I Play The Numbers Game To Find A Way To Say That Life Has Just Begun

In the first 5 minutes of the game against the Detroit Pistons, the Pistons outscored the Spurs by 10, getting up 14-4 early. In the first 5 minutes of the 3rd quarter the Pistons outscored us by 4 points. In 10 minutes they outplayed us by 14 points; in the remaining 38 (not including OT), we outscored them by 14. We were better, for longer, but had two smaller periods of inefficiency and mediocrity.

When were these two periods? The two times that our starting lineup was on the floor. I am completely befuddled by Pop's starting lineups these last 3 games. I thought starting Bonner and Bogans for McDyess and Jefferson was crazy, but Pop went one crazier this game, trotting out a starting lineup of Duncan, Jefferson, Bogans, Mason, Jr., and Hill.

To me there are two just absurd things about this lineup. The first is pretty obvious; there's only one big. I understand small ball as a tactical device for stretches of games. But as a starting lineup? I'm not buying it. As has been demonstrated, our best lineup--by an overwhelming margin--are when we have either McDyess or Blair teamed up with Duncan. With the absence of Parker we needed to move some things around. But those moving pieces seemed to be in the backcourt, not the frontcourt.

The second absurd thing about this lineup is just the sheer quality--or lack thereof--of it. For fun, let's rank our players in order of "goodness". I think we can come to some sort of general consesus with minor quibbles:

1. Tim Duncan
2. Manu Ginobili
3. Tony Parker
4. George Hill
5. Antonio McDyess
6. DeJuan Blair
7. Richard Jefferson
8. Roger Mason, Jr.
9. Keith Bogans
10. Matt Bonner

That's the entire list of players who see meaningful minutes. We can bicker about who's really #2, Tony or Manu; we can argue about the more productive big, McDyess or Blair; and we can argue about the last 4 and what order they should be in, though I think we would all agree that those are our 4 least effective players so far this season.

So let's look at tonight's starting lineup. It included #1, #4, #7, #8, and #9. Granted, #3 was gone. But essentially we started 3 of our 4 worst players.

Do you think Detroit started 3 of their 4 worst players? No. So then we put one of our worst possible lineups against one of their best. And we got outscored by 14 points in a 10 minute stretch and were never able to make it up.

The starting lineup I would like to see is #1, #3, #4, #5, and #7, with #2 and #6 anchoring our bench. That's a pretty good lineup, and gives us a fighting chance at the start of each half, unlike now.

What truly puzzles me is McDyess's sudden demotion. He has been playing well, as he demonstrated tonight. He's a very effective rebounder (moreso than Blair, in my opinion, since McDyess can rebound well on both ends of the floor), a great spot-up shooter, a pesky defender, and a competitor. He wants to win. I'll gladly go to battle with players like that. Pop must be seeing something that the distanced observer isn't seeing; but to these eyes, he deserves more minutes.

I'm sure there's more we could discuss about the game. But really, what's the point?

Looking Forward:

The rodeo road trip is over. At 4-4, I would call it a failure. We had a promising win in Denver, and then followed it up with 3 terrible games, one of which we were lucky to win. We're no further along then we were before the trip; and we may have even regressed.

Basically, we went .500 on the trip, and that sums this team up just about right.

We play Oklahoma City back at home on Wednesday. Unlike us, they are playing great basketball lately. Could get ugly.