I'm not sure if this has been covered yet but the latest edition of Sports Illustrated previews the 2004-05 season. They picked the Spurs to beat the Wolves in the WC Finals and the Pistons to beat some scrub team (probably the Pacers) in the EC Finals.
But then they pick the Pistons to win back to back les over the Spurs.
I didn't really find an explanation for it while I was flipping through the issue, but their writeup on the Pistons emphasized the fact that the Pistons had added some significant frontcourt depth (McDyess & Coleman). Granted that's a 30 year old with two bad knees McDyess and 57 year old DC but still, this does highlight a basic problem for the Spurs: they are not a physical frontcourt team. Also, Detroit is a very 'long' team thanks to guys like Tayshaun Prince and Rasheed Wallace. Going up against Detroit this could be a significant problem. Hopefully Pop doesn't screw around this season and gives Rose about 20 to 25 minutes per game. Also, I wouldn't mind if Massenburg sees the bulk of the minutes as the 4th big. The Spurs need to get more physical up front.
Massenburg's career stats aren't impressive, and now he's in his twilight years. I wanted to be surprised, but last night he didn't look like a smart player for being welcomed as a veteran, but he sure can do foul-a-minute, it that's what the people here mean by "physical".
Season's over.
The hacks have spoken.
The Pistons would be a major test for the Spurs. Rasheed and Ben Wallace might be the two best players in the league at defending Tim Duncan. Tayshaun Prince is a great help defender. Chauncey Billups can be physical with Tony Parker.
The Spurs have a better scoring team and are probably a little more athletic. They'll have to take advantage of that, but as Marcus indicated ... they'll need to aggressive in the inside. Detroit is the type of team that can just beat you up from the inside out.
We'll see.The hacks have spoken.
As for Massenburg's stats, that's great if the discussion is about him starting.
Just make the damn shots.
You can't play inside-out if there's no out.
If you don't establish an interior game then the opposition's perimeter defenders can devote more attention to closing out on your perimeter shooters. The single most important change from the '03 to '04 playoff series versus the Lakers was that the Lakers added more physical strength up front and the Spurs got weaker.
Yeah, they had great clutch shooters who nailed all their open shots last year....
Great. This argument again.
Arguments
1) Rasho sucked vs LA, his fault they werent tough on the inside, thus perimeter guys missed
or
2) Perimeter shooters just missed, if they made a few a easy series win would be automatic, not Duncan or TPs fault at all cause they were both tripled teamed.
solutions
#1 play Malik and the team should win a le easily
#2 Sign Stephen Jackson or anyone who can make a clutch shot (Barry) -- point in signing Manu was?????????
The Lakers' perimeter D was much improved over what the 03 team had to offer and that was directly related to their interior D and improved physical play at the 4 spot, as well as the Spurs trading in DRob and Rose for Radosoft and 200 lbs Horry.
I would hope that if the Spurs don't get their together within the first 20 games that Malik, Manu, and a few others will be packaged for some help. I would hate to see another season go by waiting for players to hit shots....
Our outside shooters sucked.
Shooting tends to be subpar when you got someone in your face. Why'd the Spurs torch the Lakers in '03?
Again, it gets back to the Spurs' interior strength. Malone and Shaq did a great job in patrolling the paint in '04. That freed up their perimeter guys to deal with the Spurs' shooters.
Talk with Sequ, he's at the slow speed you need.
They might suck again if Barry can't hit outside shots. Hedo hit them in the regular season, tough to predict he would have dropped off THAT much in the playoffs.Our outside shooters sucked.
If Pop would have listened to me last summer, most of the shooters that we had would've been playing elsewhere if you remember.....
Place the blame where it lies: Greg Popovich.
He is not only the Coach, he is the recruiter.
The shooters didn't suck.Shooting tends to be subpar when you got someone in your face. Why'd the Spurs torch the Lakers in '03?
You don't like Rahso.
We get it.
Buy the team and waive him.
Otherwise hope Malik plays 48 minutes per game, I guess. I'm sure he would've made Hedo not suck last season.
Wide open missed shots is an interior problem.
Got it, thanks Naismith.
Pistons are the team to beat until beaten...I don't think they'll repeat though. Larry Brown has nowhere to go but down, and his track record shows that frequently happens the longer he is with a team, if the talent level stays the same. I don't see the Brown\Rasheed chemistry holding up for another season.
I'm predicting a Pacers vs. Spurs finals, with the Spurs in 6
We'll get an injury and an early exit.
Nikos, the Lakers were playing with 5 guys last time I checked. There is no way both TD and Parker were tripled team. I know you made a comment with your tongue firmly in your cheek, but let's not get carried away.
I agree with Marcus. One of the main issues in the Lakers series was the lack of a physical frontcourt. Malone defended Duncan very well, which freed Shaq to roam in the paint as a help defender to prevent penetrations from Parker and Manu. Rasho was useless and he was left alone in several passages of the game.
I think the main problem in that series was the lack of adaptation by the Spurs. If the perimeter shooters are not hitting from the outside, you adapt to whatever cir stances and personnel you have. Bring TD and Rasho to the top of the key. TD is a very capable midrange shooter from 15-17ft, and he can be your quarterback out there. We run this very effectively vs the Suns in 2003 (in addition to the hi-lo with Duncan and DRob... I miss you David). Force the Lakers bigs to come out, and open things up for the perimeter players penetration. Instead, we continued beating a dead horse for several games.
Pop is a very capable defensive coach, but he is extremely stubborn to adopt new offensive schemes. I heard him several times saying: "The offense will take care of itself". An inside out offense can still be your bread and butter, but that is no reason why the Spurs should be just one trick pony in offense. The adoption of some motion during the regular season and some zone defenses has more to do with the healthy influence of PJ than the willingness of Pop to adapt and try different things. Learning to be more flexible when a particular offense does not give you results would only make Pop a more complete coach.
I hate it that everytime the Spurs lose in the playoffs, Pop and Spurs fans say:
"Well we just didn't hit our shots. You can't win when you don't hit your shots."
As if basketball is that simplistic. Missing shots on a consistent basis is the end result of multiple factors.
Rick Von BraunNikos, the Lakers were playing with 5 guys last time I checked. There is no way both TD and Parker were tripled team. I know you made a comment with your tongue firmly in your cheek, but let's not get carried away.
Those weren't my words at all. A lot of posters were simply excusing TPs collapse after Game 2 for the sole reason that guys like Bowen, Hedo, Manu were not hitting shots. Same with Duncan, that he wasn't doing well cause of the lack of shooting. Personally I disagree, it has some validity, but is not the pure reason for the Spurs failing to beat LA. But some posters were making it sound like if any of the perimeter guys did anything in terms of shooting, it would have been an easy series and that TP and Duncan weren't hardly at fault for the loss.
I was being sarcastic and simply listing the arguments in MB and Chumps squabbles. You should know that.
Last edited by Nikos; 10-24-2004 at 08:14 PM.
Open shots are just that. If anyone can convince me that every Spur miss was contested....
And take Rasho completely out of the picture if you like -- let him get or injured waived. What's your rotation then? We're better then, right?
If all we're worried about is how our perimeter players are defended, we'll never beat the Pistons because they defend the perimeter the way LA did last season as a matter of course.
I think it's important to note that the teams that the Spurs will challenge for to get to the NBA finals will be different than they were last season (with Shaq moving to the East).
You have the Wolves (who I think the Spurs match up with reasonably well) the Suns (who I think will impress this season), the Rockets, and the Kings.
I can't say that I know all of the answers overall, but I do know that the Spurs won't encounter a team in the west that have both Shaq and Malone in the mix.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote