Great post. Yes, I believe we would have beaten LA with a healthy Manu.
But the scary thing was how passively we played against LA. I think when our guys knew Manu was hurt, they just got scared and generally played like panzies. They played like playoff rookies instead of defending champs. Our guys know how vitally important Manu is to everythig we do, and I think they just rolled over when they realized Manu wasn't going to be there. In reality, LA was nowhere near as good as we are if we play Spurs basketball. But we didn't, due largely to Manu's injury, and we got beat.
Having said that, part of the reason Manu is so important is that he is our only emotional/energetic spark. Also, he's our only scoring spark who can get points in bunches and change the flow of a game.
As Hux's post pointed out, we don't have a guy other than the Big 3 who can get us 15-18 points on a given night. Oh wait, we did...his name was Brent Barry, but then again Pop didn't play him until it was too late, even when the guy shot almost 50% from three-point range in the playoffs.
Point is, we need a 4th guy who can actually put up points on a consistent basis. Maggette would have ben that guy, but now it will have to be Mason. However, I think the combination of Mason, Gist, Hill, and Ian on the 2nd team will give us enough to make a huge difference. Kind of like the Laker bench during the regular season, which scored enough points on energy alone to rest the starters. Of course, they folded in the playoffs because they really aren't that good, but point is that energy off the bench can carry you through the regular season pretty well. We haven't had energy off the bench (other than Manu) for years. We kind of did a couple of years ago with the Barry/Beno combo, but then again, Pop is so D-focused that he couldn't see that Beno can score in this league.
Newsflash: D has never been our problem during the Duncan years -- but scoring has.
|