Can Kyle Anderson replace Manu?

**Brazil** · 08-22-2014

Originally Posted by Obstructed_View

Not sure how you don't understand the difference in what you said to what you now say you said. Let's explain it to you like you're a five year old:

You didn't say he lacked elite-level athleticism. You didn't even say he was below average for an NBA player, both of which are true. You said "analysts have been saying dude is too slow to become a rotation player", which seems on the surface to be utter bull . We're all still waiting for you to find ANYONE who has said that. Personally, everyone I've seen, everywhere, projected him to be a first round pick. Nobody projects a guy who can't make an NBA rotation into the first round. Pretty much everyone is amazed that he fell to the Spurs.

Manu Ginobili is probably a better athlete than anyone you or I know, but he's probably below average for an NBA player. James White is an elite athlete anywhere in the world and couldn't stick in the NBA.

Thanks for at least discussing your objections in the thread instead of starting ing idiot threads.

First of you should chill. Unless I forgot something I did not insult your intelligence at any point of our discussion, I'd appreciate you do the same.

Sure I admit there is no exact quote saying he is too slow to become a rotation player but it does not mean there are no concerns about his slow release or lateral quickness. So yes there is doubt about the fact he will be able to shoot the ball other than wide opens ala Bonner or if he will be able to keep up on the Defensive end against quick players which I simplified with "dude is too slow to become a rotation player" my bad... point remains tho.

I'm no Nostradamus so I have no idea if he will play significant minutes on a nba team, I'm just saying there are legit concerns. These concerns deserve to be cleared before talking about the fact he can replace Manu. Therefore I maintain that IMO this is a silly thread and discussion, moreover IMO this thread is at idiotic as the one I created about Livio, thread meant to echo this one in an humourous way which btw seems to be trendy reading other threads on the same recipe.

On draft discussions, analysists were comparing his potential to Lamar Odom, Boris Diaw... never read anything about Ginobili.

Now YOU think that comparing him to Manu is interesting offseason topic I think it is re ed. I did not see yet any indication that YOUR opinion is more valuable than MINE.

Carry on

**Obstructed_View** · 08-22-2014

Originally Posted by Brazil

First of you should chill. Unless I forgot something I did not insult your intelligence at any point of our discussion, I'd appreciate you do the same.

I'd tell you that you had it coming for spamming the board with dumbass threads, but you were man enough to recant your earlier claim about Anderson, so that makes you smarter than 90 percent of the world.

Originally Posted by Brazil

Now YOU think that comparing him to Manu is interesting offseason topic I think it is re ed. I did not see yet any indication that YOUR opinion is more valuable than MINE.

Actually, we've been over that. I think it's okay to discuss him replacing Manu, since it's pretty likely that's exactly what he's going to do, for better or for worse. My opinion isn't more valuable than yours. If you'd said that you think it's re ed without starting threads, this probably wouldn't have escalated.

**Obstructed_View** · 08-22-2014

Originally Posted by Solid D

I'm not concerned about Kyle's offense. I'm concerned about his defense and attention span while playing D. As the ball moves, Kyle's inexperience gets him picked-off too much and when defending the perimeter off-the-ball, he loses track of his man way too easily. He needs to fix that. A recent example of that: Richard Jefferson. Richard never could fix his attention span issues and inconsistent rotations off-the-ball.

Yep, that was a big concern. I was wondering about it early on. He lost his man a few times in the first SL game and got burned. He only got beat on cuts and picks a couple more times during SL, which is a pretty big turnaround. He cheats off his man more than Pop will want him to, but I don't think I've seen him lose someone because he just flat wasn't paying attention. He seems to be a smart team defender and doesn't concern himself with mistakes as long as he learns from them. He's got ing Inspector Gadget arms too. Causes a lot of deflections. His defense only becomes a problem if the opposing team starts going Bonner on him when they see he's on the floor.

**TD 21** · 08-22-2014

Originally Posted by Chinook

Yeah, I actually don't think he'll be that poor of an on-ball defender with NBA-caliber bigs behind him. But him fighting around screens or getting caught gambling is more worrisome. That's especially true if his future is at two-guard.

There's zero chance of his future being at SG. It'll be enough of a challenge for him to defend SF's, let alone SG's. He's clearly an SF, in the mold of Turkoglu. He doesn't have the necessary bulk to play PF nor the combination of overwhelming size (for an SF) and shooting to be converted into a stretch four, like Daye.

**skulls138** · 08-22-2014

Originally Posted by Cklbmk

Cool. So I'm glad you're a rational person. I mean how ever can you replace someones role on a team if they were an all time great. We might as well concede every game after he retires forever. I mean no one can ever be a playmaker or clutch again. Am i right?

Hey as Ive said elsewhere, I wish KA the best. I wish that all his talents translate to the NBA and makeup for any weaknesses he may have. I hope he even exceeds even the most optimistic fans prediction. But to discuss his ability to replace Ginobili NOW is nuts. Ginobili (on a good day admittedly) is a combination of Bird and Jordan no less. He has four, count em, four rings and is a big reason why he has them. I mean what on earth do you see in KA that could even remotely be as good as Ginobili? Passing is the closest thing but even then he might not be as good. Everything else? Give me some examples of how he could be as good?

My optimistic prediction is that KA could be a multiple time all star but not on the first team and his positives have to makeup for a lot of his negatives.

**Chinook** · 08-22-2014

Originally Posted by TD 21

There's zero chance of his future being at SG. It'll be enough of a challenge for him to defend SF's, let alone SG's. He's clearly an SF, in the mold of Turkoglu. He doesn't have the necessary bulk to play PF nor the combination of overwhelming size (for an SF) and shooting to be converted into a stretch four, like Daye.

That's all well and good, but he'll probably play the two in 2015 anyway.

**ElNono** · 08-22-2014

Originally Posted by Brazil

I'm no Nostradamus

Originally Posted by Chinook

That's all well and good, but he'll probably play the two in 2015 anyway.

I'm Nonostradamus... and Chinook *will* be wrong on that prediction, tbh.

**Chinook** · 08-22-2014

Originally Posted by ElNono

I'm Nonostradamus... and Chinook *will* be wrong on that prediction, tbh.

Well, I'm no Nonostradamus, but out of all the new players under team control, he's the only one with the skill-set.

**Brazil** · 08-22-2014

Originally Posted by ElNono

I'm Nonostradamus... and Chinook *will* be wrong on that prediction, tbh.

**littlecoyotecoin** · 08-22-2014

Originally Posted by xmas1997

Seems to me there is a huge difference between "elite-level athleticism", "NBA-caliber athleticism", and "a lack of athleticism".

The vast majority of the articles I have read have only mentioned a lack of elite level athleticism. It seems to me that would describe many if not most of the athletes in the NBA and many of the greats.

Athleticism is the over riding issue, but IMHO considering what he has done through most of his basketball life, it makes this a negligible issue, because it describes a deliberate and patient style of play.

I agree with a lot of what you and OV are saying about Anderson, but the quote about him not having "NBA caliber athleticism" should satisfy the request of "show me one quote". That is pretty cut-and-dried. Not good enough for the NBA. Of course, the guy who wrote that could simply be wrong, but it is on the record and satisfies the burden.

**tholdren** · 08-22-2014

Let me recap this thread:

Can Kyle Anderson, a 12 ppg scorer in college, replace one of the most decorated professional basketball players of all time?

BWAAAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHA

Really? Im serious. I have no idea how this thread has made it to page three without any blue, or typos due to laughter. This cannot be real.

**littlecoyotecoin** · 08-22-2014

We should have defined "replace" earlier to prevent the argument. Semantics police weren't on duty. I agree with both of them, now, because they were both arguing different meanings of the word. You're right, he will probably replace him in position, at least for some minutes, and Brazil was right in that it's basically impossible for him to replace Manu, the player - not the position.

**littlecoyotecoin** · 08-22-2014

Originally Posted by Brazil

100 guys who have a game like Wade and manu is one of a kind... we are all Spurs fans but come on now

First of all Wade is well above average for a SG regarding passing and hitting open team mates, sure he is not as spectacular as Manu but dude is a 6 apg which is higher than Manu even per 36 mn pg.
Second Wade is / was one of best finisher in the lane so I don't see that point as one of a big difference.

Then he is a better rebounder than Manu, steal the ball at the same rate and you add 1 blk per game which is quite rare for a guard.

Using Wade in that kind of argument is a bad idea saying there ae 100 guys who have a game like him is worst

Ok, not 100, only 50? What number would you be comfortable with?

As previously stated, finding a Wade "type" can be done much more easily, and I extend that to meaning Manu is better, too, not just more "unique". Wade never won much of anything in his prime until Shaq showed up for a one and done. He had a resurgence much later with Lebron, sometimes as an albatross more than an eagle. You might say something similar of Manu with Tim. However, Manu was the driving force behind his national team's success. He had no Shaq or Lebron to lean on and coat-tail to get him to gold. They coat-tailed him, and are still trying to do it at 37 years of age. You put Wade on that team and the Golden Generation gets renamed to the Silver Squad or the Bronze Buddies, or the Also Rans. Regarding Wade's higher numbers in a few categories...he was the starter and/or main option for lots of years playing his entire career in the weak East...Manu was coming off the bench in a tougher West, trying to turn bench lemons into lemonade, likely having carried his national team on his shoulders in the previous off-season each year. Can you imagine what Manu's numbers would look like if he was a starter in a big market in the East his whole career and only played international ball once or twice? You don't think they're a little better? He would have probably been at the line twice as much, too.

In retrospect I pick Manu over Wade every time. Under-rated athleticism, as well, when he was young. , we still just saw him drive through the lane and dunk on a broken leg at the age of 37. At 27 he was quick as a whip sometimes, with the ball...picking people's pockets when without it, etc. Nimble feet, some hops, and hand-eye coordination in spades. We used to try to catch bats with wide nets when I was young, with only occasional success. He swatted one on it's first or second pass. Add the intangibles, and Bill Simmons had something in that statement. He was using round numbers, and I am sure he wouldn't want to be painted into a corner to say that Manu is better than Wade, but it was definitely a well-deserved tip of the cap to Manu.

**xmas1997** · 08-22-2014

We are lucky to have Manu through his whole NBA career.

**skulls138** · 08-22-2014

Manu and Wade are both great. I would rather have a prime Wade than a prime Lebron. Wade is much more clutch than Lebron. Having said that I would rather have Manu than Wade but they are much closer than that 100 bull .

As for styles as in Manu is more unique, who gives a flying . All that matters is whether that orange ball goes through that orange hoop or not.

Also, Shaq coattailed Wade at that point in his career.

**exstatic** · 08-23-2014

Originally Posted by TD 21

There's zero chance of his future being at SG. It'll be enough of a challenge for him to defend SF's, let alone SG's. He's clearly an SF, in the mold of Turkoglu. He doesn't have the necessary bulk to play PF nor the combination of overwhelming size (for an SF) and shooting to be converted into a stretch four, like Daye.

He has a better chance of being a stretch 4 than Daye does. 6'9" with a 7'3" wingspan is plenty long enough to play the 4. Kyle looks like when they get him in shape, his frame will be able to add some muscle.

I don't care how tall Daye is, he's a stick. Daye's been in the league for 5 years and doesn't appear to have added one pound.

**littlecoyotecoin** · 08-23-2014

Originally Posted by exstatic

He has a better chance of being a stretch 4 than Daye does. 6'9" with a 7'3" wingspan is plenty long enough to play the 4. Kyle looks like when they get him in shape, his frame will be able to add some muscle.

I don't care how tall Daye is, he's a stick. Daye's been in the league for 5 years and doesn't appear to have added one pound.

Actually, Daye's gone from 200 when entering the league, to 216-218 when reporting to The Spurs, to a rumored 225, recently. I don't have access to his bathroom scale, but the idea that he hasn't or can't gain weight is a little tired. The fact is, he has gained weight. He'll never be Baynes, but he doesn't need to be and he even does APPEAR to have gained weight if you care to look. However, if you want to blindly stick to the narrative that he hasn't, more power to you, I guess. This is not to say he has gained enough weight to be effective. That he has not proved to doubters, to be sure. But, if you're going to prop Anderson up over Daye, at least keep it factual. I love Anderson's game, thus far, too. So I am rooting for him. I am not saying Kyle can't play the stretch-4, but that doesn't appear to be what they are grooming him for at these early stages. Kyle does have a great wing-span, if a little shorter than Daye, for the position, but having him stand in the corner and kicked to would be a waste of his talents. Daye, too, for that matter. If Daye can be an effective shooter, we'll see him dribble around the charging defender and pull up for a mid-range, go to the hole and/or line, and pass for an assist and a lot more than Bonner is not capable of as Matty only had a pass around the horn available to him or his running hook. If Daye can stay on the court defensively, he might bring a lot more options offensively than Matty. Kyle and Daye are more similar than they are different in a lot of ways. I am surprised at all the hate for one and love for the other when they share a lot of the same strengths and weaknesses. It keeps being brought up that Daye has not been successful for five years in the league (which is arguable, as he had inconsistent success...not a total lack of it ever), yet he's been in the NBA five years. Anderson hasn't played a single second in the NBA, and he didn't set summer league on fire, either. He had flashes against inferior compe ion. Nothing more. I hope he comes in and sets the league on fire, or at least can get regular minutes, but there is an irrationality of expectation underlying some of the talk about him sometimes.

**littlecoyotecoin** · 08-23-2014

Originally Posted by skulls138

Manu and Wade are both great. I would rather have a prime Wade than a prime Lebron. Wade is much more clutch than Lebron. Having said that I would rather have Manu than Wade but they are much closer than that 100 bull .

As for styles as in Manu is more unique, who gives a flying . All that matters is whether that orange ball goes through that orange hoop or not.

Also, Shaq coattailed Wade at that point in his career.

Wade was in his prime, but he wouldn't have won without Shaq. He would have had another year like the one before and the ones after.

**elemento** · 08-23-2014

My opinion is that Kyle Anderson will replace Manu's role as the playmaker taking care of 2nd unit. But it doesn't mean that he will play as a SG. I think he will end up as a stretch 4 having PG duties off the bench as a 6th man. That's simply the best way to use him.

I don't see him as a starter simply because SA won't be able to hide him defensively against starters. That could be done if comes off the bench though.

**TD 21** · 08-23-2014

Originally Posted by Chinook

That's all well and good, but he'll probably play the two in 2015 anyway.

Based on what, you arbitrarily deciding so?

Originally Posted by exstatic

He has a better chance of being a stretch 4 than Daye does. 6'9" with a 7'3" wingspan is plenty long enough to play the 4. Kyle looks like when they get him in shape, his frame will be able to add some muscle.

I don't care how tall Daye is, he's a stick. Daye's been in the league for 5 years and doesn't appear to have added one pound.

No, he doesn't. He's definitely tall and long enough to play the position, but he lacks strength. Obviously Daye does too, but the difference is, he's overwhelmingly tall and long for an SF and his shooting goes from decent as an SF to potentially impact as a PF.

So what? There's plenty of rail thin bigs (Bosh, Sanders, Wright, Plumlee, Evans, Novak, etc.) nowadays, playing up a position from where they were projected when they first entered the league. It's all about match-ups. Obviously, they're not going to have him defend overpowering, low post scorers.