I began cursing during the fourth quarter, because as the free throw gap widened I realized that this difference could easily become the story of the game. And that frustrates me, not so much as a Spurs fan, but rather as a fan of objective analysis. I contemplated going back and watching every fourth quarter foul in slow motion to determine which calls, if any, were undeserved.
Thankfully I realized how pointless that would be. As a Spurs blogger few would treat my review with any seriousness. Plus, one thing I've realized over the past year and a half is that sometimes people just want to be pissed off. They'll pick a source for their displeasure and blame it for, well, everything, ignoring what should be obvious. Such as:
-The Jazz allowed the most FTA in the league during the regular season.
-The Spurs allowed the least FTA in the league during the regular season.
-In the fourth quarter the Jazz took 11 shots outside of the paint.
-In the fourth quarter the Spurs took 3 shots outside of the paint.
-Many, many of the fouls were obvious calls.
-Despite popular belief, there's nothing in the rule book stating each team has to get the same number of free throw attempts.
During the fourth quarter Mark Jackson was going on and on (and on) about how horrible Duncan was playing, even going so far as to say it was "the worst game I've ever seen him play." Umm, Mark, did you suffer some blunt head trauma in the past 48 hours? Duncan was considerably worse in game 3. And yes Mark and Jeff, we know you guys used to be player and coach. That whole bit you have going isn't funny. Please shut up. Please.
http://www.poundingtherock.com/story.../29/13916/0381
First of all, there's a strange belief that there is nothing bad that comes with slashing to the basket. Taking shots in the lane doesn't and shouldn't always result in free throws. I, too, hated seeing so many FTAs awarded to the Spurs because I hate FT discrepency. It raises reasonable doubt, and while I saw that a lot of the fouls were legit, a lot of them could have gone uncalled just the same. The technical on Fisher was uncalled for, IMO
Mark Jackson sucks balls so much I wish walton were in his place.
Pretty much.
An outside shot can make or miss, and there is a tiny chance of drawing a foul.
A penetration into the lane can make, or miss; closer shots have a better %; closer shots have better chance of geting a board; and there is good chance of drawing a foul.
implacable44's anti-defamation bot is springing into action as we speak.
If the Jazz fans wouldn't have been so adament about berating the refs, there would have been a lot less calls.
You put the refs to task, and try to call them out, they are going to be on edge and calling everything they see.
I blame the Jazz Crowd
Let's not get carried away, it's probably just been a while since you heard Walton calling a game. That's ALMOST as bad as saying you'd rather have Steven A Smith.
nope far too much bigotry in here to even try to stop it. They should rename this board the Hypocritical.
Shouldn't you be busy debunking 9/11 myths right about now anyway ? Shooting Rosie a few questions for her to respond to on the video blog ?
There are still 9/11 myths that need debunking?
Yeah youre right (seriously). I guess the grass is always greener.......or slightly less brown.....or whatever.Let's not get carried away, it's probably just been a while since you heard Walton calling a game. That's ALMOST as bad as saying you'd rather have Steven A Smith.
I say they just give TNT the whole playoffs
The way people are hating on the Spurs I think the latest myth is that they were behind it. Have you ever seen Osama and Ginobili in the same room? Think about it.
Now is there a fiber requirement for the underwear or is it just a design thing?None to debunk today.Shouldn't you be busy debunking 9/11 myths right about now anyway ?Hey, you like to lie about people too!Shooting Rosie a few questions for her to respond to on the video blog ?
You should rename yourself hypocritical44.
And I've heard that Osama is pretty tall. Interesting.
And of getting the holy crap knocked out of you. TP and Manu = Tough Guys.
I am not lying about anyone. I leave the lying and hypocrisy to clowns like you with little or no basketball IQ. You know - the dude who can't play a lick but likes to analyze - like the Jeff Van Gundy of basketball - -no -- actually you are the ron jeremy of bball - SVG -- Jeff could probably take you.
Garments ? Are you referring to garments ? Like I said perhaps you should get educated on a subject before you opine on it.
oh and p.s. chump -- hope you make that standby flight this time..
That's some assassination coming from the guy who would trade tough as nails, effective guys like Parker and Bowen for a tissue soft, never-won-nothing Ray Allen.
I bow to your basketball IQ . . . .
was she mormon?
That's some assassination coming from the guy who would trade tough as nails, effective guys like Parker and Bowen for a tissue soft, never-won-nothing Ray Allen.
I bow to your basketball IQ . . . .
Meaning what ? Ray Allen isn't a good player ? Tissue soft? So because Bruce has the benefit of playing with TD he is better? If Ray Allen had been a Spur instead of Bowen Ray would have the rings and Bruce would be on the bench with no purpose.
Yeah, I'd dispute that. Ray Allen is a fine scorer and offensive player, but he doesn't do too many of the little things that the Spurs emphasize. What makes the Spurs champions is their ability to defend. That's certainly aided by having Tim Duncan to make perimeter guys better defenders; but it's also made possible by the fact that Bowen is a versatile perimeter defender who can harass an opponent's most dangerous perimeter threat all night long. Those guys still score and put up some numbers, but Bowen is about as good as anyone at limiting those players on many nights.
Regardless, the Spurs iden y is clearly their defense. It's their ability to play hard-nosed positional defense while maintaining their commitment to an overall scheme that amplifies Duncan's strengths as a defender.
I'm absolutely convinced that Ray Allen could never do those things -- he's never shown any desire to defend anyone. On top of that, he's never shown any particular degree of toughness (either mental or physical).
The Spurs with Ray Allen might score a few more points, but they wouldn't be nearly as good defensively, and I think they'd be a perennial also-ran in the current Western Conference. If you'd be content with that -- or if you think that a bit more offense would be enough to offset the commensurate defensive drop off that would follow, I'd argue that you haven't paid very close attention to these playoffs.
Bowen is a huge part of what the Spurs do and why the Spurs win. You should check out the Spurs' historical record when Bowen misses games some time. It's rather remarkable.
Seems like a FAQ for how the Spurs win championships is needed in this forum.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
