Initial Reaction: Spurs vs. Celtics - Mar. 20

[benefactor]

Like Pop said we need to worry about things we can control.

He can't control the healthy status of Manu and TD but he can control the situation of the backup PG.

Mason SUCKS at backup PG. His ball handling isn't good and he holds the ball so much looking for a screen and his shot that stagnates the offense and nobody else get involved.

Like timvp said since moving to SG Hill is doing a fantastic job concentrating on D but I rather see him as a PG again

Actually Hill looks to have developed some comfort at SG right now, so I'd rather him go back to Vaughn at backup PG and leave Hill at SG with the second unit. At least Vaughn can initiate the offense and not dribble around until the shot clock has 10 seconds left on it...plus he is a good defender and can guard the other teams point while Hill guards the two guard.

Isn't this why we kept Vaughn anyway?

[ducks]

Tony Parker couldn't hit a midrange jumper in that game.

He was 0/8 from 15+ feet.
He was 12/15 from 6- feet.

That could be an explanation for his awful FT shooting.

RuffnReadyOzStyle is the specialist of the TP jumper's form.
Maybe it was one of those games with the pre-Engelland form.

he had no legs he was tired
his last free throw was very short

[ginobilized]

Thanks so much for the effort and thought you put into these posts. Much appreciated!

[PDXSpursFan]

THis game once again demonstrated what I've been saying:

THE MASON PG EXPERIMENT HAS FAILED!!!

I really hope that this is just a temporary arrangement until Ginobili comes back.

[Kermit]

parker isn't running the offense.. he is doing everything because the rest of his cast sucks.

Everything except for making freethrows that could've won his team the game.

[Blackjack]

I saw something different. I saw Tony go hard at Allen and actually hit Allen in the face or neck initially. Then as Allen realizes that he's bit hit and is losing possession, he decides to give TP a little smack back to the face and they both end up getting hit. I may be totally wrong, but that was my interpretation of that little thing.

That thing was part of the nastiness that game developed. Tim and Perkins were battling down low and got in each other's face. You could tell after that encounter that they both wanted to guard the other and go at him each time offensively the rest of the game.

Then later, Gooden got tied up with someone down low and they had a little "wanna be startin' something?" moment.

Before it seemed like they were just two really good teams playing each other - not rivals really and marketed by the league as "the past two champs" - but now if they meet again they will have enough of a history to make it an absolute war.

Whether Tony fouled him or not, wasn't really the point I was trying to get at. The fact is, it was a big momentum/point-swing in the critical first 5 minutes or so of the 3rd quarter. A point in the game that usually goes a long way in deciding the outcome.

The bull I referred to, was the foul not being called until Tony had clear sailing and the official being forced to make a call when Tony hit the floor. If it was a foul on Tony, why did the whistle not blow until the possession essentially had changed hands? I suppose I'd just like to see refs make the call if and when they actually see the foul.

It was just one of a few questionable calls that were costly for the Spurs (Tim getting fouled and/or the ball being knocked out of bounds from him by Big Baby, that inevitably winded up in a Celtics score after winning possession of the cop-out jumpball call, being another) but nothing I'm going to blame for the loss after witnessing some of the worst shooting (3-point. mid-range, and free-throw) by this Spurs team in a long damn time.

[Blackjack]

I really don't understand all the meltdown after this game. Was the free throw debacle bad? Of course it was...but by the reaction of some posters here you'd think we got blown off the floor all night long.

Tony couldn't hit a jumper(or his FT's late), we bricked a bunch of wide open threes, Manu is in a suit and Gooden is still pretty green....AND WE STILL ALMOST WON. Take your heads our of your asses, all of you.

You're one of a handful of posters that I usually seem to be on the same page with, but there's really no moral victory to be had from this loss. The Spurs did just about everything they needed to do to win this game, yet still lost. It's the type a game you expect from mediocre to bad teams, finding a way to lose, not win.

The only thing that's leaving me with any hope, big picture, is that I honestly believe the talent and toughness is there for this team to win a championship. If they could just get "whole" and get to see this teams true potential come to fruition, I'd love this teams chances. Even with a dinged up Duncan, if Manu and Tony are right? I feel pretty comfortable that Tim can play a big enough role that his injury wouldn't be as devastaing with the amount of talent surrounding him on this incarnation of the Spurs.

The Boston game was basically just a microcosm of what has been an overall pretty frustrating season.

[SpursDynasty]

I was pleased with this game because of our FG% defense. We are now 8th in the league in FG% defense.

With all of our health problems this season, to be 2nd in the league in PPG allowed, 8th in FG% defense, and 2nd best record in the West as of March 21? We'll take it.

With our ability to hold opponents to such low scoring, all we need in the postseason is for Bonner, Mason, Parker, and Manu to get hot from the field at the right times. TD will be there postseason, always has been...the Spurs are the favorites to win the championship.

[timvp]

The Boston game was basically just a microcosm of what has been an overall pretty frustrating season.

I can't really label this season as frustrating. Unless what you are labeling the injuries as frustrating.

The actual play has been about as good as could be expected considering that Ginobili has missed most of the season and both TD and TP have also missed games with injury. If you told me the injury woes the Spurs would face before the season, I'd think there'd be no way to get the second seed.

[timvp]

THE MASON PG EXPERIMENT HAS FAILED!!!

Eh, it's just more proof that Pop can't coach backup point guards. Mason was actually pretty damn good as a starter earlier in the season. He was also really good as a point guard when with the Wizards.

But Pop just doesn't seem to understand that you can't yank around the backup point guard and expect them to produce consistently. If you destroy the confidence of the backup point guard, there's not enough time on the court to regain that confidence. As a result, you get that neutered type of play we saw out of Mason last night.

Pop needs to pick either Mason or Hill and just let them play. Micromanaging their every possession and benching them after mistakes is just going to result in a creating yet another failed backup point guard.

Then Spurs fans can come tell timvp that he's wrong and that Pop just hasn't spent enough money on a backup or whatever excuse they use to pretend his obvious coaching weakness doesn't exist

[Blackjack]

I can't really label this season as frustrating. Unless what you are labeling the injuries as frustrating.

The actual play has been about as good as could be expected considering that Ginobili has missed most of the season and both TD and TP have also missed games with injury. If you told me the injury woes the Spurs would face before the season, I'd think there'd be no way to get the second seed.

Frusrtating, is frustrating.

Yeah, the effort and defense wasn't frustrating, but losing games (as opposed to being beaten/feeling you've been beaten) is almost as frustrating as the injuries and inability to get a read on what this teams true potential is.

Yes, the season has been frustrating because of injuries and the inabilty to see this team at full-strength. I read your response as saying, "I can't really label this loss (Boston game) as being frustrating." My bad.

[timvp]

Oh and the answer isn't Jacque Vaughn. He's decent during the regular season but he's a huge liability in the playoffs. Especially since the Spurs will likely need scoring, athleticism and energy with the Big Three not being the Big Three of the past, Vaughn just doesn't fit the needs.

The best part about Vaughn is that he doesn't let Pop affect his confidence or tenacity ... but his skill level has regressed to the point that he's not a championship level player anymore.

[timvp]

Frusrtating, is frustrating.

Yeah, the effort and defense wasn't frustrating, but losing games (as opposed to being beaten/feeling you've been beaten) is almost as frustrating as the injuries and inability to get a read on what this teams true potential is.

I don't know, to me the Spurs have stolen about the same amount of games they should have lost as they have given away that they should have won. When the Spurs have been in survival mode for most of the season, "frustrated" doesn't describe how I feel about the Spurs currently having the second seed.

But maybe that's just me . . .

[Blackjack]

Oh and the answer isn't Jacque Vaughn. He's decent during the regular season but he's a huge liability in the playoffs. Especially since the Spurs will likely need scoring, athleticism and energy with the Big Three not being the Big Three of the past, Vaughn just doesn't fit the needs.

The best part about Vaughn is that he doesn't let Pop affect his confidence or tenacity ... but his skill level has regressed to the point that he's not a championship level player anymore.

Very well said.

Yeah, when he comes in? He looks and acts like a "player", but then you see him try to finish around the rim or taking shots (that would be good shots for most) that are ill-advised coming from him.

[Blackjack]

I don't know, to me the Spurs have stolen about the same amount of games they should have lost as they have given away that they should have won. When the Spurs have been in survival mode for most of the season, "frustrated" doesn't describe how I feel about the Spurs currently having the second seed.

But maybe that's just me . . .

I can't look at standings or where the Spurs are seeding-wise, and take any solice. It's just the way I am. Everything I look at is with an eye at the big picture.

Is it suprising, or pretty noteworthy, how they've been able to achieve the 2 seed this late in the year? Absolutely.

Does having the 2 seed really make me feel all that more optimistic about winning the championship if the Lakers are the 1 seed? Not so much.

I agree that the Spurs have had their fair share of fortune this year, and maybe being frustrated isn't something most fans should feel, but it is what it is when you follow a championship-caliber team day-in-day-out for a number of years so closely.

I'm spoiled like most...

It's championship or bust.

[LEONARD]

I was pleased with this game because of our FG% defense. We are now 8th in the league in FG% defense.

With all of our health problems this season, to be 2nd in the league in PPG allowed, 8th in FG% defense, and 2nd best record in the West as of March 21? We'll take it.

With our ability to hold opponents to such low scoring, all we need in the postseason is for Bonner, Mason, Parker, and Manu to get hot from the field at the right times. TD will be there postseason, always has been...the Spurs are the favorites to win the championship.

You're dumb

[Whisky Dog]

No more time for moral victories. The Spurs failed to execute down the stretch and lost a game they needed at home.

[Capt Bringdown]

But Pop just doesn't seem to understand that you can't yank around the backup point guard and expect them to produce consistently. If you destroy the confidence of the backup point guard, there's not enough time on the court to regain that confidence. As a result, you get that neutered type of play we saw out of Mason last night.

I agree, and I think that you're on to something here. Pop's mishandling leads to "nuetered play," which must contribute in some way to our infamous offensive droughts. Players start worrying about not making mistakes instead of playing the game. Negativity in other words.

I guess there's some fields of work where micro-management is necessary...I certainly hope my airline pilot is a stickler for details. But in general I don't think it's a very productive approach for most things in life, including basketball.

[NFGIII]

Mason was already in. I would have kept Bowen on the court. If not Bowen, then Hill. If not Hill, then Udoka. If not Udoka, then Manu in his suit.

That point really confused me, too. Finley coming in for Bowen. And the O promptly went south. I sure wish we could get an explaination from Pop about why he puts Finley on the court in these situations, especially when he isn't having aparticularly good game as he was against Boston. Is it his inability to trust the younger players and/or his "vet" preference? I dunno but it is frustrating at times to see Finley trot out late 4th Q when he isn't having a good game that night. I would think it best to let him finish out on the bench rather than have him out there bricking it up.

This one really hurt since I would probably bet that in most games like this we would get the W. I can't see TP and Finley going 0-6 in the last couple of minutes ever again. I was jsut amazed that they shot that way.

Our D seems to be picking up lately and probably due in no small way to Bowen's reappearance. I agree with you Timvp that is seems that Pop is still experimenting with the finishing lineups. Hopefully by playoff time he will have made a decision about who can finish out these types of games.

I still have faith in this team but it is being severely tested at times.