Knicks · the future of the nba-- sacrifice, reduced salaries & minutes, deeper rotations, team-first (page 1)
"But since the Spurs are showing us what works, perhaps we should learn from them. If the goal of these awards is to acknowledge great basketball, then we could stand to lean towards quality over quantity.
It might also be wise to look at how other incentives fight against great basketball. The Spurs are famous for not subjecting older players to back-to-back games. For this approach, Gregg Popovich paid -- quite literally in the form of a $250,000 fine for the Spurs -- when San Antonio excused its best players from a nationally televised game versus the Heat. The NBA's a business, and Popovich's choice worked against those interests. In that context, the fine made sense, but it also reflected a subversive truth: The Spurs are giving us the best possible team basketball while working against what basketball is used to being.
Basketball is used to being a place where stars are perpetually present for the 82-game grind. It's a game that sells its heroes, and for those heroes to be heroic, they must be impervious to the fatigue of 82. The problem is, this isn't realistic. There are more games than means for physically coping. Logging 40 minutes per outing might help with awards voting returns, but returns diminish on the court. Maybe it's time to give more credit to the guy who plays less."
holfresh wrote:How did you get that title from this article???..Just like to spin you own narrative...
i added the pertinent info in an edit.
and now this--
Now the Knicks are at a crossroad that leads in so many different directions. The Nets once were there with Kidd in his 2003 free agency following two Finals trips. The Spurs wanted him badly.“We made a commitment that we were going to pay whatever it took to keep the guy,” Thorn said. “And it came down to whether he wanted to leave or not. With the tax laws in Texas, there wasn’t a heckuva lot of difference with what the Spurs could pay and what we could pay.
Also, the Spurs will have to win again or else this is just prisoner of the moment stuff. This is the Spurs 1st title in 7 years. Now, that is great and most franchises if not all would like to have that as a sort of negative but let's not over react like they haven't been bounced out early over the years. Also, they never won back to back(again it's not really a negative).
Now everything about the Spurs is great but it's always more than one way to do things. Just a year ago it was all about everyone needs a big 3 and blah blah blah.
yellowboy90 wrote:I haven't read the article in the link but players will soon be getting major jump in salary when the nba gets it new tv deal. Teams caps will explode and players have the opportunity to op out of this cba. Owners can't claim they are strapped for cash with the explosion of money that has/will come into the league.Considering the Spurs are always at the top of the league every year since the late 90's show what a great organization they are. Sure they dont win back to back or 3 in a row BUT they are always a contender. As a diehard Knick fan i would give anything to have what they have considering our organization is teh total opposite sadlyAlso, the Spurs will have to win again or else this is just prisoner of the moment stuff. This is the Spurs 1st title in 7 years. Now, that is great and most franchises if not all would like to have that as a sort of negative but let's not over react like they haven't been bounced out early over the years. Also, they never won back to back(again it's not really a negative).
Now everything about the Spurs is great but it's always more than one way to do things. Just a year ago it was all about everyone needs a big 3 and blah blah blah.
StarksEwing1 wrote:The Spurs have had the best, one of the best or two of the best big men in the game since 1990. That helps a lot. A guy I know that covered the Warriors when Pop was an assistant on Nellie's staff insists that getting Duncan is the reason Pop has had so much success. Not sure if I agree with him but getting Duncan certainly helped.yellowboy90 wrote:I haven't read the article in the link but players will soon be getting major jump in salary when the nba gets it new tv deal. Teams caps will explode and players have the opportunity to op out of this cba. Owners can't claim they are strapped for cash with the explosion of money that has/will come into the league.Considering the Spurs are always at the top of the league every year since the late 90's show what a great organization they are. Sure they dont win back to back or 3 in a row BUT they are always a contender. As a diehard Knick fan i would give anything to have what they have considering our organization is teh total opposite sadlyAlso, the Spurs will have to win again or else this is just prisoner of the moment stuff. This is the Spurs 1st title in 7 years. Now, that is great and most franchises if not all would like to have that as a sort of negative but let's not over react like they haven't been bounced out early over the years. Also, they never won back to back(again it's not really a negative).
Now everything about the Spurs is great but it's always more than one way to do things. Just a year ago it was all about everyone needs a big 3 and blah blah blah.
holfresh wrote:The biggest take away from the way the Spurs played for me, was how they rarely waist a possession..They used up the shot clock to get a good look at the basket...It's the way basketball was played in years past...It counters what MDA has introduced in a sense..Getting as many looks as possible, while putting up a fair amount of threes...The Spurs made every possession count and they get great looks with ball movement...That should be the new blueprint if anything....
Red Holzman is smiling somewhere...
CrushAlot wrote:StarksEwing1 wrote:The Spurs have had the best, one of the best or two of the best big men in the game since 1990. That helps a lot. A guy I know that covered the Warriors when Pop was an assistant on Nellie's staff insists that getting Duncan is the reason Pop has had so much success. Not sure if I agree with him but getting Duncan certainly helped.yellowboy90 wrote:I haven't read the article in the link but players will soon be getting major jump in salary when the nba gets it new tv deal. Teams caps will explode and players have the opportunity to op out of this cba. Owners can't claim they are strapped for cash with the explosion of money that has/will come into the league.Considering the Spurs are always at the top of the league every year since the late 90's show what a great organization they are. Sure they dont win back to back or 3 in a row BUT they are always a contender. As a diehard Knick fan i would give anything to have what they have considering our organization is teh total opposite sadlyAlso, the Spurs will have to win again or else this is just prisoner of the moment stuff. This is the Spurs 1st title in 7 years. Now, that is great and most franchises if not all would like to have that as a sort of negative but let's not over react like they haven't been bounced out early over the years. Also, they never won back to back(again it's not really a negative).
Now everything about the Spurs is great but it's always more than one way to do things. Just a year ago it was all about everyone needs a big 3 and blah blah blah.
Drafting Duncan didn't suck for sure...
CrushAlot wrote:Lets be honest David Robinson has been retired for a long time and Duncan(Hall of Famer no doubt) hasnt been the same player the last few years because of hsi age. So i dont buy that. the Spurs were abel to fill in with role players who always seem to step up as well. Obviously Ginobli and Parker became bigtime players after being late round picks. Im a diehard Knick fan BUT i do envy the Spurs because i wish the Knicks could be run they are run they are just incredibly smartStarksEwing1 wrote:The Spurs have had the best, one of the best or two of the best big men in the game since 1990. That helps a lot. A guy I know that covered the Warriors when Pop was an assistant on Nellie's staff insists that getting Duncan is the reason Pop has had so much success. Not sure if I agree with him but getting Duncan certainly helped.yellowboy90 wrote:I haven't read the article in the link but players will soon be getting major jump in salary when the nba gets it new tv deal. Teams caps will explode and players have the opportunity to op out of this cba. Owners can't claim they are strapped for cash with the explosion of money that has/will come into the league.Considering the Spurs are always at the top of the league every year since the late 90's show what a great organization they are. Sure they dont win back to back or 3 in a row BUT they are always a contender. As a diehard Knick fan i would give anything to have what they have considering our organization is teh total opposite sadlyAlso, the Spurs will have to win again or else this is just prisoner of the moment stuff. This is the Spurs 1st title in 7 years. Now, that is great and most franchises if not all would like to have that as a sort of negative but let's not over react like they haven't been bounced out early over the years. Also, they never won back to back(again it's not really a negative).
Now everything about the Spurs is great but it's always more than one way to do things. Just a year ago it was all about everyone needs a big 3 and blah blah blah.
StarksEwing1 wrote:I agree but look at the Knicks since Ewing left. Nothing until last year.CrushAlot wrote:Lets be honest David Robinson has been retired for a long time and Duncan(Hall of Famer no doubt) hasnt been the same player the last few years because of hsi age. So i dont buy that. the Spurs were abel to fill in with role players who always seem to step up as well. Obviously Ginobli and Parker became bigtime players after being late round picks. Im a diehard Knick fan BUT i do envy the Spurs because i wish the Knicks could be run they are run they are just incredibly smartStarksEwing1 wrote:The Spurs have had the best, one of the best or two of the best big men in the game since 1990. That helps a lot. A guy I know that covered the Warriors when Pop was an assistant on Nellie's staff insists that getting Duncan is the reason Pop has had so much success. Not sure if I agree with him but getting Duncan certainly helped.yellowboy90 wrote:I haven't read the article in the link but players will soon be getting major jump in salary when the nba gets it new tv deal. Teams caps will explode and players have the opportunity to op out of this cba. Owners can't claim they are strapped for cash with the explosion of money that has/will come into the league.Considering the Spurs are always at the top of the league every year since the late 90's show what a great organization they are. Sure they dont win back to back or 3 in a row BUT they are always a contender. As a diehard Knick fan i would give anything to have what they have considering our organization is teh total opposite sadlyAlso, the Spurs will have to win again or else this is just prisoner of the moment stuff. This is the Spurs 1st title in 7 years. Now, that is great and most franchises if not all would like to have that as a sort of negative but let's not over react like they haven't been bounced out early over the years. Also, they never won back to back(again it's not really a negative).
Now everything about the Spurs is great but it's always more than one way to do things. Just a year ago it was all about everyone needs a big 3 and blah blah blah.
CrushAlot wrote:Well to be fair the reason the Knicks have done jack since Ewing left is because tehy ahve been one of the worst run franchises in the NBA. Scott Layden And Isiah Thomas made some of teh dumbest tardes ever. Yes we had one good 54 win season but that was about itStarksEwing1 wrote:I agree but look at the Knicks since Ewing left. Nothing until last year.CrushAlot wrote:Lets be honest David Robinson has been retired for a long time and Duncan(Hall of Famer no doubt) hasnt been the same player the last few years because of hsi age. So i dont buy that. the Spurs were abel to fill in with role players who always seem to step up as well. Obviously Ginobli and Parker became bigtime players after being late round picks. Im a diehard Knick fan BUT i do envy the Spurs because i wish the Knicks could be run they are run they are just incredibly smartStarksEwing1 wrote:The Spurs have had the best, one of the best or two of the best big men in the game since 1990. That helps a lot. A guy I know that covered the Warriors when Pop was an assistant on Nellie's staff insists that getting Duncan is the reason Pop has had so much success. Not sure if I agree with him but getting Duncan certainly helped.yellowboy90 wrote:I haven't read the article in the link but players will soon be getting major jump in salary when the nba gets it new tv deal. Teams caps will explode and players have the opportunity to op out of this cba. Owners can't claim they are strapped for cash with the explosion of money that has/will come into the league.Considering the Spurs are always at the top of the league every year since the late 90's show what a great organization they are. Sure they dont win back to back or 3 in a row BUT they are always a contender. As a diehard Knick fan i would give anything to have what they have considering our organization is teh total opposite sadlyAlso, the Spurs will have to win again or else this is just prisoner of the moment stuff. This is the Spurs 1st title in 7 years. Now, that is great and most franchises if not all would like to have that as a sort of negative but let's not over react like they haven't been bounced out early over the years. Also, they never won back to back(again it's not really a negative).
Now everything about the Spurs is great but it's always more than one way to do things. Just a year ago it was all about everyone needs a big 3 and blah blah blah.
StarksEwing1 wrote:Put Duncan on those teams and the Knicks make the playoffs those years and might even make a run at the finals. Having that continuity is huge.CrushAlot wrote:Well to be fair the reason the Knicks have done jack since Ewing left is because tehy ahve been one of the worst run franchises in the NBA. Scott Layden And Isiah Thomas made some of teh dumbest tardes ever. Yes we had one good 54 win season but that was about itStarksEwing1 wrote:I agree but look at the Knicks since Ewing left. Nothing until last year.CrushAlot wrote:Lets be honest David Robinson has been retired for a long time and Duncan(Hall of Famer no doubt) hasnt been the same player the last few years because of hsi age. So i dont buy that. the Spurs were abel to fill in with role players who always seem to step up as well. Obviously Ginobli and Parker became bigtime players after being late round picks. Im a diehard Knick fan BUT i do envy the Spurs because i wish the Knicks could be run they are run they are just incredibly smartStarksEwing1 wrote:The Spurs have had the best, one of the best or two of the best big men in the game since 1990. That helps a lot. A guy I know that covered the Warriors when Pop was an assistant on Nellie's staff insists that getting Duncan is the reason Pop has had so much success. Not sure if I agree with him but getting Duncan certainly helped.yellowboy90 wrote:I haven't read the article in the link but players will soon be getting major jump in salary when the nba gets it new tv deal. Teams caps will explode and players have the opportunity to op out of this cba. Owners can't claim they are strapped for cash with the explosion of money that has/will come into the league.Considering the Spurs are always at the top of the league every year since the late 90's show what a great organization they are. Sure they dont win back to back or 3 in a row BUT they are always a contender. As a diehard Knick fan i would give anything to have what they have considering our organization is teh total opposite sadlyAlso, the Spurs will have to win again or else this is just prisoner of the moment stuff. This is the Spurs 1st title in 7 years. Now, that is great and most franchises if not all would like to have that as a sort of negative but let's not over react like they haven't been bounced out early over the years. Also, they never won back to back(again it's not really a negative).
Now everything about the Spurs is great but it's always more than one way to do things. Just a year ago it was all about everyone needs a big 3 and blah blah blah.
StarksEwing1 wrote:CrushAlot wrote:Lets be honest David Robinson has been retired for a long time and Duncan(Hall of Famer no doubt) hasnt been the same player the last few years because of hsi age. So i dont buy that. the Spurs were abel to fill in with role players who always seem to step up as well. Obviously Ginobli and Parker became bigtime players after being late round picks. Im a diehard Knick fan BUT i do envy the Spurs because i wish the Knicks could be run they are run they are just incredibly smartStarksEwing1 wrote:The Spurs have had the best, one of the best or two of the best big men in the game since 1990. That helps a lot. A guy I know that covered the Warriors when Pop was an assistant on Nellie's staff insists that getting Duncan is the reason Pop has had so much success. Not sure if I agree with him but getting Duncan certainly helped.yellowboy90 wrote:I haven't read the article in the link but players will soon be getting major jump in salary when the nba gets it new tv deal. Teams caps will explode and players have the opportunity to op out of this cba. Owners can't claim they are strapped for cash with the explosion of money that has/will come into the league.Considering the Spurs are always at the top of the league every year since the late 90's show what a great organization they are. Sure they dont win back to back or 3 in a row BUT they are always a contender. As a diehard Knick fan i would give anything to have what they have considering our organization is teh total opposite sadlyAlso, the Spurs will have to win again or else this is just prisoner of the moment stuff. This is the Spurs 1st title in 7 years. Now, that is great and most franchises if not all would like to have that as a sort of negative but let's not over react like they haven't been bounced out early over the years. Also, they never won back to back(again it's not really a negative).
Now everything about the Spurs is great but it's always more than one way to do things. Just a year ago it was all about everyone needs a big 3 and blah blah blah.
I agree they are smart and run greatly but I am not going to get wrapped up in the notion that they are the true essence of team ball and that the champions before them got there without true teamwork. Every championship team played team ball. Miami last year played team ball getting help from Battier, Miller, and Chalmers just like the Spurs got contributions from Diaw, Mills, and Green. Dallas played team ball getting help from Terry, Barea, and etc.
I am not trying to fault the Spurs but realize everyone can't do it like they do. Just a few years ago OKC was the media darlings and their organization was the supposed model of how it's done but what happens when your owner doesn't want to pay the luxury tax? Teams have to find their own way because they are all working within different circumstances.
holfresh wrote:holfresh wrote:The biggest take away from the way the Spurs played for me, was how they rarely waist a possession..They used up the shot clock to get a good look at the basket...It's the way basketball was played in years past...It counters what MDA has introduced in a sense..Getting as many looks as possible, while putting up a fair amount of threes...The Spurs made every possession count and they get great looks with ball movement...That should be the new blueprint if anything....Red Holzman is smiling somewhere...
My memories of going to see the Knicks last championship team with my Dad are fading as I get older, but one thing that does stand out was the ball movement and that they never seemed to miss. They did obviously, but I remember them shooting a higher pct than teams do today, don't know how accurate that is though.
CrushAlot wrote:I never said Duncan wasnt a main factor. Pretty sure i said he was a Hall of Famer easily. Belive me its not liek i like the Spurs in fact i ahte them. But i ahve to be fair and give them credit for the way theya re run. As a tortured Knick fan especially the past 15 years which have been bad you get a bit enviousStarksEwing1 wrote:Put Duncan on those teams and the Knicks make the playoffs those years and might even make a run at the finals. Having that continuity is huge.CrushAlot wrote:Well to be fair the reason the Knicks have done jack since Ewing left is because tehy ahve been one of the worst run franchises in the NBA. Scott Layden And Isiah Thomas made some of teh dumbest tardes ever. Yes we had one good 54 win season but that was about itStarksEwing1 wrote:I agree but look at the Knicks since Ewing left. Nothing until last year.CrushAlot wrote:Lets be honest David Robinson has been retired for a long time and Duncan(Hall of Famer no doubt) hasnt been the same player the last few years because of hsi age. So i dont buy that. the Spurs were abel to fill in with role players who always seem to step up as well. Obviously Ginobli and Parker became bigtime players after being late round picks. Im a diehard Knick fan BUT i do envy the Spurs because i wish the Knicks could be run they are run they are just incredibly smartStarksEwing1 wrote:The Spurs have had the best, one of the best or two of the best big men in the game since 1990. That helps a lot. A guy I know that covered the Warriors when Pop was an assistant on Nellie's staff insists that getting Duncan is the reason Pop has had so much success. Not sure if I agree with him but getting Duncan certainly helped.yellowboy90 wrote:I haven't read the article in the link but players will soon be getting major jump in salary when the nba gets it new tv deal. Teams caps will explode and players have the opportunity to op out of this cba. Owners can't claim they are strapped for cash with the explosion of money that has/will come into the league.Considering the Spurs are always at the top of the league every year since the late 90's show what a great organization they are. Sure they dont win back to back or 3 in a row BUT they are always a contender. As a diehard Knick fan i would give anything to have what they have considering our organization is teh total opposite sadlyAlso, the Spurs will have to win again or else this is just prisoner of the moment stuff. This is the Spurs 1st title in 7 years. Now, that is great and most franchises if not all would like to have that as a sort of negative but let's not over react like they haven't been bounced out early over the years. Also, they never won back to back(again it's not really a negative).
Now everything about the Spurs is great but it's always more than one way to do things. Just a year ago it was all about everyone needs a big 3 and blah blah blah.
holfresh wrote:OKC should be beating up on the Spurs annually, as of two years ago...OKC is younger and more talented...OKC's coach is just that bad..If Phil Jackson was OKC's coach, Duncan and Ginolbi might be talking about riding off into the sunset the last few years...
this is a great point.. scott brooks is a god awful coach. his lack of coaching ability has held that team back soooooo much.
CrushAlot wrote:StarksEwing1 wrote:Put Duncan on those teams and the Knicks make the playoffs those years and might even make a run at the finals. Having that continuity is huge.CrushAlot wrote:Well to be fair the reason the Knicks have done jack since Ewing left is because tehy ahve been one of the worst run franchises in the NBA. Scott Layden And Isiah Thomas made some of teh dumbest tardes ever. Yes we had one good 54 win season but that was about itStarksEwing1 wrote:I agree but look at the Knicks since Ewing left. Nothing until last year.CrushAlot wrote:Lets be honest David Robinson has been retired for a long time and Duncan(Hall of Famer no doubt) hasnt been the same player the last few years because of hsi age. So i dont buy that. the Spurs were abel to fill in with role players who always seem to step up as well. Obviously Ginobli and Parker became bigtime players after being late round picks. Im a diehard Knick fan BUT i do envy the Spurs because i wish the Knicks could be run they are run they are just incredibly smartStarksEwing1 wrote:The Spurs have had the best, one of the best or two of the best big men in the game since 1990. That helps a lot. A guy I know that covered the Warriors when Pop was an assistant on Nellie's staff insists that getting Duncan is the reason Pop has had so much success. Not sure if I agree with him but getting Duncan certainly helped.yellowboy90 wrote:I haven't read the article in the link but players will soon be getting major jump in salary when the nba gets it new tv deal. Teams caps will explode and players have the opportunity to op out of this cba. Owners can't claim they are strapped for cash with the explosion of money that has/will come into the league.Considering the Spurs are always at the top of the league every year since the late 90's show what a great organization they are. Sure they dont win back to back or 3 in a row BUT they are always a contender. As a diehard Knick fan i would give anything to have what they have considering our organization is teh total opposite sadlyAlso, the Spurs will have to win again or else this is just prisoner of the moment stuff. This is the Spurs 1st title in 7 years. Now, that is great and most franchises if not all would like to have that as a sort of negative but let's not over react like they haven't been bounced out early over the years. Also, they never won back to back(again it's not really a negative).
Now everything about the Spurs is great but it's always more than one way to do things. Just a year ago it was all about everyone needs a big 3 and blah blah blah.
Tim Duncan's numbers seem low because of the minutes he plays, but if you like at his number per 36 mins, PER, win shares, etc., his numbers are comparable to Dwight Howard's. That's amazing. I'd have to say the Spurs are extremely lucky to have drafted a guy who's produced like a star player for 17 years. Yeah, they've made some good personnel decisions. But they've never had to experience a full rebuild thanks to Duncan.
at the heart of the article and the video it is a question of
(1) minute restrictions to remain fresh and allowing lesser players to have meaningful minutes so they are ready come playoffs
(2) the major salary sacrifices that the main three guys have taken so that their team could be enriched instead. they also have by far and away the greatest number of foreign players who are not brainwashed into the star-system that the american conveyor belt produces.
compare the miami roster and salary distribution. your top three salary guys can't make so much more money than the rest of the roster and expect to win 5,6,7 titles. if i am riley i tell wade he should remain in miami at ginobili-type money, somewhere around 9 million. bosh pretty much the same. lebron? 18-20 million is fair for the greatest player in the world.
okc? same thing. westbrook should not be paid more than 11-12 million a year if they hope to be true contenders.
the issue has nothing to do with coaching it has to do with the overarching philosophy of the franchise. how can you coach exhausted players? how can you win without a deep bench ready to play? holzman's knicks played 10-12 players.