Reply With Quote
Nice read Cry Havoc
Great work, CH.
Duncan was simply amazing.
Nice read Cry Havoc
I watched part of this game, Neal needs to get his feet set when he shoots. I know he seems to have the green light, but he takes a lot of off balance shots that he'd be just better off passing up.
Not the first time I see that here but it's not like you don't use a possession when you shoot FT (3 for Ginobili, 1 for Parker).
No against Toronto Ginobili did not score 23 pts out of 13 possessions but more 23 out of 19 possessions which is good but not as spectacular (23 including TO).
So Parker: 14 FGA + 2FTA/2 + 6TO =21 points out of 21 possessions.
Ginobili: 18+3=16 points out of 21 possessions.
5 points on the same number of possession is a big difference in my books.
Then:
Ginobili's 6 assists worth 13 pts.
Parker's 13 assists woth 28 pts
Last edited by mathbzh; 01-22-2011 at 07:43 AM.
Manu C+ is more justified he did play well on defense, had the 6 assists (a few of the spectacular nature) and never pushed the issue and helped close the deal when the Knicks pulled into it. On a night when Parker, Blair and Duncan all had big nights offensively Manu gave us all that we needed. If Manu had hit 8 or 9 instead of 5 shots he might well have earned an A as well.
Cry ing Havoc
Good write-up
I appreciate your grades, but as an official member of the Grammar Police, I particularly appreciate your ability to write well. Thank you from the bottom of my little anal-retentive heart.
Manu is the best player of the best nba team. Now this game was for him one of his worst of the season, the grade is ok.
Contrary to some posters here I don't consider his Defense was particularly impressive.
TP played a good game during the 3 first quarters but nothing spectacular considering his 6 TOs. Nevertheless he had a great fourth and seal the deal, I think he deserves his A.
For the rest despite all this team is still Tim's one. To have a chance in PO we need him to be dominant.
Definitely wouldn't have graded TP with an A. 6 TO's against a running team is pretty much instant points, the thing that bugged me about his TO's was that he was making some of the laziest passes I have seen all season and was absolutely oblivious to how quick the Knicks are able to move into the passing lanes. The first one ok, but 3 more times I think it was where he just sort of lobbed the ball into the passing lane and NY's guards were able to easily jump in front and run. B- for TP, C- for Manu.
So you'd say this game was above average for Manu? So what, precisely, would Manu have to do to earn under a C from you? Shoot 15% with no assists and 14 turnovers?
IMO, Manu is EXPECTED to get assists. He's EXPECTED to wreak havoc on both sides of the ball. If Manu shot better, this game would have been over before the 4th, and we wouldn't have needed him, Tony and RJ to play hard in the 4th to seal the deal.
If you guys want to "expect" 27% shooting from Manu with a really poor selection of shots (even getting BLOCKED from three), that's fine. I expect way, way more of our MVP this year. A C+ game from him would be 20 points on 45% shooting with 4-6 assists and good defense. Because playing good D, creating turnovers, and getting to the stripe are all things Manu SHOULD be doing as the best player on the best team in the NBA. He doesn't need to hit a game winner to get an A from me, he simply needs to play better than he usually does. That definitely was not the case tonight, as evidenced by the fact that Tim and DeJuan had brilliant games and it was still a close game throughout. If Manu plays at a "B" level, this game is over by the mid-point of the 3rd quarter.
One of the ESPN commentators was praising Neal for boxing out Turiaf, allowing Duncan to get several defensive rebounds.
Which begs the question...what kind of line would that be, if 20 pts, 45% shooting, 6 assists, and good defense draws a C+?
Nice write-up!
I commented last game on Blair's inconsistencies. Last night he showed a lot of confidence when he had the ball, great energy on defense, and that will to win and not back down that I remember from him in college. That tenacity is what will allow him to out-perform all of the bigger, taller players he goes up against every game in the NBA. We may be witnessing his emergence, which is awesome.
Vintage Timmy, for sure. He was amazing. I thought I was watching him calmly dismantle the New Jersey Nets from a long ago NBA Finals series. It was a joy to watch.
I think my only critique would be McDyess' grade. His toughness on the court last night was great. That one face-up block he had on Amare alone should have boosted his grade. He completely kept up with the younger post players he was guarding, didn't give an inch, and rebounded like a beast. He's not out there to score 4.8 points per game, so I think we can't pay attention to the stat line too much last night. Had he gone 0 for 10, yeah, I'd of bumped him down some in spite of his stellar court presence, but he did nothing but play smart, inspired ball last night.
I think Tim Plays better when he has a new haircut... don't know if its true, but I just seem to notice it. =)
Tim should get a haircut before all our games against teams over .500!
Hit the link for the whole piece.
http://blog.mysanantonio.com/spursna...-for-the-ages/Why Tim Duncan’s monster game against Knicks was one for the ages
Tim Griffin
...Duncan’s previous game at that level game came in the deciding sixth game of the 2003 NBA Finals when he torched New Jersey for 21 points, 20 rebounds, 10 assists and eight blocked shots in one of the most memorable playoff games in league history.
But making his big night against the Knicks even more remarkable is his age. At 34 years and 271 days, Duncan is the oldest player among that group to accomplish the feat.
...Duncan will go down as one of the NBA’s greatest players. And his game Friday night is a good indication why he still remains as one of the league’s most valuable players three months shy of his 35th birthday.
I missed the entire 2nd half on TV, because my power went out for 3.5 hours last night.
so, good to read this write-up by CH. I haven't yet commented on the new CH game grades, but I like them and always read them. Good writing style too.
This was one of the few games I've seen this season. And boy, did I pick a good one to watch! Everything was there -- from Jefferson grabbing crucial boards, to Prime Minister Blair doing his thing, to the clutch TP teardrop in the 4th, Duncan finishing the break with the slam, and finally the dagger 3. It was breathtaking.
And I even got to yell at the screen in joy (seeing Neal D up guys and box out) and agony (watching Chris Quinn on the court)!
Great writeup. I especially agree with the part about Coach Phil getting angry about our 3s...
let say Parker's "assesment" doesn't seems always fair...
"Well, okay, so it's more like a skyscraper and a large apartment building"
LOL!
Manu deserved his D+ or bumped a bit for COM as C-, Tony perhaps should be getting an A-.
For me, Manu's average/standard grade (C) as Spurs best player is 15-17 pts on atleast 40% FGs, 4-5 Assts, 3-4 Rbs, 1-2 Stls.Which begs the question...what kind of line would that be, if 20 pts, 45% shooting, 6 assists, and good defense draws a C+?
Pretty sweet right up, havent been able to catch many games lately so its always great to read some type of organized summary.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
