Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 102
  1. #51
    Believe. 5in10's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Post Count
    628
    I hope he starts this year, and Manu comes off the bench. As much as I love Neal, Anderson is way better, and athletic, and as good shooter.
    I agree although I have a pretty low sample size. From what I saw though he had the physical tools/bbiq to be a good defender. I love the idea of a Leonard/Anderson defensive duo for the perimeter.

  2. #52
    Believe. 5in10's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Post Count
    628
    Just Wanted people to see GH3 #s on a per 36 minute basis compared to Anderson and Neals from last year.



    GH3:-- 14.8pts 3.3 asst 3.2reb -- 0.4blks 1.1 stl 4.5fta

    JA: 11.8pts 2.9 assts 2.3reb 0.8blks 0.4 stl 2.3fta

    Neal: 16.7pts 4.2 assts 2.1reb 0.1blks 0.6 stl 2.2fta

    I know there are some intangibles that were gonna miss from georgie, but production/stat wise, we shouldn't skip a beat.

  3. #53
    ಥ﹏ಥ DAF86's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Post Count
    44,732
    I just hope he spends more minutes at SG this season. It's a much more natural fit for him on both sides of the ball.
    SG and SF is the same thing in the Spurs system (and pretty much any system). On defense he will guard whoever Pop or the coaching stuff decide in each game and on offense he will be a spot up shooter, regardless of the position he's supossed to play.

  4. #54
    Believe. Tyrone Jenkins's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Post Count
    434
    SG and SF is the same thing in the Spurs system (and pretty much any system). On defense he will guard whoever Pop or the coaching stuff decide in each game and on offense he will be a spot up shooter, regardless of the position he's supossed to play.
    Can you further explain that? Because, SG and SF are COMPLETELY different positions - especially in the Spurs system. When was the last time anyone saw the Spurs bring the ball up the floor, call a play and RJ started running around, trying to rub his defender off of multiple picks, catch the ball at the 3pt line and quickly shoot w/ his defender flying at him trying to block the shot? That happens all the time for Manu and Neal...

    The SG is part of the primary focus of the Spurs system and rarely needs the SF to do much more than pick up hustle buckets or hit an occassional 3. That's why RJ's production decreased when he got to San Antonio (go look at his ppg before he arrived).

  5. #55
    ಥ﹏ಥ DAF86's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Post Count
    44,732
    Can you further explain that? Because, SG and SF are COMPLETELY different positions - especially in the Spurs system. When was the last time anyone saw the Spurs bring the ball up the floor, call a play and RJ started running around, trying to rub his defender off of multiple picks, catch the ball at the 3pt line and quickly shoot w/ his defender flying at him trying to block the shot? That happens all the time for Manu and Neal...

    The SG is part of the primary focus of the Spurs system and rarely needs the SF to do much more than pick up hustle buckets or hit an occassional 3. That's why RJ's production decreased when he got to San Antonio (go look at his ppg before he arrived).
    Neal and Manu do that 'cause they can, it has nothing to do with what position they're supossedly playing (which is the same bassically: the wings). I'll take your example to refute your point, when Manu and Neal are playing toghether there's one playing SG and the other SF right? Then why do both get the ball in their hands, play the pick an roll an all that? It's the player not the position that determines that kind of stuff.

    I'm too lazy to look it up but Manu has said many times that SG an SF are the same thing in the Spurs system, an I think Mau would know a thing or two about that.

  6. #56
    Believe. Tyrone Jenkins's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Post Count
    434
    Whenever Neal and Manu play together, they were usually using Neal at PG and Manu stayed at the SG. I honestly can't remember a time w/ TP or Hill, Neal and Manu all in the game at the same time. I'm not saying it didn't happen, but I can't remember it. If they did, I'm sure the offense play calling changed to utilize two SGs at the same time to get max benefit and took the defensive hit for not having a true SF.

    I'll be honest, I've never heard Manu say that but if you're sure it happened, then perhaps it is so. I'm no NBA coach but I do coach basketball and know the differences between positions.

    Regardless of all that, let me ask you a question - if the SG and SF position are so similar in the Spurs system (or any for that matter) as you have mentioned, then why is there a need to delineate a position at all? Why don't we all just call them "wings" as you mentioned and forget about all the classification? Why did Pop say we needed a backup SF behind RJ if, according to you and Manu, SGs and SFs are the same?

    Here's are two articles that mention Pop's need for a SF... I (and you) could probably find more

    http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/s...ell-697559.php

    http://www.mysanantonio.com/default/...nse-734728.php

  7. #57
    ಥ﹏ಥ DAF86's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Post Count
    44,732
    Whenever Neal and Manu play together, they were usually using Neal at PG and Manu stayed at the SG. I honestly can't remember a time w/ TP or Hill, Neal and Manu all in the game at the same time. I'm not saying it didn't happen, but I can't remember it. If they did, I'm sure the offense play calling changed to utilize two SGs at the same time to get max benefit and took the defensive hit for not having a true SF.

    I'll be honest, I've never heard Manu say that but if you're sure it happened, then perhaps it is so. I'm no NBA coach but I do coach basketball and know the differences between positions.

    Regardless of all that, let me ask you a question - if the SG and SF position are so similar in the Spurs system (or any for that matter) as you have mentioned, then why is there a need to delineate a position at all? Why don't we all just call them "wings" as you mentioned and forget about all the classification? Why did Pop say we needed a backup SF behind RJ if, according to you and Manu, SGs and SFs are the same?

    Here's are two articles that mention Pop's need for a SF... I (and you) could probably find more

    http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/s...ell-697559.php

    http://www.mysanantonio.com/default/...nse-734728.php
    I remember a lot of times where TP, Neal and Manu played toghether I also remember a lot of times where TP, Hill and Manu played toghether or Hill, Neal and Manu for that matter. All players that get the ball in their hands and initiate the offese from time to time.

    Manu said that, trust me. Maybe somebody else can post the link to that quote or at least back up the claim.

    Pop talks about the need of a SF meaning the need for a long athletic wing with defensive abilities, imo.

    And about the position thing, I don't know why it doesn't change to PG, wings and bigmen. To me it makes a lot more sense than guards, forwards and centers.

  8. #58
    Believe. Tyrone Jenkins's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Post Count
    434
    .

    Pop talks about the need of a SF meaning the need for a long athletic wing with defensive abilities, imo.

    And about the position thing, I don't know why it doesn't change to PG, wings and bigmen. To me it makes a lot more sense than guards, forwards and centers.
    That's exactly my point. Pop states exactly what he feels a SF will do in his scheme - long, athletic defense. The Spurs are loaded at SG but none of them are long or athletic w/ astutue defensive abilities. Pop didn't say he was going to have one of his many SGs play the SF role - he mentioned a need for a SF specifically. That's because in his scheme (and many others for that matter), they are different.

    The very fact that they traded away Hill (who played the SG role at times) for a bona fide SF indicates the difference.

    Basketball at the grade school level defines positions as guards, wings and posts. It's much more specialized from high school on...

  9. #59
    ಥ﹏ಥ DAF86's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Post Count
    44,732
    That's exactly my point. Pop states exactly what he feels a SF will do in his scheme - long, athletic defense. The Spurs are loaded at SG but none of them are long or athletic w/ astutue defensive abilities. Pop didn't say he was going to have one of his many SGs play the SF role - he mentioned a need for a SF specifically. That's because in his scheme (and many others for that matter), they are different.

    The very fact that they traded away Hill (who played the SG role at times) for a bona fide SF indicates the difference.
    It indicates that they wanted size and defense, nothing more. Players determine the schemes not the positions. If you have Nowitzki playing PF your schemes won't be the same as if you have Duncan playing PF.

    The Spurs have Manu at SG and RJ at SF, that's why Manu gets the ball in his hands. If the Spurs had Sefolosha at SG and Durant at SF, Sefolosha wouldn't be the one with the ball in his hands just because he's the SG.

  10. #60
    Believe. Tyrone Jenkins's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Post Count
    434
    The Spurs have Manu at SG and RJ at SF, that's why Manu gets the ball in his hands. If the Spurs had Sefolosha at SG and Durant at SF, Sefolosha wouldn't be the one with the ball in his hands just because he's the SG.
    Very true - but the team would play a different scheme. Do you remember who the SG was for Denver when Melo was their SF. Neither do I. It's because the offensive play calling was set for Melo to get the ball, in space, to do as he pleased with it. He could shoot from 3, drive, whatever he desired. He did it from the SF position - no one thought of him a the SG.

    Whenever Manu was on the floor, he had the same rights that Melo had as the SF. But RJ was still the SF and was looked upon by Pop to play defense, hustle, get rebounds and hit 3s primarily. The offense in no way ran through RJ - but that doesn't change his position.

    Whenever Manu was in the game w/ Neal and TP, the SF position didn't exist. The Spurs simply had 2 SGs in the game at the same time. Players are who they are based upon skillset THEY themselves possess, not the scheme the coach calls up.

    To further my point, can you describe the difference between Ray Allen and Paul Pierce? Both are called on in the offense to score - so what's their primary difference?

  11. #61
    ಥ﹏ಥ DAF86's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Post Count
    44,732
    Very true - but the team would play a different scheme. Do you remember who the SG was for Denver when Melo was their SF. Neither do I. It's because the offensive play calling was set for Melo to get the ball, in space, to do as he pleased with it. He could shoot from 3, drive, whatever he desired. He did it from the SF position - no one thought of him a the SG.

    Whenever Manu was on the floor, he had the same rights that Melo had as the SF. But RJ was still the SF and was looked upon by Pop to play defense, hustle, get rebounds and hit 3s primarily. The offense in no way ran through RJ - but that doesn't change his position.

    Whenever Manu was in the game w/ Neal and TP, the SF position didn't exist. The Spurs simply had 2 SGs in the game at the same time. Players are who they are based upon skillset THEY themselves possess, not the scheme the coach calls up.
    Well, that's exactly my point. I posted my first comment in this thread 'cause somebody said that Anderson would perform better if he played as a SG, and I answer it by saying that that doesn't matter 'cause is the player not the pos ion that matters (at least in terms of SG and SF, it's obviously not the same playing as a SF than a PF). If the poster would have said: "Anderson would perform better if he gets his number called a bit more" or something like that I wouldn't have said anything.

    To further my point, can you describe the difference between Ray Allen and Paul Pierce? Both are called on in the offense to score - so what's their primary difference?
    Main difference is the size.

  12. #62
    Believe. Tyrone Jenkins's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Post Count
    434
    LOL - I must admit this is probably one of the better debates that I've read on here much less been a part of. You seem to know something about basketball.

    However, I guess we just agree to disagree. My initial response is that size doesn't determine your position, your SKILLSET does.

    SG skillset - Quicker, leaner players who possess long range shooting ability who often have a quick release. Not known for great speed, lateral quickness or being analytical toward deciphering defenses, etc. Also not known for assisting or defensive/rebounding prowess (but some do possess it). Also not known for being drive the hole scorers (but again, some do posses the skill) as they're not really known for initiating contact like PGs or SFs. Remember Vinny Del Negro - slow, couldn't jump and never really wanted to defend but boy could he shoot.

    SF skillset - Taller, stronger players who possess a far more variety of skills. Defense is usually the priority and such players typically possess greater lateral quickness and vertical leaping ability than other positions. Can shoot outside as well as post up (play w/ back to the basket), initiate and play through contact and hit the boards w/ authority. Usually, the best pure athletes on the team, in terms of speed, jumping, strength, etc. are the SF.

    Size is just but ONE aspect - again, Magic Johnson was the size of a good PF but he played PG. Gary Neal is short for PG but has played SG for most of his career.

    Ray Allen is a SG and Paul Pierce is a SF even though both are relied upon to score in their scheme. They just both score in different ways due to their skillsets. Size is nowhere near their only difference - when was the last time anyone saw Ray Allen run to the block and try and post up his defender? How many rebounds does he get per game? How often would he drive to the basket as compared to settling for an outside jumper? You might notice that Paul Pierce posted up often, got many more rebounds and drove the the basket probably twice as much.

    It's not just size - it's mentality, skillset and playing style. If a player plays like a SF, has the game of a SF, has the attributes of a SF, regardless of his height, then he's a SF.

    Again, just a difference in opinion I guess...
    Last edited by Tyrone Jenkins; 06-26-2011 at 09:46 PM.

  13. #63
    ಥ﹏ಥ DAF86's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Post Count
    44,732
    Yep, agree to disagree

  14. #64
    Believe. Tyrone Jenkins's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Post Count
    434
    BTW - Anderson is a SG by both my definition and yours in that he possess SG skillset according to my definition and is the height of a SG according to yours (I know there are SF in the NBA that are 6'6" but most of those are SWINGMEN or SG/SF combos).

    Anderson played SG at Ok State. He was listed as the #3 off-guard in the nation in HS. He hasn't played SF as a primary position for over 8 years. If the Spurs use him that way, it's because they don't have any other option...

  15. #65
    Don't believe the hype... ChuckD's Avatar
    My Team
    New York Knicks
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Post Count
    4,510
    Arguing over what we think players positions are is pointless. The Spurs consider the positions to be as follows: 2 posts, 2 wings, and a lead guard. They consider the posts and wings more or less interchangeable on plays. I remember on that Christmas game in Phoenix a couple of years ago, Manu said afterward that he changed places with Mason because he liked that matchup better. Mason got the last laugh, though.

  16. #66
    Believe. Tyrone Jenkins's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Post Count
    434
    I beg to differ citing the last 2 hours of posting...

    Manu "changing places" w/ Mason (not sure what that means exactly) would indicate that 2 SGs are playing at the same time. Whenever Pop goes to a small lineup - he does it w/ SGs because there are so many of them on the team.

    Whenever the CBA is resolved and basketball resumes and Pop decides to play a bigger lineup w/ both RJ and Leonard in the game, does that mean that RJ is now the SG? Or better yet, that they're both wings? If Bonner is in w/ Blair and Splitter, then who's the wing then?

    Skillsets define positions gentlemen. That's all there is to it. If a player is utilized in a fashion not quite fitting his skillset, it doesn't change his position forever. Manu and Neal have the SG skillset - both of which differ from the skillset of RJ and Leonard (who both have the SF skillset).

    You can call it a wing, a forward or a banana, it doesn't change who they are or how they play.

  17. #67
    Don't believe the hype... ChuckD's Avatar
    My Team
    New York Knicks
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Post Count
    4,510
    I'm just telling you the Spurs system. If you want to believe that there are eight positions, or twenty, you are free to do so. The Spurs see three positions.

  18. #68
    Believe. Tyrone Jenkins's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Post Count
    434
    I can see that you and a few others feel pretty strongly about this...not sure where you get your info from but Pop asked specifically for a SMALL FORWARD. Not a wing. Not one of 3 positions. A small forward. His words. In the article. He didn't ask for a forward or wing - he asked for a SMALL forward.

    Why would he ask for something that specific if he doesn't actually have that specific position on his team?


    Tell you what, we can forget this debate and as I mentioned agree to disagree. And when the all star voting comes out next year and Manu's name is on it as a SG, both of you can cross out his position and right in "wing" if that'll make you feel better.

    Same thing for all defensive rookie team for Leonard.

  19. #69
    "The ball don't lie." dbestpro's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Post Count
    10,259
    I'm just telling you the Spurs system. If you want to believe that there are eight positions, or twenty, you are free to do so. The Spurs see three positions.
    Not anymore. That experiment is over. Bowen never played SG and neither will Leonard.

  20. #70
    ಥ﹏ಥ DAF86's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Post Count
    44,732
    Not anymore. That experiment is over. Bowen never played SG and neither will Leonard.
    Bowen started his career with the SG denomination, in '03 many times the broadcasters (at least here in SouthAmerica) would place Bowen as SG and Stephen Jackson as SF. Bowen usually guarded the opposing SG not the opposing SF, and on offense he would do always the same regardless of what "position" he was playing on paper: stand in the cornerns and shoot threes. Seriously people, most of the time there's no difference between SGs and SFs, the players are the ones that make the difference.

  21. #71
    Ghost of Mr. K SenorSpur's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Post Count
    14,918
    I absolutely love Anderson too. He was on quite a roll before he suffered the unfortunate injury. That injury which opened the door for Gary Neal to shine. As much as I love Neal, and I still want him taking any and every clutch 3-pt shot, but I believe Anderson's ceiling is really high - as a two-way player.

    I'd like to see Anderson start too because Manu played an extraordinary amount of minutes and should be preserved for the playoffs. I just get the feeling that Pop has permanently installed Manu as the starter (based on comments he made this past season) and he's likely not going to move him back to the bench - for any reason.

    It will be very interesting to see how Pop manages playing time at the SG position.

  22. #72
    Veteran ace3g's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Post Count
    38,107
    Confident Anderson ready for liftoff

    LAS VEGAS — The change came in James Anderson not long into one of his first games at the Impact Compe ive Basketball series last week.

    The second-year Spurs guard-forward was driving to the hoop, through a thicket of bodies, when an arm reached down and knocked the ball from his hands, making ample contact with his wrist and forearm in the process.

    Hearing no whistle, Anderson did something completely out of character. He opened his mouth.

    “That’s a foul!” the 22-year-old known to even his closest friends as “Quiet James” bellowed at the nearest official.
    http://blog.mysanantonio.com/spursna...y-for-liftoff/

  23. #73
    Don't believe the hype... ChuckD's Avatar
    My Team
    New York Knicks
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Post Count
    4,510
    Whenever Neal and Manu play together, they were usually using Neal at PG and Manu stayed at the SG. I honestly can't remember a time w/ TP or Hill, Neal and Manu all in the game at the same time. I'm not saying it didn't happen, but I can't remember it. If they did, I'm sure the offense play calling changed to utilize two SGs at the same time to get max benefit and took the defensive hit for not having a true SF.

    I'll be honest, I've never heard Manu say that but if you're sure it happened, then perhaps it is so. I'm no NBA coach but I do coach basketball and know the differences between positions.

    Regardless of all that, let me ask you a question - if the SG and SF position are so similar in the Spurs system (or any for that matter) as you have mentioned, then why is there a need to delineate a position at all? Why don't we all just call them "wings" as you mentioned and forget about all the classification? Why did Pop say we needed a backup SF behind RJ if, according to you and Manu, SGs and SFs are the same?

    Here's are two articles that mention Pop's need for a SF... I (and you) could probably find more

    http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/s...ell-697559.php

    http://www.mysanantonio.com/default/...nse-734728.php
    He's right. Although the personnel differ, 99% Spurs plays are written up for two posts, two wings, and a lead guard. I remember that Christmas game against PHO a couple of years ago. Manu said he switched places with Mason because he thought he had a better chance for the shot. Mason got it any way, and stuck it. They were the two wings on the play.

  24. #74
    Don't believe the hype... ChuckD's Avatar
    My Team
    New York Knicks
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Post Count
    4,510
    Not anymore. That experiment is over. Bowen never played SG and neither will Leonard.
    Exactly. He played wing, one of the Spurs three positions.

  25. #75
    Spur-taaaa TDMVPDPOY's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Post Count
    41,330
    lol draft busts

    anyway this is a make or break season for him, since next year is a team option, will the spurs pick it up or just dump him?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •