2008-09 San Antonio Spurs Thread

You guys are cracking me up with idea that people should flap their mouths before hand or they get no respect. It's called "Let the play do the talking". Anything else just makes you somebody that's "Talking loud as a muthafcuker but ain't saying sh!t".

Pop's coaching against Phil Jackson always p**ses me off, win or lose.

I'm not going to question Pop's defensive gameplan as the Lakers were executing on offense almost perfect for just that first quarter but I do wish Pop would display more confidence and give players like Fisher, Odom, and Gasol the pressure to feel they must hit every shot by giving them the open shots NOT on a catch and shoot situation. For example, Fisher, Odom, and Gasol will hit their shots if it is catch and shoot, but if they receive a pass or are handling the ball, Pop needs to have the confidence to let his players drop back a little and force them to hit the open jumper. This is when players tighten up and this is the tactic Jackson uses. I have seen Gasol, Odom and Fisher shoot poorly when they are not shooting on a catch and shoot rhythm.

Jackson's entire defensive game plan is all about appearing to be busy but I noticed it's not really that they are moving a lot, it's that when any player on the offense moves, the Laker defender is more aware of protecting the key. Pop should have noticed this and told his players to hold the ball to either get a 3 second violation or force the defense to set outside the key and then make the move to the basket. For example, Parker throws it into Duncan and cuts through the key. Fisher stops following once he gets into the key and Duncan makes his move. It's like come on, you guy is cutting through the key so wait until it clears out.

Also, on the screen with Parker and Duncan, Fisher completely over plays and jumps out to keep Parker from getting to the top of the key. This is where the 3-point shooters need to stop standing around. Parker needs to split Fisher as he has already flared out. Jackson never has the defender at the elbow completely commit but he has him flash over just to force Parker to pass to the shooter, but the defender is already there to close on the shooter. The shooter needs to move across the top of the key to the weakside as Parker is driving in. Then the shooter at the baseline should step out and the weakside shift all the way over cutting to the basket.

Either way, Pop sucks at quick adjustments. It's like a team that "wants to run the ball". That's all they can really do and they will do nothing else.

This is where Ginobli is vital. He is the one player who is able to change this up and find different avenues to attack, which will force the defense out of position.

Originally posted by StOnEy333:
You guys are cracking me up with idea that people should flap their mouths before hand or they get no respect. It's called "Let the play do the talking". Anything else just makes you somebody that's "Talking loud as a muthafcuker but ain't saying sh!t".

No, to me, it's the guy who talks loud after the fact is the guy who's talking but ain't saying s**t because he's just a front runner.

Gamesmanship is healthy prior to the game and after the game, you can talk about the game and analyze it. There's no more need to trash talk because the game is already over and the game itself IS the "in your face" without saying.

Originally posted by Joecool:

Originally posted by StOnEy333:
You guys are cracking me up with idea that people should flap their mouths before hand or they get no respect. It's called "Let the play do the talking". Anything else just makes you somebody that's "Talking loud as a muthafcuker but ain't saying sh!t".

No, to me, it's the guy who talks loud after the fact is the guy who's talking but ain't saying s**t because he's just a front runner.

Gamesmanship is healthy prior to the game and after the game, you can talk about the game and analyze it. There's no more need to trash talk because the game is already over and the game itself IS the "in your face" without saying.

So you define gamesmanship by how much you before the fact? I'm from the old school. You talk trash about what has been proven, not what you think might happen. That just makes you a loud mouth. Something that there seems to be a lot of around here.

Originally posted by dobophile:
But you were characterizing the argument as simply being about Kobe making great shots. That wasn't the argument. I do agree that the Lakers deserve a lot of credit for winning back-to-back like that.

Anyway, fragile or not, I question Bynum's presence and sense of spacing. Both injuries were a result of him being in the wrong place, essentially. Who else does this happen to? After two serious knee injuries, how confident are you that he won't do something stupid and tear another MCL or ACL?

Fine, but even if I mis-characterized the argument, I still disagree with what was being said. Against a good team in their building, the question isn't if they're going to make a run, the question is when, by how much, and will you have an answer for it?

The Lakers answered every run that the Spurs gave them, and controlled the game. It's not like the Lakers got away with one that they had no business winning.

As for Bynum...how was he out of position on either play? On the first one he and Odom went up for a rebound (happens all the time in the NBA) and he landed on Odom's foot. On the second one he was on the other side of the basket establishing weakside rebounding position, when Kobe came from the other side of the hoop, lost his balance, and went careening into Bynum.

Originally posted by LA9erFan:

Originally posted by dobophile:
But you were characterizing the argument as simply being about Kobe making great shots. That wasn't the argument. I do agree that the Lakers deserve a lot of credit for winning back-to-back like that.

Anyway, fragile or not, I question Bynum's presence and sense of spacing. Both injuries were a result of him being in the wrong place, essentially. Who else does this happen to? After two serious knee injuries, how confident are you that he won't do something stupid and tear another MCL or ACL?

Fine, but even if I mis-characterized the argument, I still disagree with what was being said. Against a good team in their building, the question isn't if they're going to make a run, the question is when, by how much, and will you have an answer for it?

The Lakers answered every run that the Spurs gave them, and controlled the game. It's not like the Lakers got away with one that they had no business winning.

As for Bynum...how was he out of position on either play? On the first one he and Odom went up for a rebound (happens all the time in the NBA) and he landed on Odom's foot. On the second one he was on the other side of the basket establishing weakside rebounding position, when Kobe came from the other side of the hoop, lost his balance, and went careening into Bynum.

I was sorta wondering where your Center "should be" if not under the basket getting into position to rebound.



I don't listen to anything anybody has to say about him being fragile. There aren't too many players that wouldn't have gotten hurt in the same situation. The only reason people pursue that train of thought is because of pure hatred and jealousy, which I can understand.

Bynum was supposed to be out by the 3 pt line when he got injured! doh!

Originally posted by StOnEy333:

Originally posted by Joecool:

Originally posted by StOnEy333:
You guys are cracking me up with idea that people should flap their mouths before hand or they get no respect. It's called "Let the play do the talking". Anything else just makes you somebody that's "Talking loud as a muthafcuker but ain't saying sh!t".

No, to me, it's the guy who talks loud after the fact is the guy who's talking but ain't saying s**t because he's just a front runner.

Gamesmanship is healthy prior to the game and after the game, you can talk about the game and analyze it. There's no more need to trash talk because the game is already over and the game itself IS the "in your face" without saying.

So you define gamesmanship by how much you before the fact? I'm from the old school. You talk trash about what has been proven, not what you think might happen. That just makes you a loud mouth. Something that there seems to be a lot of around here.

That's why the old days were so boring.

Originally posted by Joecool:

Originally posted by StOnEy333:

Originally posted by Joecool:

Originally posted by StOnEy333:
You guys are cracking me up with idea that people should flap their mouths before hand or they get no respect. It's called "Let the play do the talking". Anything else just makes you somebody that's "Talking loud as a muthafcuker but ain't saying sh!t".

No, to me, it's the guy who talks loud after the fact is the guy who's talking but ain't saying s**t because he's just a front runner.

Gamesmanship is healthy prior to the game and after the game, you can talk about the game and analyze it. There's no more need to trash talk because the game is already over and the game itself IS the "in your face" without saying.

So you define gamesmanship by how much you before the fact? I'm from the old school. You talk trash about what has been proven, not what you think might happen. That just makes you a loud mouth. Something that there seems to be a lot of around here.

That's why the old days were so boring.

Says the fan of the most boring player in the Association, Tim Duncan.

How you guys like that beat down last night. Go Lakers !!!

Originally posted by susweel:
How you guys like that beat down last night. Go Lakers !!!

Get off of my lawn!

Originally posted by pantstickle:

Originally posted by susweel:
How you guys like that beat down last night. Go Lakers !!!

Get off of my lawn!

Hey when your team has the best record in the league your allowed to go wherever you want.

Originally posted by pantstickle:

Originally posted by susweel:
How you guys like that beat down last night. Go Lakers !!!

Get off of my lawn!

Originally posted by dobophile:
I'm getting pretty damn confident. Mason, Hill, and Gooden are fantastic additions. Mason is reliable third or fourth scorer, and clutch as hell. Hill is a solid rookie and is already showing signs of being a great perimeter defender. (I wish he were about 5 inches taller.) Gooden looks comfortable, and his presence relieves some pressure from Tim. Having said that, the Spurs NEED a healthy Manu to win it all.

The Spurs are much deeper this season. They're better than they were in 2008, but so are the Lakers.

If Manu and Tim are healthy during the playoffs . . . Spurs beat Lakers in 6.

That's a big if, though.

Spurs healthy... it won't matter. Bynum will be healthy also. Lakers in 5. Lakers are letting this year slip away like last year. The Spurs are garbo.

Originally posted by dobophile:

Originally posted by socalfan21:

Originally posted by dobophile:
I'm getting pretty damn confident. Mason, Hill, and Gooden are fantastic additions. Mason is reliable third or fourth scorer, and clutch as hell. Hill is a solid rookie and is already showing signs of being a great perimeter defender. (I wish he were about 5 inches taller.) Gooden looks comfortable, and his presence relieves some pressure from Tim. Having said that, the Spurs NEED a healthy Manu to win it all.

The Spurs are much deeper this season. They're better than they were in 2008, but so are the Lakers.

If Manu and Tim are healthy during the playoffs . . . Spurs beat Lakers in 6.

That's a big if, though.

Spurs healthy... it won't matter. Bynum will be healthy also. Lakers in 5. Lakers are letting this year slip away like last year. The Spurs are garbo.

What? I don't understand the bolded.

And, Bynum? Please. I still don't understand the infatuation some Lakers fans have for him. He hasn't done anything except show a little promise and get injured. His absence means far less to the Lakers than Manu's does to the Spurs.

I really hope both teams will be healthy during the playoffs. I really do.

I meant they aren't letting this year slip away like last year.

Well we beat you with your whole team healthy last year and Bynum wasn't playing for us. I don't want to hear all this "but Manu wasn't healthy" Bulls**t. If you are in the game you are healthy enough to play. That only makes the Spurs look bad for making excuses for not being as good as Los Angeles.

I mean if it went 7 games last year and the Spurs added someone like Maghette or Artest in the offseason I could say you have something going. But we beat the Spurs in 5 games last year and our team has gotten a bit stronger mentally and physically and Bynum isn't out for the season.

Bynum adds defensive presence that we lack in the front court and did a pretty decent job on Duncan earlier on in the season. Also Bynum could give you 20 n 10 on any given night which is huge