San Antonio early offseason in review (HW/bondom34/dbrandon)

[Chinook]

[Andre Roberstan]

No, but if James Harden is a steals leader, and Whiteside a blocks leader, and Miami's defense is actually better when Whiteside is on the bench, they're probably not a great indicator.

And again, you're stating all box score defensive stats. Which again, are largely useless.

And finally, as I said, rim protection is great, but he's a bad defender.

Worth noting that Whiteside made some strides this year on the defensive side—towards the end of the year, especially after Bosh went out, his defense finally became a net positive.

But to Bondom's point, it is possible to be a bad defender but a good rim protector—it's only one aspect of the puzzle. Teams that are capable of pulling a rim protector away from the basket tend to neutralize him unless he's also good at moving laterally and sticking to a man on the perimeter. And there are some very good defensive bigs who don't rank that well at rim protection (Marc Gasol and Chris Bosh come to mind).

[bondom34]

No, but if James Harden is a steals leader, and Whiteside a blocks leader, and Miami's defense is actually better when Whiteside is on the bench, they're probably not a great indicator.

The Miami/Whiteside thing was disproved with a large sample size. And yes, you aren't actually making an argument by saying this. Those guys are better defenders that they would be if they didn't do those things. Hardly a counter.

And again, you're stating all box score defensive stats. Which again, are largely useless.

In your opinion. This isn't fact just because you believe it to be so.

And finally, as I said, rim protection is great, but he's a bad defender.

But the Spurs have a way to making it so the bigs' man job on defense is to protect the rim once guys get funneled to them.

And the Dubs will just PnR him anyway, so his rim protection isn't relevant.
Also, fine. Harden's a great defender, and Whiteside and Drummond should be DPOY over Green too. Because blocks and steals.

[Chinook]

And the Dubs will just PnR him anyway, so his rim protection isn't relevant.

But this isn't the solution you think it is. 1) Because the Spurs have better perimeter defenders than Cleveland did and thusly can make it harder for GS to gain the advantage in PnR and 2) They aren't going to be able to integrate Durant if they keep running plays with Zaza and Curry. And it's not like Curry is going to open off the screen all the time. The Spurs would switch, and that forces passes, which break the PnR. The biggest mismatch off the pass is Zaza on Green or whoever is defending Curry, and with Zaza not being the passer Bogut was, helping on him isn't going to yield the same looks.

Also, fine. Harden's a great defender, and Whiteside and Drummond should be DPOY over Green too. Because blocks and steals.

I guess we are saying that those are the only things that matter after all. I had been under the assumption that we were saying that they are part of the equation.

[Chinook]

No, but if James Harden is a steals leader, and Whiteside a blocks leader, and Miami's defense is actually better when Whiteside is on the bench, they're probably not a great indicator.

And again, you're stating all box score defensive stats. Which again, are largely useless.

And finally, as I said, rim protection is great, but he's a bad defender.

Worth noting that Whiteside made some strides this year on the defensive side—towards the end of the year, especially after Bosh went out, his defense finally became a net positive.

But to Bondom's point, it is possible to be a bad defender but a good rim protector—it's only one aspect of the puzzle. Teams that are capable of pulling a rim protector away from the basket tend to neutralize him unless he's also good at moving laterally and sticking to a man on the perimeter. And there are some very good defensive bigs who don't rank that well at rim protection (Marc Gasol and Chris Bosh come to mind).

I don't disagree. But we aren't even really talking about how good Gasol will be on defense objectively. We are wondering if he'll be good enough to justify being in on offense. I think there are a lot of reasons why he's not Kevin Love with the Cavs. I think he has a job that he can do well on that end and that the Spurs have the personnel to allow him to do that job a lot. I don't think the Warriors want to change their whole offense to run PnRs at the Spurs. That gets them out of what they want to do on offense unless the Spurs start overplaying them. Zaza is their worst offensive starter, and if the plan become to have him beat the Spurs, I think Pop would accept that, especially if Gasol is making his size felt on the other end.

[bondom34]

And the Dubs will just PnR him anyway, so his rim protection isn't relevant.

But this isn't the solution you think it is. 1) Because the Spurs have better perimeter defenders than Cleveland did and thusly can make it harder for GS to gain the advantage in PnR and 2) They aren't going to be able to integrate Durant if they keep running plays with Zaza and Curry. And it's not like Curry is going to open off the screen all the time. The Spurs would switch, and that forces passes, which break the PnR. The biggest mismatch off the pass is Zaza on Green or whoever is defending Curry, and with Zaza not being the passer Bogut was, helping on him isn't going to yield the same looks.

Also, fine. Harden's a great defender, and Whiteside and Drummond should be DPOY over Green too. Because blocks and steals.

I guess we are saying that those are the only things that matter after all. I had been under the assumption that we were saying that they are part of the equation.

But the Dubs will just pass to whoever Gasol ends up on in pnr. That's the point. They switch and GSW just has Curry drive. Gasol's too slow. They don't GSW passes, and scores that way. He's a problem defensively, this really isn't a remotely controversial idea.

[jayjaysee]

I think the Gasol signing was solid enough... I would take Gasol's wide advantage over 28 teams rather than targeting a player specifically for the Warriors series. I can't argue he was a good choice if the idea was to match up against the Wariors though :/ only SA fans can do that.

And even in that series, if Zaza plays 20 minutes - Gasol can play 20 minutes and be effective. If the Spurs get an early lead, Gasol can stay in through the entire game. He should be able to stand over Green easy and while I love Zaza thanks to this last year, he's going to be a shell imo after 100 games (or 60 or 1800 minutes however you want to call it) so come playoffs big teams should be more effective if they can keep up. That doesn't mention that GS can just start the game hot (any of Durant, Curry, Klay) and the Warriors will be allowed to play their game and Gasol will get benched. Which is the most likely situation..

I just don't think the Spurs had better options, so I don't want to take away from what they did. They upgraded against 28 teams. No center was helping match up against GS. Parsons, Barnes, Hill, Lee (decent wings that switched teams) would have helped more against GS but would have been luxuries against any other team. Upgrading Parker - via FA wasn't an option (they tried with Conley, Lin - wanted to start) so would have cost future assets in a trade..

Earlier in the offseason, I said I'd have liked them to jump in on the Hill/Teague/Utah trade.. I think Indy or Utah could have been worked to take Parker, Murray, and a small asset instead of what they ended up. But that wouldn't have worked while chasing Conley/Durant so fair to shoot it down.

Also, I've been hearing LJC talk for a long time.. Now he is here and no hype? I think in a GS series, a decent LJC would be huge. Maybe he won't be playable but his insane length would be huge in matching up with the Warriors.

[Andre Roberstan]

I think the Gasol signing was solid enough... I would take Gasol's wide advantage over 28 teams rather than targeting a player specifically for the Warriors series. I can't argue he was a good choice if the idea was to match up against the Wariors though :/ only SA fans can do that.

And even in that series, if Zaza plays 20 minutes - Gasol can play 20 minutes and be effective. If the Spurs get an early lead, Gasol can stay in through the entire game. He should be able to stand over Green easy and while I love Zaza thanks to this last year, he's going to be a shell imo after 100 games (or 60 or 1800 minutes however you want to call it) so come playoffs big teams should be more effective if they can keep up. That doesn't mention that GS can just start the game hot (any of Durant, Curry, Klay) and the Warriors will be allowed to play their game and Gasol will get benched. Which is the most likely situation..

I just don't think the Spurs had better options, so I don't want to take away from what they did. They upgraded against 28 teams. No center was helping match up against GS. Parsons, Barnes, Hill, Lee (decent wings that switched teams) would have helped more against GS but would have been luxuries against any other team. Upgrading Parker - via FA wasn't an option (they tried with Conley, Lin - wanted to start) so would have cost future assets in a trade..

This is a fair take.

But for me, I play some trading card games, and when there's a deck that completely breaks the format, the validity of everything else is determined by how it matches up with that deck. For example, in Hearthstone—Huntertaker is probably the most broken deck in the history of the game. The entire meta revolved around "how do you beat Huntertaker" until they nerfed Undertaker into the ground. Decks that didn't beat it just died a natural death.

Now, it's a little different in the NBA, because not every team is a contender. But for a team that's a contender like SA, I would have put Gasol's money towards someone who can help me in the "meta-breaking" matchup. Because you can win 60 games, but the 4 that matter for SAS are the ones they play against GSW.

Were there better realistic options? I don't know. But I wouldn't have spent the money on Gasol.

[jayjaysee]

Were there better realistic options? I don't know. But I wouldn't have spent the money on Gasol.

Disclaimer - Mavs fans rarely offer the bright side for the Spurs..

But Dellavedova is actually the only FA that changes teams, that I like more for SA...

They don't need another wing to match up against GS. Green and Leonard offer an amazing starting point. They have the depth to rest Manu, they have 4 prospects to bet on.. It's pretty reasonable to expect one of LJC, Bertans, Simmons or Anderson to be ready imo.

They need a new PG. I don't think Delly was the answer either though but he'd help against GS more than Gasol.

I don't think adding another starting wing is needed against GS and don't think there was a PG available that would help.. So you add the piece that makes your team the best it can be.

I don't think Biyombo, Ian, Mozgov, Ezeli, Noah, nor Gasol change things against GS. I don't see any of them chasing Curry around the pnr like Adams, poor word choice?. Maybe everyone is thinking SA should have signed Parsons/Barnes though? I just don't think Pop would run 3 wings enough to justify it.

The Spurs didn't address their biggest need by upgrading PG, which is a big deal - but they made the team better, brought over two decent prospects, and possibly drafted really well..

[Texas Chuck]

To me the player the Spurs might "could" have added this summer who would have helped the most is Millsap. Atlanta was shopping him in the hopes of keeping Horford while adding Howard. And obviously the Spurs have a great relationship there. Not sure they had enough attractive assets to get him, but adding him and moving LMA primarily to center would have been the first option.

But other than agreeing that the Spurs do drop off meaningfully defensively going from Duncan to Pau, I mostly agree with jay that Pau is going to be a good addition. The Spurs are going to have a really strong offense and Pau and LMA give them so many options and teams are going to find them so difficult to guard. That's going to be enough to beat the majority of the league regardless of the defense.

[Andre Roberstan]

Were there better realistic options? I don't know. But I wouldn't have spent the money on Gasol.

Disclaimer - Mavs fans rarely offer the bright side for the Spurs..

But Dellavedova is actually the only FA that changes teams, that I like more for SA...

They don't need another wing to match up against GS. Green and Leonard offer an amazing starting point. They have the depth to rest Manu, they have 4 prospects to bet on.. It's pretty reasonable to expect one of LJC, Bertans, Simmons or Anderson to be ready imo.

They need a new PG. I don't think Delly was the answer either though but he'd help against GS more than Gasol.

I don't think adding another starting wing is needed against GS and don't think there was a PG available that would help.. So you add the piece that makes your team the best it can be.

I don't think Biyombo, Ian, Mozgov, Ezeli, Noah, nor Gasol change things against GS. I don't see any of them chasing Curry around the pnr like Adams, poor word choice?. Maybe everyone is thinking SA should have signed Parsons/Barnes though? I just don't think Pop would run 3 wings enough to justify it.

The Spurs didn't address their biggest need by upgrading PG, which is a big deal - but they made the team better, brought over two decent prospects, and possibly drafted really well..

Yeah, fair enough assessment. If it were me I would have tried to find a 3/4 tweener who could slide in next to LMA in smaller lineups, but I can't pick fault with their offseason as a whole outside of not upgrading PG.

[jayjaysee]

I hope a Spurs fan responds to this..

But what happened to LJC's hype? He should be that tweener - and with his length he should be the piece that is getting talked about against GS. Maybe he had an awful year? Or just a bad summer league?

And yeah, I can't dismiss the drop off in defense from Gasol to Duncan in general. It's huge. But I don't think the defensive side aspect matters against GS. Neither are playable if GS is leading or if they are hot.

[jptremblay]

Lot of people falling in the same error, thinking that Pop will do what Warriors want, just benching the big that can give Warriors some trouble, while moving Aldridge and Leonard to positions that they're less effective, trying to stop GSW small lineup...
Maybe Pop thinks different, and is trying to upgrade his offense with two bigs and a Big forward like Kawhi, trying to obligate others to adjust for them, besides doing the same again and again...to try to neutralize Warriors small ball trying to play small to when you don't have the same weapons to be effective in that offense model.

[franktony]

I hope a Spurs fan responds to this..

But what happened to LJC's hype? He should be that tweener - and with his length he should be the piece that is getting talked about against GS. Maybe he had an awful year? Or just a bad summer league?

And yeah, I can't dismiss the drop off in defense from Gasol to Duncan in general. It's huge. But I don't think the defensive side aspect matters against GS. Neither are playable if GS is leading or if they are hot.

He just didn't develop in France as they hoped. In fact, he pretty much wasted a few years in France. San Antonio should have brought him before, 1 or 2 years ago.
He has the tools and athleticism to be a very good defender in the NBA and he has a nack to block shots, but I don't see him becoming an offensive force. Best case for him is to develop a decent 3p shot become an Ibaka-lite.

Spurs fans have more hope for Davis Bertans, at least to help right away. With that range and that shooting touch, it's much easier for him to find a role in Pop's system.

[Dupp]

Not signing Conley was the best thing that could of happened to the Spurs. Target cp3 next off season and they can be great.

[Chinook]

To me this:

But the Dubs will just pass to whoever Gasol ends up on in pnr. That's the point.

and this:

They switch and GSW just has Curry drive. Gasol's too slow. They don't GSW passes, and scores that way. He's a problem defensively, this really isn't a remotely controversial idea.

are both just ways of saying, "I don't want to argue anymore, but I'm right." And you are certainly welcome to do that. But I think it's disingenuous. There are numerous stats that give Pau good marks last year, so the whole idea that he is unarguably bad -- especially to the extent that he can't play against GS -- is anything but non-controversial.

And the idea that you think Golden State will feel comfortable breaking their offensive flow to try to go one-on-one against a Spurs team that knows full well how to deal with such play is just not something I agree with. Gasol and Love are very different players, despite your attempts to simplify this down to that comparison.

In the very least, this is not something that went past the Spurs' ability to notice. They obviously have a plan here, even if you disagree with my interpretation of what it is. But I think that tweaking the defense to work toward Pau's strengths while also encouraging Golden State to react to them offensively rather than run their usual game plan is a smart move, especially for one with the growing pains we're expecting the Warriors to go through.

[bondom34]

To me this:

But the Dubs will just pass to whoever Gasol ends up on in pnr. That's the point.

and this:

They switch and GSW just has Curry drive. Gasol's too slow. They don't GSW passes, and scores that way. He's a problem defensively, this really isn't a remotely controversial idea.

are both just ways of saying, "I don't want to argue anymore, but I'm right." And you are certainly welcome to do that. But I think it's disingenuous. There are numerous stats that give Pau good marks last year, so the whole idea that he is unarguably bad -- especially to the extent that he can't play against GS -- is anything but non-controversial.

And the idea that you think Golden State will feel comfortable breaking their offensive flow to try to go one-on-one against a Spurs team that knows full well how to deal with such play is just not something I agree with. Gasol and Love are very different players, despite your attempts to simplify this down to that comparison.

In the very least, this is not something that went past the Spurs' ability to notice. They obviously have a plan here, even if you disagree with my interpretation of what it is. But I think that tweaking the defense to work toward Pau's strengths while also encouraging Golden State to react to them offensively rather than run their usual game plan is a smart move, especially for one with the growing pains we're expecting the Warriors to go through.

Yes I and literally everyone else disagree with that plan, because frankly its a bad one. You're free to think that's the plan, and they're free to try it. But when it fails, don't be surprised.

And its not disingenuous to say he sucks at things he sucks at.

[RexRyan]

I love the Spurs and the organization, but sometimes loyalty comes at a cost. Gasol, and maybe Lee, have to offset the losses of Duncan and West - I get that. Manu's insignificant these days...... I guess the hope's that Green bounces back, Leonard and Aldridge improve some more, and Parker doesn't decline? That's a lot to ask. I think the gap between the Warriors and the Spurs is too much. C+

[gom]

Solid A. I thought signing Gasol was great, but adding Dedmon (a solid backup center who can dominate defensively) was another coup. Adding Lee (on a good contract) could be important too.

I agree that the post-Durant Warriors are still a better team, but the Spurs will be a tough tie for anyone.

Also, as a Heat fan, I have to admire the FO conduct of the Spurs who gave Manu a worthy compensation for all his years of service. That's how you do it.

[PaKii94]

Wow, surprised a bulls fan hasn't chimed in on Pau yet. Here is my take on Pau (I watched almost all of the games these past two seasons):

-Let me address the rim protection: yes Gasol is a pretty decent rim protector...but literally that is his only defensive plus. Plop him under the rim and he can block shots with his length and play 1v1 against post plays with his size. However, most centers can do this, Hibbert made a living out of this. Outside of that Pau is putrid.

-He has tinder blocks for feet and can't defend the P&R for crap. Due to this slow foot speed, he will concede the midrange elbow area which allows opposing players to build up a head of steam. This results in either a foul due to Pau or an open shot due to perimeter defenders rotating to help him.

So for his defense, he can be optimized by having him stand under the rim and having plus defenders in literally all other positions.

The bulls fall in defense can be attributed to him, every team exploited the 1-5 P&R with him since we had bad PG defenders.

People compare him to Boozer, but Boozer wasn't the center. He was a PF. He was just in charge of playing help defender, not rim protection.

On offense:
Pau can be counted on for 2 things: P&P and passing the ball. His shot is pretty money, and he can make a few threes. He can also make some nice passes and move the ball along but I sometimes thought he might have held it too long.
His post game has deteriorated, he can sometimes take advantage of smaller players on him, but he just isn't efficient enough to give him volume shots.

On the Bulls I wanted him to play backup center last year. He definitely has enough to bumslay the bench while the opponents can't exploit him too much. However, I think a team's ceiling is limited if he plays full minutes as a starting center.

He is a decent player and a really great human being but I attribute the crash and burn bulls of the last 2 years on him. He completely f**ked up the chemistry on defense which was the bread and butter of the bulls and then demanded too many inefficient volume shots on offense.

Hope this helps.

Also, as an FYI for spurs fans who think this is just bashing, Spurs are my second favorite team so I really want them to do well. And I think they will..... if Gasol plays limited minutes