I'll counter this by point out that despite a horrible shooting night, Fox actually impacted the game quite positively that was vital to the success of the team and outside of scoring played a really good game in the highest stakes environment we've seen this season.
Thanks for the writeup, Scott, appreciated as always! I'll address some specific points as I do agree overall with your assessment, and as I said, hard to complain much with the way the team overall is playing. But some points I think are still worth raising;
There needs to come an acceptance that if you want Fox to be a 25ppg scorer, you're going to be disappointed. This isn't the way the Spurs are going to play. The team's offensive identity is clearly based around a theory of diversification, as evidenced by 8 players averaging double digits, a rare feat (though we would not be the first - as I've heard mentioned in broadcasts. The Heat actually accomplished for several consecutive seasons a few years ago).
I don't care about scoring averages at all, FWIW, but I'll echo spurraider21's sentiment because it's a recurring pattern at this point; Fox had some assists and nice plays, but overall was
4-17 from the field - very underwhelming from a scoring guard. It's not just the numbers either; I'm concerned that he can't adjust to physical defenses, which the Spurs have shown to be
the single most effective way to play against Wemby. What's gonna happen when we get the Thunder or Pistons in a 7-game series of physical play - will lousy scoring nights from our All-Star as the norm be acceptable? I'd trade some assists for those makes, tbh. The "8 players in double digits" isn't very relevant to me -- we all know that doesn't fly so much in the playoffs, when transition offense stalls and you're backed in a corner. Your stars
need to make points happen, and I've been underwhelmed on that department with Fox.
There has been talk of the idea of "flipping the switch" and Fox becoming a more dominant scorer at one point... but why are we operating under the assumption the Spurs would do this? That's not the way they are designed - why would the Spurs spend the entire season building this largely diversified offensive attack, only then to transition to having it revolve around one or two players?
That's cute and healthy, again, in the RS, but again, not quite playoff-style. Look no further than the Warriors, maybe
the most "egalitarian" example of a repeated champion (the '14 Spurs are obvious outliers) -- as unselfish as Curry was, they
absolutely resorted to spamming the Curry-Draymond PnR in late-game situations, and there's a reason for it. Chinook said this as well - our shooters won't bring it every game, we lost the rebounding battle, and can't count on that outlier shooting every game. What we
could count on is a Wemby/Fox PnR...... Which again, if Mitch is hiding, he's a genius - but it's a no-show thus far. I'm simply not ready to trust the Power Of Friendship Offense to win us the Conference Finals, for example.
Now, to the point of Fox's contract... it is definitely a fair question to ask if it is worth paying a max contract for someone playing this role. I've said multiple times that if this is how you're going to play Fox, I wouldn't give up all we gave up nor hand out a max contract... but at some point we just have to accept that we did and that this is the gameplan that the staff feels best positions us to win. There is no undoing the trade or the contract... there is only deploying him in the way that best suits the team, and I feel like we're doing that.
Agreed here and worth mentioning that Fox's mentality and vibes are obviously a big positive for the team. I'm not advocating for trading him out or undoing the trade at all - rather I'd like for Mitch to give Harper or Castle a "designated rest game" and switch Fox's role into a more realistic/typical All-Star PG game. If nothing else, to give the Spurs even more flexibility and options
before the playoffs begin and practice time is over.
And then with that, I'll ask a very results-focused question... would you be happier if we had less wins but Fox were averaging 25ppg at the expense of Castle, Harper, Vassell and Champagnie scoring? (...) the main gripe about him seems to be that he isn't matching the pre-conceived notion of what we think a Max Player should be doing... but perhaps that's not Fox's shortcoming, but rather it is ours as fans.
Of course not,
BUT, I don't think your conception is quite right either. It's not about his Max salary, it's about his 1B role on the team that I feel he isn't living up to. Think it like this: we
know the playoffs are carried by Stars (there's hardly any Champions that didn't have a 1A star to lead them - even '14 had Kawhi or Timmy to the rescue),
and we see that our 1A star, while otherworldly, isn't very good at "forcing the issue" and calling his numbers - it's been bad in the RS and likely won't improve in the POs until he gets a go-to move. So, when Devin and Champ are missing their 3's, Castle's turning it over and not getting calls, and Wemby's getting stripped on every drive (all very reasonable to assume) --
who is making the scoring?
The Spurs just don't have that "go-to play" to get them out of ruts, and I fear it'll take a disappointing playoff loss for them to realize this. But, hey, I recognize it's a nitpick and I'm extremely pleased with the results so far. Just something I'll be keeping an eye out for.