Wednesday, February 4th, 2009...6:54 am
The Notebook: The Death of the Game
In the early 20th century, an assortment of authors grew frustrated with the limitations of the novel. Artists such as Marcel Proust, James Joyce and Hermann Broch crafted epic literary pieces which slowly but surely led to the deconstruction of the form that had dominated Western literature for 4 centuries. But the avante garde stylings of these modernists would eventually be pushed even further. A cadre of postwar writers would find the idea of merely exhausting the novel’s potential a failure. They sought to rob it of its fundamental characteristics: Plot, Character, Setting.
In your humble author’s opinion, the most successful attempt to destroy the novel was made by Samuel Beckett. In Molloy, which would be followed by the equally catastrophic Malone Dies and The Unnamable, Beckett presented a work in which the characters were practically indistinguishable, the setting indeterminate, the action indescribable. For further evidence, consider the novel’s final passage:
It is midnight. Rain is beating against the window. It was not midnight. It was not raining.
Last night in Denver, Gregg Popovich sought nothing less than to destroy the game of basketball.
When the Spurs tipped off against the Nuggets, a starting five of Bruce Bowen, Kurt Thomas, Matt Bonner, Roger Mason, and George Hill took the floor. Tim Duncan, Tony Parker, and Manu Ginobili would all receive DNP-CDs. Their absence was nothing less than one of the most radical coaching decisions made in the history of the game.
After yesterday evening’s contest, the Nuggets sit a single game back of the Spurs. It was billed as a match-up between the upper echelon of the Western Conference’s second tier: A battle to decide who would be the favorite to take on the Lakers in the Western Conference Finals. By removing Duncan, Parker, and Ginobili from the mix, Popovich completely robbed the game of any broader symbolism it may have held.
And why? Yes, the Spurs required an overtime period to take down the Warriors on Monday night but their next game isn’t until Sunday. When the Spurs roll into Boston this weekend, the big three will have had five full days of rest. Despite whatever playoff ramifications the game in Denver may have held, the most important game of the road trip is and was always against Boston. But does 5 days of rest provide an advantage 4 days doesn’t?
Many people will see Pop’s maneuver as symbolic of the team’s age but I don’t believe that. Parker is only 26 years old, far from the point in his career where he would need to be coddled in such a dramatic fashion. Duncan, although 32, is said to have spent much of the off-season focusing on his conditioning and up until this evening Pop has never been afraid to deploy Duncan for significant minutes, even on back-to-back nights.
The only aspect of this maneuver that easily makes sense is Ginobili’s absence: Supposedly the surging guard bruised his hip at the Oracle last night. But beyond that, the logic of what Popovich did is anything but obvious.
Popovich is known for two peculiarities as a coach: His willingness to deploy any tactic in the pursuit of victory (for instance, the hack-a-Shaq), and how easily he gives up on games. Double digit fourth quarter deficits, even early in the quarter, oftentimes mean the starters are coming out. But a well known aspect of the game is that, at the beginning of the 1st quarter, both teams begin with 0 points. Pretty much everyone would agree that with 48 Minutes left on the clock the game is very winnable.
In some ways, this is both tendencies taken to an extreme. This past weekend Ryan Schwan of Hornets 24/7 suggested that Spurs fans and Popovich are of two different mindsets regarding the importance of the regular season:
Spurs fans like to act like a mid-season game doesn’t matter to the Spurs because the team is so superior to those around it. That casual arrogance may play for the fans, but don’t believe it for a second for Popovich, Timmy and company.
Ryan is typically spot on but in this instance I believe Popovich may have validated our “casual arrogance,” or at least shown that he harbors a similar attitude.
Many people will claim that by sitting the big three, the Spurs have clearly revealed that they are in no condition to win another title. I believe Popovich has made it clear that, in his mind, anything less than a fifth ring is a failure. He has submitted the regular season to the superior importance of the postseason in the most extreme manner possible: By doing whatever it takes to win he has insured a loss.
Just as Beckett sought to rob the novel of the fundamental characteristics of plot, character, and setting, Popovich has robbed an individual NBA game of its fundamental characteristics: competitiveness, superstars, playoff importance, etc…
17 Comments
February 4th, 2009 at 7:03 am
it’s interesting. my initial thoughts when i saw the box score last night was, “cool, pop is giving the scrubs some full-blown action.” looking back at it, i was really only talking about hairston getting playtime. but initially, i didn’t think it was that big of a deal.
however, upon reading reactions both here and at poundingtherock.com, i can see both sides. definitely an interesting move on pop’s behalf.
February 4th, 2009 at 7:10 am
Typical Pop! Remember when a few years ago (2005 I think) when we were battling the Suns for the top spot in the west and Pop decided that it was not worth it and rested our players? His mindset then and now is the same, we have to win games on the road if we want to be a champ and by resting our starters against key opponents he wants to convey the message that come playoff time if we have to beat you on the road we will. Homecourt is not that important to us! With the mind-games he plays, wonder if we shd nickname him Kasparovic…
February 4th, 2009 at 7:25 am
I thought a road game against the team we’ll likely see in the second round would be more important but all of that aside, it was nice to see Hairston get decent minutes. In some ways he looked exactly like he should (his 5 fouls in 20 minutes for instance) but he also went 6 of 8 and did a nice job getting scrappy offensive boards. I understand that it is barely a silver lining, but complaining about Pop giving up the game won’t help anything.
February 4th, 2009 at 7:31 am
I started watching last night’s game midway through the 4th quarter, and my eyes couldn’t believe what the boxscore showed. It took several hurried explanations by fellow PTRers for me to even begin to fathom Pop’s reasons, or at least form my own theories regarding them.
I have no idea how people could argue that sitting our Big Trio would lower us to the status of non-contenders. If they watch the Spurs at all they should know that Tim, Tony and Manu are all good SEGABABA players (Stampler from PTR even had some statistical evidence of Manu’s numbers going up in those games), and Pop’s decision not to use 4 of his 5 starters falls solely on his cranky shoulders.
I believe the sheer length of the regular season invites this kind of attitude, and if more people had Pop’s testicular fortitude, we would see these mind games played more often. Last night I was flummoxed by Pop’s decision, today I’m once more completely happy that he’s the Spurs’ coach.
Oh, and for the record, Graydon, you didn’t mention our Fourth Big: Finley. Shame on you.
Great article. Extra Popovichs for the literary analogy.
February 4th, 2009 at 7:34 am
I don’t think this game hurt the Spurs too much. If they had lost by 20 I think it would have sent the team in the opposite direction rather than give them confidence. The game was theirs, just that the Nuggets took 20 more free throws than the Spurs. And about half of their 30 something free throws was bailing out Anthony who kept yelling for calls.
That being said, those people paid to see the Spurs’ stars. Would you be upset if you paid for a Spurs/Lakers game and Kobe, Gasol, Bynum, and Odom were all sitting out?
February 4th, 2009 at 7:37 am
Let’s just hope we take the Celtics game, otherwise there’s more pressure on the Spurs to win the next game before this rodeo road trip turns into a disaster.
February 4th, 2009 at 7:47 am
This game proved to me that Hairston is definitely a keeper, and that we could stand to drop Udoka. Udoka did have nice stats with the 4 steals (really a net of 2, b/c of 2 TOs), but his 3/11 shooting only mostly jump shots (I think, missed much of the game) was underwhelming.
Hill seemed to have an off night to me and was probably upset with himself afterward. I don’t think he should have taken any 3 balls.
Mason also seemed to have some troubling finishing (8 TOs, ouch), but otherwise had a very solid game.
February 4th, 2009 at 7:56 am
[...] about The Notebook: The Death of the Game [...]
February 4th, 2009 at 8:11 am
I was surprised too. I was following the game on GameCast and I thought they had a glitch or something. After all, how come 4 starters are not starting and not getting any minutes by the start of the 2qt? Then I remember, these are the Spurs and Pop is their coach…
Anyway, although I would like to have a good game against the Nuggets, I can’t complain about this strategy because of this: We all know the Big 3 will be excelling come playoff time but if we are even considering winning the title, the supporting cast must play well and with confidence. Having the Big 3 scoring 3/4 of the points makes the Spurs very vulnerable come playoff time when defenses are stingier and the pressure is on because if one of them has an off night, the chances of winning drop dramatically unless someone else picks it up. I liked that little used guys played good minutes but I am very pleased with Mason’s numbers. It shows he can be a boxscore stuffer, to some extend, whenever it’s needed from him. It’s hard to shine often when you have 3 (super?) stars on your team doing most of the work.
Also, it was a win-win once he sat them down. The only way the Nuggets would have feel well about the matchup was if they would have blown these guys away from the start and they didn’t. If anything they are now thinking how are they going to beat the full roster of the Spurs if they happen to meet come playoff time.
I expect a few more lineups like this from Pop. If he wants a title, it’s a must.
February 4th, 2009 at 8:20 am
A few comments since I look at this move from Pop in a very positive way:
- Duncan isn’t getting any younger, really. Ginobili was injured. Parker injured himself in the next game after the big OT win (and his career night) against the Wolves.
- instead of giving the Spurs a back-to-back of Warriors then Lakers or Clippers or even Sacramento, they make them go all the way to Denver where allegedly the players arrived at the hotel at 4am. Obviously Pop is telling the league: “if you make moronic decisions like this, then you pay the price”
- the Spurs have Denver’s number (and even more, Karl’s number), they don’t care about a loss in this case or a tiebreaker or what, and more importantly they are really playing mind games with Denver - I mean, Denver’s starting 5 barely beat the Spurs’ reserves, that must be a tough one to swallow. Denver got a meaningless win, dejected players and an angry coach (check Karl’s postgame comments).
- playing time for reserves and a good way to assess Hairston’s value.
All in all for me Pop took the only decision that made sense given the situation. And almost got a win anyway.
February 4th, 2009 at 8:43 am
First, comparing Pop to Beckett, brilliant. Loved it. As an English lit teacher and a Spurs fan, I was smiling. And reading Beckett I realize that nothing is happening and everything is happening simultaneously. Just like Pop and the regular season: not important and vital.
That got me thinking, if Pop can be compared to Beckett, what about other coaches and great writers? Who would, say, Phil Jackson equate to, or Bill Parcells, or Bill Walsh, etc.? I am not creative enough to figure this out. Or, which great writer is like a coach? Hemingway is who? Dickens is who?
Loved this blog.
February 4th, 2009 at 8:57 am
Admittedly I only watched one quarter of the game, but I skimmed over the rest today, and I have to wonder why people see Mason’s play last night in such a positive light. If anything this game proved that Mason as the primary scoring option would be a disaster. Don’t get me wrong, he’s a great shooter, but he takes ill-advised shots (like those very long, out-of-balance 3s he’s favoring lately) and can’t drive to the basket. Absolutely can’t. Shouldn’t, too.
In a bad team _someone_ has to score.
Regarding Pop’s decision, I think there’s at least one conclusion we can reach: he can play all the mind games he wants and mess around with out lineup as much as he desires and the Spurs fanbase will support him.
February 4th, 2009 at 12:08 pm
I agree with Latin_D, Mason did not prove his worth last night. All he did was show that he is filling his proper role in the rotation right now.
In his heart, I think Mason would be happiest playing for Golden State, in that kind of offense, but his guts and his accuracy from outside make him a key part of this team. His ability to create on his own does not.
February 4th, 2009 at 12:17 pm
But we are not asking him to do that. At least not on an everyday basis nor for the playoffs. As far as I see it, it is good that Mason and other people get more chances for trying things they seldom do when the starters are playing. Take Hill for instance. He did an awesome job when Parker and Manu were out at the beginning of the season, but once they came back, he regressed because he went back to the end of the rotation. He is not being asked to take over the offense or anything like that, but it would be a good idea to have them play the minutes needed to get experience and confidence.
February 4th, 2009 at 12:37 pm
I agree with Juan. All last night showed is that Mason does not have the skills to be a first option on an NBA team. But we aren’t asking him to be that. We are asking him to be a fourth option. I am also not that worried about the 8 turnovers. We don’t ask him to create for himself or for others. All we want him to do is space the floor and make open shots.
February 4th, 2009 at 2:19 pm
I understand what you say, Graydon and Juan, but in the last few games I’ve seen Mason drive to the basket way more often than his ability to actually make a layup in transit merits, and I’m sure we have all suffered his foolish rushed triples equally. Mason can be (already is) an important role player for the Spurs, but he needs to play to his strengths. Encouraging him to delve beyond his comfort zone could lead him to consider those plays as viable options during a “real” game, and that worries me.
Besides, several times this season Mason has run the point, so I imagine that might also be the case at some point in the playoffs. Last night’s TOs certainly didn’t fill me with confidence in this area.
And for the record, I love Mason. I do think he can create his own shot, but he needs to be smarter about it.
February 5th, 2009 at 11:00 am
[...] I can honestly say I’m not sure I can recall another instance of a coach resting his 3 best players in any game, let alone a big game against a conference opponent you are fighting with over seeding. I would be furious if Mike Brown pulled a stunt like this. Look, far be it from me to speak out about the situation in San Antonio. I have no clue what their injury and fatigue situation is really like behind closed doors there. It’s just hard to reconcile any team with a competitive spirit surrendering a big game like this. I would imagine most Cavs fans would lose it if Mike Brown sat the Cavs’ big 3 in their next game against Orlando. Poppovich better hope the extra rest was worth it for his guys. [The Notebook: The Death Of The Game] [...]
Leave a Reply