March 8, ABC Sunday Game, Chicago Bulls at San Antonio Spurs; Game Thread

[ninephive]

Consecutive games with a FG in NBA history:

1) Duncan (1310)
2) Hakeem (1075)

This is the only time he's never scored a FG. It's not a usual thing.

Also, Parker didn't even play in the second half of game 6 against OKC last year...and they still won.

Wow, you really need some new material bro. Here's a list of 50+ games (including some in the playoffs) that the Spurs have won where Duncan scored 8 points or less (which is how many Parker had in that first half against OKC, while shooting 50%):

http://bkref.com/tiny/WbGBX

[T_L_P]

Wow, you really need some new material bro. Here's a list of 50+ games (including some in the playoffs) that the Spurs have won where Duncan scored 8 points or less (which is how many Parker had in that first half against OKC, while shooting 50%):

http://bkref.com/tiny/WbGBX

There's your problem: you think a player who scores few points or has a bad shooting night is having a low/negative impact. That's really not the case.

Parker was literally not on the floor in the 2nd half, and the Spurs had to come back from a 7-8 point deficit (don't remember exactly).

[rmt]

This is why Duncan has become so overrated the last 3-4 years. The guy can literally disappear in a game and the Spurs can still dominate. Duncan has been an afterthought lately, with Parker and Kawhi running the show.

And yet ppl try and argue him winning that 5th ring means anything

You must have missed this whole past season where Duncan (and Green) have been carrying the Spurs while Parker and Leonard sat on the bench injured or tried to find their games.

Things are almost as they should be in SA - Duncan anchoring the defense and Parker, Leonard and Mills scoring. Get your act together, Diaw, and Spurs, let's go REPEAT!

[ninephive]

There's your problem: you think a player who scores few points or has a bad shooting night is having a low/negative impact. That's really not the case.

Parker was literally not on the floor in the 2nd half, and the Spurs had to come back from a 7-8 point deficit (don't remember exactly).

Oh wow, so not even that?! Ok, so literally your main argument is that in one game of the playoffs, the Spurs were down by 7-8 points and over the course of the next 24 minutes came back to tie the game at the end of regulation (scored 1 more point than the Thunder on average every 3 minutes of the game).

Wow. Ok so help me out... What about the fact that we were 3-2 with Tony on the floor the whole game in that series? So we won 3 out of 5 games against the Thunder with Tony playing the whole game, but could not have possibly won a 4th if he stays in? I guess I'm not sure exactly what you're implying. If all it is is that we could outscore a team by 8 points in a half with Tony on the bench, I think I can be ok with that, because it's fairly obvious that we did that countless times with other players on the bench (and it didn't even take 24 minutes!)