Yeah, I want Horry to stay. But, who would we get? I just want some big men with solid basketball IQs who can defend, rotate, and be aggressive. Barry has hit some big shots, but he's got his ring. Get some youth on this team!
You know I love Rasho. This isn't about that.
It has been a long series. I don't mean the following at all facetiously.
What minutes/ numbers did our Bigs have in game one?
Since we did win Game One last minute on a prayer, I'm not sure what real case that makes for playing our bigs.
Bowen plays Dirk for the first three quarters. Duncan plays him in the fourth.
Spurs would prioritize keeping players out of the lane. If that means conceding more perimeter shots, so be it.
All this would be contingent upon competent play from Rasho. If the Spurs have to play small ball because their bigs suck too bad to get on the court, then they have no business beating Dallas anyway. If they did, they'd have to pray the Clippers didn't advance. And if somehow the Spurs got to the Finals, the Pistons would win in four routs.
I have no clue what you just said about matchups. Okay Bowen is on Dirk. So whose covering Howard? Duncan? So you want Duncan to foul out in the first quarter? Certainly you're not putting Rasho on Howard I hope. Nobody could be that insane.
Stats from Game 1
Rasho played 8:44 minutes. Nazr played 1:41. Rob played 32:56 minutes.
Rob had 5 points 9 rebounds and one steal, block, and assist.
Sho had two rebounds.
Nazr had 1 rebound.
The third quarter was the key to game 1. Dallas led by 6 at halftime after a first half with less play from the bigs and more small ball. The Dallas lead went from 6 to 1 in that quarter when we played 2 bigs the entire time. First Tim and Horry- then Rasho and Horry- then Tim and Rasho. 24 minutes of bigs-- 9 for Tim; 9 for Rob; 6 for Rasho. Turned that game around. If I remember correctly, the fourth quarter had a couple of minutes of small ball at the beginning, but ended with at least 8 or 9 minutes of Tim and Horry together. Rob played over 30 minutes that game and Tim over 40.
At the rate the Mavericks are shooting? If the jumpers weren't falling, OK clog the lane and dare them to shoot but it's not happening, from what I see.
Indeed Duncan covers Howard. And no, he won't foul out in the first quarter. Duncan has guarded better players than Howard without getting in foul trouble, even if he gives up a lot of points. If Howard scores 30 on him, so be it. It's certainly better than having the Maverick guards go for 30 each and drawing a dozen fouls because there's nobody to keep them out of the lane.
The Spurs are going to have to give up something. What they're doing now is giving up everything.
Add in Tim and you have 85 minutes out of 96 for bigs.
Last night: 51 minutes of bigs in regulation
Game 3: 54 minutes
Get Finley more involved in Game 5... run some plays for him..
With these gosh awful, I don't think our bigs, can make enough of a long term difference in this particular series.
That is not to discount any of the Bigs heart or effort, but I think we need to let Timmy ( with the occasional big sub for rest) and the guards handle this round.
Jumpers are more difficult than either layups or free throws, which is where the Mavericks are doing the bulk of their damage now.
Now if the officials are going to call fouls whenever jump shooters get breathed upon, all this is academic.
Finley gets his best shots off of screens-- who do you propose sets those screens??
I only left Tim out because obviously we are going to play him.
Because it's working so well.
I liked when Pop said something like it was clear that the smalls can't get away with the stuff the bigs do. I thought that was a nice little jab at Dampier.
Pop's explanation about playing smalls vs bigs was extentsive, proving to me that he and his staff give our lines up serious consideration before implementing them.
Pop has proven trustworthy in the past. I say we go with his game plan.
It's not like the majority of us have any play off coaching experience to go off of.
Last time I checked the Scoreboard it said 3 to 1. Last time I checked the Spurs never played small ball in their 3 championship runs. Last time I checked the Spurs haven't played small ball all year long except against Sacramento. Last time I checked the Spurs always got it done with 2 bigs.
So whose ing fault is that?
Greg Popovich.
Scoreboard 3 to 1. What ing series are you all watching?
Pop may well be correct that the Spurs' best chance is to continue with the small lineup.
If that's the Spurs' best lineup, though, then Dallas is obviously a better team.
To be fair though Ploto- what game plan would you suggest?
Seriously.
Why wasn't this matchup difficult in years past? Maybe because the Spurs dictated tempo and defense? I recall a couple of bigs playing in years past.
3 to 1, it is what it is.
Pop's a ing fool.
You guys talk like the Spurs have gotten blown out all series.
I know it is frustrating to lose, but some perspective please.
It would be a complete idiot move to switch the line up back to normal after sticking with the small ball this long.
Maybe if we had 2 more games until elimination, we could try that. But we can't with our backs against the wall.
No matter how ty any of us think the refs are, no matter how bad anything could possibly be, we were still in a position to win both games 3 and 4 when it came down to it.
And small ball put is in that position.
I hate small ball, but will embrace it for game 5. I have to.
In the past I don't think Harris, Terry, Howard and Dirk were all starting and putting a big on any of those players in not the best option. If Griffin were still getting consistent minutes the matchups wouldn't be so brutal.
Do you seriously believe the Spurs could win 3 straight games playing this way? This is a team that has won by getting stops, not by having to hit 13 straight clutch shots to have a chance to win maybe by 2.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote