Sunday, April 5th, 2009...9:27 pm
The Notebook: Spurs-Cavs, 4/5/09
I’m not at all surprised we lost to Cleveland this afternoon. In fact, I said quite explicitly that I thought we would. In my humble opinion, there is no team in the entire Association we are more ill-suited to defeat. I say that because no team is more similar to the Spurs.
Both the Cavs and the Spurs play stodgy, spatially sophisticated defense. They both surround key offensive players, adept at collapsing the defense, with highly effective outside shooters. They both dominate the defensive boards. The Spurs average 90.5 possessions per game. The Cavs average 91.3. Both teams, although thoroughly conceived, have enough flexibility to counter opposing teams’ varying styles.
This has been true for a few years now. Then what is different than past seasons? Well, in pretty much every category the Cavs are now slightly superior. Rather than playing Cleveland tightly, this means every tactical advantage the Spurs typically enjoy is negated.
Yes, there are specific reasons we lost today: We struggled from the field (39.2%) and only connected on 4 of our 16 3-point attempts. We lost the battle of the boards (the Cavs hauled down 44 defensive rebounds compared to our 34) although they had far more rebounding opportunities because of our poor shooting (The Cavs, on the other hand, shot slightly over 53% from the field). Manu Ginobili and Tim Duncan combined to produce 10 points on 4-16 shooting. But the details of today’s game aside, I believe there is no team in the league better prepared to beat us on a consistent basis.
(The only exception may be the Orlando Magic, who play stogdy defense, surround elite players who can collapse the defense with perimeter shooters, etc… Appropriately enough, the Magic and Cavs are 2 of the 3 teams we were swept by this season. The other is the Bucks. But I have no answers for why we struggle against the Bucks).
I am still frustrated with certain coaching decisions Popovich has been making recently but before I go into the details, I want to issue a general statement about my present feelings regarding coach Pop.
I consider myself in a state of loyal opposition. I believe Pop is the best coach in the NBA. In terms of class, tactics, and motivation, there is no man I would rather have gloomily strolling our sideline. Over the years, he has instilled in our core group a level of mental dexterity that leaves me confident that, despite our recent struggles, we can pull it together at a moment’s notice. My criticisms are microcosmic, not macrocosmic. But I do have criticisms.
The most glaring of which is the minutes Jacques Vaughn has seen over the last few games. Since 2006 Vaughn has been a dedicated but humble contributor to this team. He has calmly sat through DNP-CD after DNP-CD, only to show enthusiasm when Pop calls his number. But at this point in his career, he does not possess a redeemable on-court quality.
When he’s out there, we might as well be playing with 4 guys. I’m completely serious. On offense, he is a non-factor. On defense, he is a gaping wound. His usage today was even more absurd than in past games. On the defensive end of the floor, he was covering Mo Williams. Does anybody else realize how brazenly irresponsible it is to match up Vaughn on Williams?
Making matters even worse, Vaughn shared a considerable amount of time on the floor with Manu Ginobili. If Vaughn is on the floor with a superior passer, he serves absolutely no purpose.
I will state unequivocally that every minute of playing time Jacques Vaughn receives should be going to George Hill. Both are non-factors on the offensive end. Hill is a vastly superior defender. And, if Hill is going to be a postseason contributor, he needs the burn.
To end on a positive note (there haven’t been many so far), this game was the best Drew Gooden has played as a Spur. In his 27 minutes, he scored 15 points on 7-12 shooting. If Pop can learn to trust Gooden, I am confident he will be a key component of any playoff success we may experience.
Our next game is Tuesday in Oklahoma City.
10 Comments
April 5th, 2009 at 10:15 pm
OK, so as an objective observer - How do you think my Cavs can beat the Magic in the playoffs? Please send your conclusions to Mike Brown ASAP. Thanks.
April 6th, 2009 at 4:11 am
Nice post. I sure wouldn’t want the Spurs to have to face the Cavs in the Finals, but of course their much bigger concern is how to get there.
I wouldn’t say that Hill is a non-factor offensively, and he could be a solid post-season contributor. Why Pop doesn’t play him more at this point in the season is a complete mystery.
April 6th, 2009 at 6:36 am
I think Pop might be overthinking things, but I do believe on what I think he is trying to do. Putting too much emphasis on the playoffs and instead of testing the rotation, he is testing the different approaches he can takes on each team. The only reason I can see Vaughn playing is to not show other teams how you actually going to play them. He knows teams are no longer scare of us and having a good seed relatively secured, he is playing possum.
April 6th, 2009 at 7:29 am
I was listening to the after show on WOAI yesterday and the host was extremely perplexed at the rosters Pop put out there. He then went on to hypothesize that Pop must be doing it to throw the rest of the league off. I agree, except with one small caveat: he’s putting a lot of trust in the ability of his top 8 to be able to have the chemistry to play well together even though roster continuity has been lacking all season due to injuries. I know he’s not jerking everyone around because he’s lost his acumen for the game. He’s has to have something big up his sleeve that no one knows about.
I’m calling for Pop to bench Timmy for the rest of the year like the Celts did with Garnett. We have a playoff spot clinched, and we seemingly don’t have a huge advantage over any particular team, so why not rest him so we have the best chance we can have going into the playoffs. Don’t you think the Lakers would be worried about a first round match-up with us with a healthy Timmy?
April 6th, 2009 at 7:56 am
Or there’s this: We just aren’t good enough, and no matter what Pop does, the outcomes would be similar. Tim and Manu are obviously banged up (or, at least I hope that that’s their problem). Tony is doing all he can. Our threes aren’t falling (maybe our biggest problem now). We don’t have a lockdown, perimeter defender (I love Bruce, but I don’t buy the fact that he could still defend well enough-I think if he could, Pop would play him). Mason has hit a wall. Bonner is, well, Bonner: 2 made threes a game, and about 4-6 boards. Ime is hot/cold. Gooden is too new. Hill, with a lot of upside and potential, is still a rookie. The other teams that we worry about are younger, faster, hungrier, and have that wonderful momentum. Maybe we just aren’t good enough anymore…Maybe there just isn’t a magic button that Pop could push, maybe there are things going on in practice-things that we can’t see-that are influencing Pop’s decisions. Do I second guess him? Of course! There is no way in hell that Finely should EVER guard Durant, Granger, and Lebron back to back to back (see results). I mean EVER! I don’t get that one. But maybe Pop doesn’t have any other options. Maybe he knows that Ime and Bruce can’t get it done anymore. I don’t know. Maybe we just aren’t good enough this year.
April 6th, 2009 at 8:27 am
Ken, after 4 championships I refuse to believe Pop doesn’t know what he’s doing. He is well aware Finley is ineffective and unable to guard Durant, Granger, Lebron. I refuse to believe his coaching skills have diminished so abruptly and unexplicably to the point we have more knowledge. This must be a mask and I won’t believe otherwise until he comes out with these odd roster combinations in the play offs.
April 6th, 2009 at 8:32 am
I know the love fest that my fellow Spurs fans have with Pop. I know everyone thinks that because he’s making questionable decisions there must be a method to his madness. But to think that his crazy rotation experiment is somehow related to not wanting to show other teams what we’re going to do in the playoffs seems crazy to me. That makes about as much sense as him telling our “highly effective outside shooters” to miss on purpose so they’ll get more open looks during the playoffs. This is the time of year you want your rotation set and you’re fine tuning them for the playoff run.
I know this dead horse has been beat to death but I found this interesting quote from Pop concerning JV’s playing time before the Cleveland game. “He will help us have more of a rhythm to what we’re doing, since we’re all over the map for the last month and a half,” Popovich said. “With Jacque, I can call any play, the whole package. I think we need that steadiness right now.” (Express-News) I would like to see the player he’s talking about out on the court.
I do agree with sitting Tim for the rest of the reg season if it means he will be healthy for the playoffs. Unfortunately, I think he needs more than just a couple of weeks.
April 6th, 2009 at 9:21 am
As a C’s fan, I have no rooting interest here, but I find the Jacque Vaughn-George Hill thing fascinating. Rarely do you see a coach make such a dramatic change this late in the season. I’ll be watching to see how long Pop sticks with it.
April 6th, 2009 at 9:47 am
gospurs44, I agree completely with you point about the “method to Pop’s madness.” There is no way this is some greater ploy. He is doing this because he thinks it is right; and it is our right to disagree. He either knows something that we don’t or he is just flat out wrong. That’s all there is to it. Or he has no choice, as per my previous post.
April 6th, 2009 at 10:29 am
I was also questioning some moves, but actually liked how Pop left Manu on the bench during the key stretch in the 4th when we were on the verge of closing the gap. Mason was starting to hit some shots, and I think it helped his confidence to be left in there to try to get us back into the game. Hopefully that helps him get out of his slump.
I think gospurs is on to something, too. We must be purposely missing these shots. How else would Manu go 2 for 9 and 0 for 6 on threes?
Leave a Reply