Friday, October 30th, 2009...1:18 pm
San Antonio Spurs 85, Chicago Bulls 92: the Late Edition
Although a disappointment, I’m hesitant to read too much into the Spurs Thursday night loss to the Bulls. The Spurs may have gotten younger this offseason but, as I said during the “early edition” of my recap, the Spurs are going to struggle on the second night of back-to-backs when on the road against high energy teams like the Bulls.
It’s not just that the Bulls have youth and athleticism on their side: several of Chicago’s players (Tyrus Thomas and Joakim Noah most notably) are momentum players who, when backed by crowds like the raucous one that attended last night’s game, are going to play well. I also think, given the team’s personality, the Bulls are likely to struggle on the road. My point is: when we look back in April, I wouldn’t be surprised if an away loss at Chicago is a black eye a couple of contenders have.
The other reason I am not terribly concerned about last night’s loss is that one starter, one eventual starter and one eventual heavy-minute bench player are still learning the system. Until Richard Jefferson, Antonio McDyess and DeJuan Blair get more accustomed to Pop’s offense and complicated defensive schemes, there are going to be nights where one or two, and maybe even all three, don’t look that sharp.
That is not meant to be an excuse for their mediocre performances. Implicit in the optimistic idea that they can get the work done is the admission that there is much work to be one.
Of the three, Jefferson’s performance so far may be the most disappointing. Although he didn’t shoot well on Wednesday, his passing and defense helped produce the balance and cohesion that brought about our opening night victory. Last night he continued to shoot poorly while making less significant contributions in the other two categories.
The one thing Jefferson is doing well is drawing contact when he decides to go to the hole. My only request is that he decide to head for the basket more often. He went only 3 of 6 from the charity stripe last night which is obviously far from ideal. But I am not as concerned with his 50% free throw shotting as I am with the fact the he only took six free throw attempts.
When we are shooting poorly from outside and getting beat on the boards, Jefferson (as well as Ginobili, Hill, and Parker) should be headed for the lane and looking for contact. The best cure for a stagnant offense is a series of trips to the line. On top of that, the players most likely to get called for the foul are the opposing big men. Send the opponent’s starting frontline to the bench with a few too many fouls: Offensive stagnation solved; rebounding deficit closed.
It’s not that I want Jefferson to starting eschewing three point attempts entirely. In order for this offense to hum he is going to have to settle into a place where he is comfortable catching and shotting on the perimeter with some frequency. But there has to be a balance between continuing to work on long-terms goals in-game, and sacrificing those goals to make sure me still get the W. When the threes just aren’t falling, start heading for the rim, RJ.
Last night McDyess failed to make much of an impact either, but on the whole I’m happy with his decision making. Although he went 0-for-4 from the field, I believe all four shot attempts (at the very least three) were some version of his patented mid-range jumper. Although they weren’t falling, those are shots I am fine with him taking consistently.
As far as McDyess’ defensive contributions are concerned, he and I spoke about exactly that topic after the game. McDyess, with a self-deprecating charm, understated the progress he’s made learning Pop’s complicated system.
“It’s coming along,” said McDyess. “Slowly, but it’s coming along.”
McDyess further confirmed reports that, in order to speed up that process, Popovich has made the playbook simpler.
“I don’t think he’s throwing everything in right now,” said McDyess. “So far it’s been pretty good but down the road I’m pretty sure it’s going to get a lot more difficult.”
McDyess and I also spoke about the pedagogical relationship he has developed with DeJuan Blair.
“I’m always talking to him,” said McDyess. “I tell him keep playing hard and keep playing smart. Just think about what he’s doing on defense.”
“He was frustrated because he went in the game and things didn’t got the way they normally do for him. For me, on the bench, I’m sitting there like, man, this is your second game, and you got a second half. You gotta put that behind you. We got a second half and 80 more games to go.”
It’s nice to know that McDyess has taken Blair under his wing. Between Duncan and Dice, Blair would be hard pressed to find a wiser set of veterans from whom to learn anywhere in the league.
For obvious reasons, Blair’s situation is dramatically different from those of McDyess and Jefferson. At a certain point this season I expect McDyess and Jefferson to reliable contributors, night in, night out. Blair certainly has the potential to reach a high level of reliability but it’s misguided to assume any rookie automatically will.
Before the game Popovich said DeJuan Blair needs to improve on every element of his game except rebounding. But if Blair really wants to earn heavy minutes, the area of his game that needs the most improvement is defense. As I wrote in this morning’s Daily Dime:
He has a preternatural sense of spacing that lends itself to the complicated rotations Popovich’s defenses require. And he has the core body strength to be physical without being foul prone.
But as things currently stand, he is both physical and foul prone. He plays far too much defense with his hands, and far too little with his feet and chest. His unbelievably long reach only exacerbates the problem. Once he commits himself to the necessity of lateral movement, his length will be an asset. Currently, his 7 foot 3 inch wingspan serves as a crutch.
After the game, I asked both Tim Duncan and Gregg Popovich about the amount of small ball they played last night (I believe at one point coach Pop had Duncan, Hill, Parker, Mason and Finley on the floor).
“We did it last year to, so it’s not much of an adjustment,” said Duncan. “It kind of puts pressure on everyone kind of putting a body on someone and really blocking out and finishing possessions in that way. It helps us spread the floor. We get some of our wings guys a lot of open shots, a lot of driving lanes, so its’ good for us.”
Pop cut more directly to the chase.
“We’re trying to score,” said Pop. “So we’re putting a small lineup out there just to see if we can try to generate some offense. It worked as well as my initial game plan.”
Our small ball lineups are something I will be following closely this season, partially because I am not sure how I feel about them yet. Part of me sees the wisdom in deploying a 1 forward/4 guard unit against a team like the Bulls: Chicago’s team is a bit undersized and Duncan was playing quite well. On top of that, as Pop so bluntly put it, we needed to score.
But at the same time, given how poorly we were rebounding, slowing the game down and reestablishing dominance over the glass seems like an equally prudent option. As the season unfolds the success of our different looks is something I will be tracking closely.
Before I wrap this up, I wanted to let everyone know that I experienced a right of passage last night: I got my first disdainful glare and one word answer from coach Pop. During Pop’s pre-game press talk, I asked him whether or not he was happy with the Spurs defense on Wednesday, considering how well the Hornets shot from the floor (50% from the field, 50% from beyond the arc). It was the first time I had ever spoken to Gregg Popovich.
He looked at me sternly, growled “no” and moved on to the next question. At the time I felt deflated: it’s not exactly comforting when one of the men you admire most shoots you down the first to you speak to him. In his defense, I left the door wide open by asking a question that could easily be answered with a simple yes or no. I made sure to phrase my post-game question in terms of “either/or.”
That being said, by no means was I the reporter who received the harshest treatment from Pop. But I’ll save that story for another day.
Related posts:
22 Comments
October 30th, 2009 at 2:22 pm
Thanks for the writeup Graydon. While I wish I could ask Pop questions, I’m always afraid that would happen to me.
October 30th, 2009 at 2:27 pm
Jefferson and Ginobili in particular needed to be going to the rim significantly more. Even Bonner was smart enough to go to the hole a few times (As much as I cringed to watch him dribble in.) Parker finished pretty poorly going to the basket but that could have been due to being flattened the night before and the fatigue of a back to back.
October 30th, 2009 at 2:39 pm
I am truly jealous of you Graydon. You have taken a passion (the Spurs and writing) and taken it to the next step.
How did it feel being around a great player like Tim Duncan? I’d be curious as to all the emotions of being around our beloved Spurs.
On a side note, I feel like the whole ‘Spurs are too old to compete against young teams on the 2nd game of back-to-backs’ is being ran into the ground.
Parker, Hill, Jefferson, Blair, Mason should be more than capable of running with the younger teams, and Duncan, while suffering on the defense end a little, seemed to be as spry as ever on offense, even in the second half.
October 30th, 2009 at 2:45 pm
I tried following the live chat while at the game but I guess it doesn’t work on a Blackberry. I wish the Spurs played in Chicago twice a year.. or maybe its worth a trip down to Indy or Milwaukee.
Thought that 3 by Hinrich right at the end of the first half hurt, and since I saw on the recap none of the big guns sans Duncan made a field goal in the 2nd half, makes sense we lost.
Can’t wait for the Kings game, maybe they can let their frustrations out on them!
October 30th, 2009 at 4:46 pm
Chicago did to us what we did to NO. You look at the box score and things look relatively even from a percentage point of view. The statistic that jumps out as the difference in both games was the offensive rebounds. More opportunities + same efficiency = win.
October 30th, 2009 at 5:02 pm
It is absolutely fantastic that the two of ya’ll are getting face time with the team. That’s crazy cool and well deserved.
I’m looking forward to another year of insight and prose, gentlemen. Keep it up — I’ll read every word written this year.
October 30th, 2009 at 5:50 pm
“Bulls are likely to struggle on the road”? You could definitely say that; they’re currently being blown outta the gymnasium by Boston. Yeowch.
Then again, it’s a road back-to-back of their very own.
October 30th, 2009 at 6:21 pm
Not only was this the second night of a back-to-back, I believe Tuesday the team had an intense afternoon practice (practices are almost always in the morning)…Back-to-backs are especially tough in the beginning of the season when the players aren’t in shape yet.
October 30th, 2009 at 6:49 pm
Congratulations, Graydon. Here’s to many more interviews with Pop.
October 30th, 2009 at 6:51 pm
Here are minutes played and Spurs vs. Bulls score for Timmy broken down by the other big:
TD-Bonner 17:29, 33-27
TD-McDyess 4:59, 9-12
TD-Blair 1:49, 1-2
TD-4smalls 10:06, 18-20
Best result was TD-Bonner in both +/- and scoring rate. Here are the other big combos:
McDyess-Blair 8:41, 13-21
McDyess-Ratliff 2:43, 3-7
Bonner-Blair 2:13, 8-3
Note McDyess was minus no matter who he was paired with. The Bonner-Blair +5 was the final 2:13 of the game, essentially garbage time.
October 30th, 2009 at 9:10 pm
This defeat will be a moral lesson for the Spurs. It’s good it had to happen now and I’m sure this game will define and be a turning point on how they will fare in the months to come.
Let’s look at the plus point from this team.
1) The Big 3 are healthy as ever
2) The roster depth is much better than last season (overall that is)
3) RJ and McDyess have yet gel in perfectly, once they do….you know what I mean
4) That rookie Blair, is monsterous.
Vamos Spurs!!!
October 30th, 2009 at 9:24 pm
Good analysis. I particularly liked your take on the small ball line ups.
Just finished watching the Mavs smack the Lakers, and noticed how effective the Mavs where when playing Dirk at the 5 and Marion at the 4. How do you think the Spurs will match a Kidd, Terry, Howard, Marion, Dirk line up? I suspect this is one of the scenarios where Pop envisioned RJ’s post up game will be key.
October 30th, 2009 at 10:50 pm
congrats on the interview, i think it was more confusion and poor shooting than anything. I really hope pop plays hairston when finley’s not effective. as far as the mavs game wow did i just see the refs call a straight game? insane!! lol no but really its rare you see that with l.a, and it might have something to do with the investigation going on! i the lakers were off for once, and dallas did well with their zone defense. we should really tyake notes on what they did today, because i dont think l.a will be losing anytime soon..
October 30th, 2009 at 11:32 pm
How about the wrinkle of having Jefferson bring the ball up on occasion? I thought that was an interesting development. I’d much rather have him handling the ball than Mason (as the third point guard).
I’m not sure how Mason is fitting in right now. It seems like he’s the odd man out….trade winds blowing yet???
October 31st, 2009 at 9:36 am
I don’t think I have a problem with small-ball line-ups being used strategically. As the Suns showed for so long, they can be great ways to produce offense and get up and down the floor. The thing that concerns me is that we no longer have the small-ball 4 presence that Udoka gave us to really make that work. We have to put RJ at the 4, and I don’t think he really has any feel for that, not mention doesn’t have the body for it.
The other advantage I’ll be interested in looking at with small-ball is if having Tim + smalls can make for lightening-quick rotations, as it seemed like we were getting to people quicker with 4 quicker guys out there. If so, and we were able to cut off penetration and Tim has enough weakside blocker left in him, it could be a uniquely effective defensive change-up as well as providing offensive bursts.
October 31st, 2009 at 10:00 am
If you’re going to have a small ball lineup, the perimeter defenders cannot get beat off the dribble. That’s why I don’t like any small ball lineup that includes Finley, because he’s an average-below average defender.
A small ball lineup of Parker, Hill, Ginobili, Jefferson, Duncan can defend on the perimeter and play on offense. Hairston could be used in one of those lineups as well.
October 31st, 2009 at 10:11 am
Guys.. the SPURS lost this game cause they were just plain lazy. I know it was the second game of a back to back, but Duncan came to play and the other guys should have taken their cues from him. I’ve been watching the SPURS for years and in the Duncan/Pop era, the two things that kill the SPURS the most is “Duncan watching” and falling in love with that damn 3-point line. We were victim’s of both last night. When TD has it going, it’s easy to just dump the ball down and let him work, but the other guys were just standing still and not moving to create passing lanes. Further, how many 3s do we have to miss before we realize we’re having a bad shooting night? Yeah… we came into a gym with an energetic team of guys just itching to make a statement, but why get soft and stop taking the ball to the hole?
One more note… I’m a bit worried about Tony. I really see him thinking out there and that’s not a good sign from him. I know he’s looking to get the new guys involved as any good point would, but aside from Duncan, he’s our mismatch night in/ night out. It looked like he got his shot blocked a couple of times and just stopped attacking. I’m expecting him to take the reigns this year and become the Superstar that I know he can be, but he’s gotta bring it every night or we will struggle.
October 31st, 2009 at 12:33 pm
Extremely disappointing loss. Surprised that Pop didn’t’ put in McDyess or Blair when we were getting out rebounded and especially since Bonner’s shots weren’t falling. Hill was especially disappointing - just wonder if Pop’s hyped him too much. What a fantastic game from Duncan though - just goes to show he’s as good as ever.
L0oking forward to atleast a 20-point beatdown on the Kings tonight.
October 31st, 2009 at 3:24 pm
How was Hill disappointing? His offense was average for a backup PG and his defense was outstanding.
October 31st, 2009 at 11:02 pm
Def. disagree. Hill’s defense was one of the only things that stood out that game, besides our lack of rebounding and Duncan showing off that he still has it - even in back-to-back games.
November 1st, 2009 at 7:32 am
While Hill is much improved, and amongst the top NBA backups, he does still have weaknesses as a point guard. He’s not the greatest in running the pick and roll yet (how many times do you recall him hit the roller-most of his passes end up to the wing where the offense is reset instead of progressing). He still lacks some elusiveness or creativity to his dribble. What he has improved at is his ability to drive and finish and shooting. His shot has looked really good so far. And for what the Spurs need this is huge. Because playing in a second unit with Manu and Mason mask his weaknesses while his new strengths enable him to play with Tony Parker. Which, as I’ve said before, is the only way our backup point guard is going to get significant minutes on a championship run (if Parker goes down, we’re screwed).
November 2nd, 2009 at 1:44 am
Hmm… I read blogs on a similar topic, but i never visited your blog. I added it to favorites and i’ll be your constant reader.
Leave a Reply