How to beat the Spurs?

[AdonalFoyle4Prez]

Looks like they're pretty solid in the frontcourt now with the additions of both LMA and David West, and every meet up we always have struggled against them (and in games that we win, we barely won). They have players who can shoot it from beyond the arc and can take it inside, too.

How do we exactly beat them consistently? Has our smallball lineup (Iggy at PF & Green at C) been effective against them? I remember seeing us try that, and Diaw is just a little bit bigger than Green and got his way with him.

Any clues/blueprint to neutralize them, consistently?

[weekend_warrior]

Try to push the pace without getting sloppy... And then run them out of the building. Duncan is somewhat like 39, Ginobili 37 and West also 35... Parker north of 30 as well and constantly hobbled.
If the game gets too much into those half court sets, Spurs will take it easily.

[turk3d]

What you just said, but play great defense. We need a much improved Bogut in order ti match their bigs. Help from Mo and Lee with much better play from Lee and Mo getting back to being Super Mo.

[and1GS]

Another year of this team together is huge IMO. That's the Spurs model, keep the core--which includes the main bench guys--together and expand the playbook. Remember, we scrapped a good amount of the playbook early in the season when we were playing sloppy, turnover prone bball.

I'm excited because the way you beat a team like SAS is by playing your game rather than doing what they force you to do. That and ball movement - the confidence to do both comes with time.

[FNQ]

On a Spurs site somewhere: "How do we stop Stephen Curry and Klay Thompson?"

I dont think they can out-efficiency us. We're too good from deep. Even if they do the Green-Kawhi-Parker shuffle again, we shouldn't have a problem with Bogut and Green setting mean picks.

[Jester_]

I have a theory that because this team relies on a lower probability-higher reward shot, we're more likely to lose games than, say, the '01 Lakers, but the games we win are more likely to be blowouts. So the way to beat the Spurs if this theory is true would be to tire them the hell out so the series has to go 7 games.

[cpower]

let LMA or Tony Parker to score. These two take inefficient long 2s, which would be a plus for us.

[The-Power]

I have a theory that because this team relies on a lower probability-higher reward shot, we're more likely to lose games than, say, the '01 Lakers, but the games we win are more likely to be blowouts. So the way to beat the Spurs if this theory is true would be to tire them the hell out so the series has to go 7 games.

You make it sound like we're some sort of anomaly in this regard while this is, in fact, not true at all.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2015.html?lid=header_seasons#misc::12

Teams which rely more on 3's than we do: Rockets, Cavaliers, Clippers, Hawks, 76ers
Other teams above league average in this regard: Portland, Mavericks, Raptors, Spurs, Bulls
Playoff teams below league average: Heat, Nets, Bucks, Wizards, Grizzlies, Pelicans

So almost every successful team these days emphasizes the use of the 3pt-shot - and they do it despite lower efficiency at that (we're the clear-cut 1st in 3ptFG%). I don't believe in your theory either, but even your attempt to apply it in our case is unsubstantiated in my opinion.

[Jester_]

I have a theory that because this team relies on a lower probability-higher reward shot, we're more likely to lose games than, say, the '01 Lakers, but the games we win are more likely to be blowouts. So the way to beat the Spurs if this theory is true would be to tire them the hell out so the series has to go 7 games.

You make it sound like we're some sort of anomaly in this regard while this is, in fact, not true at all.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2015.html?lid=header_seasons#misc::12

Teams which rely more on 3's than we do: Rockets, Cavaliers, Clippers, Hawks, 76ers
Other teams above league average in this regard: Portland, Mavericks, Raptors, Spurs, Bulls
Playoff teams below league average: Heat, Nets, Bucks, Wizards, Grizzlies, Pelicans

So almost every successful team these days emphasizes the use of the 3pt-shot - and they do it despite lower efficiency at that (we're the clear-cut 1st in 3ptFG%). I don't believe in your theory either, but even your attempt to apply it in our case is unsubstantiated in my opinion.

Sorry, I should emphasize that I'm not comparing us to other teams in this league, I'm comparing us to other historic teams of a similar calibre (Lakers, Bulls, etc.).

[Money_]

With that front court, you have to have someone to protect the rim. Not sure if Ezeli, Bogut and Green have enough fouls to give to take on the job of stopping that machine but you know they will compete. Disruption should be the Warriors first priority, do not let them get into the flow of their half court offense, disrupt Parker early to make him work for that first pass. Get out on the run and make them tired. Once we know we can get 2-3 stops in a row against them, we give ourselves our best chance to beat them.

[The-Power]

I have a theory that because this team relies on a lower probability-higher reward shot, we're more likely to lose games than, say, the '01 Lakers, but the games we win are more likely to be blowouts. So the way to beat the Spurs if this theory is true would be to tire them the hell out so the series has to go 7 games.

You make it sound like we're some sort of anomaly in this regard while this is, in fact, not true at all.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2015.html?lid=header_seasons#misc::12

Teams which rely more on 3's than we do: Rockets, Cavaliers, Clippers, Hawks, 76ers
Other teams above league average in this regard: Portland, Mavericks, Raptors, Spurs, Bulls
Playoff teams below league average: Heat, Nets, Bucks, Wizards, Grizzlies, Pelicans

So almost every successful team these days emphasizes the use of the 3pt-shot - and they do it despite lower efficiency at that (we're the clear-cut 1st in 3ptFG%). I don't believe in your theory either, but even your attempt to apply it in our case is unsubstantiated in my opinion.

What? How does your post disagree with mine in any way?

I thought your post implied that our team relies (more than his competition) on the 3pt-shot which isn't accurate. If your intention was to compare us to teams of different eras, well, then your statement is accurate (although I don't really see the benefit of such a comparison) and what's left is the theory.

edit: Just saw your edit and now I at least understand where you're coming from. Thanks for the clarification!

[Onus]

I think the Spurs just signed their death. The hardest part about guarding the Spurs was stopping Parker and Ginobili's penetration because they would kick out to 3 point shooters if you don't collapse down. Now they kick it out to LMA for long 2s and you just let him feast on that shot all day long. Now that becomes harder when it's Diaw and LMA, but LMA wants no part of being a center so whatever, plus he's nowhere close to being the defensive anchor that Duncan is.

Plus I don't think LMA and Duncan can cover Steph

[whocurrz]

Don't necessarily think LMA will give us a ton of trouble as Dray has check much better post players and we can live with him shooting long twos. Did the same to Gasol and he shot 34% in the last 3 games against the Grizz.

However I think we need HCA against the Spurs to win so that would be a must IMO

[MisterRogers]

You have no chance against the Spurs or a healthy Cavs and healthy OKC team.

[DreDay]

Hard to say without seeing them in action first. Preliminary thoughts are run a lot and tempt Aldridge into inefficient long twos.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ChuckDurn]

5 of the Spurs' top 9 players are 33 or older: Duncan, Ginobili, West, Parker, and Diaw. History would suggest that not all of them will be healthy when it matters.

As was partly the case for the Warriors' success this season and in the playoffs, it all depends on health, and I can't say that I'd be comfortable with the health risks on the Spurs' roster.....

[azwfan]

I'm comfortable playing any team right now. I'm expecting our offense as a team to be better, and Barnes, Ezeli, Green, and Klay to be better individually. I think there's a pretty good chance we are much better than last year with little roster changes.

The Spurs used to have championship pedigree over us. "They're the Spurs". But now, we're champs too. And we're younger. Spurs have my respect, but i like our chances.

[Senchu]

Bring back Bad Porn to destroy LMA

[Northx57]

You have no chance against the Spurs or a healthy Cavs and healthy OKC team.

Yeah, why do we even play 82 game seasons and playoffs?

[cj03]

Chances are though LMA is going to start shooting more 3s...it might be hard to counter. Although, if Parker isn't healthy and back to his old self, they won't be much of a threat.