Someone tell Ginobili he doesn't need to jack up shots

[DPG21920]

So basically, in El Nono's theory, no one can ever play bad. It's just about what they are supposed to do and since there is a positive usually somewhere in the box score, it cancels out the negatives. It's just disingenuous at best.

I agree, I liked his aggression, but this is about results. It would be like saying a guy who's supposed to be a 3 point shooter (let's say Malcolm Thomas or Matt Bonner) does all the right work to get to his spots in the offense and just misses continually the open 3's. He won't stick.

Just because Manu has an assist, which is then negated by a TO, doesn't make that a good game. Under no cir stances, whether your are a "risk/reward" player or not, is a 1 to 1 assist to turn over ratio acceptable in any game. When you combine that with some poor shooting and misses (those two floater especially) which lead to tough transition opportunities for POR along with making defensive mistakes (Pop reaming him for going under) it adds to a bad game. That means for that game, the risk did not outweigh the reward. Arguing that it didn't matter because everyone else played well enough to mask it does not by default make it a good game for Manu. It makes it a well timed bad game.

I don't see what's wrong with admitting that. There is a difference in saying he played awful and you are concerned because of not only the results, but how he was playing vs saying he had a bad game but I am encouraged by some of the things I saw. But you already know all of that.

[will_spurs]

Good guess, but incorrect. Manu stole the ball, it ended up in Parker's hands as they both went for the loose ball. When Parker began to dribble, he dribbled it off of Manu's foot who was obviously close to him. Turnover credited to Manu sice it went off his foot, but it was PArker who dribbled it.

Yeah right...

[doldrums]

ok I was thinking about 4th quarter turnover at 4:26. I stand corrected. Espn play by play coded "possession turnover" for that as well . Sometimes I watch a few minutes behind the action and view the play by play on line (less stressful that way) and when I saw Possession turnover for Manu I was looking to see a true turnover, but when I caught up to the play on tv, it was Parker dribbling off Manu's leg.

[will_spurs]

Yes there was also a turnover (maybe the same) when both Manu and Tony were running for the ball, collided, and the ball went OOB. Not sure who got that TO but it was just a stupid play.

[ElNono]

So basically, in El Nono's theory, no one can ever play bad. It's just about what they are supposed to do and since there is a positive usually somewhere in the box score, it cancels out the negatives. It's just disingenuous at best.

I don't expect anybody to agree with me, tbh.... but that's not true. I've called out Manu and other players on having weak games, when I felt they did. For example, I thought he played bad in his role as creator in Game 1 against Portland.

If players are doing what they're supposed to do, and we're missing shots, then I'm just not going to pin it on them. Just like I'm not going to pin it on certain players over one game or one series when it's clear the opponent is keying on shutting them down.

The Spurs have two creators in Tony and Manu that have carried the bulk of the assist load in the past 3+ seasons. They'll carry the heaviest burden because we're a team that thrives on high assists, so it makes sense that teams want to shut them down.

This is that time of the year where teams lock down on you, and so far I'm thrilled that, at one point or another, both have been able to come through for us.

[DPG21920]

Agreed & Manu overall has had a great playoffs. Was just talking about one game.

[ElNono]

Agreed & Manu overall has had a great playoffs. Was just talking about one game.

We're heading out for some ribs, do you want us to bring you something on the way back? beer? skittles?

[EVAY]

Well, whether or not this particular game was a stellar one for Manu, I didn't think he was as bad as some figured him to be. I agree with Nono that his game is now and always has been to create chaos (or at least unpredictability) on the court. There was a long time in the Duncan era when we were completely and utterly predictable on offense…i.e.,"bring the ball up the court, give the ball to Tim, everybody clear out of the side where Tim is and then let him back down the defender in the classic and totally predictable 'four down' play. So everybody in the basketball world considered us dull and boring, except when Manu went to work.

Not that Pop has always liked Manu doing what he does. I remember in the first season he was here, Manu came dribbling by Pop who was yelling at him to do whatever it was Pop wanted and Manu didn't, and Manu went right by him, still dribbling, holding up his hand palm-out toward Pop in the classic 'tell it to the hand' gesture. Pop was apoplectic and I was laughing my head off!

Manu makes Pop and all the rest of us nuts at times. And yet, we will all be diminished when he retires.

Doesn't mean this last game was a good one; it just wasn't all that bad for a Manu game, imo. Pop's quote sums it up "He's Manu Ginobili".

[littlecoyotecoin]

In fairness, he's encouraged to play like that, it's largely how we built our 20pt lead in the 1st half in Game 2. Steal, (risky) pass to Beli, and1. Run in transition, (risky) pass to Boris, and1.

Then at the end, flop, penetration, (risky) pass to Kawhi, dagger from the corner. He's a high-risk, high-reward player. If you enjoy the successes, then you have to accept the mistakes.

We just become too predictable offensively otherwise. As Pop said, he makes stuff happen.

Not saying he doesn't make you feel like you're playing with a loaded weapon sometimes, but at this point you have to hope the successes outweigh the mistakes and move on.

This. Nono, you are to logic and reason what DPG is to self-gloss.