Initial Reaction: Spurs vs. Grizzlies - Game 2

[Obstructed_View]

You missed it, by simply assuming Arthur flopped. Funny how the refs didn't. Watch the game the third time and im sure Matt Bonner will look like he's the second coming of David Robinson to you.

You are blowing up Matt Bonner on this board in dumb way.

Okay, there, bag. You've made yourself a ton of credibility by suggesting that I of all people have some unreasonable love for Matt Bonner. You have 600 posts on this message board. I probably have at least 600 posts that are critical of Matt Bonner. But at least I'm not so blind with hatred for him that I have to make up about what he does wrong.

So it's interesting that you try to bring in the refs to back you up. They fall for flops all the time. They miss stuff all the time. The whole point of a flop is to draw attention to the play and trick the refs into blowing the whistle. You tried to make it as a case that Matt Bonner continually ed the rest of the team out of their great defensive stops by violating the rules. Fail.

He simply did what he supposed to do, when he wasn't fouling. Matt Bonner is a player with limited abilites on the defensive end. The team defense helped hide that. We are all gratefull for that adn the win. Thats about as good as it's gonna get from him.

The rest of your post is pathetic . "Amazingly good defense" and i wont concede Matt Bonner isn't fustrating to watch . Ya no worries, you keep telling yourself that.

Yeah, you came into this conversation completely level headed, without any attempt to paint Matt Bonner as a loser who's responsible for the failure of the Spurs on the inside. You beg out of taking five minutes to read the breakdown I spent three hours on, watching every single play of the game that Bonner was in, but you have time to reiterate your ridiculous baseless indictments of his performance as though you can sneak it by me.

Some of you ing people should quit watching basketball, because you suck at it.

[Slippy]

Gems.

"when it's possible that he didn't do it a single time"
wrong.

"with, at absolute MOST, two fouls in the first half"Atleast you admitted it. We can only imagine what your slant would of been if you had watched the game a thrid time.

"Amazing good defense"He defended like he supposed to and did more right than wrong. Ya im amazed because that doesn't usually happen. I''ll give you that. Could it be most fans are just gratefull that he wasn't that much of liability this time around.

"Bonner was great on defense"The bar wasn't that high to begin with. His defense was good enough but the team d covered up his weaknesses. Your superlatives in describing Bonner are over the top.

"If that's what you came away with after all the work I put in, then I feel sorry for you."The work you put in has sent you on a Matt Bonner crusade, doesn't make you any more right than others who only had to watch it once. Your bias is your blindness. Btw i found it painstakinly boring and had me thinking you need to get a life. I also wanted 10mins of my life back.


"i didn't miss it, arthur flopped on him twice"That's your fictional opinion he flopped twice which you've tried to base as fact . Fact is he was called both times . The One i pointed out, all he had to do was block out because the rebound was Manu's and Blair was backing up. He pushed Arthur off on the chest. When you're limited like Matt and overmatched by Athur you have to pull out all stops. Problem being he didn't get away with it.

I spent three hours on, watching every single play of the game that Bonner was in, but you have time to reiterate your ridiculous baseless indictments of his performance as though you can sneak it by me.

Boo Hoo Hoo. You deserve a cookie for the three hours you spent wasting your time focused on Dice and Bonner. How dare i try and sneak this by you. You are taking all this way too seriously.

[Slippy]

Im getting back to my other life. Clock is ticking and my easter break is getting shorter. Next game can't come soon enough.

[Cry Havoc]

at saying Obstructed has any love for Matt Bonner's game. New here, aren't you?

[Cry Havoc]

Right along with the, "I only watched the game once but my recollection is better than yours." argument.

[timvp]

Defensively, Dice was horrid the entire game, and that includes the fourth quarter.

Can't agree with that. First half, McDyess wasn't any good on either end.

But at the end of the fourth quarter, he was virtually flawless on the defensive end. He got Randolph to miss three shots without any double-team help. And he went about it perfectly by avoiding body contact and then going after the shot. McDyess can't body Randolph -- that just allows Randolph to either bump McDyess out of the way or draw a foul. How McDyess defended him in the fourth is exactly how I'd want Randolph guarded. It exploits Randolph's lack of explosion to the rim, which is probably his one flaw right now on the offensive end.

Yeah, the Spurs only got one of the rebounds on the trio of Randolph misses (and that was McDyess getting the rebound himself) but that shouldn't take away from McDyess' defensive work. One of the rebounds was lost when Manu didn't box out Allen and the other when Gasol pushed Duncan out of position.

On top of that, McDyess had a couple of great double-teams and that huge charge. There's no way McDyess was "horrid" defensively in the fourth quarter. I'd classify it as at least "very good".

[Obstructed_View]

Can't agree with that. First half, McDyess wasn't any good on either end.

But at the end of the fourth quarter, he was virtually flawless on the defensive end. He got Randolph to miss three shots without any double-team help. And he went about it perfectly by avoiding body contact and then going after the shot. McDyess can't body Randolph -- that just allows Randolph to either bump McDyess out of the way or draw a foul. How McDyess defended him in the fourth is exactly how I'd want Randolph guarded. It exploits Randolph's lack of explosion to the rim, which is probably his one flaw right now on the offensive end.

Yeah, the Spurs only got one of the rebounds on the trio of Randolph misses (and that was McDyess getting the rebound himself) but that shouldn't take away from McDyess' defensive work. One of the rebounds was lost when Manu didn't box out Allen and the other when Gasol pushed Duncan out of position.

On top of that, McDyess had a couple of great double-teams and that huge charge. There's no way McDyess was "horrid" defensively in the fourth quarter. I'd classify it as at least "very good".

That fits right in with the "hope they miss shots" defensive scheme, because Dice didn't even slow Randolph down on any of those three shots. Randolph just missed them. I gave him credit for drawing the charge, even though everyone that saw it knows it was a make-up call.

"Without any double-team help"? The reason Manu didn't box out is because Randolph pushed Dice right to the front of the rim and Manu came over to help. It's also the reason Duncan was so far under the basket and fouled Gasol on the rebound. I like Dice, but as I said elsewhere, James Anderson could have done the exact same defensive job on Randolph. If you can't keep him out of his spots, ever, can't block any of his shots, ever, can't keep your teammates from having to come over and help, and have to hope that he misses shots and still have lost so much position that his teammates are unguarded for the offensive board, that's failure defense.

He helped very well on one trap and Manu got a steal on a bad switch. He got one big rebound and immediately turned the ball over, and he did a good job of drawing the foul on Randolph with the pump-fake. I expect WAY more out of my starting center, and so should any fan of a team they think has championship aspirations.

Classifying it as anything other than "hugely disappointing" is failing to realize how far Spurs defense has fallen.