Tuesday, July 16, 2013

Lakers vs Spurs game 2

Really late post alert.  This post has been in my drafts for about three months, so I figured I should either post it now or not post it at all.  The first part is basically only relevant in the context to that game.  But the rest is still vaguely relevant and has a couple of my thoughts on how and why the Spurs are so decent.

Gasol had a much more efficient game, and as such the Lakers only lost the TO battle by 5 in game 2.  The refs seemed to be calling a bad game against Howard the entire night.
Clark got all of 13 minutes..  Not sure what Coach D'antoni is doing there.  Another thing that didn't make sense..  Apparently Jordan Hill is finally semi-healthy and Coach D'antoni played him six minutes... In the last six minutes of the 4th quarter.. Just thinking out loud here (obviously).. But, if he is actually healthy, then I think he should have played the first six minutes of the 4th quarter.  The game was starting to get away, but wasn't totally out of hand at the end of the 4th.  Imho, Jordan Hill would be my sixth or 7th man, and (if he is healthy) should be playing.
Dwight Howard had an oddly ugly +-.  Since he was in the game when the subs made a mini run I was surprised that he was tied for the worst +- of the game at -14.

I don't want either of the PGs of the Lakers to guard Parker.. Frankly, they've stunk.  I say that he should mainly be guarded by Jamison and Clark.  Consistently the Lakers are way too close to Parker..  (The Lakers never ended up fixing either problem..)  Sure, you don't want him to gather a ton of momentum, but honestly that should be somewhat irrelevant.  I think that Jamison should play off Parker roughly an arm's length and a half.  So a bit less than twice that of the average perimeter player. Could Parker occasionally gather enough momentum to simply blow by Jamison?  Yes.  But..  It would happen fewer times than with the Laker's PGs.  

Also, so far in the series Green and Splitter have been vaguely irrelevant, so I think the players guarding those two players should be much more willing to help and that someone should take a charge.  Anyone.  Anyone at all.  D-Howard blocking shots is great and all, and can be vaguely intimidating to Parker, but something that would be even more intimidating (and effective) is if Parker would have to (attempt to) run over someone like Ron Artest and either get the and one, a blocking call, or it goes the other way.  Worst case scenario, Parker is getting tired and bruised while the Spurs continue to win.  Best case scenario, Parker gets a charge and is forced to become purely a facilitator.

How do the Spurs consistently make so many contested long range 2's?
A Zach Lowe article has also noted that somehow the Spurs, Parker and Duncan especially, have found some sort of prodigious way to make midrange low quality shots at a high volume..  I assume (effectively the same as he does) that it is through their hard work and impressive muscle memory, due to so many games and general practice time.

I wonder why there are not more examples of players who can make mid to long range contested twos.  Kobe Bryant and Carmelo Anthony are the main players I can think of who like to attempt many mid to long range two's and make a fair portion of these shots.  (The problem is that even if  a person is great at making long range contested twos it is still almost always not an efficient shot to be taking at a high volume Long range twos are basically only useful in terms of helping to spread the defense, and also sometimes when there is no other shot to take with the shot clock winding down)

In terms of shot arc, I really like Parker's long range arc, if anything it might be too high, which is certainly a rarity. I don't really like Duncan's shot arc, generally it seems very flat.
I would say that Parker takes a few more contested shots, especially off of pick and rolls, while Duncan tends to shoot the open 18 foot (or however long) jumper.
To have a team shoot 50% (I don't know what the Spur's % is I'm just making a generalization) on contested long jumpers is very impressive and extremely devastating to opposing defenses.

No comments:

Post a Comment