Trying to make Duncan into something other than a post player for the sake of argument is not sound. You chase Tim Duncan out of the post one way: with doubles. Actually you don't even chase him out of the psot that way. Then he just beats you by moving the ball. Which is the real value of a post player. Spencer's post game is of little value to anyone other than Spencer. He creates no spacing, beats no opponent worth beating with it, gets nobody of note in foul trouble, causes no real problems for oppposing teams with it, because he lacks conviction in there. He actually plays like a softie who lacks guts in there and is afraid of contact, but given his overall demeanor I think conviction is the actual problem not softness.
As a further aside, NOBODY said anything about bullying his way to the basket. Spencer couldn't bullya 90lb weakling, although that's roughly the only person he'll test. Some of the best players of all time have done it on pure skill -- McHale and Hakeem come to mind. But EVERY great post player has conviction in there and makes the defense respond to the threat he poses. That is the whole key to the dominance that dominant post players have had throughout history. They break a defense, not by their own scoring, but by making the defense respond to their threat and lose containment on their teammates. It does not require bullying, but the guts to hang in there and fight, yes.
I agree with a lot of what you said. Especially that he looks soft at times, I think he is frustratingly inconsistent, but when he does go in the post he can be enormously effective. I also tend to think that his inconsistenty is tied to his youth and inexperience, and not his mindset. I also, however, think that developing a consistent outside game is a good thing as well. I never said that Duncan wasn't a post player, I was making my point specifically in the context of what you said about "taking what you want whether the other guy wants you to have it or not," and your criticism of Hawes for adjusting to his opponents. Duncan can certainly take what he wants a great deal of the time, but he also has a versatile game and will step out and take an easy jump shot when it is given to him, which allows better floor spacing (clearing out the post) and gives him the chance to pass into the lane since his defender will come out with him. Like I said, Shaq is the only play I have personally seen who didn't have to do this, who could just stand in the lane and make everything from within 3 feet, no matter how many guys are guarding him.
Oh, and BTW, one thing that these discussions reveal is that people have no idea what a great post player looks like, little idea of what makes a great player period, and here is the eye opener, have a much lesser opinion of Spencer Hawes' talent in there than I do. I find it ironic that people will whine about me being tough on Spencer when I am the only one giving him any real credit. Spencer can be a GREAT post player. But he never will be if he is allowed to squander it. And whatever else he may end up being instead, it will be less valuable to his team than being a great post player would be.
Again, I agree with you, so maybe this just shows some misunderstanding on my part of your original post. Watching Spencer is frustrating because he is very inconsistent, but he has shown that he can get in the post and score consistently. I'm not sure where you get off saying that I don't know what a great player looks like, though. I think maybe we have different expectations of what Hawes should look like at this point in his career. I think he is closer to a Garnett or Nowitzki than Duncan or Shaq, meaning that playing in the paint will be one part of his game, but he will also bring an extra dimension by hitting a lot of outside shots and 3 pointers, stretching the defense and getting guys to be out of position, allowing for, like I said before, better spacing for our guys on the offense to get pentetration and lay-ups. In your original post you stated that "players can't even trust Spencer to BE in the post in the first place. And the blame there lies squarely at Spencer's feet, or rather in Spencer's head.
The day he quits screwing around, starts running to the post and demanding the ball, not when the other team allows him too, not when he feels like it, but
every time down the floor, is the day when his lack of post opportunities will become the responsibility of his teammates". I think if the offense is fluid, if Spencer moves around the floor and can take outside shots as well as getting his points in the paint, the team will be better off for it.
This is reminescent of the "three clouds of dust" philosophy in football, or the trench warfare of WWI (that worked out real well). Personally, I'd rather attack the weaknesses of an opponent, rather than their strengths, more like the guerilla warfare Sun Tsu. I agree with the point guard comment. When we finally get one worth a darn, Spencer and all the big guys will prosper.
