Author Topic: NBA last night including Pop sucks.  (Read 1991 times)

Offline Reality

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8738
    • View Profile
    • Email
NBA last night including Pop sucks.
« on: November 25, 2006, 01:48:23 PM »
Lose Pop. 
Spurs come back from 17 down to tie Mavs end of 3rd.
So Pop, trying to be cutesy and impress everyone with his *creativeness*, starts the 4th qtr with oberto, horry, vaughn, bowen, and finley.  Frankie Elson was glued to the bench for all but 6 minutes.

Mavs went up 5 during the small ball nonsense (Horry not that small but has so obviously been sucking, including last night). 
So much for the mantra of "Pop plays who is playing well."  False!  (Altho he finally did give Barry minutes over slumping FinDog.)

Lurker I'm sorry but that was pure selfish bullcrap by Papavich.  Yet another punking by Avery Johnson.
Jomal, simple question.  Who had the best talent in the NBA last year?

Duncans foot still looking good.  Tony Parker great in the stretch but had a couple key travels in the last 5 minutes.  This aint last year, Tony.  I can't tell if Croshere cheapshotted GNob or if GNob just slipped.  I think Croshere shoved him.

Lakers.  Is Phil Jackson going to outcoach Popavich?  Again?  Took Utah to the wire.
« Last Edit: November 25, 2006, 02:32:10 PM by Reality »

Offline WayOutWest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7411
    • View Profile
Re: NBA last night including Pop sucks.
« Reply #1 on: November 27, 2006, 10:51:09 AM »
I'm not JoMal but the best talent in the NBA last year were the Mavs.  The Suns, Spurs and Clippers were close.  I'd put Miami neck and neck with the Clippers last year.
"History shouldn't be a mystery"
"Our story is real history"
"Not his story"

"My people's culture was strong, it was pure"
"And if not for that white greed"
"It would've endured"

"Laker hate causes blindness"

Offline Reality

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8738
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: NBA last night including Pop sucks.
« Reply #2 on: November 27, 2006, 11:38:09 AM »
Psssh Spurs hands down.

Offline Joe Vancil

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2208
    • ICQ Messenger - 236778608
    • MSN Messenger - joev5638@hotmail.com
    • AOL Instant Messenger - GenghisThePBear
    • Yahoo Instant Messenger - joev5638
    • View Profile
    • http://www.joev.com
    • Email
Re: NBA last night including Pop sucks.
« Reply #3 on: November 27, 2006, 12:37:16 PM »
Based on what I *SAW* last year?  The Mavericks.

Finley has lost a step or two.  Duncan was hurt, and it showed.  Robert Horry looked old.  Van Exel got minutes, while a young, talented Beno Udrih who needed time to develop rotted on the bench.  Mohammad regressed.  Oberto disappointed.  The only person who really looked IMPROVED was Tony Parker, who had a career year.

For the Mavs, Harris developed, Marquis Daniels played good stretches, Nowitzki improved by leaps and bounds on both sides of the ball, folks like Armstrong provided veteran leadership WITHOUT stealing minutes (ala Van Exel), Josh Howard became a common household name.  Stackhouse provided scoring punch from the bench.  Terry struggled in the early-going, and adapted.  Diop showed signs of life.

I felt that San An was the more talented team going in - but San An looked disappointing last year, and Dallas looked like championship material.  And when it came playoff time, Dallas backed up their potential by outduelling San An.
Joe

-----------
Support your right to keep and arm bears!
Club (baby) seals, not sandwiches!

Offline Reality

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8738
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: NBA last night including Pop sucks.
« Reply #4 on: November 27, 2006, 01:16:36 PM »
Joe,

Virturally everything you posted was on Pop.
Finley lost step but was given huge minutes in playoffs.
VanX over Beno.
Mohammad regressed.  Perhaps due to his own fault, yet put in Pops headgamey "doghouse" the latter part of year and entire Mavs series.  Would Riley or Phil Jackson resulted to small balls and doghousing Moham?  No way.
Fabs disappointed, yet also got micro minutes last year.  He is fairly effective vs Dirk.  In stretches.  Which he got zero of in playoff.

Now the biggest one, Parker.  Right you are.  He continues All Star year and smokes in the 1st round vs Kings.  Up 20 late 3rd clinghing game with Mad Dog Artest with an ankle injury, showing signs of Prozac deficientcy and looking to maime.  Headgamey Pop puts Parker back in the game, Artest smacks him.  Parker now 75% vs Mavs.
Thats on Pop, 100%.


Duncan, his playoff was awesome, foot or no foot.
With all that it still took a GNob brain fart for the ages.

Spurs were better.  That is not a diss on the Mavs.

Offline WayOutWest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7411
    • View Profile
Re: NBA last night including Pop sucks.
« Reply #5 on: November 27, 2006, 01:54:40 PM »
Joe,

Virturally everything you posted was on Pop.
Finley lost step but was given huge minutes in playoffs.
VanX over Beno.
Mohammad regressed.  Perhaps due to his own fault, yet put in Pops headgamey "doghouse" the latter part of year and entire Mavs series.  Would Riley or Phil Jackson resulted to small balls and doghousing Moham?  No way.
Fabs disappointed, yet also got micro minutes last year.  He is fairly effective vs Dirk.  In stretches.  Which he got zero of in playoff.

Now the biggest one, Parker.  Right you are.  He continues All Star year and smokes in the 1st round vs Kings.  Up 20 late 3rd clinghing game with Mad Dog Artest with an ankle injury, showing signs of Prozac deficientcy and looking to maime.  Headgamey Pop puts Parker back in the game, Artest smacks him.  Parker now 75% vs Mavs.
Thats on Pop, 100%.


Duncan, his playoff was awesome, foot or no foot.
With all that it still took a GNob brain fart for the ages.

Spurs were better.  That is not a diss on the Mavs.

You're pretty way off the target.  I think it's obvious to any non-Spurs blinded fans that the Mavs had and have more talent.  IMO the Spurs had a better TEAM last year than the Mavs but the Mavs CLEARLY had more talent.  The Mavs talent was the reason they beat the Spurs.  The Mavs had to rely on individual one-on-one playground moves and scores from Terry, Dirk, Howard and Daniels.  The Spurs relied on defense and execution to win their games but it wasn't enough to win the series.  TD being hurt didn't help their cause either, not to mention Horry really didn't show up and Parker was outplayed by Terry.  The Spurs look a little more athletic but it's not going to help against Diggler while the Mavs still have their guys they aquired to take on teams like the Spurs and Heat.
"History shouldn't be a mystery"
"Our story is real history"
"Not his story"

"My people's culture was strong, it was pure"
"And if not for that white greed"
"It would've endured"

"Laker hate causes blindness"

Offline Reality

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8738
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: NBA last night including Pop sucks.
« Reply #6 on: November 29, 2006, 07:53:52 AM »
You didn't address one thing i wrote.
You total of "two" non Spurs fans just say "Dallas was better because they were."
Because they made more playground shots.

San Antone a better TEAM but Dallas has more TALENT.
Oh that makes sense.

They didn't either.

Offline Randy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 836
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: NBA last night including Pop sucks.
« Reply #7 on: November 29, 2006, 10:13:27 AM »
You seem to be comparing the Spurs with a healthy TD against the Mavs.  As they were last year in the playoffs -- the Mavs were the more talented squad.  If TD hadn't been hurt, it might have tipped the scales in the Spurs favor -- I think it would have, but he wasn't and the Mavs were more talented.

You think several players on the Spurs team are WAYYYY more talented than they are:
  Manu, and Fabs in particular!  Manu is streaky and makes stupid decisions (by-the-way, where is this "superstar" this year -- he has flat disappeared!) and Fabs is filler.  Pop had to play Horry WAYYY too many minutes last year during the regular season -- that's a huge mistake. 

The Mavs were the better team and they proved it by winning last year!

Offline Lurker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3705
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: NBA last night including Pop sucks.
« Reply #8 on: November 29, 2006, 11:06:28 AM »
The Mavs were the better team and they proved it by winning last year!

Some teams always look better when Knick Mavetta bails them out of two games.



But back to the real topic...Dallas has more talent based on depth.  Spurs top 2-3 are better than Dallas' top 2-3.  Spurs last year were a better TEAM than Dallas...more cohesive.  Dallas relied too much on the superior depth of talent to win.
It riles them to believe that you perceive the web they weave.  Keep on thinking free.
-Moody Blues

Offline westkoast

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8624
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: NBA last night including Pop sucks.
« Reply #9 on: November 29, 2006, 11:20:12 AM »
The Mavs were the better team and they proved it by winning last year!
.  Spurs last year were a better TEAM than Dallas...more cohesive.  Dallas relied too much on the superior depth of talent to win.

Is this Texas logic?    ;D  The Spurs were the better team but Dallas won because they had more quality players that all contributed as a team?

Spurs had the better defense but the Mavs had a better bench, a better perimeter game, and they were not too shabby on the backboard.  From top to bottom the Mavs had the better team.  The Spurs had a few players better then the Mavs but that doesn't mean they have the better team from top to bottom.

Reality we can go down each player on every roster from last year......or we could look at the fact that the Mavs advanced and the Spurs didn't.  What happened to the best team wins?
http://I-Really-Shouldn't-Put-A-Link-To-A-Blog-I-Dont-Even-Update.com

Offline JoMal

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3361
    • View Profile
    • http://
    • Email
Re: NBA last night including Pop sucks.
« Reply #10 on: November 29, 2006, 12:05:35 PM »
To finally getting around to answering for myself, the best team last year was the team that won in the end - the Heat.

In the West, the Mavs have the depth; the Spurs the experience AND the coach. Regardless of your opinion of him in THAT game, his relentlessness for execution is Popovich's talent. That he has some middle-of-the-road talent in the mix and an aging and injury-prone superstar in Duncan (but a sure bet young talent in Parker) puts some issues out there that Pop has to deal with on occasion.

Unlike the Mavs, of whom Johnson can slip and slide talent into the game on a whim and not lose much, Pop has to deal with deciding on hot-hands or small but speedy, and recognize when Duncan needs to be sitting and Parker needs to return, even if logic from the bleachers screams otherwise.

Ultimately, it comes down to the players and if they are "on" or "off" that night. Ginobili occasionally makes errors in judgement. Great. Perhaps he can let Popovich know when a brain fart is coming on. That would be helpful for a coach to know. The other team is making a run late in the fourth. Okay, put Parker back in to settle things down. He gets hurt. Great. Could the other team at least let Pop know they would be making a crazy charge down the stretch because - I don't know - they still would like to WIN THE GAME!!!

His options are to recognize the needs at the time and hope the players he has on the court are the right ones. Do the players always fit the bill on any given night? After 82 games, if you get it right sixty percent of the time and can't claim the best talent in the conference, maybe it is time to re-evaluate YOUR expectations of what it takes to coach the Spurs.

 
"We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty.....We will not be driven by fear into an age of unreason.....We are not descended from fearful men, not from men who feared to write, to speak, to associate and to defend causes that were for the moment unpopular....We cannot defend freedom abroad by deserting it at home."

Offline Joe Vancil

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2208
    • ICQ Messenger - 236778608
    • MSN Messenger - joev5638@hotmail.com
    • AOL Instant Messenger - GenghisThePBear
    • Yahoo Instant Messenger - joev5638
    • View Profile
    • http://www.joev.com
    • Email
Re: NBA last night including Pop sucks.
« Reply #11 on: November 29, 2006, 12:25:56 PM »
Reality,

     You'll get no argument from me that Popovich sucks.

     That said, his players didn't perform last year.  You can only blame so many things on the coaching.  Beno Udrih didn't develop - yes, that's on Popovich - but regardless, he didn't develop, whereas Harris did.  If Dallas offers Harris for Udrih, San An jumps on that deal.  Instead, Van Exel plays - a pick-up which I criticized at the beginning of the season last year, for this very reason.  Darrell Armstrong provided more veteran leadership - especially to his young guards, and more importantly, while not stealing their minutes - that Van Exel did.

     Mohammad tanks.  That's not on Popovich.  Mohammad is an incredibly stupid player, who tends to do stupid things on the court.  That's been the knock on him ever since Utah drafted him and sent him out before playing a game for them.  He had a good part of a year for San An - when, because he was new, it was easy to overlook some of the stupid plays, because, obviously, he doesn't know the schemes.  He got his rebounds, and played his defense - mostly, because he was playing next to a healthy Duncan.  But when you actually had to deal with Mohammad across a season, all of a sudden, Nesterovic becomes the better option.  Anyone who has watched Mohammad for long saw this coming a mile away.

     Finley struggles.  Again, not entirely on Popovich.  It truly was a down year, and he didn't play the heavy minutes he usually logs to play his way out of it.

     Oberto did nothing last year, except justify WayOut's prediction of him as a "journeyman center."  He's playing better this year - but that's THIS YEAR.  We don't validate his last year performance based on good performances this year.  (And, by the way, playing Oberto in low and forcing Duncan to the perimeter is *STUPID*.  A Greg Popovich flavor of stupid.)

     Robert Horry disappeared.  That's not on Popovich.  It's just the fact that Robert Horry is getting old.  Van Horn was easily as effective as Horry was.  Obviously, the Spurs wouldn't jump on a Van Horn for Horry proposal, but it's because of Horry's *HISTORY*, not his past season's level of effectiveness.

     Duncan was hurt, and was less effective because he was hurt.  That's not on Popovich.

     Bowen is a very limited player.  He's no great talent - he just plays defense at a really, really elite level.  That's nothing compared to what Josh Howard is - even if Bowen is a better defender than Howard.  If the Mavs offer Howard for Bowen, the Spurs jump on it.

     If the Mavs offered Diop or Dampier for Nesterovic or Mohammad, the Spurs jump on it.  And if the Spurs had the choice of Finley or Stackhouse, they MIGHT take Stackhouse (it would be an egregious mistake, but they might do it).  Essentially, there's Parker - who had a career year last year, Ginobilli - who is really the identity player of last year's team, and Duncan who the Spurs wouldn't have traded for their Dallas counterpart.  And last year, across the entire year, Nowitzki outperformed Duncan.  (I'm not saying Nowitzki is better than Duncan;  I think Duncan's the best player in the league.  But last year's flavor of Nowitzki - my choice for last year's MVP - isn't far behind.)  And, to be honest, I don't think Dallas would have traded ANY ONE of their players for the Spurs counterpart except for Marquis Daniels versus Ginobilli, and Oberto for one of their centers based strictly on future potential (kind of like the Caron Butler for Kwame Brown deal that the Lakers made).

     The Mavs were the more talented team last year.  It showed up in the cohesiveness of the team.  The Spurs were equal to the sum of their parts, and the Mavericks were greater than the sum of their parts.  The Spurs relied on the super year of Parker, Ginobilli over the lack of a Mavs 2-guard, and Duncan - their stars - and the Mavs used the whole team.

     Now I agree with WayOut that the Mavs flavor of teamwork is somewhat individualistic, which is the Mavs Achilles heel, whereas the Spurs are a more methodical, team-oriented team - which is the only reason the Spurs were in the series against the Mavs last year, but the fact that Dallas was able to defeat the better team-oriented game just goes to show the greater level of talent that they had last year.

     I'm curious to see how the loss of Darrell Armstrong plays out in the clubhouse for Dallas.

Joe

-----------
Support your right to keep and arm bears!
Club (baby) seals, not sandwiches!

Offline Lurker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3705
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: NBA last night including Pop sucks.
« Reply #12 on: November 29, 2006, 12:44:53 PM »

     The Mavs were the more talented team last year.  It showed up in the cohesiveness of the team.  

     Now I agree with WayOut that the Mavs flavor of teamwork is somewhat individualistic, which is the Mavs Achilles heel, whereas the Spurs are a more methodical, team-oriented team - which is the only reason the Spurs were in the series against the Mavs last year, but the fact that Dallas was able to defeat the better team-oriented game just goes to show the greater level of talent that they had last year.


Sorry Joe.  But this is contradictory.  Either the Mavs survived because they had more talent that plays individualistic...OR they were a more cohesive team.  But you can't have as more cohesive team that wins by being individualistic.
It riles them to believe that you perceive the web they weave.  Keep on thinking free.
-Moody Blues

Offline Reality

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8738
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: NBA last night including Pop sucks.
« Reply #13 on: November 30, 2006, 09:14:20 PM »
To finally getting around to answering for myself, the best team last year was the team that won in the end - the Heat.

In the West, the Mavs have the depth; the Spurs the experience AND the coach. Regardless of your opinion of him in THAT game, his relentlessness for execution is Popovich's talent. That he has some middle-of-the-road talent in the mix and an aging and injury-prone superstar in Duncan (but a sure bet young talent in Parker) puts some issues out there that Pop has to deal with on occasion.

Unlike the Mavs, of whom Johnson can slip and slide talent into the game on a whim and not lose much, Pop has to deal with deciding on hot-hands or small but speedy, and recognize when Duncan needs to be sitting and Parker needs to return, even if logic from the bleachers screams otherwise.

Ultimately, it comes down to the players and if they are "on" or "off" that night. Ginobili occasionally makes errors in judgement. Great. Perhaps he can let Popovich know when a brain fart is coming on. That would be helpful for a coach to know. The other team is making a run late in the fourth. Okay, put Parker back in to settle things down. He gets hurt. Great. Could the other team at least let Pop know they would be making a crazy charge down the stretch because - I don't know - they still would like to WIN THE GAME!!!

His options are to recognize the needs at the time and hope the players he has on the court are the right ones. Do the players always fit the bill on any given night? After 82 games, if you get it right sixty percent of the time and can't claim the best talent in the conference, maybe it is time to re-evaluate YOUR expectations of what it takes to coach the Spurs. 

In addition to getting W.O.W. a copy of Game 6 Kings-Lakers 2002, I can see you will enjoy a copy of Gm 6 Kings-Spurs 2006.

For now tho for recollection lets take the written page:
_______________________________________________________from ESPN_______________________________________________________________
The Spurs scored the final five points of the first half after Artest limped to the locker room with 1:58 left. San Antonio then made a 16-3 run to open the second, getting consecutive 3-pointers from Bowen and another from Brent Barry to take a 61-41 lead.

Manu Ginobili scored two baskets while Artest was hobbled, and Parker scored 14 points in the third quarter, including a long 3-pointer at the buzzer after Kevin Martin hit one for the Kings.

"Such a bad time to get an ankle sprain -- such an unfortunate break," Artest said. "Pretty sore to cut and stuff. I couldn't do what I wanted to do."
Parker also left the game in the fourth quarter to rest his strained and bruised right leg, but returned quickly as the Kings never got closer than 14 points.
_______________________________________end ESPN______________________________________________________________________________


How good was it going?  Well the 5 point run after Artest got hurt just before halftime turned into an 18-1 run.  Michael Finley hit back to back baskets.  Okay his 2nd shot was a dunk.  Still, this put the Spurs up 20 points with 8 minutes to go.  Jomal are you really going to try to convince me that a 4th qtr 8 minutes left 20 pt Spurs lead with a hobbled Artest and in general deflated Kings team was a threat to the Spurs?  Kings get it down to 14 with 6 minutes left.  Fair enough.  No other options for that Pop guy whose coaching you like?  Brent Barry at point?  Let Nick VanEx slosh around for the rest of the game?  No, to you and Pop it was neccessary to march Parker right back out.  Bam, slam bodied hard by Artest.  Reinjured.  Don't care if he finished the game. Obviously reaggravated his injury.  Eyewitnesses told me Parker could barely walk after that game and the next moring.  Ditto with between the Dallas games. 

Parker had an All Star year,  55% season career best continued in Kings series at 20ppg on 50% floor and 55% treys.  Throw in 5 assists per game. 
Culminated it with 25 points or so by halftime of the clincher vs the Kings.  There was nothing W.O.W. could say or fabricate about Tonys performance.

Until the Artest smack.

Yeah that was some A-1 coaching.