quote:

---

You commented on Ian Mahinmi playing in the 3rd quarter as if it happened just out of the blue. H didn’t come in until end of the run where Dallas curb stomped the Spurs starters to seal the game mid-way through the quarter.

---

That wasn't the first time the Spurs have trailed significantly midway through the third in this series. Mahinmi hasn't played before in that situation. Hmmm, what could be different... and why would Mason lead the team in minutes with 28 when he has averaged 11 for the series?

Real mysteries if you are trying to convince yourself the Spurs played all out.

quote:

---

Ian's minutes also had a lot to do with Blair being in major foul trouble early.

---

Ian didn't come in for any reason other than the game was completely out of control and they didn't want Duncan to get hurt. Blair didn't come back until the fourth and it was for Bonner.

aero ag 2010, try to keep up. I agreed with fireag, I'm calling mass out for using stupid reasoning.

edit:post limit

[This message has been edited by Clean American (edited 4/28/2010 10:11a).]

quote:

---

Duncan is NOT playing well, and that's bad news for the spurs.

---

I don't know why I am even...

But, the 7 seed Spurs have a home game to close out the 2 seed Mavs....and that's bad news, according to you.

For the series, Duncan is averaging:
18.4 pts on 50% shooting
9.4 reb
36 min

He sure is playing terrible.

You'll probably see Ducan get 38-40 mins in Game 6 and put up 20 and 10. Manu will likely still be struggling with his shot unless he can lose the nose tape. Tony, Hill, and Jefferson will have to have good games. It should be close at the end and will depend on who makes shots down the stretch, just as in most playoff games.

clay, here's what i meant. duncan played well early on, but, he is rather old as we know. here's the cause for concern. the past 2 games:

30mpg
4 for 18 FG= 22%
7ppg

he had a great game 3, including taking over late. he was shade of 2003 duncan. my point, is that the spurs are gonna need him to play much better than the above stats for the past 2 games. or this thing is going to game 7.

^
|
|
|
I actually agree with SimpleGay on this one. Duncan is the key, and the rest of the team draws from his energy. His output in the last couple of games has been non-Timmylike. It almost cost them in game #4. It most certainly cost them in game #5. He needs to dig deep for game #6 or the Spurs could be in deep doo-doo.

Only reinforces FireAg's point that Pop wasn't going to "waste" energy last night trying to scramble back into the game.

[This message has been edited by MassAggie97 (edited 4/28/2010 10:23a).]

quote:

---

the game turned in the 3rd quarter because duncan stunk it up, and caron butler finally stepped up.

---

WTF game were YOU watching?!?!?

Butler had 12-points (43% shooting) in the 1st Q...

Butler was a huge difference from the get-go...

Damn, you're dumb...

Mass....if duncan comes out and goes 20, 10 + in game 6 and the spurs win, ill say Pop was using coachspeak and clearly instructed his guys to take it easy in game 5 and wrap it up at home.

otherwise...this thread is completely wrong.

quote:

---

Pop was using coachspeak and clearly instructed his guys to take it easy in game 5 and wrap it up at home.

---

I'm not even saying he gave his guys any "take it easy" instructions. What I'm saying is that you could probably tell from his demeanor in practice, etc. that he wasn't going to let his team kill themselves to win a trap game.
You could certainly tell it from his player rotations.

[This message has been edited by MassAggie97 (edited 4/28/2010 10:38a).]

ok, well, whatever you wanna bundle it as, fine.

but it sounds like an excuse. i think the spurs wanted to win this game just as much as game 4. they could use the rest for the next round.

but, if the spurs come out and play "hard" or whatever it was they "chose not" to do last night, and they win....then you'll be right.

If they lose, it doesnt make him any less right. It just makes Pop's strategy fail.

Of course, he could have had Duncan/Manu play 40 mins last night, still lose, and have tired legs for a home close-out after the Mavs won a hard-fought battle to keep their season alive.

I think there is some truth to it and is a worthy topic (i.e. "did he do it and was it the right move?" ) as long as it is not made into an excuse ("the Spurs only lost because of it" -- which is clearly false because the Mavs played well and won have won last night regardless). I guess we'll see how Game 6 plays out.

[This message has been edited by moorehead01 (edited 4/28/2010 11:00a).]

quote:

---

I think there is some truth to it and is a worthy topic (i.e. "did he do it and was it the right move?" ) as long as it is not made into an excuse ("the Spurs only lost because of it" -- which is clearly false because the Mavs played well and won have won last night regardless). I guess we'll see how Game 6 plays out.

---

Agreed...

I believe that he did do it, and he made the decision in the 1st Q...

Was it the right move in the end? Well, I'll tell you at the end of the series...

If the series goes 7 (and let's say that, for the sake of argument, the Spurs did pull it out in 7 anyway), I think you could classify it as a calculated risk that blew up on him...

In other words, I think the risk/reward is only on the + side for Pop if SA wins game 6...

[This message has been edited by FireAg (edited 4/28/2010 11:16a).]

Agreed. I think the Mavs would have won last night regardless so I am much happier today that the Spurs will be well rested for G6.

quote:

---

Agreed. I think the Mavs would have won last night regardless so I am much happier today that the Spurs will be well rested for G6.

---

Exactly.

...and Simpleton, win or lose or even how easily they win if they do has nothing to do with it; Dallas has a good team and could very well win a game anyway if the right guys are hot. Your proof will be in the significantly different player rotations.

I can almost guarantee that the Spurs won't give up on a 17 point gap early in the third quarter next game.

I don't believe that Pop went into the game thinking he would play his studs light minutes . . .

That being said, it was evident half-way through the first quarter that Dallas would win the game barring a monumental collapse+Ginobli/Parker/Duncan going off for 35. Even though the scoreboard didn't show blowout, I think Pop realized this would be an almost impossible game to win, and adjusted minutes accordingly (he took Duncan out quite early).

From watching the game it looked like Pop decided from the beginning to have his starters go 75% effort and let the role players go all out. If the B team had stayed close by the late 3rd he probably would have stepped on the gas.

Why wouldn't he be okay with taking the series back to SA? If the Mavs were going to win another game in this series it was going to be last night anyway. The starters get some valuable rest in a game where the Mavs were bringing 110% intensity. And by extending the series he keeps the starters with a competitive edge instead of sitting idle for a week.

A. Pop understands the mentality of his players
B. Pop has confidence his players can have a horrendous one game and not have it carry over to the next.
C. Pop plans on winning every game, but he is also in tune with his team.
D. When it became obvious the Spurs didnt have it, then he went into next-game mode.

You can't bring your A-game and ultra-intensity every night, especially as you get older. The Spurs just completed 3 ultra-intense games where they prevailed. Pop is not going to say it straight out, but they deserved a "night off" and he and his players know it.

Not saying Dallas wasn't great and they would probably win even if S.A. was playing great last night, but it is what it is.

Sounds like a consensus is developing.
I agree with the last several posts.

Nobody could know what is in Pop's mind, but the last few posts make sense to me and seem to fit the bill. Anybody who has watched the Spurs with any regularity has seen them come out and lay an egg early on like that. When the energy level is at zero and the stars are just going through the motions, the Spurs rarely ever win, if at all.

[This message has been edited by MassAggie97 (edited 4/28/2010 2:47p).]

Pop lost the game on purpose so that his team wouldn't sit idle for a week before second round?

I've now heard it all.

Wait.
Who said that?

He definitely didn't set out to lose the game. I just don't think he did everything in his power to try and get back into the game once they got behind, particularly after the Mavs big run to start the 2nd half.

Birdman, don't be an idiot. No one said that.

quote:

---

And by extending the series he keeps the starters with a competitive edge instead of sitting idle for a week.

---

quote:

---

Who said that? - Birdman, don't be an idiot. No one said that

---

Learn to read, especially if you're going to call people idiots.

[This message has been edited by birdman (edited 4/28/2010 3:41p).]

Just going by the context, I believe that particular reason was more like a secondary benefit than an actual motivation for throwing the game. Presenting it as the sole reason is pretty disingenuous.

quote:

---

Pop lost the game on purpose

---

This is the part that people are calling you out on. Nobody is saying he purposefully lost a game. There is a difference between purposefully losing, and not "doing everything possible" to win. Do you see that, or not?

Don't insult people's intelligence. You knew darn well you were putting words into people's mouths.

What aero ag said. Don't take it out of context with the rest of my post, especially if you're telling others to learn to read.

Speaking of reading, if you read any threads other than this one you should know I'm a Dallas fan. If you have any lick of objectivity you could see that the Spurs were not playing 100% last night.

Pop must be smarter than I think. He's the only person in the world who knew how to extend this series without losing the game.

Sorry about your thread. It was a failed bit. No reason to get pissy about it.

Pop did not set out to lose the game, bird...

More simply put, with a close out game at home in his back pocket, Pop simply lowered his threshold for allowing his team to fight for the win in game 5...

Having watched the Spurs in the playoffs with Pop in control, for over a decade now, this is not the first time he has taken a calculated risk like this...

I will also add that doing this has backfired as well, and could easily happen again...it's simply a calculated risk that he thinks that he will win more times than not...and to be fair, the man has four titles...

this thread is a thread for spurs fans making excuses.

if dallas should win game 6, this thread will be AWESOMETACULAR

birdman actually gets it.

quote:

---

birdman actually gets it.

---

In what way does agreeing with you mean that anyone gets it? I'd argue the exact opposite.

again...people are making arguments for a coaches' intentions.

when his quotes, and logic, suggest this is not correct.

the spurs wanted to win game 5. and they tried their hardest to do so. when it was over halfway through the 3rd quarter, then, maybe they started to rest.

dallas played a good game. butler showed up, just like hill the previous game. quit making excuses (like pop was waiting for game 6) when CLEARLY the spurs need the rest for the next round. and now momentum has shifted to dallas' favor. give some freaking credit where credit due. quit being the usual spurs fans we-are-better-than-you-so-we-lost-because-we-didn't-try.

that crap is reserved for the people in austin.

[This message has been edited by Simplebay (edited 4/28/2010 5:28p).]

quote:

---

the spurs wanted to win game 5. and they tried their hardest to do so. when it was over halfway through the 3rd quarter, then, maybe they started to rest.

---

um, really?

quote:

---

that crap is reserved for the people in austin.

---

Your reading comprehension is about the same as my 2 year old son. Several people have given the Mavs credit for the victory. No one is making excuses. You obviously didn't watch the game if you thought the Spurs tried their hardest to win the game.

I am glad there are people like you in this world. I need someone to laugh at every now and then. Thanks.

"First in Sight, Ready to Fight"

quote:

---

um, really?

---

Yea, the rest of the NBA better watch out with the freaking stud line up headed by Matt Bonner and Roger Mason.

"First in Sight, Ready to Fight"