Reply With Quote
Whew. I needed that. Thank you.
When will you stop being wrong in general?
The system is tough enough that the general consensus is players don't really "get it" until year 2.
Mason might be somewhat effective this year, but we'll probably see what he's really made of in 2009.
Also, Mason isn't really known as a guy who can put the ball on the floor and finish at the rim. He's actually not really known as an offensive player in general. We'll see what he's made of, but I don't think you can expect Mason to be the "fourth scorer" that we've been hoping for.
Whew. I needed that. Thank you.
Anytime.
Whew. I needed that. Thank you.
The players dont get it becasue they are 1 trick ponies!!! They catch and shoot thats all.......so it takes a while for a shooter to learn where to be without getting in the way and causing the O to bog down......however with players like mason who can shoot and get to the rack.....the learning curve is not as steep so He should pick it up quickly especially since he came from washington were they run a movement based Princeton style O.......The spurs run basically 3 sets that just require the shooter to read and react but players who can put the ball on the floor have more flexiblity....Mason isnt known because he place with the NBAs biggest BLACK HOLE IN GILBERT!!!! MICHAEL JORDAN WOULDNT BE KNOW PLAYN WITH THAT CLOWN.....HE CONSTANTLY HAS THE BALL. Mason is not explosive but he can drive and pull up and he is sneaky quick
Yeah
Last edited by DPG21920; 09-08-2009 at 08:02 PM.
What do you want, a cookie?
Oh look, the armchair a-holes are out. Yayyyyyyyyy!
Don't want a cookie, but it is funny being heckled by others during a debate when they think they know everything. Especially when you can tell they have never watched certain players play.
Like when people call you an idiot and tell you David Lee is an amazing shot-blocker and jump shooter.
"She has man hands!!"
d'oh
pat yourself on the back some more there, DPG. For the price, we couldn't have asked for more. Pop pushed him into roles we found out he couldn't fulfill. He's a mediocre backup point but he's more than just a spot up shooter. And he's not a good defender, but he's above the average. He caught on the system pretty quickly, but seemed to lose his legs as the season went on. Shouldn't be a problem this season.
He is not an above average defender. Finley and Bonner both defended better than him. What else can he do besides spot up shoot? He has an ok pick and pop, but still very limited overall. To be expected if you watched him play before the Spurs.
I said from the beginning that I was ok with signing because it was low risk and he would be a piece to keep the team from sliding. I was not thrilled about it, but it was all the Spurs could do. Then they realized this year they had to do something serious. I said if the Spurs had to rely on him too much, it would be a disaster. When Manu went down, Mason had to be that guy in Manu's role and he could not do it.
I actually think Mason did much better than I thought he would and he was worth every penny. But it was only because of his shooting. He shot extremely well (outside of the playoffs).
Don't rain on my parade bc I am joking about calling some people out, especially when they were mocking me because at the time I was the new guy. Saying "my God kid, do you follow the NBA" and "you have no f'ng clue" deserves a little bump. All in good fun, no need to
Finley's matador defense failed on a number of occassions. Bonner is a good defender, not athletic but great at being in the right position and guaridng faster perimeter players.
Mason just needed to increase his stamina while regaining his legs over the summer. I guess we'll just agree to disagree.
Listen to what you're saying, man! Manu is ing Manu. Now I know you're going to say you aren't comparing the two, but a 3.5mil guy shouldn't have anywhere near those expectations. He averaged double digits, hit a number of cold blooded shots, and IMO played pretty good defense. This season he could really shine. Imagine him playing that clutch shooting Horry-type role nearly every champ has these coming playoffs when there's not nearly as much pressure on him to produce.When Manu went down, Mason had to be that guy in Manu's role and he could not do it.
Also, adding a guy like Mason to a team like this I really like. But at the time, when he was the main move, most Spurs fans knew it would not be enough in all likelihood. I thought if everyone was healthy, maybe. But then the Lakers had Gasol with a year under his belt, Bynum back along with Ariza.
Most Spurs fans were disappointed because they knew it would not be enough and we want to win it all. He will be a valuable piece now however. I am not knocking the guy at all, just being honest about his abilities. He fills a much needed, valuable role on this team.
Well, we can disagree and it is your right, but I feel most of us think Mason was the worst defender on the team last year. You might not agree, I just think so.
Point is, thread got bumped, people that did not watch him before the Spurs were dogging me for saying he was not a good defender and they had never seen him play. I jokingly'd them. I did not even bump the thread.
I agree. His role will be better this year. But people were talking about him like he could do a wide variety of things at the beginning of this thread and were in typical ST fashion projecting their hopes onto him. It was not realistic.
Who's 'most of us?'
What does that have to do with what I was saying? I didn't dog you, did I?Point is, thread got bumped, people that did not watch him before the Spurs were dogging me for saying he was not a good defender and they had never seen him play.
If Manu would have been healthy last year, Mason would never have had the pressure he did in the playoffs. This year, we've added tons of wing depth with RJ and Manu returning healthy. And maybe I'm just being forgetful, but Mason didn't seem like a below average defender to me.I agree. His role will be better this year.
Out of so many opinions, of course not. Then again, there's your type on the other side downing the guy both before and after its all been said and done.But people were talking about him like he could do a wide variety of things at the beginning of this thread and were in typical ST fashion projecting their hopes onto him. It was not realistic.
I am sorry, Finley is a worse defender than Mason. Finley has been playing longer and should recognize a bit more where to move, but does not have the speed or agility to get there. Mason was learning the system and will do even better this year as a role player. As it was, until the first and only round in the play offs, he was pretty clutch.
Most of the regulars on the board
You did say "pat yourself on the back there some more, DPG." Then proceeded to "defend" Mason, better than he can defend himself.What does that have to do with what I was saying? I didn't dog you, did I?
Very valid point and I agree that he will be better next year because he will play the role he is capable of. I never dogged him, just gave an accurate description of his game. I like Mason. Just was refuting some misconceptions about his game.If Manu would have been healthy last year, Mason would never have had the pressure he did in the playoffs. This year, we've added tons of wing depth with RJ and Manu returning healthy. And maybe I'm just being forgetful, but Mason didn't seem like a below average defender to me.
Where did I "down" him? I simply gave an evaluation of his ability. Once again, I like Mason. I did not like the signing because the Spurs made no other moves, but I acknowledged it was low risk and he could fill a role.Out of so many opinions, of course not. Then again, there's your type on the other side downing the guy both before and after its all been said and done.
If I say Tim is a bad FT shooter, is that dogging him? No. It is being honest. Saying what a player does well along with pointing out his weaknesses is not dogging a guy.
WTH does that have to do with anything??
Yeah, which you admittedly did.You did say "pat yourself on the back there some more, DPG." Then proceeded to "defend" Mason, better than he can defend himself.
And I'm not defending Mason as much as saying for his price and abilities, he's not someone you should be calling "i told you so's" on.
Pop said multiple times throughout the season that they surprised them by being able to play point. If people said that when he was first signed, then it was followed up by Pop saying it, does that make a misconception? I'm not even saying he can play point WELL, but he can play point.Very valid point and I agree that he will be better next year because he will play the role he is capable of. I never dogged him, just gave an accurate description of his game. I like Mason. Just was refuting some misconceptions about his game.
And again, I don't consider him a below average defender. He just had too much on his shoulders on the other end with manu out. He's already said he's improved his legs. It can only be assumed he will need to compete hard defensively to continue earning decent minutes. Maybe you have a misconception?
So you didn't like the signing due to a lack of signings. Great logic.Where did I "down" him? I simply gave an evaluation of his ability. Once again, I like Mason. I did not like the signing because the Spurs made no other moves, but I acknowledged it was low risk and he could fill a role.
Uh, yeah! Tim shoots around 70% for his career. That's not exactly bad. A bit below average, but "bad"?If I say Tim as a bad FT shooter, is that dogging him? No. It is being honest.
It seems to me, like you're happy he "lived up" to ultimate failure in the playoffs. Why tear him down, when he actually overachieved in many ways?Saying what a player does well along with pointing out his weaknesses is not dogging a guy.
You keep asking me questions and then when I answer you say WTH does that have to do with anything. You asked, "who is they". I answered
What you continue to fail to recognize is that I am calling the "I told you so" on people being s to me. Not on Mason. People saying "do you know the game kid...". Mason fit my description, that is not a bad thing. This is not about me being "right" about Mason, it is about needling people for some of their comments.Yeah, which you admittedly did.
And I'm not defending Mason as much as saying for his price and abilities, he's not someone you should be calling "i told you so's" on.
Well we are discussing what he can do. Anyone can do anything by your logic. Duncan can dribble quite well, but would he be an effective PG? No. Mason is not an effective PG, so what is the point at saying he can play point?Pop said multiple times throughout the season that they surprised them by being able to play point. If people said that when he was first signed, then it was followed up by Pop saying it, does that make a misconception? I'm not even saying he can play point WELL, but he can play point.
Defense has nothing to do with the offensive weight he had on his shoulders. Sure you might be able to argue he was more tired than normal from taking on more offensive responsibility, but that is pretty weak imo.And again, I don't consider him a below average defender. He just had too much on his shoulders on the other end with manu out. He's already said he's improved his legs. It can only be assumed he will need to compete hard defensively to continue earning decent minutes. Maybe you have a misconception?
Like I said, I highly doubt me thinking Mason was a below average defender was a misconception if you take emotion out and just assess his game last year.
I clearly said that I did not like that he was the "main" move. The signing in and of itself was fine. The fact that it was the big move, was not.So you didn't like the signing due to a lack of signings. Great logic.
Don't be so literal. I was making a point that pointing out a weakness or misconception about a players game is not knocking the guy. It would be different if I said "Mason is garbage and he sucks so bad, what a worthless...". I did not. I gave a player assessment from what I had seen.Uh, yeah! Tim shoots around 70% for his career. That's not exactly bad. A bit below average, but "bad"?
Not at all. The Spurs lost. That does not make me happy. What makes me happy is knowing the Spurs made enough moves to give them a chance, which gives Roger a chance to excel.It seems to me, like you're happy he "lived up" to ultimate failure in the playoffs. Why tear him down, when he actually overachieved in many ways?
I actually said he did better than I thought, and that was with his increased role. But it was fools gold all along and anyone could see that. He could not be successful in the role many envisioned him in and in the role fate thrust him in last year.
If you understand that the "
Ok, but overall, where would you rank his defensive performance for the year? Was he one of the worst on the team? One of the best? In the middle?
Also, after reading some of the comments in here with regards to his defensive abilities coming in, did he surpass, just meet or fall below defensive expectations?
I forgot about this thread
i'm wondering why you think it should matter - this season could be much different. Not why you answered.
I do understand, but I think you are a bit off base with your description.What you continue to fail to recognize is that I am calling the "I told you so" on people being s to me. Not on Mason. People saying "do you know the game kid...". Mason fit my description, that is not a bad thing. This is not about me being "right" about Mason, it is about needling people for some of their comments.
I'm just trying to clear up what misconceptions people had that you were so right about and they were so wrong about. Is it a misconception that he can't play point nor defense, even though Pop said he can do both?Well we are discussing what he can do. Anyone can do anything by your logic. Duncan can dribble quite well, but would he be an effective PG? No. Mason is not an effective PG, so what is the point at saying he can play point?
You're ignoring my angle on the issue, which is that he could be - will be required to be - stronger on defense this season. IE, too early for "i told you so's". Is your angle different? why don't you tell me yours?
This was his first year with a big role, and that role increased substantially and even unexpectedly as the season went on. I think his legs came out from under him because he wasn't used it. He's worked on that and he won't be called on as much this year. I think that couple translate into better defense - besides the obvious, if he doesn't play D he'll be on the bench.Defense has nothing to do with the offensive weight he had on his shoulders. Sure you might be able to argue he was more tired than normal from taking on more offensive responsibility, but that is pretty weak imo.
Why was it a "big" move? because the Spurs made a steal according to "everyone" but you?I clearly said that I did not like that he was the "main" move. The signing in and of itself was fine. The fact that it was the big move, was not.
Fair enough. But I still get the feeling you feel he somehow should have succeeded in situations he doesn't have enough ability to do anything in but fail.Don't be so literal. I was making a point that pointing out a weakness or misconception about a players game is not knocking the guy. It would be different if I said "Mason is garbage and he sucks so bad, what a worthless...". I did not. I gave a player assessment from what I had seen.
Roger did excel - just not in the role he was required to if he we wanted a championship. Not unexpected for a 3.5 million dollar role player.Not at all. The Spurs lost. That does not make me happy. What makes me happy is knowing the Spurs made enough moves to give them a chance, which gives Roger a chance to excel.
AgreedI actually said he did better than I thought, and that was with his increased role. He could not be successful in the role many envisioned him in and in the role fate thrust him in last year.
I don't feel like doing the entire quote thing anymore so I will say these last few things:
The misconceptions were that "he was known for his defense". He has never been a great defender. Pop was wrong about Mason being able to play point in this system. In a more hectic system where you can take bad shots (like Washington) he looked decent. But overall, he cannot do it with any amount of success for sustained periods of time. He might be able to have some success every once and a while, but not overall. It is not his strength. He is not quick enough and his ball handling is not strong enough.
These are not the Spurs of old. Mason does not have to be better on defense, same with Bonner. Bonner actually did ok. Would it be nice if Mason picked it up? Of course. Pop will not be benching many people because of defense anymore. He does not have the luxury. Unless some new guys turn into defensive dynamos, the Spurs seem to be going for more offense.
He will never turn into something more than what he is, or at least not a quantum leap. Even if he improves his defense next year in a reduced role, he will not "be known" for his defense, which is what people were saying. The "I told you so" will not change the fact my scouting report on him was accurate. He can still play a great role for the Spurs, but the scouting report will not change. That is my angle.
It was a "big move" because that took up most of the Spurs MLE. Once again, do not be so literal. When I say "big move" I did not mean the Spurs expected him to become part of a big 4, but that he was their biggest signing that summer.
I don't get how you can say I think he should have succeeded in situations he can't because that was my whole point. To make an assessment of what he can and cannot do.
Lastly, I did not bump the thread, but I will not apologize for needling some people every once and a while
There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)
Posting Permissions
