Well, the only true playmaker the Spurs had in the last 15 years was on the bench.
Parker was an amazing gravitation player not because his court vision or playmaker skills, but because his speed and the scoring threat he posed.
Now, he's not that offensive player anymore. It might be time to play him like a point guard, using him to pass the ball, and let the younger guys to score.
Except Tony has never shown much court vision. But you don't need much to pass the ball to iso-players. I really hope he is working hard on his 3-ball, so he can bring the ball up, make a pass to initiate the offense and hit a reasonable percentage of 3s.
Danny hit his shot like same old Danny in the playoffs
Thinking some folks are not getting what I was saying about Parker. If you watch those vids, you can see he wasn't the assist man on a lot of those plays. What the Spurs are missing isn't a Kawhi who dominates the ball but can pass better than he can now. They are missing a system where Kawhi is dangerous enough that him existing creates the initial mismatches that lead to multiple players scoring, even if he doesn't touch the ball. That's what happened with the Loop. That Tony was in great shape at the time and could run that those screens so fast, so many times in one game put a tremendous strain on the defense. Because the opponent got so far out of position trying to make sure Tony didn't get open, there were opportunities for cuts and screens to get off-ball players good looks.
Right now, the Spurs' offense as it relates to Kawhi just doesn't have that organization. A lot of that has to do with the fact Kawhi's best two-point element is playing in the post, and that's a lot less predictable than penetration is. It's hard to run post-up oriented set plays for guys other than the post player. Sure, you have the hammer that comes from the post (the Diaw special), but that's just one play that has to be used sparingly to maintain its effectiveness. It's like the four-down Duncan era, but a not-as-good version and in a league that can handle post-up wings for the most part. The diversity relies on guys making cut-throughs and teams doubling, which as discussed before is unpredictable, as the help can come from multiple places. Of course, you also have Kawhi's three-point game, but unless they start putting in Korver-inspired sets for Leonard, that's not good enough.
I can't tell you what type of sets the Spurs can use to get that type of effect out of Kawhi. And that's the main reason why I've been apprehensive about wing-oriented offenses. They're just clunky, because the wing will either have to play like a PG or like a PF. With the Korver/Allen set excluded, wing-led offenses are only about individual talent and the mismatches that talent can create. Unless Kawhi becomes a guy who can drop 30-33ppg if the defense doesn't commit to stopping him, that system won't work as well as the systems for guys like James and Durant have.
At least there's still LMA to help balance things out.
I wouldn't say that a player who had 90 percentile from every spot on the floor, has just a good post-up game.
His mid-range j is still nice, and we saw that he looked strong at driving in the OKC series.
Tim barely had a scoring season of more than 23.3 ppg, he had just only one in 2001 putting 25 ppg...Also, he was the best PF to ever play the game, the Spurs won 5 rings...Unless Kawhi becomes a guy who can drop 30-33ppg
Not sure why the Spurs would need Kawhi to score 33 ppg.
Last edited by YGWHI; 09-19-2016 at 12:12 AM.
30ppg.
Add that to the vault.
True. He did his best Robert Horry impersonation last year.
Its amazing that fans only remember the times Horry came through or only remember the 4 times he hit a big shot out of the 14 years of going deep in the playoffs with the Rockets, Lakers, Spurs. Horry was fortunate enough to play on great teams year in and year out throughout his career to give him a big enough sample size or opportunity to make a shot or play his role well for great teams. Fact is, Horry wasn't a rarity -- he was a role player just like Bowen, Green, Oberto ect.. He wasn't a clutch player because there's no such thing -- he just had unbelievable opportunity throughout his career playing on a big stage. And with him, for whatever reason, people only remember the shots he hit and forget the shots he missed or the times he played horrible.
So tired of people crowning him as some god of role players. It's about opportunity with role players.
Horry was very inconsistent during his career. Horry was invisible in 98', 99', 03' for the Lakers, 04' 06' ' 08' for the Spurs.
Def not the god of role players. But he's a guy who has shown to hit big shots in big time crunch situations. He's a guy that during his "better years" you would not think 2x about getting him the ball to take a big shot
He actually missed a lot of important shots in the playoffs too. No one remembers them though. Players usually shoot around their career percentages if the playoff sample size is large enough.
Clutch doesn't exist because there's no way to quantify it. Horry wasn't clutch, he hit some big shots yes, but the sample size and opportunity allowed it to materialize and everyone only remembers the times he did come through. People talk about him like he came through every opportunity -- he didn't .. not even close.
Yea guys will miss shots of course. Even the greatest missed shots in crunch time. There is no "clutch" stats sure, but if it's a big game and he gets the ball to take a shot, I don't think many have an issue with it.
No one comes through on every opportunity
Interesting Chinook, this post focuses really on the system. We'll just have to see what Pop has in store. Kawhi is a willing passer, and he's been developed by Pop to look for others, but he's not in the business of being purposeful and deceitful with his moves, like Diaw was for example. He doesn't go in there thinking ok if I make this move here, so and so going to be open, and then goes to it. He goes there to look for a shot for himself, which he is very good at, so I won't dispute YGWHI or some fan arguing that is good enough. But he will really get to another level of domination if he learns how to dupe defenses to do what he wants and starts making teammates better bc of it. That is some next level stuff that Lebron is capable of, but he's a HoF player.
As for Pop leveraging Kawhi, his 3s are from spotting up a lot, not the Korver kind. Maybe, Pop will involve Kawhi in more PnR, that is something that we didn't see enough of. I am sure he will still get his Kobe touches, he's good at those, but Pop will use LMA and Pau too. It's probably on how these 3 play together. Don't know what he has in store for Tony either. He's becoming an afterthought and a passive Tony doesn't help win games either.
Any good NBA three point shooter proven role player, I wouldn't have a problem with taking an important shot. Spurs have had big shots made by Jaren Jackson, Sean Elliott, Mario Elie, Steve Kerr, Gary Neal, Stephen Jackson, Bowen, Danny Green, the list goes on -- players are who they are. Whether they're a good three point shooter or a bad one -- it will show up in the playoffs if sample size is enough. For Horry, he had the most opportunity to play in big games than any other role player. He benefited from that and fans who don't know much like to crown him as some special clutch performer when he's failed a lot of the time.
Fact is, Horry shot 34% for his NBA career from three in 2300+ attempts. In the playoffs, Horry shot 35.9% from three in 728 attempts ( much lower volume) but the difference in percentage is insignificant. Again its just comes down to opportunity.
Horry was a solid role player, but I'm tired of people crowning him as the most clutch guy ever. They couldn't be more wrong.
Good points. All b4 my time. What is your take on Bonner?
Great three point shooter, but he wasn't good enough overall to have an opportunity or be on the floor in huge games.
Meh...I'd still take Horry on my all-time Spurs playoff team bench, regardless of his shooting percentages. There are a lot of things that don't show up on a stat sheet.
But I do agree that the Spurs have had a lot of guys step up in key moments in the post season over the years. 2013-2014 Danny was far more of a clutch shooter than Horry ever was. I was just alluding to Danny's apparent apathy until the playoffs rolled around last year. That was what always amazed me about Horry...he never seemed to give a crap until the post season. Danny wasn't lacking in effort at any point last season, but his focus seemed to change in the playoffs.
Diaw reminded me of Horry's fame (bc I didn't see the Horry times) bc he seemed lazy but usually turned it on in the postseason.
Last season Horry Diaw went missing but Horry Danny showed. I think Horry has become mythical and is now used by fans like me who never really saw him to describe players who you might have doubted but would show up for playoff games. I was interested in Manutres opinion about him bc I didn't see him and I would not know of that take unless someone like him shared it. Good to keep in perspective. Mills is another example. I am sure ppl will remember the finals 2014, but he had series before then that he was really off shooting and his most recent dud against OKC shows that it's indeed a streaky shooter, but you don't have doubts letting him take a 3 under some duress, bc he has as good a chance as any other good shooter to make those. I think in the playoffs, what I have liked of the Spurs is that they tend to go to the hot hand and give a chance to a guy here or there who may end up having a of a series and helping. Last season they didn't have enough "others" come in and help. I liked Shaq's description of the "Spurs Others" in 2014 as factors that helped in different series.
Hopefully some Spurs "others" grow up and come in and help this next season, part of the joy of watching basketball: the unknown.
At the end you have players who perform equal, better or worst in POs than regular season. Horry had indeed this reputation of coasting in RS and stepping up in POs which is basically true, same for Diaw which is arguable. Coasting, defense attention, more focus, pressure... all that are parameters explaining results.
I don't know if I believe in clutch or not but if you have played enough sport you know that some just like pressure or better pressure does not influence their performance and for others pressure is a making them miss what they usually convert. Horry would just deliver his usual him whether pressured or not thus calling him clutch. clutch is probably to be defined by not being worst under pressure
Bonner is typical of the dude under performing in POs.... .41 at 3 pts career RS and .35 at 3 pts POs... sample is large enough and gap significant enough to be conclusive
Disagree. However, Bonner would likely under perform in the playoffs because he's just not good enough to compete with the best teams' best players when it matters. However, the sample size isn't large enough. In the regular season throughout his career Bonner was able to get off 1900+ attempts and shot 41%. In the playoffs, despite playing for the Spurs for 10 years, he was only able to manage to get off 138 attempts and shot 35%. In basketball, 138 attempts is not a lot and not enough to draw end all conclusion like you're implying. By no means am I saying Bonner is a playoff performer. He's not, not because of his three point % but because he's just not good enough on either end -- he's a 10th-12th man on a contender. However, when you're just looking at the three point % in regular season vs. playoffs -- the sample is too small to draw end all conclusions.
You can't quantify clutch, it's proven because in the long run, the players are who they are and their percentages will likely reflect that as the sample size increases -- they'll regress to their career mean. There's no such thing as a " clutch" gene as Skip Bayliss says. Smarter people than you and me have written about it. It's a misused concept in sports that fascinates the average IQ fan.
There's confidence, not clutch, but most guys in at the end of big games already have that confidence -- all of them, no matter if it's in the 1st quarter or the 4th quarter. There's no special clutch gene that helps players become more productive all of a sudden because of the the time, or lack of, on the clock.
Last edited by MaNu4Tres; 09-20-2016 at 06:11 PM.
Bonner is and will always be a in the playoffs.
Horry was fortunate to play with 3 of the 4-5 greatest centers in history and the 3 greatest of the past quarter century. Granted, he was damn near a perfect compliment to them, but still.
It's funny when people claim he "bailed out" O'Neal in '02 and Duncan in '05, when in reality he was only ever in those situations primarily because of them.
It's also funny when people forget how he the bed in 98', 00', 03' for the Lakers and in 04', 06', 08' for the Spurs. Ups and downs, inconsistency -- even for the greatest "clutch" player ever.
Danny getting votes of confidence from Coach and Kyle.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote