Adridge non entity so far tonight. That doesn't change we get beat by 40

Not a very good start so far

An all too early prediction: time to pack it up and start watching again next year. Maybe LeBron will have a crazy finals and manage to beat the warriors because we sure aren't.

That was a dispiriting start.

They've scored more 3 pointers than we have points

LaMarcus needs to take a damn shot.

We run plays for him, he bails, and then we scramble to put something up. Jesus H Christ, shoot the damn ball. You're the best player on the floor for us right now. Freaking act like it.

Pendragon12 said:

---

LaMarcus needs to take a damn shot.

We run plays for him, he bails, and then we scramble to put something up. Jesus H Christ, shoot the damn ball. You're the best player on the floor for us right now. Freaking act like it.

---

I don't know what happened to the guy that was Portland's leader for all those seasons. He is awful.

I'm done. Sit him. Trade him. End the LA experiment and throw some money at Simmons and Patty. At least Simmons is proving he deserves playing time every chance he's getting these playoffs.

Even if LA has a better second half than this, don't care. Only way he can redeem himself if he leads us to a championship this year.

Letting freaking McCaw blow by you and that weak ass foul for an and-1? Freaking sit him.

Aldridge is stealing salary tonight.

He's worse that Harden Game 6

Pathetic

Love how Simmons competes. Would be a shame to lose him this offseason

Pendragon12 said:

---

I'm done. Sit him. Trade him. End the LA experiment and throw some money at Simmons and Patty. At least Simmons is proving he deserves playing time every chance he's getting these playoffs.

Even if LA has a better second half than this, don't care. Only way he can redeem himself if he leads us to a championship this year.

Letting freaking McCaw blow by you and that weak ass foul for an and-1? Freaking sit him.

---

The same Patty Mills who played 37 minutes last game, scored 5 points, missed all his threes and shot airballs?

Thoughts on Simmons vs Danny Green? I would give some real thought to trading Green and signing Simmons as the starting 2 guard at about $8 million.

You get a 2 year younger player for $2 million less, that can actually drive. Defense is about the same. You give up a little in 3 pt shooting but I'm pretty sure with a year or two with Chip, Simmons could go from a 32% shooter to high 30s. Green is right at 40% for his career, but definitely has a faster, better looking shot.

GatorAg03 said:

---

Thoughts on Simmons vs Danny Green? I would give some real thought to trading Green and signing Simmons as the starting 2 guard at about $8 million.

You get a 2 year younger player for $2 million less, that can actually drive. Defense is about the same. You give up a little in 3 pt shooting but I'm pretty sure with a year or two with Chip, Simmons could go from a 32% shooter to high 30s. Green is right at 40% for his career, but definitely has a faster, better looking shot.

---

I'm not opposed.

I was just talking to friends about how Simmons could have been the X factor in this series. Instead he is the only one playing well without Kawhi.

Agree. Patty is not regular starter. Murray or somebody else. Cp3 would be nice.

Murray needs offseason in weight room...

I was surprised we broke triple digits.

GatorAg03 said:

---

Also, Patty has shown he is a great bench player and spark, and I really like him, but he isn't a starting caliber PG on a championship team. If he wants to get paid you have to let him walk.

You have to go all in on trying to sign CP3 this offseason and if you don't get him you go all in on developing Murray.

---

Kyle Lowry is out there as well, and is more likely IMO to change teams than Paul is.

But I don't know how you make the money work either way.

Teams that go up 2-0 in conference finals are 49-4

Aldridge is playing like he just got called up from the D-League against a team that doesn't have a single player who should be able to match up with him.

Glad I couldn't watch tonight. Looks like pundits have gone from Warriors in four to just call it off.

GatorAg03 said:

---

Thoughts on Simmons vs Danny Green? I would give some real thought to trading Green and signing Simmons as the starting 2 guard at about $8 million.

You get a 2 year younger player for $2 million less, that can actually drive. Defense is about the same. You give up a little in 3 pt shooting but I'm pretty sure with a year or two with Chip, Simmons could go from a 32% shooter to high 30s. Green is right at 40% for his career, but definitely has a faster, better looking shot.

---

Problem is, Kawhi and Simmons are the same player - they need the ball in their hands. So you lose 3 point shooting, and you lose floor spacing. I love Simmons, but I think you lose a little in defense too. But not enough where I would say have to keep Green at all cost.

Simmons may be more expensive than Green after his play this playoffs. So you have to look at the value too. For the price we pay both, Green may be the better value. That said, I hope we find a way to keep and integrate Simmons. He's shown heart, athleticism, and I don't want any of our rivals to have him because the guy is good.

I think if we did keep him, his most likely role is 6th man, and I think he would be damn good in that role. He needs to work on his distributing skills, but he can create his own shot which we will need once Manu is done. I don't know how you work him and Kawhi on the floor at the same time for most of Kawhi's minutes, but I'm not paid to coach basketball so there could be a way.

I would prioritize Simmons over Patty, but Patty has shown he's worth more money these playoffs, save for last game. I doubt we pay him market value (we shouldn't), but he is still a fantastic bench piece and can start in a pinch against some teams (Houston). If he wants to start, then you probably let him go. It all depends on the PG market. We need a veteran for Murray regardless if Tony is done, and I don't think a Chris Paul is realistic unless he takes a drastic pay cut.

Ryno01 said:

---

Teams that go up 2-0 in conference finals are 49-4

---

How many teams up 3-1 had lost the Finals before last year?

Pop even went public about his disappointment in LaMarcus. I hope he didn't hurt his feelings.

Quote:

---

Thoughts on Simmons vs Danny Green? I would give some real thought to trading Green and signing Simmons as the starting 2 guard at about $8 million.

---

I don't think you can get rid of Green. His defensive talent is so incredibly rare. We have to try and keep both Green and Simmons. With Manu's future up in the air, I'd be happy with Simmons leading the juice unit with our younger guys. Then he can play at the end of the games with the starting group against smaller lineups. Unfortunately, I think he's gonna make a hell of a lot more money than $8 million a year. If we don't pay him in the double digits, there will be someone out there who will.

Patty is the odd man out IMO. He's just so limited to what he can do. And these playoffs are really magnifying that. I love him, but if we can't get him for a bargain, we have to let him go. But to be honest, I think the way he has played in the post season will probably scare some teams off from throwing big money at him. Or at least the ones that thought they could use him as a starter.

Good, it's a damn joke what we pay LMA, Pau and feel free to add Green to the list for the production they give us. When they play even an average game Spurs are in every game. When they play good, Spurs are unbeatable Unfortunately we rarely get consistentcy from those three.

I get we had some terrible breaks this playoffs, but guys still need to show some fire. I'm at the point where I'm fine if we ship off anyone not named Kawhi or Simmons this offseason....and I suppose you keep the young guys Bertans and Murray for at least another year to see if they develop and of course Manu if he signs for vet min.

Everyone else on the team should be fair game to trade or let walk.

If Kawhi can go up 20 on the warriors with these collection of spares, then what will Spurs be if we actually give him a second, consistent all-star? Kawhi and Pop could drag any roster in the NBA to 50+ wins in my opinion.

Brian Earl Spilner said:

---

Ryno01 said:

---

Teams that go up 2-0 in conference finals are 49-4

---

How many teams up 3-1 had lost the Finals before last year?

---

Cleveland was not down 3-1 partly because LeBron was sitting out due to a bad ankle sprain.

It is all about Kawhi's ankle regarding whether Spurs get swept or they are at least able to win a game or maybe two.

Unlike the Game 6 @Houston (where the reports were that Leonard wanted to play and would have played had that been a Game 7), this time Kawhi apparently was in no shape to play. Lots of soreness still two days after.

Whether he is back for Game 3 is what everybody will be watching for (and even if back, whether he is able to play anywhere near 100% and then without re-spraining it - remember that even before ZaZa stuck his foot out that Leonard was already limping a little after tweaking the ankle just a moment before stepping on a teammate's foot).

It's a really tough deal because based on the game 1 and regular season results you can say there is substantial evidence that the Spurs' idea of beating GS by going big had merit. The Spurs were dominating, albeit against an admittedly rusty GS team, prior to Kawhi's injury--- even without a major piece in Parker. But without Parker and now Kawhi, who I don't really expect to be healthy again this season even though he will likely play next game, we don't have a semblance of the team we'd hoped to match up against GS with. Too many bad matchups for SA, and just not enough on either side of the ball.

I think the Spurs would have had a good chance in this series with a healthy Kawhi, and an even better one with Parker. As it is, I think you're looking at trying to salvage a game for pride.

DSAg44 said:

---

Murray needs offseason in weight room...

---

I love DJ but he needs an off season at the all u can eat buffets.

But that substantial evidence was largely based on LMA having his 1 in 10 good game (which he promptly stopped doing as soon as Kawhi was injured and repeated that poor performance in Game 2). I think expecting that LMA for a full series is fool's gold.

If going big against GS is the silver bullet, then you would think it would still be a bit more effective even without Parker and Kawhi.

I honestly think game 1 was mostly Kawhi. You put 4 NBA players around him of even average caliber and you are a top 5 team in the league. You put a other bonafide all-star next to him and you are a title contender.

I would commit to getting Kawhi a second scoring option and a PG that can facilitate an offense (Get CP3 and you have both in the same player). I would do that much more than I would commit to staying big by bringing back LMA and Gasol as some GSW killing move.

I think George Hill would be a better option

Quote:

---

If going big against GS is the silver bullet, then you would think it would still be a bit more effective even without Parker and Kawhi.

---

Except without Kawhi, our defense is suspect at best against a team like GS. And without Kawhi AND Parker, we have absolutely no one to create offense on the starting unit. LA has never been a creator of offense, at least with the Spurs, he needs plays run for him to be productive. Going big only helps if we can get the bigs the ball in advantageous positions on the floor. Without Parker, Kawhi demands enough attention that the bigs can operate. Without Parker and Kawhi, GS can just collapse on whichever big is in the paint for us at the time.




With Parker, we close out game 1. I firmly believe that. He would have been able to calm the team down, likely run some decent offensive series to at least get good shots rather than live ball turnovers, and we have someone who can create for others with a little bit more gas than Manu. Parker wouldn't have been a difference maker in the series - that's Kawhi and Kawhi alone on this team - but he would have been a huge difference maker in game 1.