rasho couldn't rebound the ball to save their lives, and I think in large part because the bigs were so soft on the defensive glass, Sacramento got offensive board after offensive board and boatloads of second chance points. Even if they rebounded, the notion that Rasho and Nazr could deny penetration and make a team a jump shooting team was severely challenged by the way the Kings attacked the Spurs -- and Rasho and Nazr were completely unable to provide any kind of resistance against the Kings' effort. In fact, their ineffectiveness was so pronounced that Pop stopped using them IN THAT SERIES.
Minutes by game vs. Sacramento (starter bolded)
Game 1 -- NM 25; RN 24
Game 2 -- NM 24; RN 13
Game 3 -- NM 10; RN 18
Game 4 -- NM 18; RN 23
Game 5 -- NM 1; RN 11
Game 6 -- NM 2; RN 14
It's the middle of July; the Spurs won't offically bounce a basketball until the beginning of October.
A million things can happen between now and then.
So, again, how exactly is it that Rasho and Nazr were going to have anything to do with making Dallas a jump shooting team when they had no success making the less-athletic Kings a jump shooting team? Until you can answer that question in some persuasive way, you'll never convince me that Pop made a tactical mistake by going away from Rasho and Nazr.
I don't disagree with you there -- but as the counter above notes, your argument hinted that you believe Pop erred tactically by taking Rasho and Nazr out of the rotation. I ask again -- how exactly is it that you expected Rasho and Nazr to cover for those weaknesses against Dallas when they were basically invisible against a less-athletic Kings team?
This is reason #1 the Butler signing is so important. Maybe getting too far ahead, but I don't see anybody on Dallas able to handle him. They had trouble enough with Duncan, now we're adding another gifted interior scorer.
I see worlds of foul trouble ahead for them.
I had to wait until after my post-playoff depression to fully understand this well-stated point.
Pop's decision to not play our two centers in the Dallas series had little to do with a sudden commitment to small ball as much as it had to do with the simple ineffectiveness of Rasho and Nazr's game.
Same is true regarding the widely-held salary conspiracy theory and Pop not playing Nazr in attempt to keep his value down.
Nazr stunk, Rasho stunk, and therefore they didn't play. Their suckiness dictated Pop's rotation decisions as much as the league's progression towards small ball lineups. And I don't think at any point Pop thought "I think I'll sit Nazr in an attempt to keep his market value lower." If anything he was probably regretting not being able to showcase his two centers for trade and sign-and-trade offseason possibilities.
I'm glad the Spurs organization is attempting to keep this team evolving (for the better) and that they've signed a couple of role player centers who might better fit this new team concept.
Considering the teams options I think they made out about as well as they could have. If you figure that our two previous centers had statlines consisting of all goose eggs those last few games of the season I can't see these two new guys being any worse.
uhm, isn't this a beat writer from NY? It should be obvious why we didn't keep Rose, the same reason they don't want him anymore
Wow, Spurstalk revisionist history in full effect on this one....
Look, the idea that Nazr and Rasho sat in the Dallas series due to some ineffectiveness exhibited in games 1 and 2 of that series is a myth.
Game 1 of that series Pop had already committed to small ball. This where myself and others began the criticism of him. Everyone here hangs on to this idea that the sudden insertion of Devin Harris into the Mavs starting lineup in game 2 killed the use of them off is sorely misguided.
Pop started Robert Horry in game *1* of the Dallas series. He played 33 minutes next to Duncan. He came up with 5 points, 9 boards in his PT. Conversely, Nazr and Rasho got a combined 10 minutes and came up with 3 boards.
Game 2, neither big saw the court until the Spurs were down 14 points, and the rout was on. Everyone here seems to love to blame Nazr for not coming in and single-handedly stopping a streaky shooting team that was streaking at that time.
After that point, neither saw the court again except pre-game warmups.
From Way Downtown usually has pretty solid takes, but you've missed the boat on stating that their poor play carried over from the Sacramento series to the first two of the Mavs series. This simply was not the case.
Judging them for their play in the Sacramento series also seems a little misguided. Using that series as a benchmark, Bowen shouldn't have been getting much run in the Mavs series either.
The simple matter is every year the Spurs have failed to win the le Pop always develops his 'dog house' players throughout the course of the series, and this post-season it was lucky numbers 2 and 8 that found themselves there.
Speed/quickness will beat size. I'll take that bet all day.
Unfortunately, I can't tell you if his decision was a tactical error or not because I don't know. I will tell you this. The Spurs were already at a decisive disadvantage in the rebounding department even before the series versus the Mavs. The decision to go exclusively "small" only exacerbated the rebounding differential.
Two of their 4 losses in that series (Games 3 and 4 if I remember correctly) were directly related to their inability to secure rebounds in the final seconds of close ball games - while using a smaller lineup. My only criticism of Pop there is that I would have rather seen him utilize a bigger lineup in those type situations.
As for the Sac series, Rasho is a decent shot-blocker. I would have rather seem him foul out of games against the Kings contesting shots, instead of watching Wells, Martin, Artest and others constantly getting to the rim. Of course, that would require Rasho becoming aggressive - but I digress.
The bottom line is they lost the series. If they hadn't we wouldn't be having this debate. As fans, we have the right to second-guess coaching decisions. However the truth is we'll never know if his decision to go the "small ball" route was a tactical error or not.
Last edited by SenorSpur; 07-21-2006 at 04:31 PM.
That would explain why that two-headed center tandem is no longer here. I hope the next duo can be even more effective. The overall upside is they are younger, cheaper and hopefully more active.
And so will Dallas, which is why Diop + Dirk led them to +25 on the offensive glass while we played Finley and Bowen at the 4.
Its alright. Intelligent minds think alike.
You'd have me if Horry hadn't also started Games 5 & 6 vs. Sacramento and if that decision hadn't been predicated almost exclusively on how poorly Rasho and Nazr were playing by the end of that series. In Game 1 of the Dallas series, Pop just carried over the lineup and rotations that he had been using at the end of the Sac series. That exclusion of Rasho and Nazr from that lineup and that rotation were, IMO, the product of the complete ineffectiveness of either Rasho or Nazr.
What the remainder of the Dallas series showed was that Robert Horry was also unable to play effectively.
Again, I think that's because Pop had already figured out that there wasn't a damned thing that Rasho or Nazr could do to make a difference against Dallas. I think the decision to go small was entirely a matter of the iden ies of the bigs who were available and the style of play that had taken over at that point. Different bigs very well might have been part of the plan; those bigs weren't playing because they hadn't been very good in the run-up to that series.
So, is your argument then that despite the fact that Rasho and Nazr had been pretty much shelved by the end of the Sacramento series, Pop should have given it the old college try and reinserted them against Dallas just to see what would have happened?
My point is that after the first 4 games of the Sacramento series, Pop had plenty of reason to think that Rasho and Nazr were going to be equally dreadful (if not more so) in a series with the Mavericks. I'd think that trying them again would have been a fairly frivolous effort on Pop's part; the thought that Rasho and Nazr were going to be in any way effective against that Dallas team playing a smaller lineup strikes me as fanciful at best.
I don't think it was just the Sacramento series that led Pop to his conclusion that Rasho and Nazr would prove unhelpful. But I think the doubts that Pop had were certainly reinforced in that series.
Bowen is a different question for a number of reasons.
And if Pop exercised some sort of extreme level of patience and gave Nazr and Rasho regular season-type burn against the Mavericks, only to discover that neither could do a damned thing against the Mavs, I'm sure the cavalry would have come calling for Pop's head for not making the move sooner.
I honestly don't believe that Pop puts his ego in front of his team's chances for success; I don't know that his players would allow it. If there's a guy on the bench who can help the club, that guy usually plays. Guys who don't play usually don't play because they're perceived to be unhelpful. Again, I don't see anything that would lead me to conclude that Rasho and Nazr would have done anything helpful against Dallas in that playoff series -- in part at least because they couldn't do it against Sacramento.
Last edited by FromWayDowntown; 07-21-2006 at 05:05 PM.
Actually part of me was wondering why Pop didn't continue with the Oberto experiment.
IIRC, he did quite well in that match.
Malik Rose Sucks.
WTF?
Why is this guy writing about Malik Rose? damn Kerrville times reporters need to stay current. As was pointed out we won a le without Rose, and i fully supported ditching him since he wasn't playing up to his salary.
You offered nothing to show what has been proven time and time again. Kinda hard to understand much of anything you are saying.
I don't think Miami agree with that Notion.
You are so right: but POP also felt good, real good, about doing it.
Regarding the Malik Rose article, I have one thing to say: sour grapes. This was done long time ago... and we won a championship in between with Nazr as our starting center.
FWD,
I agree with you that rebounding was the big issue in both the Sacramento and Dallas series. What I completely disagree with you is that Nazr or Rasho were the problem, and furthermore, that Horry, Finley, Barry and/or Bowen playing PF was the solution.
Let's take a look at this issue more closely. The following is the list of best defensive rebounders in the playoffs, sorted by defensive rebound percentage, i.e. the total number of defensive rebounds they got as a function of the total number of rebounding opportunities.
The best defensive rebounder is, not surpringsinly, Tim Duncan. The second and third best are Rasho and Nazr, in that order. Perhaps more telling is that neither Horry, nor Finley are exceptional defensive rebounders, in fact the rebound at almost the same rate than our starting SG. That is horrid for our PF and SF, and we got beaten badly on the glass precisely because of this. Lastly, but not least, it is imperative for the Spurs system that they get size and rebounds in the paint to compensate and balance the team because our starting SF is one of the worst defensive and offensive rebounders in the league, and he gets a significant amount of playing time (this is not a knock on Bruce, he is what he is and he brings other positive aspects to the game, but it forces you to compensate and balance the team out).Code:Player DR DRC DR%* Duncan 104 424 24.5% Rasho 23 116 19.8% Nazr 16 93 17.2% Horry 29 217 13.4% Finley 48 367 13.1% Gino 50 388 12.9% Barry 29 277 10.5% Bowen 22 400 5.5% DR: total defensive rebounds DRC: total defensive rebounds chances DR%: percentage of defensive rebounds * Source: http://www.82games.com
Let's take a look now at how the Spurs attack the offensive glass and created further opportunities in the playoffs.
The first thing you notice is how good Nazr is on the offensive glass... his percentage doubles the second best in the team. The second point is that Horry is still pretty good on the offensive glass, even better than Tim and Rasho. The last point worth mentioning is that Finley, Barry and Bowen are horrid offensive rebounders, and they managed to combine for one more offensive rebound that our starting SG.Code:Player OR ORC OR%* Nazr 15 80 18.8% Horry 19 192 9.9% Duncan 33 398 8.3% Rasho 7 100 7.0% Gino 9 341 2.6% Bowen 6 363 1.7% Barry 3 254 1.2% Finley 1 317 0.3% OR: total offensive rebounds ORC: total offensive rebounds chances OR%: percentage of offensive rebounds * Source: http://www.82games.com
There were certainly other aspects to the game than just rebounding, but weakness getting defensive and offensive rebounds was an undeniable factor in both playoff series. In past playoffs, the Spurs almost always enjoyed a significant advantage in rebounds, but this year this was not the case.
There are other things that should had been done differently. In the Dallas series, Horry and Oberto deserved more playing time getting under Dirk's skin. Play them extensive minutes on him, even if they foul out... they were our two best match ups, and they would have freed other players to more reasonable defensive assignments, avoiding doubling too much. Putting a player 6 inches shorter on Dirk was a huge mistake, and allowed the Mavericks to break the Spurs defense repeatedly.
I blame this faux pas on Pop; he simply failed to strategically impose his will and force the Mavericks to adapt to the Spurs. The Spurs had to navigate in unchartered waters and improvised a permeable and soft defensive scheme in the middle of the playoffs away from what they had done all year long. This was an unforgiving sin.
To put it in clear terms:
SMALL BALL!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions