The Notebook: Spurs-Hornets, 3/30/09
Ed. Note: I apologize that “the Notebook” is making such a late appearance. I have been feeling pretty under the weather and that has made it hard to write. Tack on the fact that I moved to a new apartment yesterday and don’t have internet yet and it has made getting this post up a bit of a challenge. If my posts pop up at somewhat unexpected times over the next couple of days, that’s the reason why.
The Spurs lost to the Hornets in Louisiana yesterday, 90-86. After falling down seven with under a minute to play, the Spurs nearly completed an improbable comeback after a quick three and steal by Manu, followed by another quick three by Finley. But after Manu purposely fouled Chris Paul near the half-court line, Paul was ruled to be in the act of shooting and made all three free throws, putting the game out of reach.
I’m not going to over analyze the final foul call Paul received. I personally felt that, because his hands were moving left to right (away from the basket) when he received the contact, saying he was in the act of shooting is a bit of a stretch. But, no matter how sober-minded I may intend to be, any discussion of a crucial foul’s legitimacy immediately elicits partisan jeers. So all I’ll say is, after such a hard-fought contest, I was disappointed the game came to a close in such a controversial manner.
At the end of last week, John Hollinger wrote an edition of Per Diem in which he connected a team’s rate of 3-point attempts to their offensive efficiency. In short, he felt taking (and not even necessarily making) more threes was a sign of efficiency. While I deeply respect Mr. Hollinger’s work, I must disagree. Because yesterday evening the Spurs were undercut by their incessant need to shoot the long ball, as they have been time and time again this season.
I understand the Spurs are one of the best 3-point shooting teams in the league. I understand that our offensive scheme is perfectly designed to create open looks for perimeter shooters. But we need to have the sobriety to realize that, when the outside shots aren’t falling, the cure isn’t more outside shots. When we struggle from deep, we need to work the ball inside or earn some trips to the charity stripe. The Hornets had a poor night from the field as well (.375) but by initiating enough contact to make it to the free throw line 33 times (and making 32 of those attempts) they were able to produce points consistently. I’ve made this point far more times than I care too. The fact of the matter is, even for a talented shooting team, 29 3-point attempts is too many.
Aside from their coverage of David West, the Spurs did a decent job on the defensive end of the ball. As I mentioned earlier, the Hornets had a rough night from the field. Recent history would suggest that their low FG% and the fact that they were playing the Spurs is not a coincidence. We executed our defensive scheme well, allowing for mid-range looks while remaining tough on the interior and perimeter.
But West remained a match-up problem for the Spurs, as he has always been. I often mention how we struggle against forwards who are comfortable shooting from 10-15 feet. No one better exemplifies this than West. Over the course of the game, we had several people cover West: Thomas, Gooden, Udoka. None of them were particularly effective. Udoka may have done the best job and for predictable reasons: Of the three he is the most comfortable chasing his man anywhere on the floor. If we face the Hornets in the first round of the playoffs, Udoka may earn that tough assignment.
Our next game is tomorrow night against the Thunder back home in San Antonio.
