An article most of you will "love" by Fred Silva

[Shifty]

Spurs vs. Thunder: Stat of the Game

by Fred Silva
20 points 6-7 FGM-A in 16 minutes, 9 points 3-5 FGM-A in 17 minutes. Those are Michael Finley's and Matt Bonner's stats, respectively. I don't know about you, but the fact that they produced this well in the starting lineup made me cringe, just slightly. So, should we expect to see these two in the starting lineup against the Hornets? http://cdn1.sbnation.com/images/blog/star-divide.v5547.jpg
Is Coach Pop seriously considering only starting 3 of the Spurs' best 5 players? I think the answer is 'yes' and here's the logic. Michael Finley is a career starter. That's what he knows how to do and he does it fairly well, even at his veteran age. By bringing him off the bench one would negate his positive influence. He is a solid player, makes few mistakes, and opens the floor; all things that you want from a starter. One thing that Finley does not bring is energy. He is not a guy that will change the pace of the game, which is greatly what you want out of a bench player. So even though Ginobili is the better player, one would maximize Finley's contributions by starting him instead.
Matt Bonner is an atrocious defender. He seems to arrive just in time on his help defense to get dunked on or commit the foul. However, he is probably our best offensive sidekick for Tim Duncan. I know Antonio McDyess can shoot and DeJuan Blair has been more than impressive; but as of right now, Coach Pop has to have more confidence in starting Bonner since he started last year and has played well during the preseason. After the Spurs' defeat to the Lakers two years ago, the decision was made by the coaching staff that the Spurs were not offensive-minded enough. I remember Coach Pop saying that despite the great defense that the Spurs played against the Lakers, we lost because we could not score enough points. The following year Bowen saw his role reduced and Bonner came out of nowhere to start. I think they will keep this offensive mindset this season and play Bonner more than most would like.
My feeling is that while starting Finley and Bonner will not improve our starting lineup, the second unit will be vastly improved. Sometimes you have to sacrifice one aspect of the game for another in order to give your team the best chance to win. Coming off the bench, we will have Hill, Mason, Ginobili, Blair and McDyess. What second unit in the NBA can match up with them? The energy that Hill, Ginobili, and Blair will bring to the game will completely change the pace and be unmatched. Blair and McDyess will gobble up every rebound in sight while Hill will be able to lead the break with Ginobili and Mason on the wings and Blair cleaning up after them.
Obviously, I could be completely off here. I mean, who knows what's going on in Pop's head? But I do think the thing to take away from this is that the Spurs are so deep this year that it really would be impossible to mess up. We have 10 very good players, and one could make the case for 9 of them to start. (George Hill can't start, we already have a point guard.) This is groundbreaking for the Spurs. Have you ever seen nine startable players on a Spurs' roster? Not even in '03.
And regardless of who starts the game, the fourth quarter lineup of a close game will include Parker, Ginobili, RJ, and Duncan with whichever big guy is playing best at the time. As I said before, with this much talent it's nearly impossible to make a wrong move. This is getting me excited. Is it the 28th yet?



http://www.poundingtherock.com/2009/10/21/1095018/spurs-vs-thunder-stat-of-the-game

Now excuse me will I find a hiding place to avoid being injured by the angry mob.

[peskypesky]

Pop should go all the way with this brilliant strategy. Bring all 5 of our best players in off the bench.

[peskypesky]

I think the Patriots should bring Randy Moss off the bench. The Vikings should do the same with Adrian Peterson. What a fucking BRILLIANT idea!!! Don't start the game with your best players. That's too bloody obvious. You want to take people by surprise. And you don't want your worse players to feel bad that they have to come off the bench. So start some of them. Give all the scrubs hope! Yes!! Brilliant!! Let's hope Phil Jackson doesn't catch on to this brilliant strategy. Can you imagine what would happen if the Lakers put Gasol on the bench? Shit, they'd win a championship or something. And can you imagine how good the Bulls woulda been if Jackson had been smart enough to bring Pippen in off the bench?

[007nites]

Starting Lineup

Starters

Parker
Mason
Jefferson
Duncan
McDyess

After first subs

Parker
Ginobili
Jefferson
Blair
Duncan

Second Sub

Hill
Ginobili
Finley
McDyess
Bonner

[mystargtr34]

Michael Finley is not a 'startable' player in the league anymore, for any team. Either is Matt Bonner really. Any team can start any player, but whether they have the ability to play starter minutes, or have an impact, is another question. In my mind the Spurs have Parker, Manu, Jefferson, McDyess and Duncan who are starter caliber players - thats it.

[exstatic]

I think Holt is a hands off owner, but he would come into the locker room and give Pop a nuclear wedgie if he starts Finley over RJeff after Holt opened the checkbook to the tune of $15M.

[peskypesky]

I think Holt is a hands off owner, but he would come into the locker room and give Pop a nuclear wedgie if he starts Finley over RJeff after Holt opened the checkbook to the tune of $15M.

i agree.

[Russ]

Bonner's one value could be like an "innings eater" in baseball -- a starting pitcher who protects the rest of the staff by pitching a bunch of innings so they don't have to. Such a pitcher disappears durning the playoffs in favor of the fresher, more talented arms that he protected.

Bonner could be a "minutes eater" who protects McDyess, Blair, Ratleff, etc. for the playoffs.

Only problem is, I thought that's what they were doing with Bonner last year. But Bonner ended up playing big minutes in the playoffs and coming up small. :(

[peskypesky]

Bonner's one value could be like an "innings eater" in baseball -- a starting pitcher who protects the rest of the staff by pitching a bunch of innings so they don't have to. Such a pitcher disappears durning the playoffs in favor of the fresher, more talented arms that he protected.

Bonner could be a "minutes eater" who protects McDyess, Blair, Ratleff, etc. for the playoffs.

Only problem is, I thought that's what they were doing with Bonner last year. But Bonner ended up playing big minutes in the playoffs and coming up small. :(

see! you're already smarter than Poppazit.

[Flux451]

Speculation eats away the feeble. Only time will tell.

I want whatever lineup wins games. I don't care who is playing.

[Mel_13]

Bonner's one value could be like an "innings eater" in baseball -- a starting pitcher who protects the rest of the staff by pitching a bunch of innings so they don't have to. Such a pitcher disappears durning the playoffs in favor of the fresher, more talented arms that he protected.

Bonner could be a "minutes eater" who protects McDyess, Blair, Ratleff, etc. for the playoffs.

Only problem is, I thought that's what they were doing with Bonner last year. But Bonner ended up playing big minutes in the playoffs and coming up small. :(

I like the 'innings eater' analogy. Problem last year was that the more talented arms had broken down by the time they were needed and the 'innings eater' had to start in the big game.

Let's hope the talented arms hold up this year and the 'innings eater' can go to the bullpen when the big games roll around.

[Blackjack]

After the Spurs' defeat to the Lakers two years ago, the decision was made by the coaching staff that the Spurs were not offensive-minded enough. I remember Coach Pop saying that despite the great defense that the Spurs played against the Lakers, we lost because we could not score enough points.

Except, it wasn't about needing a mindset as much as it was about needing to manufacture more offense; the Spurs simply didn't have enough firepower; now, they do.


Bonner's one value could be like an "innings eater" in baseball -- a starting pitcher who protects the rest of the staff by pitching a bunch of innings so they don't have to. Such a pitcher disappears durning the playoffs in favor of the fresher, more talented arms that he protected.

Bonner could be a "minutes eater" who protects McDyess, Blair, Ratleff, etc. for the playoffs.

Only problem is, I thought that's what they were doing with Bonner last year. But Bonner ended up playing big minutes in the playoffs and coming up small. :(

I've had a similar take in regards to Bonner, but I like your 'innings eater' analogy.:tu

The fact of the matter is, Tim, 'Dyess and Ratliff are older players that are more succeptible to injury the more minutes they play. Starting Bonner to start the season and giving time to the likes of Blair and Mahinmi buys time for the vets and allows Pop to keep them fresher for down the stretch.

People might not like it, but Holt's paying 10M in luxury tax for a chance to win another title. And if Tim, 'Dyess and, to a much lesser extent, Ratliff aren't fresh, healthy, and ready to go when it counts? Holt's all-in approach would be all for not; Pop and RC have to be looking to do everything possible to come through on Holt's investment after all the trust and faith he's displayed with his wallet.

That being said, I'm hoping we won't see both Bonner and Finley starting together on any kind of consistent basis. I realize Pop might want to start the season with some familiar faces around Timmy while he gets back into form, all while allowing the newcomers to get their legs and/or find their way in the system, but there's plenty of corporate knowledge there to not have both Bonner and Fin starting together; replace Fin with RJ in your starting-5 from last year, and that'd be fine to start the season; the team did win 54 games despite key injuries.

[DJB]

I fucking hate Bonner.

[peskypesky]

I fucking hate Bonner.

me too!

[Fred Silva]

Glad y'all liked it. Either way, it was meant to stir discussion. After all, we have a week to kill.
Please read the article and 67 comments before you attack. I answered most questions there.
Also, I never said Finley should start in front of RJ. The lineup I thought Pop might go with consisted of Parker, Finley, RJ, Bonner, and Duncan. Basically last year's lineup plus RJ because Pop digs what's familiar.
Musar... You meant 'neither.'
And Pesky, come on, man. Comparing the NFL to the NBA does not make any sense. In the NBA, you can get away with not starting your best 5 guys, as we did in '07. The analogy does not translate for a plethora of reasons. It's really not worth getting into, unless you insist.

[peskypesky]

Glad y'all liked it. Either way, it was meant to stir discussion. After all, we have a week to kill.
Please read the article and 67 comments before you attack. I answered most questions there.
Also, I never said Finley should start in front of RJ. The lineup I thought Pop might go with consisted of Parker, Finley, RJ, Bonner, and Duncan. Basically last year's lineup plus RJ because Pop digs what's familiar.
Musar... You meant 'neither.'
And Pesky, come on, man. Comparing the NFL to the NBA does not make any sense. In the NBA, you can get away with not starting your best 5 guys, as we did in '07. The analogy does not translate for a plethora of reasons. It's really not worth getting into, unless you insist.

The analogy doesn't translate? Of course it does. It's very simple. In any sport, any sport, you put your best players on the court, the field, whatever. It's always been that way, always will be. Pop's trying to re-invent the wheel.

[Fred Silva]

I fucking hate Bonner.

And for the record, so do I. I did begin writing about him with, "Matt Bonner is an atrocious defender. He seems to arrive just in time on his help defense to get dunked on or commit the foul." He drives me more crazy than the people who live below me and are blasting hip hop at 1:30am. Seriously, wtf. I nearly knocked their door down a second ago but they refused to open the door.

[Fred Silva]

The analogy doesn't translate? Of course it does. It's very simple. In any sport, any sport, you put your best players on the court, the field, whatever. It's always been that way, always will be. Pop's trying to re-invent the wheel.

No, absolutely incorrect. In basketball, the goal is to maximize the potential of your roster. For example, let's say you have a wing player that excels when the ball is in his hands, [read: Ginobili]. The way to maximize his abilities would be to play him when he can have the ball in his hands. That is to say, play the guy when Parker, RJ, and Duncan are not on the floor. Else, you do not maximize your roster's potential and render your second unit inferior to what they could have been. That would be why Ginobili has come off the bench since '07.

[Zzakk's Garage]

Bonner and Finley are now pure shooters, which is perfect.
They rock that job.
We're finally deep on matchup strategy and y'all give a crap who starts?

Pop is working the rest of the league and y'all need to shut up and figure it out for yourselves.
Sshhh!!!

[jason1301]

I think Holt is a hands off owner, but he would come into the locker room and give Pop a nuclear wedgie if he starts Finley over RJeff after Holt opened the checkbook to the tune of $15M.

If you read the article; its TP Fin RJ TD Bonner not Fin over RJ.


Which kinda makes sense, since Fin is a big guard, plays above average D, and can stretch the floor for us. If you think about it; That starting five should be a pretty good regular season team. Last year with Mason over RJ we did pretty well.

I guess the question is who plays the 2 better Fin or Mason? If we face the Lakers I 'd take Fin, being stronger can defend Ron Ron better than Mason.

[ulosturedge]

This guy is retarded. I'll go with starting Finley if he plays the first 10 minutes of the game and is never seen again...What do these people not get about all the Spurs championships were due to their defense. Mavs man handled us last year in the playoffs because we couldn't stop shit. The whole season actually looked like that last year. The Spurs that won championships made alot of people miss and when they drove to the paint someone was there to alter their shot. Bonner, Finley, and Mason are all defensive liabilities. Don't want to sound mean, but I don't want to see any of those guys on the court in crunch time in the playoffs. Defense wins Championships.

[Danny.Zhu]

Our "second unit" can beat at least 1/3 of the "first unions" in the league I guess.

[will_spurs]

I don't care if Bonner or Finley start, as long as they are used in the role they are supposed to have (15-20 mpg max) and not in the role they had to have last year because the Spurs roster was so shallow. Some (enlightened) people here have been saying it time and ever, Bonner and Fin are good around 15 mpg, very bad at 30 mg with a mission to carry the load.

The other thing that stands out for me is that the Spurs 2nd unit is "Hill, Mason, Ginobili, Blair and McDyess". That's a team that would go .500 or more in the first place. Things look good.

[SKINNYPIMP210]

The other thing that stands out for me is that the Spurs 2nd unit is "Hill, Mason, Ginobili, Blair and McDyess". That's a team that would go .500 or more in the first place. Things look good.

I love that second unit. Maybe even RJ in there rather than Mason, for a little more height. Idk, I have no idea what the rotation is going to be, I'm sure it will change several times throughout the year. I'm just great-full that we have this much talent! :toast :flag:

[anakha]

Come on, man. Don't use logic. Anything but that. That shit doesn't fly around here...

Says the guy who can't help but keep coming back after getting banhammered multiple times. :lol

[ElNono]

Matt Bonner is an atrocious defender. He seems to arrive just in time on his help defense to get dunked on or commit the foul.


In basketball, the goal is to maximize the potential of your roster.

If we're striving to be the defensive team we once were, and given that this season we should have the talent to do that, one of those sentences above doesn't go with the other.

[silverblackfan]

I agree that there look to be 10 very good players on this bench that could start on most teams. Constant offensive force combined with consistently increasing defensive pressure = Win.
With this many good players, Pop can run multiple units with their own unique characteristics. Reminds me of Hubie Brown Grizzlies (2003) before he retired. That was a deep team, if I remember right which caused a lot of teams to burn a lot of energy.

[SpurNation]

I would have to agree with most of the OP if the Spurs can create leads or not be losing by more than 10 when the rotation changes are made.

Finley is better than Mason at shooting and defense...so the Spurs would have the better of the two starting the game. Ginobili is, and probably until his tenure with the Spurs is done, will be coming off the bench.

The improved depth the team has in the post compared to last year also allows this scenario to work. If Bonner is having a bad game. And I think the proof is overwhelming that if Bonner starts off bad...he ends up bad...the depth of McDyess and the emergence of Blair can compensate for a bad start of Bonner if replaced soon enough before damage is out of hand.

The only question I have with this starting lineup is where does Mason fit in the equation? Too small to play SF...not enough minutes to play SG. IMHO...that would be a waste.

But if it works and produces W's...

[K-State Spur]

I think the Patriots should bring Randy Moss off the bench. The Vikings should do the same with Adrian Peterson. What a fucking BRILLIANT idea!!! Don't start the game with your best players. That's too bloody obvious. You want to take people by surprise. And you don't want your worse players to feel bad that they have to come off the bench. So start some of them. Give all the scrubs hope! Yes!! Brilliant!! Let's hope Phil Jackson doesn't catch on to this brilliant strategy. Can you imagine what would happen if the Lakers put Gasol on the bench? Shit, they'd win a championship or something. And can you imagine how good the Bulls woulda been if Jackson had been smart enough to bring Pippen in off the bench?

Ridiculous comparison. Nobody plays every play in basketball. Your bench guys are going to get some minutes - so it doesn't really matter whether they are at the beginning or the middle, you just want your best guys in there together at the end.

As for Jackson, he did bring in Kukoc off the bench, even though TK was easily one of the Bulls' 5 best players during that era.

Do NOT take this as advocating to start Finley & Bonner!

[Agloco]

Michael Finley is not a 'startable' player in the league anymore, for any team. Either is Matt Bonner really. Any team can start any player, but whether they have the ability to play starter minutes, or have an impact, is another question. In my mind the Spurs have Parker, Manu, Jefferson, McDyess and Duncan who are starter caliber players - thats it.

Blair?

[jdev82]

Bonner's one value could be like an "innings eater" in baseball -- a starting pitcher who protects the rest of the staff by pitching a bunch of innings so they don't have to. Such a pitcher disappears durning the playoffs in favor of the fresher, more talented arms that he protected.

Bonner could be a "minutes eater" who protects McDyess, Blair, Ratleff, etc. for the playoffs.

Only problem is, I thought that's what they were doing with Bonner last year. But Bonner ended up playing big minutes in the playoffs and coming up small. :(

we didnt have another servicable big. what were we going to do? play kurt for 48? get ian out there on crutches to defend? we had no choice

[all_heart]

No, absolutely incorrect. In basketball, the goal is to maximize the potential of your roster. For example, let's say you have a wing player that excels when the ball is in his hands, [read: Ginobili]. The way to maximize his abilities would be to play him when he can have the ball in his hands. That is to say, play the guy when Parker, RJ, and Duncan are not on the floor. Else, you do not maximize your roster's potential and render your second unit inferior to what they could have been. That would be why Ginobili has come off the bench since '07.

Ginobili can't be the only real offensive threat on the floor, how long would it take for the other team to start doubling him? Having said that, there are enough weapons on the team where that shouldn't happen. To me the pure shooters like Mason, Fin, and Bonner need to be on the floor with guys like Tony and Manu who can get in the paint and dish, that's a no brainer though :lol

[PDXSpursFan]

this guy is retarded. I'll go with starting finley if he plays the first 10 minutes of the game and is never seen again...what do these people not get about all the spurs championships were due to their defense. Mavs man handled us last year in the playoffs because we couldn't stop shit. The whole season actually looked like that last year. The spurs that won championships made alot of people miss and when they drove to the paint someone was there to alter their shot. Bonner, finley, and mason are all defensive liabilities. Don't want to sound mean, but i don't want to see any of those guys on the court in crunch time in the playoffs. Defense wins championships.

+1

[Fred Silva]

If we're striving to be the defensive team we once were, and given that this season we should have the talent to do that, one of those sentences above doesn't go with the other.

You did not read my article. I am not advocating for a lineup that specializes in defense. I think that since we do not have a defensive stopper this year, we have to go on the offensive. We can preach defense all we want, but without a Bell/Battier/Bowen, Kobe will drop 45 on RJ, Fin, or Mason.

I think our starting lineup, at least to start with, should be one that knows how to play together. Bonner started 67 games and Finley started 77 games last season. I think that is the way that Pop will lean to begin with.

Truth be told, I would rather have McDyess start in front of Bonner. And I would like to see a starting lineup that consists of Parker, Ginobili, RJ, McDyess, and Duncan at least a few times for kicks. My article was more about explaining the logic behind the players that I feel are probable to start the first game of the season.

[ElNono]

You did not read my article. I am not advocating for a lineup that specializes in defense. I think that since we do not have a defensive stopper this year, we have to go on the offensive. We can preach defense all we want, but without a Bell/Battier/Bowen, Kobe will drop 45 on RJ, Fin, or Mason.

I disagree. I think our team as a collective needs to go back to winning with defense as opposed to winning by trying to outscore opponents. It's true we don't have a defensive stopper like Bowen in his prime, but collectively we can do a whole lot better that we've done. People forget it wasn't just Bowen that stopped Lebron the last time we were on an NBA Finals. It was above par team defense. Nobody missed rotations, everybody boxed out, TD could block a shot, Horry could block a shot, everybody rebounded, etc.

I'm actually not really concerned with Kobe scoring 45. I doubt he will basically on the premise that Kobe himself has evolved a lot as a player lately, and he understands that getting his teammates involved is more important than his personal point tally. And that's a credit to him. The big problem is when you have guys like Gasol putting 20+, Bynum putting 20+, Odom putting 15+, Fisher scoring in double figures, Vujacic off the bench scoring in double figures, etc.

The way you go back to being a top defensive team is playing your best defenders most of the time, and rolling out the 1 trick offensive ponies when you get in a drought. Under that premise, Bonner should really be behind Ratliff in the rotation.


I think our starting lineup, at least to start with, should be one that knows how to play together. Bonner started 67 games and Finley started 77 games last season. I think that is the way that Pop will lean to begin with.

Makes no sense. Dice will learn how to play with Duncan by coming from the bench but he won't learn if he is a starter? But Richard Jefferson knows how to play even though he just arrived to the team, just like Dice...

I tell you what... you tell me Pop is playing them early to see what they have left to offer, and I might buy that...

[4down]

:lmao at ppl freaking out over starting lineups in October.

I do appreciate the discussion on the offensive/defensive emphasis in Spurs ball. - carry on

[benefactor]

Let's be serious here...Bonner is only going to be starting for the first few weeks. McDyess will be starting by early/mid-December. I honestly don't care if Finley starts at the 2 as long as RJ is on the floor with him and Finley's minutes stay around the 15-20 min range, depending on how hot he is from behind the stripe.

You people need to take some Xanax.

[jason1301]

Let's be serious here...Bonner is only going to be starting for the first few weeks. McDyess will be starting by early/mid-December. I honestly don't care if Finley starts at the 2 as long as RJ is on the floor with him and Finley's minutes stay around the 15-20 min range, depending on how hot he is from behind the stripe.

You people need to take some Xanax.

I agree, the best part is ppl commenting w/o reading the article thinking that what he was saying is; Fin should start over RJ :lol

[ElNono]

I'm just bored... season can't start soon enough... :toast

[Manufan909]

The other thing that stands out for me is that the Spurs 2nd unit is "Hill, Mason, Ginobili, Blair and McDyess". That's a team that would go .500 or more in the first place. Things look good.

I'll still bitch about Fin-Bo starting every once in awhile, but I do love that bench lineup. The only way to keep it would be For Ian/Theo to show enough to start alongside Tim. I know people will argue about Theo starting because he is so fragile, or Ian because he is fragile AND foul-prone, but using both for 5 minute bursts alongside Timmy would do wonders for the Spurs D, and Ian's confidence. I'd hold off on Ian starting until the middle of January, and just play him 10-15 minutes a game, see if he can squash his bad habits.

[senorglory]

Spurs have had much success in the past cobbling together a 2 or 3 headed beast to fill the 5 spot, in the absence of a clear 20 - 10 type starting center. I like our prospects of doing the same this year, with the variety of big men we have on our roster that are NBA starter caliber in the categories of defense, rebounds, energy, mid-range, and outside shooting... even if no one player possess all those skills.

p.s. Nice article Fred.

[lennyalderette]

Michael Finley is not a 'startable' player in the league anymore, for any team. Either is Matt Bonner really. Any team can start any player, but whether they have the ability to play starter minutes, or have an impact, is another question. In my mind the Spurs have Parker, Manu, Jefferson, McDyess and Duncan who are starter caliber players - thats it.
totally agree with you on this!!! lets not get easily influenced here, matt bonner cant stop bynum!!! what in the hell is he going to do? as far as bench players being ginobili and mcdyess i understand that but so does phil jackson so if i were phil i would just bring kobe in when ginobili comes in and that would settle that. think about it even if manu comes in scoring twenty against a scrub from l.a it means nothing because kobe is going to do the same thing to finley get what im saying? and likely score more on finley than manu would on a scrub. so all theyll do is go after finley and bonner when we start, then hell slack up on finley to double whoevers more of a threat. it just really doesnt make sense to put that many starters on the bench

[lennyalderette]

we should have our one weapon Gino, or maybe 2 now blair, and let our starters handle the their starters and b team handle their b team

[Fred Silva]

totally agree with you on this!!! lets not get easily influenced here, matt bonner cant stop bynum!!! what in the hell is he going to do? as far as bench players being ginobili and mcdyess i understand that but so does phil jackson so if i were phil i would just bring kobe in when ginobili comes in and that would settle that. think about it even if manu comes in scoring twenty against a scrub from l.a it means nothing because kobe is going to do the same thing to finley get what im saying? and likely score more on finley than manu would on a scrub. so all theyll do is go after finley and bonner when we start, then hell slack up on finley to double whoevers more of a threat. it just really doesnt make sense to put that many starters on the bench

Seriously? Have you not read all the, "That guy clearly didn't read the article" posts? I wrote about the likely starting lineup of the Spurs' first game on the 28th. I did not write about the starting lineup against the Lakers. I did not say this was going to be the starting lineup for the year. I think the lineup will, and should, evolve as different players step up. The point was that I think Finley and Bonner might start the first game and I can understand the logic behind it.

[lennyalderette]

no im not talking about you at all, im just speaking out of frustration in case they do go up against l.a with this squad its not directed towards this particualr article, just the possibilities of them keeping this starting line up. this line up would work well against teams that dont have a strong five

[superjames1992]

The hate for Bonner on this forum is hilarious...

[Fred Silva]

The hate for Bonner on this forum is hilarious...

I agree. Bonner is not great by any means but at least he is goofy, takes every shot possible, and hits his threes. There are worse things.

For example, Oberto, Elson, the corpse of Robert Horry (I mean his last year with us, not when he was awesome,) Nazr, Rasho (was he not the worst? At least Nazr could get in the way defensively, although he had bricks for hands,) Sean Marks, Massenburg, the corpse of Kevin Willis, the soon to be called corpse of Theo Ratliff, and Danny Ferry (who did play underneath.) Do you like any of those options? Some bring defense with negative offense and some bring below average offense with negative defense (looking at you Rasho.) If Bonner arrived this season, I would argue people would be glad of the addition, and, admittedly, glad that McDyess would start game 1.