Sure, in our minds Bruno, but obviously not in Pops. If Bonner is hitting 3's, which he is, then he is playing well because that is what they pay him to do.
While Bonner main quality is shooting 3's, Spurs don't pay him only to do that.
What I'm saying is that Bonner has been worse than in previous years in the other areas of his game. For example, it's his worst rebounding year. Bonner is rebounding at the same level than Gary Neal. He is also 6-28 form inside the arc.
Bonner was better last year than this year because he was less an one trick pony. That's the reason why he got $11M and a player like Steve Novak got the min.
Well even though it has gotten worse in some areas, those areas were never good to begin with. I find it hard to believe the Spurs paid him so much because he was marginally better than a player like Novak in some areas that were still by all accounts well below average.
Not sure how I feel about acquiring AR. Not that its realistic... but AR as an athlete and based on potential; theres no way you dont trade Bonner for him. But he appears to have some severe maturity and work ethic issues. Hes the type of player that Don Nelson should have been in love with, yet he was benched for half the game. In New York, Im not sure if its cause they have Amare but AR is pretty much buried on the bench as well..
Bonners spot on the floor in beyond the arc (usually next to neal) where he can stretch the defense, so how exactly do you expect him to put up good rebound numbers? You can say what you want about his contract, but answer me this, out of all the bigs the spurs have, who shoots 3's better than bonner? , let me reword this, what NBA bigs are shooting better than Bonner from the arc currently?
It isn't football where a kicker or a punter can suck at everything else except kicking/punting the ball.
Being a great shooter isn't enough to be a good NBA player. You need to be decent in the other areas of your game to be good player. Bonner hasn't had this decent level this year. Bonner was better last year.
Being a bad offensive re bounder would be understandable but he is even a worse defensive rebounder.
And?
Do you think that defense, rebounding, drawing fouls... doesn't matter?
Even if Pop was more confident in Splitter, I just don't see the Spurs considering that trade. Pop would be reluctant to give Randolph much time and neither he nor Splitter would be able replicate Bonner's limited, but very specific, role in the Spurs offense.
Like it or not, the Spurs are very unlikely to get back a player via trade that would, in Pop's mind, replace Bonner's role in the offense. Unfortunately, barring something like Tayshaun Prince being bought out by the Pistons, I don't see a whole lot of options for the Spurs that will improve the team significantly.
While I agree with Bruno, I must accept that Bonner is here to stay and be in the rotation no matter what. Which is a bad thing.
Even the supposed "only play him as long as he's hitting threes" theory is busted because even if he's missed everything there's the chance that he could hit late like against the T-Wolves.
Bonner is etched in stone as a Spurs fixture.
And with that, there's not really the kind of salary flexibility under the current CBA for the Spurs to get Randolph. Maybe McDyess and a first for Randolph and Azubuike's expiring broken legs which aren't playing anytime soon.
Randolph isn't someone the Spurs would ever trade for. They would only sign him if he were cast onto the scrap heap, a la Stephen Jackson. His at ude is so bad, they'd need to be able to cast him off at no cost if he didn't work out.
This.
We could only hope that may happen. Now is not the time to try and get hinm in a trade. Randolph would be a future piece if he develops. If he was obtained this year, it's likely he would rarely see the floor due to not being familiar with the system.
He would need a camp and most of a season to become a contributor.
Right now, the Duncan/Ginobili window is nearing closing. The team is playing well and shows room for improvement plus Anderson will likely be back around the all star break, you just don't move a piece to invest in the future in a season like this. I would love to move Bonner for Randolph and roll the dice that he evolves to a stud to play with Parker, Hill, Splitter and Blair but a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
The thing about Bonner is that he is not just a three point shooter like Steve Novak. But he is about the best three point shooter in the league right now with set feet and catch and shoot ability. And combine that with this size and the "spreading the floor" ability, he has been a factor in the Spurs' offense and has played his part in some easy wins. He does have a lot of liabilities. But if we exchange him for Randolph, I would have to see what Randolph brings to the table.
From the little of what I saw, AR brings a load of nonsense on the floor. Poor positioning, taking extremely bad shots, screwing up the offense, knowing nothing about spacing and just playing his own game. Coaches like Pop hate such players.
Bonner on the other hand, from what I see, has been quite smooth in his fitting with the offense. He moves around the baseline looking for space and keeps his eye for the pass from the paint and if he does not have a good shot, generally passes on to the next perimeter shooter. He also has the ability to fake his shot and draws defenders that way. In other words, he is a good fit for the offense. His defensive performances have been up and down all season, but whenever he rebounds well, he helps the team.
AR has more skill on paper than Bonner. Passing ability, athletic build, easy rebounding skills and post skills. But they are merely on paper and I am sure the Spurs don't want to take on a project rather than winning now.
I think as the season progresses, Splitter will play more and more eating into Bonner and McDyess' minutes. And in limited spot minutes, I would prefer Bonner over Randolph.
You can't look at a trade for AR including Bonner as a one-for-one. As in, you lose one and the other's supposed to step into and fill his role.
What you're doing is acquiring a player that may or may not do much if anything this year, but just may turn into a real star down the road -- given the quality of the franchise he'd be coming to. Getting rid of Bonner would push Splitter up the depth chart, and that's why I'd do it in a heartbeat.
What Bonner does, as fruitful as it may seem during the regular season and in a +/-, is not something the Spurs have relied upon in the past to win championships, nor should they rely upon it now to win championships. They don't need a 3-point-shooting, one-trick-pony 4 -- they don't have the rebounding or shotblocking at the wing to compensate for it.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: a championship-caliber team needs specialists, so long as what they specialize in is what the the team lacks. Bonner is their only 3-point shooting 4, true. But losing him won't lead to this team lacking when it comes to championship aspiration.
That is more theoretical than played out from facts. What I see is Randolph's play and Bonner's play. As of now, the former is rugged and mostly nonsense, while the latter fits a need.
No, that's simply the rationale. A team with championship aspirations isn't going to trade for Randolph and expect him to play the role Bonner will most likely be tasked with (as unfortunate as it is that he'll be tasked with it).
Randolph is about the future. He's a low-risk, high-reward acquisition. Trading for him means you believe in Splitter and the ability to win playing the way you did in '03 on the frontline -- a formula that has proven to be championship-worthy.
Except Splitter is a rookie and is still learning the system...and considering that the Spurs are 20-3 with Bonner's helping (as minuscule as it is), I wouldn't want to upset the applecart as yet. Randolph is a knucklehead thus far and high risk answering no present need in this year's championship quest.
I was solely speaking to the rationale and not as a proponent of the trade.
Having said that, it becomes painfully more obvious by the day that Pop and the Spurs value Bonner more than they should and that they don't plan on allowing him to just be a quality situational player for when the games really count. So if the Spurs should happen to unload him for Randolph now, I'd be more than fine with it. Tiago's more than capable of being the team's 3rd or 4th big in the rotation -- Duncan, 'Dyess, Blair, Splitter and Randolph in a situational role is a much better scenario to me than Bonner as their 3rd big and Splitter being the Spurs' '05 Oberto.
It ain't about a great start or regular-season record. We're talking big picture, and Bonner currently has too prominent of a role in it (and that's not a knock against Bonner but the position his coaches have put him in).
Great post
Solid take.
Who would've ever thought that Splitter's development would be hindered by Pop's over-reliance on Bonner? For what it's worth, I agree with your points. The Spurs have enough 3-pt shooting and could get along fine without Bonner. They simply don't have enough length and defense on the wing. While any returns Randolph would provide wouldn't be realized this year, I do like him as an option going forward - much more so than Bonner. Of course, it'll never happen, though.
The Spurs could probably swing a trade of Chris Quinn plus the Curtis Jerrells trade exception for Randolph. A draft pick would almost certainly be required to sweeten the pot of course. If we could manage that I'd be game.
Quinn can't be traded until hes been on the team for at least 3 months though. So it can't happen just yet. But if Quinn is still here at 3 months and Randolph is still in the doghouse I'd look at it really hard.
Quinn would probably be waived anyways and could be brought back with ease if the Spurs wanted. Udoka would also bite the dust since they'd be at 14 players and his contract is non-guaranteed.
Trade exceptions can't be packaged with players. If Spurs do a trade for Randolph, they will need to trade a player like Bonner, McDyess or Splitter.
On a side note, It's December 15th. Bonner can now be traded.
Very good points. But we all know Bonner isn't going anywhere. IMO though ,this team is different than even last years team, in regards to more offensive firepower. I believe come playoff time, that Pop will have Bonner on a shorter leash than in previous years, due to Jefferson's noticeable offensive improvement from last year, along with Hill, Neal, and hopefully Anderson. Couple that with Blair recentl showing signs of coming out of his early season funk and Splitter, and Pop(hopefully) shouldn't fill compelled to keep Bonner on the floor when hes not producing on offense.
Oh crap, you're right. Damn, that shoots that whole plot out the window.
Well, you could maybe swing a Quinn, Udoka and 1st rounder package once they're tradeable. It will be tight under the CBA, but it might work. Both of those players are non-guaranteed and could be waived immediately. Sheds a multi-year contract from the Knicks and also picks up a freebie draft pick. Considering their luck in the 2nd round and late first in recent years thats no small thing.
Knicks Wanted Pick Back from Houston for Randolph
Dec 15, 2010 2:58 PM EST
Daryl Morey declined the Knicks' offer to send the Rockets Anthony Randolph in exchange for the return of full rights over New York's 2011 draft pick.
Houston was granted the right to swap their own pick for New York's pick, only protected for the first overall selection, in the Tracy McGrady deal completed on deadline day last February.
New York also traded Houston its 2012 pick outright but that pick is protected for the top five selections.
http://www.realgm.com/src_wiretap_ar..._for_randolph/
Read more: http://www.realgm.com/src_wiretap_ar...#ixzz18DNoKQZc
Thorpe on randolph:
VW (NYC)
Which coach could get something out of Anthony Randolph?
David Thorpe
(12:51 PM)
Pop. With TD helping a ton.
Whatever Knicks decides to do with Randolph, it's safe to say that they won't do anything before the Melo situation is solved.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
