Monday, March 30th, 2009...8:28 am
Other People: The Loss to New Orleans
Jump to Comments
The internets are alive with discussion following last night’s loss to New Orleans.
- Henry Abbott, following Jeff McDonald and Chris Sheridan, draws our attention to an end of contest problem with the game clock. Video (HT: TrueHoop):
- Ryan Schwan has a great recap from the Hornets perspective. My favorite observation: “While Paul drawing the three foul shots ten feet from the three-point line made me laugh like an idiot,(for the second time this year) my favorite play was West’s seventeen footer to put the Hornets up five with just short of a minute to go. Despite West having gone 11-12 since the middle of the third, the Hornets cleared the side for the West-Paul two man game, and Paul showed just how nasty he can be. As West floated from the elbow closer to the baseline, Paul pushed the ball towards the basket, turned, and drove his shoulder repeatedly into Matt Bonner’s stomach while protecting the ball from Parker, who was trying to strip him. As a result, Bonner was almost all the way out to the free throw line when Paul turned and shoveled a low pass at West’s ankles. West reached way down and almost flubbed the catch before being able to get into position to shoot. If Paul had not pushed Bonner out so far, that shot was contested and was unlikely to find the net. Instead, West only had the six-foot Tony Parker trying to contest him, and he drilled it calmly with his deadly one-legged set shot. Great play. Simply great.”
- LJ Ellis reacts with a coaching question: “Against the Hornets, I was a bit puzzled why Pop didn’t go with the same strategy he used last time against New Orleans. In that victory, the Spurs went under the screen on Paul and forced him to score. Pop also started Thomas that game to not allow West to get off to a good start. In this game, Pop had the Spurs go over the screen against Paul and started Bonner on West. My guess would be that Pop didn’t want the Hornets to get a free look at the defense the Spurs would play in the postseason … but it was definitely an odd coaching maneuver.”
- Jeff McDonald puts his finger on a bet the bank win-loss indicator: 3 point percentage.
- Buck Harvey says the Spurs were out-worked.
- Kelly Dwyer says: “San Antonio played a solid, if uninspired at times, game; and probably lost because it got very little from the off guard slot; where Ime Udoka and Roger Mason Jr. combined to shoot 1-10. Sure, Udoka was usually spelling Michael Finley, but let’s just go with that imagined symmetry.”
- Skeets and Tas talk Chris Paul and bad referees.
- Randy Hill, from Sunday, says the Spurs are now-wait for it-Tony Parker’s team.
- Kevin Arnovitz discusses Hilton Armstrong’s defense of Tim Duncan: “Hilton Armstrong, once Chandler’s understudy and now the Hornets’ starting center, had an impressive defensive game against Tim Duncan. Not only did Scott entrust his third-year big man with the tough assignment, but the Hornets’ coach made a deliberate decision to have Armstrong’s teammates stay at home on the Spurs’ shooters. This left Armstrong alone against Duncan for most of the night.”
- Current Playoff Matchups
10 Comments
March 30th, 2009 at 8:37 am
We lost because we missed three pointers and they made free throws. Simple really.
About the last play, the call was correct, but the bogus part was not calling a foul on Parker. That was crap. Anyways, life goes on. Or so I’m told.
March 30th, 2009 at 8:46 am
I’m with you Ken. I was more agitated about the lack of a foul call on Parker in the backcourt than I was about the clock situation.
I guess sometimes the game just doesn’t go your way. The Hornets D was collapsing the lane, making it impossible for Manu and Tony to get penetration, forcing the Spurs to jack so many 3′s. We just weren’t hitting them last night.
It was a rather painful game to watch in that respect.
March 30th, 2009 at 9:18 am
Other than the missed 3s and FTs mentioned previously here are a few interesting stats:
Manu 4-11 (4-9 from threes): He only took 2 shots that were not 3s! Guess he is still trying to regain form….
Duncan: 6-14: As has been mentioned previously, he has not been the same player since his knee injury. Back to back Sean Marks blocks! Seriously?
Back to the 3s: I have never understood this in general, how do we always shoot well/poorly as a team? Shouldnt it be that most times we have one shooter who is making them and other ones that are not? Also, would be interesting if somebody looked up Bonner’s 3 pt % since the Gooden signing.
March 30th, 2009 at 9:33 am
And most of the three’s were wide open. Lost count of how many open threes Finley and Udoka had from the corner. It was also irksome to hear that Pop has decided to use Mason at point come hell or high water. It seems to be evident to everyone, including our opponents (notice that when he’s playing point, they begin guarding him closely in the backcourt) that he is not, nor ever will be, a point guard. My fear is that it will effect is shooting.
March 30th, 2009 at 9:49 am
agutierrez, maybe it’s Pop’s arrogance that keeps him playing mace at PG? I think he likes to prove people wrong.
March 30th, 2009 at 9:57 am
I don’t think there should ever be a second of the game (unless we are up or down by a ton in the 4th) in which at least one of the big three are not in the game. Obviously, Manu is not totally healthy yet, but still. I hate those times when I see Tim, Tony, and Manu sitting. Our team just dies then.
March 30th, 2009 at 10:01 am
I agree with Randy Hill: Tony Parker has been the best player on the Spurs this year and looks to be the best player for the foreseeable future.
The Tim Duncan I saw last night looked old, slow, stiff, and not capable of being the number 1 option on a championship team. It looks to me that Tim is, and will remain, at best the number 2 option - probably number 3, behind Tony, and then whoever is open for a three pointer - Mace, Ginobili, Bonner, Finley.
Tim will continue to be a great safety net, a great security blanket. But he’s not good enough to carry the Spurs to a championship on his post scores and blocked shots like he did in 99, 03, and 05.
March 30th, 2009 at 10:05 am
I’m with you guys on Mason running the PG. The full court pressure is definitely applied every time he is in there, which ends up taking a good amount of time to initiate the offense. That has really be irking me lately. Hill may not be a natural PG, but at least we can initiate the offense with plent of time on the shot clock.
And Ken, I can’t remember for sure, but was there ever any time last night where one of the big 3 wasn’t on the court? To me, it really seemed that the offense was stagnant when TP wasn’t on the court. Manu couldn’t seem to be able to get the offense going, which illustrates that we still need some time before he is acclimated back to playing condition. In that respect, it just looked like one of the big 3 wasn’t on the court, even though there was. Of course, I could just be wrong… maybe there were times when none of the 3 were out there.
March 30th, 2009 at 10:30 am
Great game discussion, ladies and gents. I had considered writing a full length feature on the subject of Mason Jr. as a point guard, but time won’t permit it. But in lieu of a more a carefully worded post, let me say this: Roger Mason Jr. is not a point guard. I’d prefer to see Pop play Manu Ginobili at back up point and spell Mason Jr. with George Hill. My 2 cents.
March 30th, 2009 at 10:35 am
Navin,
The team wide feast or famine trend is odd. I’ve puzzled over that myself.
Leave a Reply