Sad To Say But Clearly Tim and Tony Are The Problems

[quentin_compson]

The best solution would be to leave Tony and Tim in the starting lineup alongside michael finley, matt bonner, and and Roger Mason Jr. Then our second unit of George Hill, Manu Ginobili, Richard Jefferson, Bogans and Antonio McDyess. Try this for a couple a days and see which unit gets you more games and better results overall. Clearly the 2nd unit will ALWAYS outperform the 1st one. And for all you stupidass fans who keep saying oh its just one game and its early..Wake the up! Its the Western ing Conference! Theres little room to experiment and s just cus pop cant realize that tim and tony should not take up too many shots when they are struggling. Tim was productive somewhat yesterday but its pathetic to see how we have to work for everything becuz we have to set up the ball for him all the time. You have Jefferson as a main weapon too you know..use him!

Yeah, because it is a very good thing to have a S5 that ALWAYS (as you put it) gets outperformed by the second unit.

Sure, why not start the game with three defensive liabilities (Fin, Bonner, Mason J.). Maybe the guys we play will laugh so hard at us pulling the same as last year they will actually forget to score.

And Tim wasn't "somewhat productive" against OKC, he just played great. If the Spurs had gotten him more shots in the fourth, they might have ended up with a win.

[angelbelow]

I think people are forgetting that, for a long time, Tony and Tim WERE the offense. For years now everything has run through them with a couple of spot up shooters and Manu off the bench. That's the style of play they're used to and it's going to take a while to get that fixed.

It was clear last night that the guys like George Hill and Richard Jefferson were not getting the ball in the same places that they did in the previous games. Also, Tim didn't do as good of a job clearing out of the lane when guys were cutting in as the replacements did (sometimes it worked out, sometimes it cluttered the cutter). Tony took more shots than I would have liked but no more than he has been for many seasons now.

I also thought this game was just one the Spurs blew. Lots of inside shots that just didn't fall that would have been huge. And did anyone keep track of how many times the Spurs turned over the ball driving into the lane? Not to mention the Thunder had a player (see: Refs) that was able to get the team uncontested shots from the free throw line all night.

The only thing that really bothered me was the defense. When certain players are in, the Spurs play great team defense. I don't think I have to name any names.

Also agree with everyone that thought Manu should have been in at the end, regardless to how he'd played.

this is a good post

[My Fault]

Lol @ bring an all-star PG off the bench. Why do some Spurs fans seem to wanna throw the craziest of things out there after every lost. Seriously watch some more basketball other than the Spurs more often and maybe some of you will get a grip of the game of basketball.

[ElNono]

Lol @ bring an all-star PG off the bench. Why do some Spurs fans seem to wanna throw the craziest of things out there after every lost. Seriously watch some more basketball other than the Spurs more often and maybe some of you will get a grip of the game of basketball.

I watched the Clippers beat OKC today. Does that count?

[SA210]

The spurs will not win with tim and Tony consuming all the shots. They take away from better athletic players like Jefferson and George Hill. The defense sets in when we post up tim. Tim should not be our main weapon anymore. On to parker. He is coming off an injury but this same happened last year. We lost him for 5 games or so and plugged in George. We were getting team chemistry goin and then Tony comes bak and messes that up to. Tony should focus on distributing to better and healthier players when his game aint going on as opposed to trying to break off his shooting rust..pathetic. RJ dissapears thanks to Tim and Tony. RJ shouldnt adjust to Tim and Tony..Tim and Tony must adjust to him and the rest of T.E.A.M

[SA210]

I agree with the notion that this isn't a player personnel problem. It's a coach problem.

[spurs4real]

i posted about this same theory on Tony Parker wanting to be like Iverson, I said back then he needs 8 to 9 assists per game in order for his shooting attempts not to hurt us. I said back then trade him while we can get a couple of players mayve even a first round pick for him while we still can.

[AFBlue]

Problem?!?!

The Spurs have too many good or great players...that's a of a "problem". The Spurs FO brought in no less than three legitimate talents that deserve any number of touches on offense. That's added to a "big 3" that already dominates the ball.

It's no wonder that less than 10 games into the season the Spurs (players AND coaches) haven't exactly figured out how to get everyone the touches they need and when. But obviously Pop is trying (starting out different lineups and working with different combinations). Give the man some time!

Same message for the players...the new guys are trying to find there way, but the adjustment will take just as much time for the team vets.

Seriously...people need to stop overreacting to early chemistry issues. It will work itself out and the pure talent level on this team won't allow for the Spurs not to be in the thick of the playoff hunt when all is said and done.

[senorglory]

W.t.f.?

[Bukefal]

Tony is trying to run this team like he did the last months of last season. But with these new players and new rotations, it isnt working out (yet). Again, it needs time, they need to adjust.

[portnoy1]

Tony is trying to run this team like he did the last months of last season. But with these new players and new rotations, it isnt working out (yet). Again, it needs time, they need to adjust.

You say time. But time has already shown what to expect. Remember Michael Finley of 04-05 with the Mavs. He was 31 at the time i think. He could shoot the 3 obviously, but he could drive and post and hit midrange pull up jumpers. Immediately once he came to the spurs he became a spot-up shooter that could put the ball on the floor if nessecary. As the seasons with the spurs progressed on he became nothing more than a spot up shooter with additional abilities lost due to non use. RJ is practically the same just not as good a shooter but more athletic. He can drive, post and hit the midrange jumper off the dribble. Sound Familiar? If Pop doesnt take over the playcalling, RJ in a year or 2 will be a s of his former self. Just like a spur Named Finley who we now bash, but at one time were excited to have. Will that be RJ's fate? its up to TP/Pop.

[mosdef17]

I have been thinking it would be good to see RJ play with the 2nd unit off the bench. You can either leave Manu in 2nd unit too or start him. I was thinking start him. I really like the second unit of:

McDyess
Blair
Jefferson
Mason/Finley?
Hill

They played well together when our stars were out vs. Dallas and the Raptors.

I didn't read this whole thread so I'm sorry if someone else already suggested this.

[Mel_13]

You say time. But time has already shown what to expect. Remember Michael Finley of 04-05 with the Mavs. He was 31 at the time i think. He could shoot the 3 obviously, but he could drive and post and hit midrange pull up jumpers. Immediately once he came to the spurs he became a spot-up shooter that could put the ball on the floor if nessecary. As the seasons with the spurs progressed on he became nothing more than a spot up shooter with additional abilities lost due to non use. RJ is practically the same just not as good a shooter but more athletic. He can drive, post and hit the midrange jumper off the dribble. Sound Familiar? If Pop doesnt take over the playcalling, RJ in a year or 2 will be a s of his former self. Just like a spur Named Finley who we now bash, but at one time were excited to have. Will that be RJ's fate? its up to TP/Pop.

Utterly ridiculous. You do realize that there are resources available to test your theories before you post them?

Let's distill this post down to the essential two points:

1. The Michael Finley the Spurs signed in 2005 still possessed a diverse offensive game and the Spurs turned him into a spot up shooter.

2. The first eight games of the 09-10 season point to the same fate for RJ.

The first point is absolutely wrong and there are several years of data to prove it. The second point is based on a very small sample size, but the statistics available support an opposite conclusion.

First on Finley. The Finley you say existed in 2004-05 was last seen in 01-02 or 02-03. 82 games has stats going back to the 02-03 season. The following list shows the percentage of Finley's shots that are jump shots compared to close-in shots (jump shots first):

02-03 80/20
03-04 87/13
04/05 89/11

05/06 90/10
06/07 91/9
07/08 93/7
08/09 90/10
09-10 92/8

Finley had stopped getting opportunities close to the basket long before he joined the Spurs. He had also transitioned to the 3 pt game years before he left Dallas. In the five seasons from 97-98 through 01-02, Finley took between 15%-18% of his shots from beyond the 3 pt line. In 02-03 the percent went up to 27% and then was 32% in both 03-04 and 04-05. In his career with Spurs, 3 pointers have accounted for 42% of Finley's shots.

So the changes in Finley's game were clearly well established for at least two seasons before his arrival in San Antonio.

Second, the notion that the a similar fate awaits RJ. We only have eight games worth of data as a Spur to compare to his recent history, but let's see what it tells us.

Jump shot/close in percentages:

06-07 63/37
07-08 62/38
08-09 73/27
09-10 62/38

So, to the extent that one can draw any conclusions from such a small sample size, the percentage of shots that RJ is taking close to the basket perfectly tracks his last three full seasons. As to three pointers, they represented 24% of all his shots in 08-09 and 26% of his shots this year.

Theories debunked.

[portnoy1]

Utterly ridiculous. You do realize that there are resources available to test your theories before you post them?

Let's distill this post down to the essential two points:

1. The Michael Finley the Spurs signed in 2005 still possessed a diverse offensive game and the Spurs turned him into a spot up shooter.

2. The first eight games of the 09-10 season point to the same fate for RJ.

The first point is absolutely wrong and there are several years of data to prove it. The second point is based on a very small sample size, but the statistics available support an opposite conclusion.

First on Finley. The Finley you say existed in 2004-05 was last seen in 01-02 or 02-03. 82 games has stats going back to the 02-03 season. The following list shows the percentage of Finley's shots that are jump shots compared to close-in shots (jump shots first):

02-03 80/20
03-04 87/13
04/05 89/11

05/06 90/10
06/07 91/9
07/08 93/7
08/09 90/10
09-10 92/8

Finley had stopped getting opportunities close to the basket long before he joined the Spurs. He had also transitioned to the 3 pt game years before he left Dallas. In the five seasons from 97-98 through 01-02, Finley took between 15%-18% of his shots from beyond the 3 pt line. In 02-03 the percent went up to 27% and then was 32% in both 03-04 and 04-05. In his career with Spurs, 3 pointers have accounted for 42% of Finley's shots.

So the changes in Finley's game were clearly well established for at least two seasons before his arrival in San Antonio.

Second, the notion that the a similar fate awaits RJ. We only have eight games worth of data as a Spur to compare to his recent history, but let's see what it tells us.

Jump shot/close in percentages:

06-07 63/37
07-08 62/38
08-09 73/27
09-10 62/38

So, to the extent that one can draw any conclusions from such a small sample size, the percentage of shots that RJ is taking close to the basket perfectly tracks his last three full seasons. As to three pointers, they represented 24% of all his shots in 08-09 and 26% of his shots this year.

Theories debunked.

Very Well as always mel_13. Well have to see, but unless a change is made RJ will not be as affective. And maybe I missed something(heck I know I did) in all those numbers you threw out, but could RJ being on track with last season be because of the 2 1/2 games parker sat out when he went wild?

[Spur|n|Austin]

dude it's their first game back! We will be fine. Fake ass spurs fans

+1

[Mel_13]

Very Well as always mel_13. Well have to see, but unless a change is made RJ will not be as affective. And maybe i missed something(heck i know i did) in all those numbers you through out but could RJ being on track with last season be because of the 2 1/2 games parker sat out when he went wild?

Perhaps, but that would be an even smaller sample size. Your perception of what may become of the RJ/Tony pairing may well prove true, but we'll need at least 20-30 games to get any real indication. Tim, Tony, and Manu are all far from their best right now and RJ is still finding his way on the court with them. If everyone is healthy in January and the same problems can be seen, I'll get out on the ledge with you.

[portnoy1]

Perhaps, but that would be an even smaller sample size. Your perception of what may become of the RJ/Tony pairing may well prove true, but we'll need at least 20-30 games to get any real indication. Tim, Tony, and Manu are all far from their best right now and RJ is still finding his way on the court with them. If everyone is healthy in January and the same problems can be seen, I'll get out on the ledge with you.

And jump off or what? At least thats what I plan to do if the seemingly best spurs team EVER assembled cant get it together.

[spursfan09]

Geez drama queens...

[easjer]

Oh, ffs.

Players need to time to feel each other and out and gel. Injuries probably set that process back a little, but also gave the players and coaches time to see what the players can do.

If it's so obvious to everyone here, do you think it won't be obvious to Pop, Tony and RJ when they watch tape of the game? Do you think they won't try different combinations and look to see how they can learn to coexist?

Give at least two or three games more with both of them playing before we relegate one or the other to the bench or throw our hands up in despair, shall we?

[easjer]

Additionally, anyone who has been a Spurs fan for years should know that Pop is more than willing to concede the division le and homecourt advantage for the purpose of making the team better in the long run. It may drive you crazy personally, but it's no great secret that they are focused on the end of the season and the playoffs. They don't care if it's the Western Conference and they enter the playoffs at the 6th seed. You may, they don't.

They want to figure out the best rotations and that will take time and it may very well cost them a few games you think they ought to have won. But the focus is not on winning every single game they play so much as building the best team for the playoffs. And I have no doubt they will be in the playoffs, and that really is all that matters. Anything else is a bonus.

Also? It's November. Save the panicking until at least early January, please. It is too early with too many new players in the mix for this kind of crap. Take up knitting or whittling or something else to occupy your time. This is nothing new, y'all.

Finally? OKC played much, much harder on defense than SA did. They crashed the boards harder and were extremely active in trying to disrupt passing lanes and force the offense. The Spurs have to improve their defense overall, and that too will take time.

[TJastal]

Additionally, anyone who has been a Spurs fan for years should know that Pop is more than willing to concede the division le and homecourt advantage for the purpose of making the team better in the long run. It may drive you crazy personally, but it's no great secret that they are focused on the end of the season and the playoffs. They don't care if it's the Western Conference and they enter the playoffs at the 6th seed. You may, they don't.

They want to figure out the best rotations and that will take time and it may very well cost them a few games you think they ought to have won. But the focus is not on winning every single game they play so much as building the best team for the playoffs. And I have no doubt they will be in the playoffs, and that really is all that matters. Anything else is a bonus.

Also? It's November. Save the panicking until at least early January, please. It is too early with too many new players in the mix for this kind of crap. Take up knitting or whittling or something else to occupy your time. This is nothing new, y'all.

Finally? OKC played much, much harder on defense than SA did. They crashed the boards harder and were extremely active in trying to disrupt passing lanes and force the offense. The Spurs have to improve their defense overall, and that too will take time.

Pop's playing for a 9th seed in order to get this thing figured out right. Oh wait, ..

[LongtimeSpursFan]

Spurs fans need to leave the coaching to the coaches.

[phxspurfan]

I'm pretty sure the game was lost when RJ got stopped by Sefolosha, with about 20 left on the clock, with a timeout to spare, down 3, after a turnover. We'll be fine. Just call the damn timeout. They know this and have admitted it was a mistake.

The rest of the game that led up to that point can be debated and debated, but basically it comes down to the fact that this is November basketball. We're not the Suns. We're a machine that needs to be hitting on all cylinders, and for that to happen we need time to warm up.

[Betsy]

I agree totally about Parker because he has a problem with hogging instead of passing! To many turn overs the dumbo has.
But leave Tim who is the best player the Spurs have. Back off about him.

[senorglory]

Through the first 8 games of the season, TD is leading the Spurs in points 15.8, rebounds 11.5, and blocks 1.7.

If he's had a monstrous drop off in ability, it's showing in the stats is pretty subtle.