Reply With Quote
TBH, fans of most NBA teams would kill to have a run like we've had over the last 15 years.
http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/9178858/kawhi-leonard-future-san-antonio-spurs-big-three
The Meaning of Being a True Spur
Kawhi Leonard, the end of the Big Three, and the playoff struggles of the regular-season ans in San Antonio
By Carles on April 17, 2013
The Spurs rarely take chances. But to acquire Kawhi Leonard with the 15th pick in the 2011 NBA draft, they took one in giving up on point guard George Hill. In three seasons with San Antonio, Hill had evolved into one of the most beloved role players in recent team history because he expertly followed Gregg Popovich's Guide to Making It in the NBA by Maximizing Your Strengths and Not Doing Anything Else. Many other players have passed through the Spurs development ranks to become solid contributors on NBA teams, but Hill was the best definition of a Spur — someone who overachieved by focusing on defense, developing a corner 3, and trusting his professional existence in the hands of franchise leaders. He was a "Pop Guy," even if that label seems to inflate the market value of former Spurs.
The trade was a proactive move for the Spurs in the short and long terms — why not draft a player whose natural ability made him a more unique asset with a higher ceiling than Hill? That way, the Spurs avoided giving Hill an unnecessary hometown extension for an 'adequate' return. The expectations for Kawhi Leonard were not to replace Hill as a role player who complements the existing 'Big Three' of Tim Duncan, Manu Ginobili, and Tony Parker. At some point, Leonard is going to have to supercede one of the 'Big Three' and nudge his way into elite status. As we approach the playoffs, the only way the Spurs can beat teams like the Thunder, the Heat, or even the Nuggets is if Kawhi Leonard can make that leap right now.
Every year, the Spurs are among the serious playoff contenders — the team has finished in the top four in the Western Conference in 14 of the past 15 seasons — but it's hard not to wonder if we've glorified their franchise model long after its useful life. As the team approaches the playoffs in an uncharacteristic funk,1 we're watching it suffer from a mix of injuries and almost unheard-of behind-the-scenes chemistry issues. For a team that plays the regular season in such a way to 'peak at the right time,' the Spurs haven't looked this out of sync in years. This season may finally be the point at which the team's short-term and long-term flaws have collided.
It has been six solid regular seasons and five playoff failures since the San Antonio Spurs won the 2007 NBA Finals in a four-game sweep over LeBron James's Cleveland Cavaliers. After winning four championships between 1999 and 2007, the Spurs' prime may be in the rearview mirror. Furthermore, two of those championships involved David Robinson and the 'Twin Towers' model, which further marginalizes the history of the Spurs' 'Big Three.' Despite staying compe ive, five years without winning it all is a long time to continue to try to 'figure things out' with the same core. Things must change now.
Manu Ginobili, Tim Duncan and Tony Parker
Rocky Widner/NBAE/Getty Images
The Spurs can't just keep shifting role players around, hoping their non-stars finally align. It's an oft-cited idea that the thing that makes the Spurs such an effective regular-season team — consistency, commitment to system, lack of ego, corner 3s — makes them a static, predictable en y in the playoffs. It all goes back to the problem with George Hill–type players such as Danny Green, Gary Neal, and DeJuan Blair. Each has a 'touching' personal story of NBA achievement; they've learned to 'become a Spur.' But time has proven that a roster filled with 'Spurs' doesn't ensure an NBA championship. These types of players are necessary on any team, but aren't disruptive enough to change the course of a playoff series.
Leonard has to evolve into more than just a role player during the playoffs, or the decision to trade Hill for an unproven draft pick in 2011 won't mean much of anything; just one more role player added to the pile. The urgency is heightened: Duncan and Ginobili are aging. Their time is running thin. Parker is somewhere between underrated and overextended from carrying the 'Big Three' for the past two seasons. Leonard has to challenge himself to be an offensive catalyst instead of floating in the 'Role Player Zone.'
The abrupt release of Stephen Jackson indicated some sort of tension or disharmony in the team's locker room. This is unprecedented. Spurs fans have fond memories of Jackson from his evolution into a 'Pop Guy' and key contributor during the 2003 championship run, but the reality is that the Spurs aren't going to win a championship if they're relying on Stephen Jackson to contribute in a playoff series. Cutting a symbolic leader feels like a final war cry, eliminating a link to the past to remind everyone that just because he has 'been there' doesn't mean he will be here. The idea of 'championship intangibles' hasn't worked since 2007 — hence yesterday's signing of Tracy McGrady, a player who has never gotten out of the first round of the NBA playoffs.
Read More...
TBH, fans of most NBA teams would kill to have a run like we've had over the last 15 years.
Liked it, thanks for sharing.
Pretty good article, said what most of us are thinking tbh
I like the article. Especially the analogy of Ginobli being a prized antique car.
You've got some good stuff there. Keep writing!
Solid read, thanks for posting ADS!
Truth - "Big Three' has been reduced to something like a 'Big 1.7"
Great read. I'm confident in Kawhis ability
I actually really enjoyed that article. Reiterated my thoughts on how Kawhi must emerge. Can, and will.
"Ginobili, who is 35, has played in just 93 games in the past two seasons; he just hasn't felt like a member of the team. Nowadays, he's like an antique car you take out to impress the neighbors — the fuel economy is brutal, but it can still motor down the road when you really need it."
Lets hope.
One thing I've wondered for the past couple years... once Manu and TD retire and we inevitably end up in the lottery, what is it going to take to become a contender again? Will we have to hit rock bottom and hope we get the first pick? Will any free agents actually want to sign in San Antonio without guys like Timmy here, or are the Spurs such a well revered organization that players will want to play for Pop? I guess we'll see. For now... enjoy the the last days of the glory years.
It's one thing to get lucky and win the first pick....its a whole nother level of luck, to win the lottery, during a year which a td/drob Is available...considering these types of guys come around once or twice in a lifetime, I'd say the spurs r screwed....for every td, there's 10-20 Michael olawakande(sp)..
Blah!!
That article is garbage, just seems like another attempting to minimize the success of Duncan, Parker and Ginobili. I could cut holes into his arguments, but like TampaDude mentioned, most franchises would kill to have the run of success and championships that the Spurs have had.
I do argee with his assessment that you can't have so many one-dimensional players around the "Big 3" especially as their physical health and skill-level deteriorates. I also agree with his sentiment that Leonard needs to overtake Ginobili in the heirachy, and in a lesser extent (a banged up) Parker, if the team is to have any playoff success. He can't be passive like Sunday against Los Angeles if they want to accomplish anything.
Last edited by J_Paco; 04-17-2013 at 10:58 AM.
If anything, it speaks to the patience of the fan base compared to most others out there (you wouldn't know it by reading half the posters on this site). Trust in the powers that be goes a long way to not botching a rebuild.
This is quite easily the best piece written about the spurs that I've seen posted here. Great analogies to illustrate all points made. I love the fact that most Luke warm NBA fans despise this team for being " boring", while many knowledgeable hard core basketball beat writers find them fascinating to the degree that they are capable of such insight. Says allot about the substance of this team. Guys, we can and moan all we want, but we're all real lucky and have been for about the last 23 years. When the spurs eventually suck, i'll still be watching Sean and Bill hoping for the rebuild. As far as I'm concerned, win or lose, we're blessed
Kawhi definitely needs a larger role in the offense. A lot of that is on Pop and the play calling as much as it's on Kawhi to assert himself. When he's playing with confidence he's amazing, but you can absolutely see it when he becomes tentative. We've seen his emergence these last 3 months or so and I'm hopeful it will continue into the playoffs.
As for the rest of the article, I'm not sure it's time to turn the page on the Big Three. We're struggling at the moment, and this is obviously the worst time for that to happen. But I believe there's a little life left in Tim, Tony and Manu and I don't want the Spurs to press the reset button yet.
EXACTLY!
Leonard has to evolve into more than just a role player during the playoffs, or the decision to trade Hill for an unproven draft pick in 2011 won't mean much of anything; just one more role player added to the pile.
FIFY:
The Spurs can't just keep shifting role players around, hoping their non-stars finally align. It's an oft-cited idea that the thing that makes the Spurs such an effective regular-season team — consistency, commitment to system, lack of ego, corner 3s — makes them a static, predictable en y in the playoffs, except in 1999, 2003, 2005, and 2007. It all goes back to the problem with George Hill–type players such as Danny Green, Gary Neal, and DeJuan Blair. Each has a 'touching' personal story of NBA achievement; they've learned to 'become a Spur.' But time has proven that a roster filled with 'Spurs' doesn't ensure an NBA championship, except in 1999, 2003, 2005, and 2007 . These types of players are necessary on any team, but aren't disruptive enough to change the course of a playoff series except in 1999, 2003, 2005, and 2007.
Goddamn I was hoping this was a Zach Lowe column..
Yes, the Spurs have been basking in the media's glorification for far too long. Obviously a "franchise model" is only useful if it wins championships on a consistent basis. Read: Lakers, Celtics.
Stunning revelation.
Yes, 2003 playoffs were definitely won by the Twin Towers of Duncan at 24 ppg 11 rpg 5 apg 3 bpg and Robinson at 7 ppg 6 rpg 1 bpg. A better Twin Towers duo has never existed.
In other words, small market teams: Be like the Heat, Lakers, Celtics, it's so easy.
Yes, the decision will be evaluated during his second year as a pro.
Blair, Finley, etc.
Not sure if serious.
"Sixers, Hawks after Smith leaves, Magic without Dwight, Suns without Amare, 2013 Lakers, are all teams to be emulated."
"Let me just contradict my whole article."
What?
A full page of babble amounts to this one coherent sentence, which is something we've all been saying since midseason.
The Spurs' plan for building is not really that questionable, since they've been the best at finding good players for their system with limited assets and flexibility. Instead, Pop's coaching style and system is what is open to criticism. That's what determines which players are on the roster and how the players are used. I think Pop's done a great job, but the what ifs have to start with him if they have to start at all.
The suggestion that the Spurs would be better off had they, for example, traded Ginobili for Gilbert Arenas and Washington's fifth-overall pick in 2009 (Ricky Rubio) and then traded Parker for Toronto's fifth-overall pick two years ago (Jonas Valanciunas), seems really unlikely. For every OKC, there are several Raptors and Kings, who can't seem to put it together despite their talent. When you have something that works, you stick with it for as long as possible. Last year's deep playoff run is not an indicator that the Spurs' mentality is incorrect.
Trading for Leonard wasn't the risk; drafting him was -- and only to people who didn't put the work scouting him that the Spurs had. Trading Hill (or Parker to some people) was a pretty obvious move. Leonard hasn't replaced Hill; Green has, and Joseph can, too. So when you have a chance to keep your core together and continue to cycle in talented players like Leonard, Baynes and Anderson, you do it. Even if they burn out, you still have a strong core. Why give that up just to draft a Wes Johnson or Michael Beasley? Who here thinks it would make sense have traded away all the Spurs' core players and tank just to draft Derrick Williams over keeping their core and trading for Leonard?
Really?Sometimes I wonder how the Spurs even got locked into a 'Big Three.'
That's kind of lame tbh.
i don't agree with everything the author wrote in this article, especially as it pertains to Kawai. Regardless of his on-court demeanor or the look in his eyes, Kawai is obviously a talented young player, who has a high motor and plays with a certain level of passion and ferocity that this team needs. There is no doubt that he needs a bigger role and needs to become the Spurs eventual breakout star and I believe he will. It may not happen in these playoffs, but he certainly is on the verge.
The one thing I do agree with, as it's something I've been preaching, is how the Spurs have mistakenly locked themselves into having so many one-dimensional role players surrounding the aging Big Three. The author makes a good point in that "these type of role are aren't disruptive enough to change the outcome of a playoff series" and he's on point. In doing so, this puts even more pressure on the aging core. This decision was a mistake that has been obvious the past 2-3 seasons. While the regular season hasn't necessarily exposed these deficiencies, the playoffs have certainly exposed these flaws and the team has ceremoniously fallen short in the playoffs as a result. This was the geneis of the George Hill trade, yet it's clear more tough decisions and personnel changes await.
Regardless of what happens in the playoffs, one wonders if the Spurs management will finally start to rethink and shift this philosophy.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
