Reply With Quote
That was one of our major problems last year with a healthy Parker and a half healthy Manu. What makes you think that would change with these misfits now minus Parker and Manu......
Other than Tim Duncan our guys cant shoot worth a damn!!! Finley did well, but he will soon go 0-15, since he is so erratic. I watched clank after clank after clank last night.......I mean WTF is the problem? I used to think Ime could shoot, not anymore. He had WIDE open looks and clanked them. Could we please get a good shooter in house!!!!!!! I will take Marbury right now....cancer or not.
OK......Ive vented. Im ok now. I promise.
Thats how the spurs play year in and year out. We live and die from beyond the arc. We dont outscore you. We dont outrebound you. We dont makes stops. We win from behind the arc and we lose from behind the arc. Its a slow death in this league. Its funny we have guys who can hit from beyond the arc, but nowhere else. They can make a 3 point shot then miss an easy layup. Dont act like this is our first season doing this. Thats how we live under Pop. Pass the ball around until someone is open from beyond the arc. Even when Fab is under the basket all by himself he will look to pass the ball to someone beyond the arc. The only person who was scoing in the paint night in and night out was TP. TP was our point guard and our center. I for one joking have always said. When Tony starts hitting from beyond the arc the spurs will fall apart. With noone under the paint and noone who can make a gametime layup. What do yall expect.
I would take Marbury on this team. The team needs someone other than Duncan who can get to the rim and create his own shot.. The cancer thing is overblown, we should make a run at hime.
The Spurs are taking too many threes and not enough twos. Mason has almost completely stopped shooting anything but three pointers. Once they combine smarter shooting with the good defense they've been playing they'll start winning more games.
mystargtr34 is right about getting to the rim. The only person I saw trying besides Finely of all people was Jacque Vaughn, and he could not pull it off. Everyone else was content with tossing it around the arc. Hill looks interesting but he has to handle the ball better and learn to drive to the basket.
Marbury is owed about 40 million these next two seasons. And the Knicks aren't buying him out or giving him up for Bonner and Vaughn.
He isn't worth a fraction of that.
If bought out and he wants to sign for the minimum, bring him in. It obvious the Spurs are missing some offense. They played great defense last night, but could not make a shot at the beginning of the 4th quarter. That is why having a Marbury is not all bad.
No thanks on the head tattoo cancer
If Spurs need this guy we are definitaly done. Don't get me wrong, I used to be very high on him in his rookie years when he was with the wolves, but he has now become everything the spurs are not.
Your point is well taken, but I saw the Spurs miss shots that werent 3pt'ers also. They were clanging 12ft. jumpers.
If they're defense continues to show as it did last night, then I'm content with the offensive (or lack thereof) production at this point. The young fellas are learning the system and will start to make their shots. Defense is the key. When Manu and Parker return, the offensive production will pick up and the young players can use their new found experience in their role of coming from the bench. As long as the new players grasp the defense and are executing, the offense will come when we have our team healthy.
fail
Knicks need to just buy him out if they aren't playing him. It's ridiculous to let him rot on the bench taking up a valuable roster slot. But the Knicks have history with Steve Francis. They are going to make another team buy out his contract.
He shot 41% from the field in his last two meaningful seasons and he has NEVER been close to a 40% 3pt shooter. Where are we getting this idea that he will help our shooting?Other than Tim Duncan our guys cant shoot worth a damn!!! Finley did well, but he will soon go 0-15, since he is so erratic. I watched clank after clank after clank last night.......I mean WTF is the problem? I used to think Ime could shoot, not anymore. He had WIDE open looks and clanked them. Could we please get a good shooter in house!!!!!!! I will take Marbury right now....cancer or not.
OK......Ive vented. Im ok now. I promise.
Marbury would be the guy that could get to the basket. Right now we have very few guys who can drive to the hoop. If you notice we are not getting to the foul line becasue everything is a jump shot. There is also talk about trying Salim again to help the poor outside shooting because the Spurs have already placed money in his pocket.
The Spurs also had about three attempts in the paint before the 4th quarter, and the only person that went to the hole other than Duncan was Hill. At some point maybe they should go to the rim instead of shooting jump shots. That's strategy and aggression related, not personnel related.Your point is well taken, but I saw the Spurs miss shots that werent 3pt'ers also. They were clanging 12ft. jumpers.
Ive been trying to convince spurstalk that Marbury would be a good addition to the spurs now and later this season, but theyre not having it.
they think hes going to DESTROY THE SPURS!!!!
how can anyone with common sense want a so-so player who MAKES AS MUCH AS DUNCAN ?
First of all, I dont think we would have to pay him that much. Secondly, he is loads better than anyone we have right now besides Tim. If Parker and Manu were healthy......maybe those two as well.
I don't think he will destroy the Spurs, I just think his roster spot would be better suited for another SF/PF tweener or another big. In case you haven't noticed, there is a bit of a size problem with our team and our West rivals.Ive been trying to convince spurstalk that Marbury would be a good addition to the spurs now and later this season, but theyre not having it.
they think hes going to DESTROY THE SPURS!!!!
Yeah it might be hard to destroy a 2-5 team. Personally, I'd rather have someone who could score than someone who is categorized as a tweener of which I think we have more tweeners than any other team. If it's size you want you really need the PF/C with some mobility. Hey, here's a novel idea! Maybe we should improve both the bigs and the smalls.
I have still yet to see any real evidence on now Marbury might be an improvement.
Can he block shots, defend big guys and rebound? No? Then why the would the Spurs want him?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
