El Conclusión: San Antonio Spurs 120, Oklahoma City Thunder 111

I thinkthe hack a splitter worked wonders for OKC. Spliter did sort of decently not choking all his freethrows but in a game of runs and momentum the way the game slowed down was huge for OKC. I think Pop should have pulled splitter and finish the quarter with that isane momentum we had.Perhaps he had faith in Tiago and while he didnt disapoint per say the way the game changed certailnly help the thunder a lot, even if Tiago had hit em all.

Watching this game as a Spurs fan was pure enjoyment. GSG!

That’s what I’ve been saying for quite some time. I think they still lose, but IMO it’s their only chance.

If you do a post about the third quarter, I think you should call it “El Explosion”. That was amazing.

Leonard with a double-double! 18 and 10. Only one foul. Hill was a nice player but Leonard is special. He dunks past Ibaka like Ibaka is not there. Those big hands really help on a strong dunk. This guy might be an All-Star in a few years. Maybe my favorite of the “new spurs” (although I love Tiago Splitter).

Did the thunder go small when Blair had those great games during the regular season?

Did anyone else think it was a mistake for Coach Brooks to use his big adjustment at a point in the game where he had a 20 percent chance of winning (margin was greater than time left in game)? Granted they came back, but it seems like they provided Pop with a whole quarter of tape to figure out how to beat this lineup.

I agree OKC is in pick-your-poison position, but above all, they have to defend the PnR better. And frankly, Perkins was absolutely awful in that regard. That hurt them more than anything.

The Spurs generate almost all their offense from the PnR, and right now they’re getting whatever they want when Perkins is defending the screener. Changing that is priority #1, 2, 3…. Brooks can’t just sit their and watch TP come off screens and toy with the defense. He has to take something away.

I’d expect Brooks to go small and switch screens like they did in the 4th. So what if you give up a few mismatches to TP on the perimeter or to TD in the post. An all-isolation diet isn’t exactly what the Spurs want.

I was thinking the same thing last night. The difference between the Spurs going small vs. the Thunder going small, the Spurs move the ball better. You can play two bigs against the Thunder like the Spurs did last night because 3 guys are going to get the ball, and the other two are just going to stand around. Diaw on Fisher was a good matchup. He wasn’t moving, just camped out in the corner. When he did get the ball he couldn’t get a shot over Diaw’s length and if he went past Diaw, he still had to shoot over Duncan. I say, let them go small with their big 3. They can’t play the whole game.

Small ball can’t be used all game. The Spurs are too good and will have adjusted by the end of the first quarter. They struggled early when Brooks went small ball, but adjusted well, finishing the quarter off with some nice baskets. The only reason it works in spurts for the Thunder is that they were in somewhat of a desperation mode. They can’t keep that intensity up for 48 minutes. Brooks used it in about as good of a fashion as he could, but the Spurs’ lead was too big and they’re poise is just too great. Nothing phases them anymore.

I agree, love Leonard. He was HUGE last night. 18 and 10, as you mention, but his boxscore is even better than that might lead you to believe: 18 on just 12 FGA, 3-6 3FG, a steal, two blocks, and only one turnover. For the playoffs, he’s shooting 50% from the field, 45% on 3’s, and 85% from the line. I wouldn’t be surprised if that gives him one of the highest true shooting scores in the playoffs.

I wouldn’t mind seeing Blair if they intend to use him in the post when OKC goes small. That being said, he’s not as crisp on rotations IMO, since he doesnt have Diaw’s length he can’t close out on Fisher. Shooting is about angles, Fisher gets a more preferable angle shooting over Blair than Diaw and Blair won’t be able to recover as fast if he leaves his feet. The current rotation works well and I don’t see Pop changing anything with the success they’re having.

I’ve been saying that since the series started. If we get in a pickle they could throw Blair in there and shake up Brooks strategy besides Blairs a good free throw shooter and his rebounds could come to life with these match ups. That’s the same team they played during the regular season. He’s good for this series as well.

So they take it to 30pts and then they bring it back to 6. So what? It’s a game of runs anyway.

Agree.

As I already acknowledged, the Spurs are a tough number to crack for any team, including the Thunder. A small ball, run at every opportunity strategy is their only chance of breaking through, albeit, it’s a limited one. But they need to emphasize/optimize their core strengths: speed, youth, length, and athleticism. That means playing the following players more and more minutes as you go up this scale: Ivey, Perkins, Cook, Fisher, Collison, Sefolosha, Ibaka, Harden, Westbrook, and Durant.

There goal should be to out-run us, and use their long arms, quick hands, and great hops to cut-off, disrupt, block, and deflect driving lanes, passes, and shots (forcing excess turnovers) in both transition and half court defensive sets. They need to try and trap Parker unpredictably, and they need to be smarter and more aggressive in guarding the pick and roll, fighting through screens where possible, but also using switches well when appropriate. Duncan’s a tough cover for the Thunder anyway you look at it, but they’d do just as well if not better with a tag team of Ibaka/Collison, especially if they can keep the tempo at a fever pitch. But to try and do all this, they need to play their fastest and most athletic guys the great majority of minutes, and constantly push the pace (95+, and score at least 105+) in an all out effort to score in bunches out in transition.

And in regards to the rebounding, they get a lot of their boards from their wings and Ibaka (Perkins is 26th in total rebound rate among 32 league-ranked centers). Durant is actually the Thunder’s best defensive rebounder, and one of the best rebounding SF’s in the NBA. He’s ranked 7th, just behind Kawai in total rebound rate for SF’s, and he’s number one in defensive rebound rate among all SF’s. Ibaka leads the Thunder in offensive rebound rate, and is #5 in the league among PF’s, tied with DeJuan Blair. Westbrook is second in the league among PG’s in offensive rebound rate. And their SG’s are in the top 20% in defensive rebound rate league-wise among all SG’s, with Thabo, Harden, and Cook ranked 16th, 18th, and 21st.

The fact is, OKC cannot match up with us in either offensive or defensive half-court sets. Neither Ibaka nor Perkins are offensive threats in the half court, particularly in the low post. Thus, their spacing in the half court is not good, and their offense is too imbalanced, with WB & KD getting close to 80% of the starting units shot attempts.To attempt to compensate for these problems, they need to push the pace with WB & Harden leading the attack, Durant and Ibaka running the lanes, and spot up shooters spreading the floor (e.g., Cook and Fisher).

Will this allow them to beat the Spurs in 4 out of the next 5 games? Probably not (and hopefully not!). But in my view, it’s the only chance they have.

Blair is actually a good match-up on Perkins. Perk can’t stay with him on the pick and roll, and Perk has trouble exploiting Blair’s defensive weaknesses.

How can you say Blair is a good free throw shooter when his regular season average was lower than Tiago’s? Against OKC in the three regular season games he was 4 of 9 from the FT line.

Which game are you referring to? Collison had all of one offensive rebound, which was out past the FT line that he took away from Green on a long rebound. The rebound prior to that one was so long that when Fisher caught up with it he stepped out of bounds. From what I recall there were a number of offensive rebounds by OKC that were the result of the ball bouncing out long over everyone’s head, and boxing out wasn’t the problem. OKC did not turn them into a whole lot of points either.

Daniel, even with statistics, you look at possessions. Offensive rebounds take a possession away from the defense, and at the rate the Spurs were scoring at over 50%, that 16-8 edge on offensive rebounds is 8 more possessions, which is 8 more points at 50% fg. Right? If we’re looking at blaring differences in the box score, that one sticks out along with fast break points 26-10 Okc edge.

I’m referring to game 2. Collison definitely gained control of the ball after multiple OKC misses against the SA second unit. Maybe they didn’t all qualify as rebounds. This happened on several consecutive OKC possessions in I think the 2nd quarter; the commentators emphasized it, it was quite striking, and led to baskets for OKC when they’d missed their first and in one case second try. I can’t tell you much more than that, since I was listening to the game, not watching. If they were all due to long bounces, that would be great.

It must have been the series near the start of the 2nd quarter. Fisher missed a three pointer and OKC had a team rebound while Manu was charged with a foul on Collision. Eight seconds later and Collison misses a jumper and another “team rebound” (out of bounds off a Spur?). Fisher misses and that results in a defensive team rebound, the ball going to the Spurs. That took 34 seconds off the game clock with no points for OKC, and then Bonner hit a three. Next possession for OKC and Fisher misses a jumper with the rebound bouncing back out to him but he steps out of bounds. Next time Harden misses a 17 footer and Green started to get the long rebound out near the top of the key but Collison rushing away from the basket beats him to it. That led to a layup by Harden 11 seconds later. So after all that activity in a minute and a half, Collison showed a lot of hustle and the Spurs outscored them 3-2.

“I’m curious where OKC can go from here to expect to win four out of the next five games.”…still curious?