mreinman wrote:nixluva wrote:mreinman wrote:nixluva wrote:nykshaknbake wrote:Well for one I'm glad we don't have to worry about putting a quality 1 guard out there. It's really an overrated position. I mean what sucessful teams have a star pg as their centerpiece?
There's a difference between a Star PG and a Quality PG. You can't overlook the fact that Phil won all those titles without a Star PG. Just a few years ago he was in 3 straight finals without a star PG. So in terms of proof of his case, Phil has significant evidence on his side.
Tony Parker is high quality but he's not considered a Star PG. So if you look at the most recent titles you don't see a lot of Star PG's. Curry and Westbrook stand out, but it's not the end all be all factor in Finals teams.
2005 San Antonio Spurs (2) 4–3 Detroit Pistons (2)
2006 Dallas Mavericks (4) 2–4 Miami Heat (2)
2007 San Antonio Spurs (3) 4–0 Cleveland Cavaliers (2)
2008 Los Angeles Lakers (1) 2–4 Boston Celtics (1)
2009 Los Angeles Lakers (1) 4–1 Orlando Magic (3)
2010 Los Angeles Lakers (1) 4–3 Boston Celtics (4)
2011 Dallas Mavericks (3) 4–2 Miami Heat (2)
2012 Oklahoma City Thunder (2) 1–4 Miami Heat (2)
2013 San Antonio Spurs (2) 3–4 Miami Heat (1
2014 San Antonio Spurs (1) 4–1 Miami Heat (2)
2015 Golden State Warriors (1) 4–2 Cleveland Cavaliers (2)
geeez!!!
jordan and kobe were practically PG's like lebron. Duh that they don't NEED a "real" PG.
Maybe riley was running the triangle too?
You really are funny. A SG or SF that has passing skills and can create their own shot is not so unique that only Kobe n MJ have ever done it. They are 2 of the best ever but you can succeed with lesser versions of Big Combo guards. That's the point. Your absolutist take is wrong. They don't have to be AS GREAT as Kobe or MJ in order to be effective and help the team win.
Along with KP's development among others the missing connective element is the backcourt defense and offensive versatility.
they may have to be as good as mj, kobe and shaq if they are going to keep this stupid triangle offense and take a bunch of stupid mid range inefficient shots and not play much more PnR.
Or just get Duncan, Kawahi and Parker. That may do it to. And you keep saying that they are running the/alot of triangle but they set a pick for parker about 90 percent of the time. How about we start with that? Just a little tweeeeeeeeeeeeeenie pick for our pg. Is that to much to ask from the big cheif?
You assume that picks are not part of what we do but we do use them. Just not as well as the Spurs. You see the Plays with Tony Parker and it makes you forget the many other plays not involving Parker where they run a lot of stuff exactly as we do.
It's not so much PnR by the Spurs as it's just using Dribble Handoffs, Drag Screens and Weaves. The same things the Knicks do. The difference is the guards we have. Jose and AA are nothing like the Spurs guards. Gallo is only slightly more likely to drive off a screen and Jerian a little more so, but none are really aggressive coming off Drag Screens or Dribble Handoffs. That's gonna make things look a lot different even running the same plays.
The Spurs do a lot of the same exact things we do and I mean a LOT of the same things. They run Triangle but when it's Parker and Duncan in the 2 man game it's gonna be pretty effective. So there not an issue with the offense as much as the need to get better performances from the guard spots. We have capable bigs to work the drag screen game but we need better performance from our guards.
Spurs run the same kind of overload on one side and 2 man game on the other that we do.
