Reply With Quote
This used to be true. But he became a front-runner, quite unexpectedly. I guess the media culture just rubbed off on him. Pity, really. But I no longer seek out his analysis because it has become so inconsistent.
I'm not sure what the Spurs were supposed to have done. Durant, the ultimate following-beta, was never going to go anywhere but coattail with the Warriors.
Meanwhile, the Warriors say that about every team. That they're no threat at all. They were talking about the Cavs all season -- remember the 'I hope their locker room still smells like champaigne' comment? Up until the Cavs beat them.
This used to be true. But he became a front-runner, quite unexpectedly. I guess the media culture just rubbed off on him. Pity, really. But I no longer seek out his analysis because it has become so inconsistent.
When did he become a front runner?
Kawhi should have recruited LeBron!
The Spurs have two weaknesses going in: bigs and guards. The Warriors have the best smallball team maybe ever, so trying to match that would be pretty dumb. The Warriors have one weakness, and by getting Gasol, the Spurs gave themselves a sliver of daylight. Sounds like a pretty damn successful season to me.
They had weaknesses that weren't addressed, at least as it appears now, and might have added and lost other weaknesses. Losers, winners, what's important is what happened to the rosters. Context matters.
One thing I had been hoping for in a Duncan replacement was improved pick & roll defense. Didn't happen. Maybe the rim protection will remain the same. Probably greatly improved offensive production from Gasol (provided he doesn't fall off his own cliff at his age), but a lot from the same spots as Aldridge, getting lots of touches to facilitate, etc. But did they get better defensively in the area that is necessary to maximize chances against GS?
I also hoped that they would add a point guard with decent size, in the draft or otherwise, who could play emergency minutes as a defender and ball mover. Parker's effectiveness was at near zero with no defense, and Mills and his size limitations combined with age and wear & tear isn't a great option. Could they get someone who was as effective as George Hill was as a rookie? Just play hard defense and make hustle plays with size and speed?
That didn't happen. They added Murray who is a long term project, mostly defensively. I can't see him ready his rookie year to make a defensive impact.
They are still razor thin upfront. Dedmon is currently the only true big on the bench. That could/should change as they fill out their roster, and how Dedmon handles being a third big is a question mark. Anderson and Bertans are the other pieces, and while hopeful for Anderson at PF I can easily picture him being eaten up by legit 4s. Bertans has fight in him, but against NBA talent and with Pop doing Pop things? A big question mark.
While he is more credible than your typical sports journalist, I've heard him laugh about riling up Spurs fans in the past. He enjoys it.
27 year old Durant > 40 year old Tim
Diaw/Boban/Duncan =/= Gasol
Gasol isn't a + against small ball lineups. He's slow as on both ends of the court and he's going to get manhandled in the low post on defense. He is a good passing big and a fairly decent low post scorer himself but he isn't going to offset the 30 point swing that comes from Golden State's 3 point attack. The Spurs got skunked by GS , not because they lacked a scoring big but, because they couldn't match Golden States fire power even though they had a top 5 player, another top 25ish player at PF and a ton of championship experience at C, PG and back up SG. The Spurs set themselves for failure because they waited too long to get young. Now, they have a bunch of rotation players that either flat out stink (Simmons, Bertans) or aren't nearly developed enough to be counted on in medium to high leverage situations (Anderson, Dedmon, LJC, Murray). And for yet another season, the Spurs are going to rely on 38 year old Manu Ginobili to carry the bench all season long only to be totally gassed by the time the playoffs arrive.
4/5th's of the Spurs starters are ISO players and they won't beat a team like GS playing ISO ball. They'll either bring back the motion offense or they'll be cast aside pretty quickly.
Anderson? Really
Usually like Lowe but calling them "losers" is too much. No one can control the fact that Durbeta is Durbeta and Timmy retired. Alsoat some of the posters in here justifying Lowe's claim .
Lowe is so damn biased to the organizations he has a good relationship with and it's clear that the Spurs aren't one of them, which is why he's mostly ignored or made snide remarks about them for two years.
He keeps stating that the Warriors "never feared the Spurs", as if that automatically gives credibility to the notion that they couldn't beat them. I also don't know where he got the notion from, that the Spurs have "never been able to score against these Warriors", when prior to last season they owned them.
He goes on to contradict himself, essentially calling the Spurs antiquated, yet he likes how the Jazz match-up because of their size. Unlike the Spurs, their starting bigs provide little in the way of post up threats/floor spacing and offer similar rebounding.
Well, Lowe talking about Parker means the Spurs should do something to upgrade PG an SG positions. And he's right.
Parke wil play his good games in the first months of the season and then he will look extremely incompetent latter, like the last two playoffs.
And signing 39-year-old-Manu doesn't solve our issues in the perimeter against elite guards.
People say that there aren't true options in the market this summer to trade Parker, but who knows if Lowe thinks the Spurs should make a move with Celtics to get younger, or try to find a way for Teague/whoever/X, because he doesn't give an option
The only people in the universe that thought the Spurs had a real shot at Durant were the posters in this forum.
Even with the Spurs flaws in PNR defense they were so far the best defensive team it wasn't even funny. Did they really need to improve their "GS defense"? In the regular season, SA held GS to two really low scoring games; between how they checked a great OKC defense and with the success they had against GS (even though they gave up points the other two GS games) I dont think they needed to improve too much there.
I also think having Dedmon helps that more than anyone last year. Same with LJC possibly. Scoring was the issue and while TP is a big concern, Gasol is a much better scorer than Tim right now so even with the same opportunities Tim had, Pau will give you 4-6 more PPG at least.
I personally don't think Lowe is biased at all and he's not the only one "reporting" about that GS mindset. They are y though and thought CLE couldn't beat them and we saw what happened.
The one change I noticed in Lowe is he seems more bitter now since Grantland was blown up. He no longer has a sense of humour, only responds on Twitter to argue with fans vs engage with them like he used to. Seems like a piece of him died with Grantland.
Agree. But you need to have the right personnel to do it. Do you think that the Spurs with old players like Parker, Manu, Gasol, all over the 35, can run, setting a fast, up-tempo?
Donovan's defensive estrategy was the closest facsimile to Pop's, but improved, with younger and more mobile bigs.
The Cavs -with other personnel- used other tactics. They maintained an aggressive, double-teaming defense on Curry, we didn't see Pop double him that much.
Also, Pop beat the Warriors slowing the pace and giving the ball to LMA, and exploiting Diaw favorable mismatch over Barnes.
But the Cavs won the 3 fastest-paced games of the series and killed them with perimeter players like Irving.
So? I didn't mention Durant. I'm talking about upgrading our PG/SG.The only people in the universe that thought the Spurs had a real shot at Durant were the posters in this forum.
You can only sign whom wants to come here & whom you have the money to sign.
Sometimes, even though there is a "best" strategy, guys like KD choose GS. Nothing you can do. You are constantly making decisions on what you want for your future while balancing being compe ive now.
Could SA have signed Eric Gordon or Mike Conley? Maybe, but it doesn't seem likely and does handing out contracts like crazy assuming they want to come to SA make sense and turn out better than improving like SA did while maintaining solid flexibility next year?
Sure, having Westbrook would be great but was there anyone like that available, that SA could afford that would be worth it both long and short term?
I agree. Gasol is an upgrade in everything but average age and minutes. With all due respect to Timmy, with two bad knees his only value to the team was when he retired and gave up a roster spot. Boban might have been a good value for seven million a year, but he's a liability on defense, and an unknown quan y against top compe ion. Meanwhile, Diaw had a foot out the door and we all knew it. If Gasol can match the production of last year, it's almost certainly better than bringing back Diaw and Boban, and only cost the team about three million dollars more.
Not sure where there's evidence of that. They played the Wizards last year who went small and Gasol nearly dropped a triple double on them. The way to beat a small lineup is to have two good scoring bigs who can exploit a mismatch, and they have to be able to switch and pay attention on defense. If Gasol and Aldridge can't do that, then the Spurs never had a shot anyway, and nothing they could have done in the offseason was going to change that.
Marjanovic and Diaw are not the solution to that problem, and you know it. My position is that the Spurs did what they could, and got great market value for someone who can cover all of Duncan and Marjanovic's minutes, and is probably a net gain at every statistical position for the cost of another Kyle Anderson.
The Spurs matched up fine with the Warriors. Timmy broke down and all that championship experience seemed to follow suit. The Spurs played one decent game in the playoffs.
Agree completely, though not hitting on draft picks hurts, and can't really be planned around. Personally, I have zero problem with bringing in vets last year, basically firing every available bullet before Duncan hung it up. Though it sucks, Gasol is still the best solution that was available. Boban and Diaw don't fix any of that.
I don't think I agree that they are isolation players. They can do it, but last year shows that the Spurs struggle to beat bad teams playing iso ball. The Spurs still have a bunch of good pick and roll players.
And really, all of this, while fun to debate, isn't the biggest problem. As you mentioned above, the depth is dependent upon a bunch of really really young players. Someone from that group is going to have to step up and make a major contribution if the Spurs want any chance of even making the conference finals, let alone beating the Warriors.
I agree. Gasol is an upgrade in everything but average age and minutes. With all due respect to Timmy, with two bad knees his only value to the team was when he retired and gave up a roster spot. Boban might have been a good value for seven million a year, but he's a liability on defense, and an unknown quan y against top compe ion. Meanwhile, Diaw had a foot out the door and we all knew it. If Gasol can match the production of last year, it's almost certainly better than bringing back Diaw and Boban, and only cost the team about three million dollars more.
Not sure where there's evidence of that. They played the Wizards last year who went small and Gasol nearly dropped a triple double on them. The way to beat a small lineup is to have two good scoring bigs who can exploit a mismatch, and they have to be able to switch and pay attention on defense. If Gasol and Aldridge can't do that, then the Spurs never had a shot anyway, and nothing they could have done in the offseason was going to change that.
Marjanovic and Diaw are not the solution to that problem, and you know it. My position is that the Spurs did what they could, and got great market value for someone who can cover all of Duncan and Marjanovic's minutes, and is probably a net gain at every statistical position for the cost of another Kyle Anderson.
The Spurs matched up fine with the Warriors. Timmy broke down and all that championship experience seemed to follow suit. The Spurs played one decent game in the playoffs.
Agree completely, though not hitting on draft picks hurts, and can't really be planned around. Personally, I have zero problem with bringing in vets last year, basically firing every available bullet before Duncan hung it up. Though it sucks, Gasol is still the best solution that was available. Boban and Diaw don't fix any of that.
I don't think I agree that they are isolation players. They can do it, but last year shows that the Spurs struggle to beat bad teams playing iso ball. The Spurs still have a bunch of good pick and roll players.
And really, all of this, while fun to debate, isn't the biggest problem. As you mentioned above, the depth is dependent upon a bunch of really really young players. Someone from that group is going to have to step up and make a major contribution if the Spurs want any chance of even making the conference finals, let alone beating the Warriors.
Fixed it for you.
Pretty much this. It's laughable that Lowe thought this was earth breaking news. The Warrior's arrogance reminds me of the early '00 Lakers. They will continue to talk a lot of and dismiss opponents until they are beaten multiple times. Eventually their arrogance will be their down fall.
Either moving the ball with 3-point shooters and old guards who can't make their shots.
We shouldn't forget that the Spurs missed most uncontested shots in last playoffs. It's not like they didn't create good looks, they did, but missed those open shots.
Anyway, the Cavs beating Warrios with Iso plays, I'm not saying that's the way, or the Spurs' way, but you should find a balance between Iso and Motion.
Especially, when your best player is one of the most efficient iso-scorers in the league.
Should you put him spotting-up in the corner most game ignoring his real strenght?
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)
Posting Permissions
