Reply With Quote
This is why I always live on. I am a dynasty that will never end.
Through three quarters and one minute of tonight's game against the Sixers, Pop had played zero small ball. ZERO. As you may know if you followed the game blog, if you ignore the starting lineup, I was quite happy with Pop's rotations in the first half.
What followed in the third quarter and first minute of the fourth quarter was uninspired basketball, particularly on the defensive end, that allowed the Sixers to tie the game. With his team getting killed by transition points, Pop decided to go small for the first time with 10:45 left in the game. While the reasoning behind that was perhaps valid, the result was predictable to anyone who follows this team: 5 minutes of small ball led to a 5 point lead for the Sixers. Granted, the Sixers ran off 11 straight points after Pop went big again, but one has to wonder if the damage hadn't already been done to the psyche's of both teams.
Now, I'm not blaming this loss on small ball alone or Pop alone. In fact, the 5 minutes of small ball was likely the lowest total in quite a long time, and I still take the 43 minutes of "big ball" (or, as some may call it, "basket ball") as a good first step in Pop's coaching.
The question is: is this an anomaly, or a sign of things to come? Will Pop begin to edge away from small ball, or will it continue to be a crutch as it has been most of the year? And perhaps most importantly, despite the defensive lapses in tonight's game, can an increase in minutes for Spurs bigs lead to them becoming at least a solid defensive team?
This is why I always live on. I am a dynasty that will never end.
Dalembert was out of the game, why not play small ball?
PS: What is the definition of insanity? Anyone?
Free ian!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Someone needs to stage a small ball intervention with Pop. He has a serious addiction now.
yup
and you
Because even though you could have a mismatch at PF, you're still left with no one to guard the rim. Therefore their guards get easier baskets. Just because another team plays small doesn't mean the most effective response is playing small.
Did you watch the game? Pop put RJ at the PF slot because were were getting killed in transition and they had Thaddeus Young playing PF. Pop went small because they were killing us with small ball. Hate on small ball is usually justified... not tonight.
Agreed, Spurs should exploit the other team for going small not try to match what the other team. When the are the Spurs ever going to be the dictators?
You know what's funny, we don't even play good small ball. WTF ARE WE THINKING PLAYING SMALL BALL!ARGHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!
And that going small to match with them worked like a charm didnt it.....
How do we all just ignore this part of it? Defense and turnovers were the problem tonight. Not small ball.
We don't really play any basketball well this year. Our bigs are too short or slow to guard other bigs and our guards are just terrible at defending anything that moves. We play bad against old slow teams and bad against young athletic teams.
I wasn't intending for this thread to be a condemnation of small ball tonight. As I said, Pop's reason for going to small ball tonight may have actually been very valid, although based on the way we've played small ball this year, the result was predictable.
This thread is more of a commentary on how LITTLE the Spurs played small ball tonight, and what that means going forward. If I had to guess, I would say that Pop is trying out a new strategy, and a mere 5 minutes of small ball per game may be all we have to endure from here on out. If so, the ramifications are interesting and worth discussing.
As a side note, if you MUST play 5 minutes of small ball per game, I'd rather it be in the 2nd or 3rd quarter, definitely not the 4th, unless things are going seriously awry.
We were getting killed in transition because we were careless with the ball and turning it over. Also because 53 games into the season, people are still lost on offense and don't know what we're running. It's really frustrating to watch...
I don't think it's an indication of anything. We played big against Denver because they play big. We played almost exclusively small ball against Indiana because that's what they trotted out. Today, we were going against Dalembert and Brand until Sammy got tossed out, but Eddie Jordan went and put another big for him (can't recall his name).
Pop is in this phase where he just tries to match up with whatever the other team is doing. I don't think that aspect of our gameplan is going to change.
This team is just too inconsistent on the offensive and defensive end
Offensively too many droughts happening in a single game
Defensively, there's no shot blockers, and small only makes it worse
Oh and duncan seems tired and parker is hurt...
Marreese Speights played some too. I guess we'll have to wait and see in the long run, but I think Pop could have tried RJ against Brand if he really wanted to.
"They played a small lineup which really plays into what we like to do," Jordan said. "We matched up even though we are not as physical. We are relentless, quick and athletic. We used all of our skill set in that department to break things open."
You know what's funny, we don't even play good small ball. WTF ARE WE THINKING PLAYING SMALL BALL!ARGHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!
Pop's best days are way behind him.. Most other teams would have fired him by now.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
