Matt Bonner - Lucky or Good?

[timvp]

Last season, Matt Bonner led the Spurs in +/- with a +338. He also led the team in +/- per minute with a +.175. Fluke, right?

Well this season, Bonner is at it again. He leads the team in +/- with a +43. He leads the team in +/- per minute with a +.211.

I've mentioned this elsewhere but I'm interested in more opinions. Why do you think this is the case? Is Matt Bonner really a much more important part of the team than he's it appears? Is it because the Spurs need a three-point shooting bigman next to Tim Duncan to operate smoothly? Is it just a matter of luck and evidence that +/- should be ignored?

I'm not sure where I stand. The sample size is getting quite large to just say it's a fluke.

Hmmm . . .

[rAm]

It is just so hard for me to justify that he is this good.

There are definite times when he plays good defense, or does the right thing. But for each of those plays there are plenty where he is out of position or does something that makes me yell.

So no matter how good the stats look, I feel like the Spurs would be better off with a different player. Maybe with a similar style to Bonner's (spread the floor), but just... god I want Horry back.

That being said, I thought there were several times where he played excellent defense against Nowitzki. You just can't stop that bitch.

[z0sa]

He's an above average roleplayer, especially when he's snaring rebounds. The fact he doesn't intimidate lots of shots and shoots 3's (and the constant belittling) causes his stock to fall with spurfan unjustifiably.

The jury is still out on whether or not he can be a consistent playoff contributor, but I think it's a proven fact now that, at least during the regular season, he helps make good shit happen when he's on the court.

Also, I'm confused about people constantly saying he's a bad defender or he's out of position. I can assure you, he's not.

[hater]

Last season, Matt Bonner led the Spurs in +/- with a +338. He also led the team in +/- per minute with a +.175. Fluke, right?

Well this season, Bonner is at it again. He leads the team in +/- with a +43. He leads the team in +/- per minute with a +.211.

I've mentioned this elsewhere but I'm interested in more opinions. Why do you think this is the case? Is Matt Bonner really a much more important part of the team than he's it appears? Is it because the Spurs need a three-point shooting bigman next to Tim Duncan to operate smoothly? Is it just a matter of luck and evidence that +/- should be ignored?

I'm not sure where I stand. The sample size is getting quite large to just say it's a fluke.

Hmmm . . .

Matt Bonner is having a solid season and is the 3rd best big man for the spurs.

you been reading too many posts at www.spurstalk.com

[ElNono]

I think you're merely using the wrong statistical measure.
Plus-Minus is heavily reliant on who else was on the floor with him. If he happened to share the floor mostly with Duncan/TP/Manu, then he would look great. If he happened to share the floor with Mason/Finley/Vaughn then he would look horrible.

One could use PER, and then he would rank as an average NBA player (15.0).
PER, IMO, actually works well in his case, since the main knock on PER is that it largely measures offensive performance, and we know Bonner is nowhere near an elite defender (PER was largely unfair with players like Bowen, for example).

[Brazil]

I already posted that in the game thoughts but I'm quite surprised by his rebounding efforts. I was wondering if he is more focus on that or if he worked with Blair this summer or something...

[ElNono]

Also, I'm confused about people constantly saying he's a bad defender or he's out of position. I can assure you, he's not.

Well, we should just close this thread then. :lol

[z0sa]

Well, we should just close this thread then. :lol

What a surprise - you hating in a Bonner thread.

[lurker23]

This is a very good question. As everyone surely knows by now, I'm a Matt Bonner fan, and at least a small part of that reason is that he's majorly under-rated on this board. However, he is what he is, and that's certainly NOT the best player on this team (or even top 6). He's a solid role player who can knock down the three-ball and rebounds at a rate that compares decently to similar role players.

My initial instinct is that it's a combination of being better than is generally appreciated on this board, and the rotations he gets put into (i.e.- both lucky and good). I don't think you can solely attribute his success to being on the floor with Tim Duncan, or otherwise Duncan would likely have the highest +/- on the team.

However, I think this topic deserves some further delving into the numbers. I have a suspicion about some of the cause here, and will get back to you soon when I crunch some stats.

[timvp]

Matt Bonner is having a solid season and is the 3rd best big man for the spurs.

you been reading too many posts at www.spurstalk.com

Pop and RC must read too much on ST too since their main offseason goal was to find bigs that could replace Bonner. Not to mention Bonner has already lost his starting job this season.

[z0sa]

Pop and RC must read too much on ST too since their main offseason goal was to find bigs that could replace Bonner. Not to mention Bonner has already lost his starting job this season.

I wouldn't call it replacing him, though the term may fit. More like moving him back into a role both he and the team can be successful with.

And I don't put much weight behind him "losing" his starting position. What exactly has Blair done substantially better than him to attain it? Pop is just shuffling lineups and I'm sure another part was testing Bonner's mentality/toughness when coming off the bench as opposed to starting. Thus far, one would have to say moving him to the bench has produced a positive response.

[timvp]

I think you're merely using the wrong statistical measure.
Plus-Minus is heavily reliant on who else was on the floor with him. If he happened to share the floor mostly with Duncan/TP/Manu, then he would look great. If he happened to share the floor with Mason/Finley/Vaughn then he would look horrible.

One could use PER, and then he would rank as an average NBA player (15.0).
PER, IMO, actually works well in his case, since the main knock on PER is that it largely measures offensive performance, and we know Bonner is nowhere near an elite defender (PER was largely unfair with players like Bowen, for example).

Disagree. PER is somewhat useful in regards to production. I'm not really talking about his production -- that is obvious from watching the team play.

I'm more interested in why the team consistently does better with him on the court. Sure, +/- over the short term can be heavily influenced by teammates but that influence dissipates as the sample size grows. Going into a second season with Bonner still leading the way makes the stat less of a fluke.

And besides, this season Bonner has seen his role change on a daily basis. He's played 100 minutes as a starter and 103 minutes from off the bench. That's enough teammate variation that his +/- probably isn't due to just the luck of being with the right teammates at the right time.

[ElNono]

What a surprise - you hating in a Bonner thread.

How am I hating on Bonner in this thread? The OP asked a question, I merely responded. At least I backed it up with more than 'trust me, I know'.

[z0sa]

How am I hating on Bonner in this thread?

I didn't say you were hating on Bonner.

[Hollinger]

The numbers speak for themselves: Matt Bonner is a stud!

[ElNono]

Disagree. PER is somewhat useful in regards to production. I'm not really talking about his production -- that is obvious from watching the team play.

I'm more interested in why the team consistently does better with him on the court. Sure, +/- over the short term can be heavily influenced by teammates but that influence dissipates as the sample size grows. Going into a second season with Bonner still leading the way makes the stat less of a fluke.

And besides, this season Bonner has seen his role change on a daily basis. He's played 100 minutes as a starter and 103 minutes from off the bench. That's enough teammate variation that his +/- probably isn't due to just the luck of being with the right teammates at the right time.

The teammate influence only dissipates over time if the teammates remain the same and their production is the same over the sample size, which is not the case at all.

For example, take Mason. He started last season on fire, and then his production dwindled over the second half. If Bonner happened to play more minutes with Mason early in the season, and less minutes with him on the second half, then that's a net gain for Bonner over the plus/minus Mason contributed to his own plus/minus.

That's why plus/minus is a much better stat to compare lineups within a team, provided all the players in said lineups maintain certain level of production.

Now, I don't outright discard that Bonner isn't a positive influence on the team. But I don't think plus/minus is going to tell you the extent of that.

[ElNono]

I didn't say you were hating on Bonner.

My mistake. :toast
And FWIW, that's why I put a :lol after it. It was a joke.

[peacemaker885]

I think you're merely using the wrong statistical measure.
Plus-Minus is heavily reliant on who else was on the floor with him. If he happened to share the floor mostly with Duncan/TP/Manu, then he would look great. If he happened to share the floor with Mason/Finley/Vaughn then he would look horrible.

One could use PER, and then he would rank as an average NBA player (15.0).
PER, IMO, actually works well in his case, since the main knock on PER is that it largely measures offensive performance, and we know Bonner is nowhere near an elite defender (PER was largely unfair with players like Bowen, for example).

Well this could also be interpreted for another player: why does Jefferson suck when Tim, Tony and Manu are on the floor? For now its chemistry, yes, but if its the same come December, does this mean he sucks?

[Ballcox]

I guess my question with Bonner would be is his offensive production negated by him being a defensive liability?

I love the idea of a big man who can shoot from range out to 3pt. line, but with Bonner he usually gets targeted on the defensive end and his rebounding has always been sub-par for a guy his size.

I guess overall I'm still on the fence with him and if his production really helps the team. He also can't pull another disappearing act like he did last year in the playoffs.

[lurker23]

So, I have a couple of theories on this Matt Bonner Phenomenon. My first theory was that as a player who shoots a lot of 3 pointers, he helps his team get more points per possession than other 2-point-shooting big men. While this still may be part of the equation, I'm not really sure I have the data to back it up. Yes, Bonner was second on the team last year on percentage of shots that were three pointers, but I'm not sure that his shots per minute were enough to really sway the numbers in his favor.

Percentage of FGA that were 3-pointers (08-09):

Bowen: 52.4%
Bonner: 50.0%
Mason: 47.9%
Finley: 46.3%
Udoka: 43.5%
Ginobili: 42.6%
Hill: 19.6%
Parker: 5.1%
All others below 1%

FGA per minute played (08-09)

Parker: .51
Gooden: .45
Duncan: .44
Ginobili: .42
Mason: .33
Finley: .295
Hill: .293
Bonner: .278
Udoka: .277
Vaughn: .26
Thomas: .22
Bowen: .12

So, I don't think this theory is valid on this simple a manner. However, I have another theory that (for the sake of brevity per post) I'll explain in my next post.

[hater]

Pop and RC must read too much on ST too since their main offseason goal was to find bigs that could replace Bonner. Not to mention Bonner has already lost his starting job this season.

not really. their main offseason goal apparently was to keep Bonner involved but replace him on the starting spot. Something spurstalk.com never would support.

spurstalk was calling for bonners head from the getgo.

[VivaPopovich]

why were we a better team momentarily without tony parker and tim duncan? does this mean we're better off without tony parker and tim duncan? of course not!

forget getting everyone to mesh together, we havent even had long stretches where every man in the rotation plays together yet. the chemistry just isn't there yet and it could be 30-40 games in before it gets there.

although he's still being over-used, pop is moving towards the right direction, starting antonio mcdyess and closing the games with mcdyess. altho i tell you, if theo ratliff is going to get no minutes at all, he might as well just trade him.

much of the bonner hate is probably psychological. he actually is improving his defense and rebounding but he is so white he stands out on the court even with the zoomed out angle, and he looks like a dork running up and down the court and his movements are so awkward, it's not something i've never seen on the spurs in all my years watching basketball

i'm growing quite desensitized to it all. the best thing we could hope for is that he at least hits his 3's

[lurker23]

My main theory on this Matt Bonner Phenomenon is two-fold, and comes from examining the 5-man-unit data on 82games.com:

1. The Power of Three Point Shooting
2. The Power of Balanced Lineups

Let's take a look at the top lineups in +/- last year:

-Parker-Mason-Finley-Bonner-Duncan: +88
-Parker-Mason-Finley-Bonner-Thomas: +48
-Parker-Mason-Ginobili-Bonner-Duncan: +28
-Parker-Ginobili-Bowen-Bonner-Duncan: +27
-Hill-Mason-Finley-Bonner-Duncan: +27
-Parker-Ginobili-Finley-Bonner-Duncan: +20

http://www.82games.com/0809/0809SAS2.HTM

Other than Matt Bonner, all of these lineups have 2 things in common:

1. They all have 3 players in the lineup who can hit the 3-pointer at a high percentage.
2. They are all balanced lineups with 2 big men, 2 swingmen, and 1 point guard.


The first part of this is purely offensive. By having 3 guys on the floor who can hit the three pointer, you open up the floor, and (assuming you're hitting your threes) you allow yourself to get more points per possession.

The second part of this has a lot to do with defense and rebounding. By having a balanced lineup on the floor, particularly the presence of two big men, you improve your defense and hit the boards harder.


So why do these two benefit Matt Bonner the most? Specifically, I think Matt Bonner is pretty much the only player on the team who never has to play in an unbalanced lineup. By having Bonner be the only big man on the court, you would basically be going to super small ball, and would theoretically give up a lot on defense; so, understandably, Pop has never gone to this lineup.

I'm not saying this is completely the reason, and it's just a theory. Nor is this a condemnation of small ball, though the numbers may be trying to show that (the worst +/- group last year was Parker-Mason-Ginobili-Bowen-Duncan at -29).

As a final note, you have to give credit to Bonner for his outstanding shooting and improving defense last year. Without his individual effort, all of this theory would be moot from the start.

[nkdlunch]

regardless of these +/- and technical mumbo jumbo. at the end of the day, Sheed will say "just pass the ball to whoever Bonner is guarding"

so to answer the OP, yes Bonner is good. But not good enough to play major minutes in a playoff situation.

[SpurNation]

Good. As a bench player.

[peacemaker885]

Yes he's a decent bench player. Starter? HELL F'ING NO. Why is everyone trying to fit Bonner in the lineup so hard, what has he ever done when it counts?


He did this:

0BAomDJMEwY

[HarlemHeat37]

I don't know about last year, but this year his +/- has benefited from garbage time..Bonner is +15 so far this year when the game is out of reach, or when the game is basically over and he's inserted with a few minutes left..

I don't know if it means anything, last year might be different, I'm just saying for this year..

His teammates haven't impacted his +/- though, since he's also #1 in weighted on court/off court impact..

[ElNono]

Good. As a bench player.

Depending on the matchups, 15-20 minutes off the bench, which is kind of the role he's playing now.

[SKINNYPIMP210]

I think he is playing better this year, I was impressed how well he stayed with dirk. Even though dirk torched him.... But yeah we are missing the shot blocking and rebounding. We have given up too many second chance points this season! I always wondered why? I want to blame Bonner but idk. Last night when dirk had that tip in it was because George Hill didn't stay with him or even go to the basket for the board. I think Timmy was on the other side of the basket and dirk had a wide open lane to the basket!

[AussieFanKurt]

i'll give it to the big fella, hes played good for last few games

[HarlemHeat37]

Ya, Duncan contested Terry's shot on the p&r, I think it was Hill's assignment to rotate to Dirk, but I'm not sure..

[SKINNYPIMP210]

Yeah but Dirk is fucking insane. even amazing defense short of a block and Dirk will drain it.

Yeah I know I read my post again and it sounded kind of harsh. Even though Dice was all over him he still hit some crazy shots! But I was impressed that Bonner stayed with him and didn't bite on any of his pump fakes.

[The Truth #6]

To me the issue with the Spurs is lack of consistent cohesion. Some games one player goes off and then isn't heard from again. Put another way, other than the first game, we have yet to see a consistent balanced attack. I think our best unit of Parker, Mason, Finley, Bonner, and Tim is, sadly, because it allows Tony and Tim to do all the work. Yes, having 3 point shooters balances the floor for them to get in the paint, but I think the net effect is that Tim and Tony have to do more of the heavy lifting, and not surprisingly, both of them are somewhat injured. The other negative effect is that the role players don't develop as they could or should and get used to standing around. Not surprisingly again, Bonner, Mason, and Finley all sucked horribly in the playoffs when they couldn't just stand around and wait for someone to pass them the ball.

Anyway, that's just a theory.

Also, regarding Bonner: I think Bonner is cool and I like his sandwich blog, however just because he's in position on defense doesn't mean he's actually playing good defense. He's playing defense according to the system, which means he understand where to be, but in no way does he impede the other player from scoring. The results are bad even if the effort is great. Yes, he's playing up to and beyond his potential. So, I don't think he should be criticized for not giving good effort, but I don't think fans should defend him in thinking he's being effective.

[AussieFanKurt]

Depending on the matchups, 15-20 minutes off the bench, which is kind of the role he's playing now.

Yeah I would be happy to see him getting around that time. 20ish minutes or so is fine unless he's playing abnormally bad or good

[peacemaker885]

throw out stats. Matt bonner isn't athletic. Matt bonner can't create his own shot most of the time. But matt bonner is one of the hardest working players in the nba and shoots better than most guards. I once heard a story of him and brent barry having a shoot out. 100 nba 3 pointers, best percentage wins. Brent made 92, matt made 86. I don't think many players in nba history could break 75.

Matt plays hard every time he steps between the lines and is under valued by nba fans. I'm not saying i wouldn't trade him, but i would only trade him for an upgrade of a player.

+1

[diego]

Bonner is a good role player, he has a good shot and hustles out there- I'm pretty sure that his poor rep has more to do with the he was starting- pop even set him up for some gamewinners- and for those gamewinners and in the playoffs, he often choked. When that coincides with the first duncan team to lose in the 1st round, people are going to look for explanations and bonner is a nice red target, especially when horry/bowen (from the role player hall of fame) are essentially the players he replaced.

I'd have to see how much better his +/- is than everyone else. But if I had to pick out reasons his numbers might be inflated, I'd guess:

1) This team's inside-out offense favors a jump shooting big and he is a good target for the big 3 to pick up on, thus he gets an inordinate amount of high quality looks

2) because we no longer have as much "inside" in the inside-out offense (not necessarily his fault, what with the big 3's injury woes), we get more "outside" and so the team depends more on his ability to hit 3pters to win

3) pop's wacky rotations make stats in general difficult to rate for the spurs. maybe bonner was involved in more good experiments than bad. it goes to bonner's credit, but the way the way the coach sets up the team will always affect the player's rating, and maybe all this stat tells us is that pop is better (or more focused on) at getting the best of bonner than he is at getting the best out of player X.

in sum- the spurs need better than bonner, but they could do worse, especially for his price

[roycrikside]

Last season, Matt Bonner led the Spurs in +/- with a +338. He also led the team in +/- per minute with a +.175. Fluke, right?

Well this season, Bonner is at it again. He leads the team in +/- with a +43. He leads the team in +/- per minute with a +.211.

I've mentioned this elsewhere but I'm interested in more opinions. Why do you think this is the case? Is Matt Bonner really a much more important part of the team than he's it appears? Is it because the Spurs need a three-point shooting bigman next to Tim Duncan to operate smoothly? Is it just a matter of luck and evidence that +/- should be ignored?

I'm not sure where I stand. The sample size is getting quite large to just say it's a fluke.

Hmmm . . .

Maybe Pop is more cognizant about putting him in good match-ups and sitting him when it's a bad match-up than he is with guys like Fin, Mason, etc.

Matt's a better defender than he gets credit for being, and even if he does give up buckets, it's only going to be 2 points, whereas when he scores, the team gets 3 points.

Also, if Matt is getting abused, he's probably going to cost himself fouls and therefore be taken out.

[Chomag]

He is a good bench player. Nothing more, nothing less.

I hold judgment untill I see him contribute in games that matter, and the playoffs when he is known to just wet himself.

[phyzik]

It's like this....

1. Chuck Norris
2. Dos Equis guy
3. Matt Bonner

[Big P]

The total of 3 pointers(all he is good for) he makes does not make up for all the points that he gives up on defense. He gets absolutely torched by opposing bigmen. I am glad that Pop came to his senses & yanked Bonner out of the starting lineup a whole 3 games into the season.

[quentin_compson]

My main theory on this Matt Bonner Phenomenon is two-fold, and comes from examining the 5-man-unit data on 82games.com:

1. The Power of Three Point Shooting
2. The Power of Balanced Lineups

Let's take a look at the top lineups in +/- last year:

-Parker-Mason-Finley-Bonner-Duncan: +88
-Parker-Mason-Finley-Bonner-Thomas: +48
-Parker-Mason-Ginobili-Bonner-Duncan: +28
-Parker-Ginobili-Bowen-Bonner-Duncan: +27
-Hill-Mason-Finley-Bonner-Duncan: +27
-Parker-Ginobili-Finley-Bonner-Duncan: +20

http://www.82games.com/0809/0809SAS2.HTM

Other than Matt Bonner, all of these lineups have 2 things in common:

1. They all have 3 players in the lineup who can hit the 3-pointer at a high percentage.
2. They are all balanced lineups with 2 big men, 2 swingmen, and 1 point guard.


The first part of this is purely offensive. By having 3 guys on the floor who can hit the three pointer, you open up the floor, and (assuming you're hitting your threes) you allow yourself to get more points per possession.

The second part of this has a lot to do with defense and rebounding. By having a balanced lineup on the floor, particularly the presence of two big men, you improve your defense and hit the boards harder.


So why do these two benefit Matt Bonner the most? Specifically, I think Matt Bonner is pretty much the only player on the team who never has to play in an unbalanced lineup. By having Bonner be the only big man on the court, you would basically be going to super small ball, and would theoretically give up a lot on defense; so, understandably, Pop has never gone to this lineup.

I'm not saying this is completely the reason, and it's just a theory. Nor is this a condemnation of small ball, though the numbers may be trying to show that (the worst +/- group last year was Parker-Mason-Ginobili-Bowen-Duncan at -29).

As a final note, you have to give credit to Bonner for his outstanding shooting and improving defense last year. Without his individual effort, all of this theory would be moot from the start.

:tu

I think this is a very good theory, as I'm with ElNono regarding the +/- net points: It is much more telling for comparing different lineups than for judging a single player's performance.

Pop knows very well that Bonner is not a great presence under the basket and doesn't rebound much. So he knows he has to put in a big alongside Matt who provides those things.
I think Bonner profits from being in lineups that have an inside presence as well as guys that can drive it to the basket. That way, Bonner's strength (3 point shooting) is on display while his weaknesses tend not to weigh in that much.

Also, Bonner is a very good shooter and works very hard. Not the worst kind of player to have on your team - if you don't have to ask him to do things he just can't do (which was basically the case last season).

[Phenomanul]

He could have gotten Nowitzki (and or Terry) ejected after that reach in... unfortunately they didn't bite... and Nowitzki went wild...

[jag]

He's not mobile, he can't jump, he's really just a non-athletic white guy. It's sometimes tough to watch him play...but he constantly outworks people. It's easy to figure out why people don't like watching him play, and that's cause it's not pretty.

People get frustrated with him due to unrealistic expectations. He's a big man who plays outside...you can't really expect too much out of him.

That being said, he works hard and he knows his role. By knowing his role and recognizing his limitations, it allows him to consistently contribute on both ends of the floor.

[pad300]

Last season, Matt Bonner led the Spurs in +/- with a +338. He also led the team in +/- per minute with a +.175. Fluke, right?

Well this season, Bonner is at it again. He leads the team in +/- with a +43. He leads the team in +/- per minute with a +.211.

I've mentioned this elsewhere but I'm interested in more opinions. Why do you think this is the case? Is Matt Bonner really a much more important part of the team than he's it appears? Is it because the Spurs need a three-point shooting bigman next to Tim Duncan to operate smoothly? Is it just a matter of luck and evidence that +/- should be ignored?

I'm not sure where I stand. The sample size is getting quite large to just say it's a fluke.

Hmmm . . .

I don't know what you do for a stats source, but can you subsection the data? Is Matt Bonner a flat track bully? You might be able to tell by finding +/- and +/- per minute against opponents whose team finished greater than .550 (from last season's data)? Or how about +/- in games the Spurs won vs. the Spurs lost?

[Chieflion]

I agree with lurker's theory. Besides, if Bonner has a positive impact on our team, why should the Spurs consider trading him, unless it is a clear upgrade? Pop knows how to make it work with Bonner.

[the crimson blur]

I think is fairly simple really. Bonner is the only big Pop doesn't use in small ball. Our plus-minus in small ball this season and last were on the whole very bad. Not only that, but Bonner is consistently used in our team's best lineups. He is consistently used with 2 creators on the court at the same time. It is very rare to see just Manu/Bonner, Tony/Bonner, or Timmy/Bonner as you will with Dice, Kurt, or Blair.

He is a good role player though. The hate he gets here is unwarranted.

[Kamnik]

He is a good role player though. The hate he gets here is unwarranted.

Agreed.

The only problem I got with him is his playoff play....

Now, does it make sense to play him a lot in the regular season to get wins and later on see him choke in the playoffs? I don't know...

[Russ]

Last season, Matt Bonner led the Spurs in +/- with a +338. He also led the team in +/- per minute with a +.175. Fluke, right?

Well this season, Bonner is at it again. He leads the team in +/- with a +43. He leads the team in +/- per minute with a +.211.

I've mentioned this elsewhere but I'm interested in more opinions. Why do you think this is the case? Is Matt Bonner really a much more important part of the team than he's it appears? Is it because the Spurs need a three-point shooting bigman next to Tim Duncan to operate smoothly? Is it just a matter of luck and evidence that +/- should be ignored?

I'm not sure where I stand. The sample size is getting quite large to just say it's a fluke.

Hmmm . . .

One year may not be enough. We might not be able to draw a conclusion from just one year.

But after two years of this trend, the evidence is in and it is indisputable -- +/- is worthless. :)

[SequSpur]

Last season, Matt Bonner led the Spurs in +/- with a +338. He also led the team in +/- per minute with a +.175. Fluke, right?

Well this season, Bonner is at it again. He leads the team in +/- with a +43. He leads the team in +/- per minute with a +.211.

I've mentioned this elsewhere but I'm interested in more opinions. Why do you think this is the case? Is Matt Bonner really a much more important part of the team than he's it appears? Is it because the Spurs need a three-point shooting bigman next to Tim Duncan to operate smoothly? Is it just a matter of luck and evidence that +/- should be ignored?

I'm not sure where I stand. The sample size is getting quite large to just say it's a fluke.

Hmmm . . .

That statistic is a bunch of bullshit. Nowitski was +30 in his face last night...more bonner = more losses.

Recognize.

[SpurmzKilla]

can't wait till the Spurmz don't resign Bonner and the Lakers pick him up. He plays alongside Bynum or Gasol and lights it up from 3 and when your old asses are trying to close out he drops it in to one of the bigs and the posterize your lame asses. And then when you try to help and double team we kick it out to Bonner to drop a killer 3 in your face. Can't wait till Bonner gets on a good team and all you dumb assholes start saying, "Pop is a fucking asshole for giving up Bonner, it's his fault that Bonner never developed into the star he is in L.A. OH GOD it hurts so bad to get beaten by a player I said I hated. I'm so fucking stupid"

You assholes have a great above-average role player that can stretch a defense, your team just can't capitalize on his skill set by playing a wicked post-up game. Your complaining about the wrong teammate. Idiots. Spurmz. If you new anything about basketball you'd be greatful for his presence and effort, you'd realize who the real problem was and then promptly shut the fuck up.
but by all means don't stop acting like jackasses, it's really entertaining to see you bitches shit your pants cause you can't figure out why your beloved Spurmz are LOSING.

Here's an example. Your mother-
she has a small mouth(even though she talks too much)
I don't slap her and call her a bitch cause my dick is too big for her mouth. She still has a silky tongue and gives it all on her knees. Who am I to expect her mouth to just grow without me violently face-fucking her?
It is what it is, the tries her giving oral and even though her vajajay is too loose(from popping your fatass out) she gives it her all and her butthole is tight so while one of her holes is superior, she works hard using the other two so all in all she's a great wednesday night. Hump Day is always good. I would never take her out on friday, cause I know her ceiling. We've been able to maintian a healthy relationship this way. and with my 7 day rotation of different talents I have an enjoyable week.

Laker Nation

[phyzik]

can't wait till the Spurmz don't resign Bonner and the Lakers pick him up. He plays alongside Bynum or Gasol and lights it up from 3 and when your old asses are trying to close out he drops it in to one of the bigs and the posterize your lame asses. And then when you try to help and double team we kick it out to Bonner to drop a killer 3 in your face. Can't wait till Bonner gets on a good team and all you dumb assholes start saying, "Pop is a fucking asshole for giving up Bonner, it's his fault that Bonner never developed into the star he is in L.A. OH GOD it hurts so bad to get beaten by a player I said I hated. I'm so fucking stupid"

You assholes have a great above-average role player that can stretch a defense, your team just can't capitalize on his skill set by playing a wicked post-up game. Your complaining about the wrong teammate. Idiots. Spurmz. If you new anything about basketball you'd be greatful for his presence and effort, you'd realize who the real problem was and then promptly shut the fuck up.
but by all means don't stop acting like jackasses, it's really entertaining to see you bitches shit your pants cause you can't figure out why your beloved Spurmz are LOSING.

Here's an example. Your mother-
she has a small mouth(even though she talks too much)
I don't slap her and call her a bitch cause my dick is too big for her mouth. She still has a silky tongue and gives it all on her knees. Who am I to expect her mouth to just grow without me violently face-fucking her?
It is what it is, the tries her giving oral and even though her vajajay is too loose(from popping your fatass out) she gives it her all and her butthole is tight so while one of her holes is superior, she works hard using the other two so all in all she's a great wednesday night. Hump Day is always good. I would never take her out on friday, cause I know her ceiling. We've been able to maintian a healthy relationship this way. and with my 7 day rotation of different talents I have an enjoyable week.

Laker Nation

Hi Jeff.

[androck]

Matt Bonner is a valuable player because he hits the 3-pt shot at a very high percentage and he causes the opposing team's C or PF to defend him on the perimeter rather than in the paint. This opens up the games of TP and Manu in particular as well as helps Tim since he gets doubled in the low post less often. His value on the offensive end of the court greatly outweighs his defensive liabilities. His biggest weakness is in defending big men that can hit the mid-range jumper (Dirk, David West, Lamarcus, etc.)

[Borosai]

Matty!!!

[IcemanCometh]

Matt Bonner couldn't guard a white basketball player

[SequSpur]

Matt Bonner couldn't guard a white basketball player

Ditto.

[ShoogarBear]

Well, we don't expect you to, Sequ.

[SequSpur]

http://http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y55/silverbeam/CSM%20Blog/LucyFootball.jpg

[FkLA]

The red hair, lack of athleticism, and awkwardness of Matt just bothers alot of people...I think he plays good D he is just not athetic and the refs have no respect for him at all. Ive seen numerous plays already this season where he gets called for a foul and he has his hands straight up in the air. On offense aside from his 3s he's also pretty decent at penetrating once he pump fakes, and either finishing or finding an open man.

I like the Red Rocket. I think he's a nice asset to have.

[SequSpur]

The red hair, lack of athleticism, and awkwardness of Matt just bothers alot of people...I think he plays good D he is just not athetic and the refs have no respect for him at all. Ive seen numerous plays already this season where he gets called for a foul and he has his hands straight up in the air. On offense aside from his 3s he's also pretty decent at penetrating once he pump fakes, and either finishing or finding an open man.

I like the Red Rocket. I think he's a nice asset to have.

So why have him on the team then? 90 percent of the NBA can hit an open 3 and 100% of them can miss them...

He doesn't get respect because he doesn't belong.

[jdev82]

Last season, Matt Bonner led the Spurs in +/- with a +338. He also led the team in +/- per minute with a +.175. Fluke, right?

Well this season, Bonner is at it again. He leads the team in +/- with a +43. He leads the team in +/- per minute with a +.211.

I've mentioned this elsewhere but I'm interested in more opinions. Why do you think this is the case? Is Matt Bonner really a much more important part of the team than he's it appears? Is it because the Spurs need a three-point shooting bigman next to Tim Duncan to operate smoothly? Is it just a matter of luck and evidence that +/- should be ignored?

I'm not sure where I stand. The sample size is getting quite large to just say it's a fluke.

Hmmm . . .

great. plus minus numbers. those are awesome. buddy, alls i know about bonners play is hes played good d, rebounded nicely, and filled his role well past few games, but he cost us two straight games with his mistakes down the stretch. not fouling in dallas, fouling against utah. fuck matt bonner. i hope he chokes on a hoagie.

[kace]

for me, it could be:

1. he often plays with the best spurs
2. he's better and more useful than people think (a good bench player/15 mpg player)
3. he plays more in good situations (easy wins, blowout, garbage time, a lot of open 3's allowed by a weak perimeter defending team.... all those situations who increase the +/- stat) (not sure about that one but from what i remember, could be true)

[sabar]

Fact is, he puts up more points than he allows, despite what the horde of new posters would claim. He has done so every season in the NBA. His highly accurate 3-point shot led the spurs in points per 100 possessions on the Spurs last year -- by a large margin at that.

His excellent plus/minus is from a combination of factors, including:

1. A very accurate 3 pt shot
2. Frequently getting open looks
3. Playing with good line-ups
4. Having serviceable defense

Looking into stats in the past, Bonner is not the only 3 point shooter to have a large margin of offense over defense. Brent Barry and Horry also put up more points than they gave at a high clip. I don't have plus-minus for those years though.

Bonner is good, as a role player. He does his role perfectly without being a defensive sieve. I have no idea how that rumor ever started. Its just average D, but he shoots so well that it is good enough.

[phxspurfan]

What was MJ's career +/-? I'd bet it was just ok since the early bulls lost a lot of games. I'd say Bonner's +/- is a fluke and if he were on a bad team that lost a lot he'd be much more average.

[xtremesteven33]

Bonner is playing great right now so his trade value is as high as it has ever been.....thats the only benefit of him playing well right now.

[Big P]

Bonner is playing great right now so his trade value is as high as it has ever been.....thats the only benefit of him playing well right now.

Great?? His defense is non existant, he got lit up for 30+ when he was "guarding" dirk. Not sure what you are seeing, but I would call his play far from "great".

[neboat]

My concern with bonner is this: it seems a lot of us feel he is a nice player during the regular season...but during the playoffs his defense will be exposed and his offensive opportunities will diminish. And since he doesn't bring much else to the table, he becomes a liability in the playoffs.

Alright, if that is indeed the case, then it's something we need to solve!!! What good is Bonner if he's an integral piece to our offensive, but is only good in the regular season and not the playoffs?

[androck]

I was looking at the adjusted plus/minus numbers for San Antonio last year here:

http://basketballvalue.com/teamplayers.php?team=SAS&year=2008-2009

and was surprised to see Matt Bonner led the team in 1-year adjusted plus/minus (of course, this would not have been the case if Manu were healthy all year since he's off the charts in APM). Not only are his numbers on the offensive end great, his defense was actually a -1.94 for the year (negative is good).

For 2009, he is once again leading the team in APM although there really haven't been enough games to make much of a conclusion. Here's hoping his numbers from last year continue!

[ElNono]

Ime Udoka... really?

If you want to give props to Matt, this is the number to highlight:

47.3%

Or even 44% from last season...

[androck]

The number to highlight is "4" which I want to see become "5". I'm interested in determining which players can help us get to 5. Matt Bonner is definitely one of those players although I'm not saying he's on the level of Tim, Tony, Manu, or even RJ.

I think it's pretty clear looking at last year's APM who is not helping the team and still getting a ton of minutes: Mike Finley.

[lurker23]

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=139947

Also:

http://www.48minutesofhell.com/?gcid=C12289x022&gtkw=48+Minutes+of+Hell (however, 48MOH server is having issues at the moment; a snipet of the article can be found at the Daily Dime linked below, in box #8)

http://espn.go.com/nba/dailydime/_/page/dime-091123/seeding-west

[tav1]

The Daily Dime thing is by Varner and is a stand alone about Bonner, written after last night's game. The 48MoH piece is by Gordian and is a game recap.

[NFGIII]

He's not mobile, he can't jump, he's really just a non-athletic white guy. It's sometimes tough to watch him play...but he constantly outworks people. It's easy to figure out why people don't like watching him play, and that's cause it's not pretty.

People get frustrated with him due to unrealistic expectations. He's a big man who plays outside...you can't really expect too much out of him.

That being said, he works hard and he knows his role. By knowing his role and recognizing his limitations, it allows him to consistently contribute on both ends of the floor.

:tu

Good bench player who knows his role. We have enough stars so we need good role players on this team. So far he is one of them. Hopefully he can stay this consistent over the whole season. If so imagine his stats then!


Fact is, he puts up more points than he allows, despite what the horde of new posters would claim. He has done so every season in the NBA. His highly accurate 3-point shot led the spurs in points per 100 possessions on the Spurs last year -- by a large margin at that.

His excellent plus/minus is from a combination of factors, including:

1. A very accurate 3 pt shot
2. Frequently getting open looks
3. Playing with good line-ups
4. Having serviceable defense

Looking into stats in the past, Bonner is not the only 3 point shooter to have a large margin of offense over defense. Brent Barry and Horry also put up more points than they gave at a high clip. I don't have plus-minus for those years though.

Bonner is good, as a role player. He does his role perfectly without being a defensive sieve. I have no idea how that rumor ever started. Its just average D, but he shoots so well that it is good enough.

Agreed. Puts up more than he gives up and fits in as a role player. With his shooting average D is exceptable. Imagine if he could play better D?

And I agree with your statement about the rumor. The majority perception of this board seems to be a little out of whack when it comes to Bonner.

Maybe _Jag hit on it with his point about unrealistic expectations. But I really don't know. All I know, as of now, is that he is playing great coming off the bench and doing what Pop expects of him - hitting the 3 and grabbing some rebounds while playing adequate D. If this could only last the entire season this board would be all over him.

:flag:

[YoMamaIsCallin]

regardless of these +/- and technical mumbo jumbo. at the end of the day, Sheed will say "just pass the ball to whoever Bonner is guarding"

It's interesting you bring this up because I've noticed this season that teams have a strong tendency to go with the Sheed play when Bonner's in -- i.e. just dump it down to Bonner's man for an iso.

The interesting thing is, I think it's hurting our opponents. He's not THAT easy to score on, the Spurs ARE good at team defense and help, and it takes the offense out of their rhythm and game. Even if they get a couple of buckets or fouls vs. Bonner, I think overall it isn't helping them.

I think the Sheed play works for Sheed, because he's such a talented offensive player. Hell, Duncan has trouble guarding him one-on-one. But others, not so much.

Bonner even did a decent job against Dirk. I think it's because Dirk doesn't have foot speed and that's Bonner's big defensive liability, guarding quick players.

[YoMamaIsCallin]

That statistic is a bunch of bullshit. Nowitski was +30 in his face last night...more bonner = more losses.

Recognize.

That's more about a coaching decision to not double-team Dirk until late in the game. Dirk will score on just about anyone one-on-one. Bonner actually did a decent job on him.

I think the Spurs would rather Dirk take it one-on-one and stagnate the Mavs' offense, then take the ball out of Dirk's hands at the end, even if they do give up points. This is similar to what they've done with Amare in the playoffs. Even if Amare gets his, it means the rest of the team is stagnant. And they can always switch the D and shut him off in crunch time.

[5in10]

The interesting thing is, I think it's hurting our opponents. He's not THAT easy to score on, the Spurs ARE good at team defense and help, and it takes the offense out of their rhythm and game. Even if they get a couple of buckets or fouls vs. Bonner, I think overall it isn't helping them.

I think the Sheed play works for Sheed, because he's such a talented offensive player. Hell, Duncan has trouble guarding him one-on-one. But others, not so much.

Bonner even did a decent job against Dirk. I think it's because Dirk doesn't have foot speed and that's Bonner's big defensive liability, guarding quick players.

+1 Bonner is a nice asset to have come off the bench, it really opens the floor for duncan and our offense when Bonner is hitting the three ball. Bonner is good at rotating on defense and a lot of the time plays great defense but just isnt long or athletic enough with his t-rex arms to alter the shot.

[coyotes_geek]

More statistical nerdery. The Spurs are actually better defensively with Bonner on the court. This is just a statistical observation and should not be taken as me trying to say that Bonner is a great defender. Or even a good one.

http://www.82games.com/0910/09SAS9.HTM#onoff

[SpurNation]

More statistical nerdery. The Spurs are actually better defensively with Bonner on the court. This is just a statistical observation and should not be taken as me trying to say that Bonner is a great defender. Or even a good one.

http://www.82games.com/0910/09SAS9.HTM#onoff

I especially noted the win% of 72.7 = 59 to 60 regular season.

Statistically...that'll get you in the playoffs. And if he can maintain the averages...it would (again statistically) help get the team through.

Good enough for me.

[senorglory]

can't wait till the Spurmz don't resign Bonner and the Lakers pick him up. He plays alongside Bynum or Gasol and lights it up from 3 and when your old asses are trying to close out he drops it in to one of the bigs and the posterize your lame asses. And then when you try to help and double team we kick it out to Bonner to drop a killer 3 in your face. Can't wait till Bonner gets on a good team and all you dumb assholes start saying, "Pop is a fucking asshole for giving up Bonner, it's his fault that Bonner never developed into the star he is in L.A. OH GOD it hurts so bad to get beaten by a player I said I hated. I'm so fucking stupid"

You assholes have a great above-average role player that can stretch a defense, your team just can't capitalize on his skill set by playing a wicked post-up game. Your complaining about the wrong teammate. Idiots. Spurmz. If you new anything about basketball you'd be greatful for his presence and effort, you'd realize who the real problem was and then promptly shut the fuck up.
but by all means don't stop acting like jackasses, it's really entertaining to see you bitches shit your pants cause you can't figure out why your beloved Spurmz are LOSING.

Here's an example. Your mother-
she has a small mouth(even though she talks too much)
I don't slap her and call her a bitch cause my dick is too big for her mouth. She still has a silky tongue and gives it all on her knees. Who am I to expect her mouth to just grow without me violently face-fucking her?
It is what it is, the tries her giving oral and even though her vajajay is too loose(from popping your fatass out) she gives it her all and her butthole is tight so while one of her holes is superior, she works hard using the other two so all in all she's a great wednesday night. Hump Day is always good. I would never take her out on friday, cause I know her ceiling. We've been able to maintian a healthy relationship this way. and with my 7 day rotation of different talents I have an enjoyable week.

Laker Nation

I've always wondered why more spurstalkers didn't appreciate Bonner for being an overachiever for the Spurs, rather than lamenting what he's not.

[senorglory]

My main theory on this Matt Bonner Phenomenon is two-fold, and comes from examining the 5-man-unit data on 82games.com:

1. The Power of Three Point Shooting
2. The Power of Balanced Lineups



+1 for your overall analysis.

[lefty]

Bonner is the invisible Larry Bird.

Except that's it's easy to spot him because of his stupid flashy red hair

[lefty]

Last season, Matt Bonner led the Spurs in +/- with a +338. He also led the team in +/- per minute with a +.175. Fluke, right?

Well this season, Bonner is at it again. He leads the team in +/- with a +43. He leads the team in +/- per minute with a +.211.

I've mentioned this elsewhere but I'm interested in more opinions. Why do you think this is the case? Is Matt Bonner really a much more important part of the team than he's it appears? Is it because the Spurs need a three-point shooting bigman next to Tim Duncan to operate smoothly? Is it just a matter of luck and evidence that +/- should be ignored?

I'm not sure where I stand. The sample size is getting quite large to just say it's a fluke.

Hmmm . . .

I'd say lucky.

The +/- numbers can be misleading

Maybe the +338 and current +43 have more to do with who he's been on the court with.

Yeah, he can knock down open shots, but when you see his rebounding and D, he is not championship material

[aquiet20&10]

can't matt bonner just be our big man version of steve kerr and leave it at that? offense from outside, occasional solid rebounding and occasional solid defense given the right matchup. thats all we need from him! we really shouldn't be asking him to guard players like dirk for extended periods of time anyways. why the hell did we get dice and ratliff?? on a side note, i hope timmy is schooling dejuan on the finer points of D so that young man can use that wingspan to its full potential. just saying.

[TD 21]

Is it because the Spurs need a three-point shooting bigman next to Tim Duncan to operate smoothly?

He's more lucky than good, though he is useful as a 15-20 mpg bench player. I say that because he's one dimensional and isn't above (if he even is at all) average in a single other category.

This is a myth. In '99 and '03 they won with Robinson and Rose, then in '05 they won with Mohammed and Horry and finally in '07 with Oberto and Horry. Out of those bigs, only Horry was a legit 3 point threat. But in reality, he was more clutch than efficient (.341 regular season / .359 playoff 3 point percentage) from 3. I'm not saying it doesn't help, for obvious spacing purposes, to have a 3 point shooting big next to Duncan, but it's also not a necessity, nor has it been the way the Spurs have generally operated.

[superbigtime]

He's good at flinging the 3 when there is another big on the floor to command the double and to rebound the ball. He is atrocious in the small lineup.

[antgomez2009]

Well, its clear to say that the Spurs are that much better when he is playing at his best. The numbers dont lie, Ask Jay-Z. Matt Bonner has always been a good role player, better yet, the best of his kind, especially on Offense! The thing that does not factor PER is Defense! Which he lacks! But I wouldnt want to see Bonner in another Uniform, because the only thing that holds the Red Rocket back is Bonner! I feel he still has Pop on his mind because he doesnt want to mess up and he constantly puts pressure on himself that does not need to be there! To see him score 22 pts is not a surprise! To see him block KG or grab 12 boards is a Surprise! I feel he still has much to improve to Round his Game into a really really good player!

[xtremesteven33]

I still would trade Bonner. Too short to contribute on the defensive end. If his shot isnt falling or hes not getting looks then he is a liability.

Bonners trade value is as high as it ever has been in his career. Im happy for him and am glad to see his is earning respect here on Spurstalk but I really dont see us winning the championship with Bonner getting major minutes....

[kace]

Bonner can be a great player coming from the bench, knocking down 3's and even making decent/average defense, even if his rebounding seems a desperate cause.

but the bif IF for him will be his ability to contribute in the PO. he failed last year and till he proves people wrong, Bonner will face some legit scepticism.

i guess that most of the fans would be happy if Bonner could put the same kind of numbers in PO than in RS in a 15 mpg role. i would.

[superbigtime]

can't matt bonner just be our big man version of steve kerr and leave it at that? offense from outside, occasional solid rebounding and occasional solid defense given the right matchup. thats all we need from him! we really shouldn't be asking him to guard players like dirk for extended periods of time anyways. why the hell did we get dice and ratliff?? on a side note, i hope timmy is schooling dejuan on the finer points of D so that young man can use that wingspan to its full potential. just saying.

It seems like the only person who expects him to guard the great PFs of the game and to rebound and D-up as well as Ratliff and Dice is the head coach. He just lets David West, Dirk, and the like dominate him. His being put in those situations is what gets fans frustrated. Lower expectations = less frustration.

[Flux451]

I still would trade Bonner. Too short to contribute on the defensive end. If his shot isnt falling or hes not getting looks then he is a liability.

Bonners trade value is as high as it ever has been in his career. Im happy for him and am glad to see his is earning respect here on Spurstalk but I really dont see us winning the championship with Bonner getting major minutes....


WHo would you trade him for?

If his shot isn't falling then he doesn't get minutes which is the way he been played recently.

If he gets major minutes on off games then yes, but if he is on fire then what better compliment to Tim then a three point marksman...given he isn't a total mismatch on defensive.

I think Pop has figured out how to play him.

[DAF86]

Good enough to be a bench player.

Checking in, on vacation

[slayermin]

I think Pop knows when to use him. If he's hitting the three, the Spurs are a very tough team to beat. He spreads the court for the slashers and since he's a 40% 3pt shooter, he should have a very good +/-.

But if he isn't hitting or being aggressive, there is no point for him to be out there. McDyess, Blair, and Ratliff are superior at all the other facets of the game.

[duhoh]

The numbers speak for themselves: Matt Bonner is a stud!

oh boy,

hollinger? i hate hollinger :lol

[lurker23]

Interesting note on Bonner's season so far. He's averaging 2 less minutes per game, which puts him on pace to lose 150-200 minutes for the entire regular season combined. However, he's on pace to shoot 100+ MORE three-pointers than he did last year (268 last year vs. on pace to shoot 372 this year). If he somehow manages to continue shooting 47.3% from 3-point range (vs. 44.0% last year), I don't think many of us will be complaining.


(To put this in perspective, this isn't very likely. At last year's 44%, Bonner had the 90th best 3-point shooting season in the history of the NBA. 47% would be the 24th best season ever.)

[z0sa]

(To put this in perspective, this isn't very likely. At last year's 44%, Bonner had the 90th best 3-point shooting season in the history of the NBA. 47% would be the 24th best season ever.)

We have the pieces to assure he's open night in and out. He could do it.

[lurker23]

We have the pieces to assure he's open night in and out. He could do it.

I'm not saying he can't do it, I'm just saying it's unlikely. Then again, for his career so far, he is the 12th best 3-point shooter in NBA history. :downspin:

[ehz33satx]

... god I want Horry back.

Bonner brings it 100% every game. Horry would only bring it 1/4 of the season.
He coasted all season long. Bonner is giving it his all. I for one like him quite a bit. I enjoy watching him play. Sure he misses a few defensive assignments, but its still early in the season. Give him time and he will get better. He is up there with George Hill in importance for this team.

[Rummpd]

It looks to me like Bonner has put effort in the gym and off the court and it could not happen to a nicer man and he can be an effective 6th-9th man part of this team. I am most happy with his effort on the boards recently - wonder if Blair is pushing him as the new kid on the block to work on what was the worst part of his game?

[z0sa]

I'm not saying he can't do it, I'm just saying it's unlikely.

I didn't say you said he can't do it .. :wakeup

[lurker23]

I didn't say you said he can't do it .. :wakeup

No worries, just clarifying. :toast

[Tito_Trinidad]

Matty B is just lucky

[gatoloco]

bonner on the floor vs the lakers in the playoffs is a nightmare scenario.

that's all we need to know.

[Sotongball21]

Bonner brings it 100% every game. Horry would only bring it 1/4 of the season.
He coasted all season long. Bonner is giving it his all. I for one like him quite a bit. I enjoy watching him play. Sure he misses a few defensive assignments, but its still early in the season. Give him time and he will get better. He is up there with George Hill in importance for this team.

+1
Bonner and Hill works really hard in games. They are the very important for the spurs. The last game with them playing really well, I saw the spurs offense of kicking out, and passing the ball around for that extra pass.

[The Truth #6]

Bonner is only important for the regular season. It's an important role, but let's be clear, he has proven to vanish in big moments, especially in the playoffs. Even last game he got pushed around by the Turk with the hockey mask. He's important for the majority of games but not the ones that matter until proven otherwise.

[yavozerb]

Bonner is only important for the regular season. It's an important role, but let's be clear, he has proven to vanish in big moments, especially in the playoffs. Even last game he got pushed around by the Turk with the hockey mask. He's important for the majority of games but not the ones that matter until proven otherwise.

That turkish guy is pretty good and averaging 12/7. I agree with bonner's playoff performances but usually when the spurs play bad its not only bonner who plays bad, its usually the whole team who plays bad. Its funny that when the spurs lose its usually bonners fault but when they win, bonner is mentined only as a sidenote..

[MannyIsGod]

Last season, Matt Bonner led the Spurs in +/- with a +338. He also led the team in +/- per minute with a +.175. Fluke, right?

Well this season, Bonner is at it again. He leads the team in +/- with a +43. He leads the team in +/- per minute with a +.211.

I've mentioned this elsewhere but I'm interested in more opinions. Why do you think this is the case? Is Matt Bonner really a much more important part of the team than he's it appears? Is it because the Spurs need a three-point shooting bigman next to Tim Duncan to operate smoothly? Is it just a matter of luck and evidence that +/- should be ignored?

I'm not sure where I stand. The sample size is getting quite large to just say it's a fluke.

Hmmm . . .

Matt Bonner doesn't usually get his due around here. For one, Spurs fans have a general feeling that he's a horrible defender when in truth he's actually very good at moving his feet and staying in front of most players. He doesn't have the athleticism to block many shots but he does a good job staying in front of players most of the time.

What he's horrible at is rebounding. He doesn't always get a body on players and he's just not very good at boarding the ball.

Now, that being said, he's obviously a very good offensive player with a great shot and better than average dribbling and passing. His driving is usually underrated and while I would rather him shoot more than drive thats simply because his shooting is so good and not because he's a terrible penetrator.

The problem with Matt Bonner was never Matt Bonner but Popovich. Setting him up to be the starter was setting him up for failure. He's not someone you should start but someone who should always fill a role off the bench.

[leemajors]

Matt Bonner doesn't usually get his due around here. For one, Spurs fans have a general feeling that he's a horrible defender when in truth he's actually very good at moving his feet and staying in front of most players. He doesn't have the athleticism to block many shots but he does a good job staying in front of players most of the time.

What he's horrible at is rebounding. He doesn't always get a body on players and he's just not very good at boarding the ball.

Now, that being said, he's obviously a very good offensive player with a great shot and better than average dribbling and passing. His driving is usually underrated and while I would rather him shoot more than drive thats simply because his shooting is so good and not because he's a terrible penetrator.

The problem with Matt Bonner was never Matt Bonner but Popovich. Setting him up to be the starter was setting him up for failure. He's not someone you should start but someone who should always fill a role off the bench.

Solid. Let's hope if he is lucky, it holds in the postseason. Bonner is what he is.

[Blackjack]

The No-Flash Flashpoint
by Graydon Gordian


In my recap of Monday’s Bucks-Spurs game, I touched on one of the team’s more controversial topics: The talent and usage of Matt Bonner. There are a proud few who claim that his ability to spread the floor and gaudy advanced statistics speak to his importance to the team, even if his vanilla-flavored style isn’t making any highlight reels. There are an equally passionate many who see Bonner’s limited defensive ability and one-trick-pony offensive style and insist he be relegated to the end of the bench.

I’ve danced around the subject numerous times but I don’t believe I have ever articulated just what I think Bonner is capable of and how often he should be used.

Keep reading → (http://www.48minutesofhell.com/2009/11/25/the-no-flash-flashpoint/)

[whottt]

Last season, Matt Bonner led the Spurs in +/- with a +338. He also led the team in +/- per minute with a +.175. Fluke, right?

Well this season, Bonner is at it again. He leads the team in +/- with a +43. He leads the team in +/- per minute with a +.211.

I've mentioned this elsewhere but I'm interested in more opinions. Why do you think this is the case? Is Matt Bonner really a much more important part of the team than he's it appears? Is it because the Spurs need a three-point shooting bigman next to Tim Duncan to operate smoothly? Is it just a matter of luck and evidence that +/- should be ignored?

I'm not sure where I stand. The sample size is getting quite large to just say it's a fluke.

Hmmm . . .



1. +/- doesn't mean much over a small sample size. It doesn't automatically mean anything over an entire season. Although in this case probably both stats mean something.

2. Bonner plays well in games that aren't close and against teams that aren't that good. He also plays well when he doesn't face much defensive pressure. I don't Pop tends to go with him much in closely contested games, especially down the stretch, although I'm not 100% sure on that.

But he definitely tends to play well in blowouts and when the whole teams is playing good more often than he does independently of the team.

It's not so much a question of is Bonner lucky or good...he's good, that's why he's also a choker when he fails to do it under pressure. If he wasn't any good to begin with he wouldn't a be a choker, and unfortunately he pretty much unqestionably is one. While it's not unheard of for chokers to change, it doesn't happen very often, unfortunatley for us, and Bonner.


There's nothing merely good about Bonner's shot, he's got an exceptional shot, and form...that's why it sucks so hard when he chokes. And unfortunately he doesn't do much esle when his shots aren't going down.


If you ask me what sets Tim Duncan apart from so many other players, I do not think Duncan is dominant in the traditional sense, what makes him dominant is that is is impossible to shut down every aspect of his game. You might get him in one area...that just means he's going to step it another where you aren't getting him. Bonner doesn't have that sort of mentality...he's really got no exuse for not being a consistent high rebounder...he's a big brawny guy, that plays hard and isn't afraid of physical contact, the only reason his rebounding tends to suck when his shooting tends to suck is his mental outlook.

[nuclearfm]

Matt Bonner = gets more white people in the seats.

[slick'81]

lucky for being on the spurs yes good and hitting some open tre's

[superjames1992]

Yeah if he was black, he would of been canned a long time ago.
:bang

[TJastal]

Matt Bonner = gets more white people in the seats.

I believe this is an accurate statement.

I point this out because it was claimed in a different thread by some other spurs fans that nobody comes to watch nba games to see slow unathletic white guys play, and that was their excuse why the slow unathletic white guys around the league (example: Matt Bonner) always get the butt end of all the ref's calls because they don't sell tickets.

I don't get why if slow, unathletic white guys like Bonner still get people motivated to buy tickets to see him (which helps support the league) why does he still command so little respect from the officials?

Especially I've noticed if the officials are black he might as well forget it... he will get called for anything and everything.

Yesterday's game was a typical one for Matt Bonner. Get called for 3 quick fouls (2 of which were b.s I thought) get mad and start making more mistakes.. lose confidence.... and then get quickly yanked out of the game.

[PUPPETMASTER]

/does it really matter/

[thispego]

yeah, you're a fuckin queer

[rayray2k8]

fuck bonner

[Mavs<Spurs]

pure, unadulterated, dumb, dumb luck.

he can't defend. he doesn't rebound.

he does exactly one thing reasonably well- shoot wide open 3 point shots.

On this team, his + / - is not because of what he does on the offensive or defensive possessions.

[benefactor]

yeah, you're a fuckin queer

[Mavs<Spurs]

Matt Bonner = gets more white people in the seats.

lol.

:bang

this white guy would rather see as little of Bonner as possible on the court during the Spurs games.

same with Finely.

[Sean Cagney]

Bonner brings it 100% every game. Horry would only bring it 1/4 of the season.
He coasted all season long. Bonner is giving it his all. I for one like him quite a bit. I enjoy watching him play. Sure he misses a few defensive assignments, but its still early in the season. Give him time and he will get better. He is up there with George Hill in importance for this team.

Yes but when has he hit a big shot in a game that counts late in the year? I would take 1/4 of the year over 100% all the time and shrivel up like a slug in beer when it counts. Atleast that 1/4 is later and not the early part or middle of the year like Bonner. Some have it all year or most but dissapear late, I want the one who has that extra gear when it counts. They were both role players anyways, Horry a good defender and very clutch, Bonner not a good defender but very good shooter when it doesn't really matter much. Bonner has to hit a big shot before I like him.