Ian Mahinmi Could Be Summer's Secret Prize

[duncan228]

Ian Mahinmi Could Be Summer's Secret Prize (http://nba.fanhouse.com/2010/06/02/ian-mahinmi-could-be-summers-secret-prize/)
By Tom Ziller

This summer's NBA free agent extravaganza revolves around basketball deities like LeBron James and Dwyane Wade. But as we've documented at FanHouse, this is also a mighty deep class of players, with perhaps 40 free agents who can expect contracts in excess of $2 million. My list of the NBA's top 50 free agents (http://nba.fanhouse.com/2010/04/06/top-50-2010-nba-free-agents/) has an ever-growing addendum, and it (for the most part) ignores potential acquisitions currently playing overseas.

Well-known veterans will indeed get the bulk of attention come July 1. But there's a corps of young, relatively anonymous players up for grabs as well. One of the most mysterious in this set is 6'11 Spurs forward Ian Mahinmi. The Frenchman, 23, saw only spotty action in San Antonio this season, appearing in 26 games and logging more than 15 minutes in a game only twice. In that limited action, Mahinmi performed, shooting 63 percent from the floor and collecting more than 18 percent of all available rebounds while on the court.

That production syncs with his more extensive NBA D-League experience. Mahinmi played more than 1,300 minutes with the Spurs-owned Austin Toros in 2007-08, finishing the season third in the league in PER, top-10 in rebounds and blocks per game, fourth in effective field goal percentage, second in True Shooting percentage, second in Win Shares, and a first-team All D-League honoree. Basically, Mahinmi is what almost every team is looking for in the draft this June: an active, productive young big man.

But why, then, is Mahinmi such an afterthought heading into free agency? Why did the Spurs decline his cheap option for 2010-11? Why are the Spurs considered unlikely to make a strong effort to keep Mahinmi?

On the surface, Mahinmi simply hasn't played much lately, which could explain the lack of buzz. Mahinmi suffered a season-ending injury at the start of the 2008-09 season, limiting the Frenchman to just one game with the Toros and not a single minute with the Spurs. Mahinmi came back healthy for the '09-10 season and remained on S.A.'s roster for the entirety of the year. But the free agent addition of Antonio McDyess and the drafting of DeJuan Blair pushed Mahinmi down the pecking order. McDyess, the 13-year veteran, started 50 games for the Spurs, and Blair -- who many observers felt was underused -- averaged 18 minutes a night in playing all 82 games. With Tim Duncan continuing to anchor the frontcourt and Matt Bonner at the ready for "stretch-4" situations, Mahinmi struggled to get off the bench. While Bonner is a free agent and McDyess and Duncan continue to get closer to retirement, the potential signing of 2007 Spurs draft pick Tiago Splitter may keep the rotation too tight for Mahinmi to break through in San Antonio.

As so many prospects before Mahinmi have learned, building a reputation without opportunity is difficult. But at just 23 years old, Mahinmi has to worry just as much about his next contract as the one in play this summer. As such, Mahinmi and his agent have made noise about going to a team who promises to get the forward plenty of playing time. NBA teams rarely agree to such demands (especially for unproven players), which has me thinking Mahinmi is on his way back to Europe. That's unfortunate for NBA fans, because this kid can really play. But unless an NBA team can see through the fog and find a deal that works for Mahinmi (by providing a reasonable opportunity for playing time), joining an upper echelon European club makes the most sense for the Frenchman.

As a fan of Mahinmi, I'll continue to hold out hope some young team will convince him to stay in the States. While signing Mahinmi won't be as impactful as prying LeBron from Cleveland or Chris Bosh from Toronto, grabbing the Frenchman could wind up looking like the summer's most prescient move.

*********************

MORE MAHINMI

FanHouse's Tom Ziller joined Timothy Varner and Andrew McNeill of 48 Minutes of Hell (http://www.48minutesofhell.com/) on the 4-Down Podcast to discuss Ian Mahinmi's future.

Hear the Podcast (http://www.48minutesofhell.com/2010/06/02/4-down-podcast-ian-mahinmi-tom-ziller/)

[rjv]

That's unfortunate for NBA fans, because this kid can really play

:lol

[Blackjack]

I demand that objective be banned from this thread for fear of his own safety!

That is all. Carry on. :toast

[hater]

To be able to turn the page on these last 3 years of failure, the following players must GO:

Ian
Bonner
Mason

[tp2021]

To be able to turn the page on these last 3 years of failure, the following players must GO:

Ian
Bonner
Mason

Bonner failed the Spurs.
Pop screwed Mason, who then failed the Spurs.
The Spurs failed Ian.

[Cane]

Ian could come back but the article failed to mention any of Ian's main weaknesses like his boneheaded fouling and turnover tendencies (and lack of improvement on this end). The latter of which (turnovers) was a problem for the team all year. Also not enough attention for Blair's superior display of talent. Hard to take such an article seriously.

[hater]

Bonner failed the Spurs.
Pop screwed Mason, who then failed the Spurs.
The Spurs failed Ian.

Thus, the fact that any of those 3 staying here is guaranteed failure

[admiralsnackbar]

Tom Ziller... any relation to John Ziller of Scene Media (publisher of the Scene in SA mag)?

[Dr. Gonzo]

Ian could come back but the article failed to mention any of Ian's main weaknesses like his boneheaded fouling and turnover tendencies (and lack of improvement on this end). The latter of which (turnovers) was a problem for the team all year.

Those are all Pop's fault.

[Cane]

Those are all Pop's fault.

Nope especially considering the part about taking the article seriously.

[Mel_13]

Nope especially considering the part about taking the article seriously.

It appears you are not familiar with Dr. Gonzo's body of work on the subject of Ian Mahinmi.

[hsxvvd]

Like Beno, he'll probably get time and decent stats on a losing team, posters here will point to the stats and say it was a mistake to let him go, but the real story will be in the win column.

[Mr Bones]

Mahinmi played more than 1,300 minutes with the Spurs-owned Austin Toros in 2007-08, finishing the season third in the league in PER, top-10 in rebounds and blocks per game, fourth in effective field goal percentage, second in True Shooting percentage, second in Win Shares, and a first-team All D-League honoree. Basically, Mahinmi is what almost every team is looking for in the draft this June: an active, productive young big man.


Some perspective: Ian finished third in PER in his best d league season... behind Alando Tucker and Nick Fazekas. Other players that have had higher PERs in a D League season include Alexander Johnson, Courtney Sims, and Cezary Trybanski.

[Stump]

I clicked the link. Ian is #33, Mason is #41, and Bonner is #43.

McGrady missed the cut. :lol

[Johnny RIngo]

Ian could be a decent back-up big if he learned to stop fouling so much. In any case, I'd much rather see him back then Bonner.

[DPG21920]

I think it is lame as hell to bash Ian. The guy by all accounts has had a rough go of it, and has been a good citizen. He is still by all accounts a good prospect based on his age and abilities.

He has not been given a fair opportunity based on the work he has put in to thrive or fail. Some of that was due to injury and some was due to Pop's tactics. Say what you will about Ian, but I don't think it is fair to bash the kid.

[Dex]

I think Ian could do well in a running system like Golden State, Phoenix, or Toronto. His fundamentals here were always lacking, and I don't ever see him becoming a post up banger, or a superstar.

Mason is what he is: a spot up shooter. There are a variety of teams that will be looking for these, and he'll find a spot somewhere, but it's up to him to find his shot and see if he'll manage to stick in the league.

If Bonner doesn't get resigned with the Spurs, I really don't know where he'll land up. You have to seriously wonder who wants Brian Scalabrine 2.0 but with less cajones. But the three point percentage through the season and the fact that he's over 6'6 will have somebody dialing the numbers, I'm sure. I just hope it isn't the Spurs.

[xellos88330]

i think it is lame as hell to bash ian. The guy by all accounts has had a rough go of it, and has been a good citizen. He is still by all accounts a good prospect based on his age and abilities.

He has not been given a fair opportunity based on the work he has put in to thrive or fail. Some of that was due to injury and some was due to pop's tactics. Say what you will about ian, but i don't think it is fair to bash the kid.

+1

[Mr Bones]

I don't think most people are bashing Mahinmi. It's just that he has attained a strange cultish legendary status on spurstalk, and in reality he had one pretty good year in the D League... which is not all that noteworthy. I imagine most people would have the same reaction to exaggerated expectations for Nick Fazekas or DJ White or Dwayne Jones. It's not a matter of bashing, it's just being realistic.

[TDMVPDPOY]

well someone did say he was going to be the saviour of teh spurs, wheres the picture....

cant even beat out the scrubs in practice

[eisfeld]

After all the Spurs did to make sure they'll draft him... I wish him good luck elsewhere and I'm sure he'll put up good stats on another team.

[Dr. Gonzo]

He's no Pops Mensu-Bonsu.

[Stump]

I don't think most people are bashing Mahinmi. It's just that he has attained a strange cultish legendary status on spurstalk, and in reality he had one pretty good year in the D League... which is not all that noteworthy. I imagine most people would have the same reaction to exaggerated expectations for Nick Fazekas or DJ White or Dwayne Jones. It's not a matter of bashing, it's just being realistic.
The hype for guys like Pops and James White! may have been over the top, but I don't feel like the support for Ian can be regarded as excessive or 'cultish'. Ian may be a project, but he is one that could provide elements the Spurs are absolutely starved for in their bigman rotation (youth, speed, athleticism, shot blocking, etc.). Given the rarety of such guys, if he develops he is extremely valuable. Also, his ceiling is far far higher than any other project player the spurs have worked with in the past few years.

I disagree with how the FO has handled the situation, but I understand their reasoning. Regardless of if Ian stays a spur or heads elsewhere, I wish him luck and hope he succeeds.

[BronxCowboy]

Who was that kid a couple of years ago that the Spurs signed that was supposed to be the big "under-the-radar" free agent acquisition of the summer, but he never panned out and we traded him to Houston as part of the Scola deal or something? Am I getting that right? That's what this article reminded me of.

[Mel_13]

Jackie Butler

[Muser]

Pretty shitty prize.

[BronxCowboy]

Jackie Butler

That's the one! The next Moses Malone. About like Mahinmi is the next Kevin Garnett.

[buttsR4rebounding]

I think it is lame as hell to bash Ian. The guy by all accounts has had a rough go of it, and has been a good citizen. He is still by all accounts a good prospect based on his age and abilities.

He has not been given a fair opportunity based on the work he has put in to thrive or fail. Some of that was due to injury and some was due to Pop's tactics. Say what you will about Ian, but I don't think it is fair to bash the kid.

If Ian succeeds elsewhere you can put the blame squarely at the feet of the Spurs medical staff. Their failure to properly diagnose his ankle injury during the 2009 season cost Ian the chance he needed to prove himself. He would have gotten a ton of playing time and we would have been able to see if he could make the adjustments needed.

[Agloco]

I think it is lame as hell to bash Ian. The guy by all accounts has had a rough go of it, and has been a good citizen. He is still by all accounts a good prospect based on his age and abilities.

He has not been given a fair opportunity based on the work he has put in to thrive or fail. Some of that was due to injury and some was due to Pop's tactics. Say what you will about Ian, but I don't think it is fair to bash the kid.

This. No minutes from Pop = Inconsistent play.

I've always said this: Give Ian 15-20 solid minutes during the first half of a season and see what he can do. If he doesn't improve in basic areas (fouling, TO, etc) then give him the hook.

You simply can't judge this kid based on the lack of burn he's had thus far.

[TDMVPDPOY]

hasnt earn shit toget 20mpg

[Dr. Gonzo]

hasnt earn shit toget 20mpg

He ALTERS SHOTS!!

[phxspurfan]

Mahinmi will get an offer from another team and the Spurs will let him go. But the FO will keep Bonner and Mason as shooters, since they have no chance financially to get one of the better shooters in FA to come here. Hell, it's hard enough to get anyone to come here and they can't overpay now that they have RJ.

[ginobilized]

I can see OKC making an offer. Presti might have a use for Ian.

[BronxCowboy]

OKC might actually be a really good fit for him. Would suck if he goes to OKC and really does turn out to be good.

[Agloco]

hasnt earn shit toget 20mpg

Well, how you do "earn shit" exactly? Not by playing the last 6-7 minutes of blowouts.

He needs prime time minutes. You can't gauge his progress or potential from garbage time.

[Whisky Dog]

Dude is only 23, and his weaknesses are things that experience usually fixes. Horrible decision by Spurs to nit keep him around. I'd love to see more of him and less of Bonner. Why do they need a stretch 4 anymore? TD isn't dominant and the offense needs to change to reflect that.

[MaNu4Tres]

Dude is only 23, and his weaknesses are things that experience usually fixes. Horrible decision by Spurs to nit keep him around. I'd love to see more of him and less of Bonner. Why do they need a stretch 4 anymore? TD isn't dominant and the offense needs to change to reflect that.

I don't think they need a stretch 4 either, especially if that stretch 4 is of lower quality for the 5th spot in the rotation for the minimum. For the 6th big spot, I wouldn't mind because the Spurs wouldn't be dependent for this experimental (lower quality) big man to produce at this spot when Duncan and McDyess sit out.

In regards of the offense, it has changed.

The Tony and Manu pick and roll has been the Spurs' first option for the past 3 years, oppose to 4 down during Duncan's first 10 years in the league.

When Duncan is the screen setter, a stretch 4 gives Manu and Tony a wider lane to penetrate. Which makes the defensive rotations longer and gives the Spurs offensive players off the ball more uncontested shots from the outside when the ball movement is precise.

However, I'm still not a fan of the stretch 4, as I am a fan of strong interior defense. And I don't believe a stretch 4 is more valuable than a strong interior defense by any stretch. Spurs were fortunate to have a player like Horry for many years, who could stretch the floor and have an impact on the defensive end. Truth to the matter is, a player like Horry is extremely hard to find. What I find interesting is I believe Pop was enamored by the teams success with Horry's ability to stretch the floor on the offensive end. So much that he probably overlooked what Horry actually brought on the defensive end for the team's overall success. Leading to his infatuation with Bonner the past two years, despite Bonner's obvious defensive liabilities.

Concerning Bonner's situation, I do think he plays good position defense to help his overall value as a stretch 4, but his physical liabilities while playing adequate positional defense just doesn't win the battle in one on one situations in the post when it's all said and done. Concerning his weak side rotations off the ball, the only time he is effective is when his timing is precise to draw the charge. If his timing is not precise (which is the case 8 times out of 10), it's a relative easy 2 points at the rim or at the free throw line because of Bonner's physical liabilities, which doesn't effectively threat any offensive player within the vicinity of the basket. Therefore in the end all he can really do is stretch the floor.

All in all, Spurs need to continue to pursue players that can effect the game in multiple of ways. And hopefully defense is back to being the priority.

[TD 21]

I tend to agree with you, but at the same time shooting has become arguably more crucial than ever before in the NBA.

We just saw it with the Celtics last night, when they had a Perkins, Rondo and T. Allen all playing at once. The lack of spacing killed them. I remember a particular play where Rondo drove and Fisher helped off of T. Allen in the corner and slid in and took the charge. As Van Gundy pointed out, if that's R. Allen instead of T. Allen, Fisher is staying home and Rondo has a layup.

For as much talent as a Duncan, Splitter, McDyess, Blair front line would possess, it's not all that versatile of one and it clearly lacks shooting, even if Blair becomes an adequate - adept mid-range shooter. I'm not advocating bringing in some severely undersized player who's a liability in myriad areas, but at the same time I'm not so sure it would be prudent to forgo bringing in a big who's a range shooter. I know there's not a long list of stretch four's who are multi-faceted players and are affordable/attainable, but the Spurs need someone who's tall who can make a jump shot.

They don't need a cadre of one dimensional three point shooters (like Bonner, Mason and Finley), but they also can't be devoid of three point shooting. They have to find a balance.

[MaNu4Tres]

I tend to agree with you, but at the same time shooting has become arguably more crucial than ever before in the NBA.

Shooting is crucial. I'm not denying that. I agree Spurs need to find the right balance. But they can't overvalue and stockpile one dimensional shooters who can't play a lick of defense.



For as much talent as a Duncan, Splitter, McDyess, Blair front line would possess, it's not all that versatile of one and it clearly lacks shooting, even if Blair becomes an adequate - adept mid-range shooter.

Duncan and McDyess are better than average mid-range shooters from 15-18 feet out.

Truth to the matter is, most teams don't have quality big men that can really light it up from the perimeter.

What they do have which makes them more versatile, are long wings that are capable of playing the small-ball four. Spurs only have had one of those and his regressive outside shooting last year made him incapable to fill the versatile and athletic "stretch" small ball-four.

Having a long-three like a Babbitt, George, or Jefferson(if he can improve his outside shooting from last year) can be a more valuable option and would make the Spurs extremely more versatile than just adding any big man that can shoot a jumper. IMO

[TD 21]

Shooting is crucial. I'm not denying that. I agree Spurs need to find the right balance. But they can't overvalue and stockpile one dimensional shooters who can't play a lick of defense.



Duncan and McDyess are better than average mid-range shooters from 15-18 feet out.

Truth to the matter is, most teams don't have quality big men that can really light it up from the perimeter.

What they do have though, that makes them more versatile are long wings that are capable of playing the small-ball four. Spurs only one of those and his regressive outside shooting last year made him incapable to fill the versatile and athletic "stretch" small ball-four.

Having a long-three like a Babbitt, George, or Jefferson(if he can improve his outside shooting from last year) can be a more valuable option and would make the Spurs extremely more versatile than just adding any big man that can shoot a jumper. Regardless of a Duncan, Splitter, McDyess, Blair frontline. IMO

Agreed.

I don't know if I'd say Duncan is a better than average shooter from 15-18 feet. But I do think if he's paired with Splitter, he can move outside more, particularly in the regular season and specifically against lesser competition.

The good teams do, though. The Lakers don't really (though Odom can make the three), but their three bigs collectively overwhelm teams inside, so they can get away with it. The Celtics have Wallace to shoot the three, plus Garnett and Davis are adept mid-range shooters. The Magic have Lewis and Anderson, both knock down three-point shooters. The Cavs have Jamison to shoot the three. The Suns have Frye, who's a knock down three-point shooter, plus Stoudemire who's adept from mid-range.

Yeah, other than the Celtics, those teams do have that and it is valuable. It's something the Spurs haven't had in a long time. It wasn't just Jefferson's outside shooting regressing, he's just a bit too small to play that role. Ideally, you want someone 6-8 - 6-9 and 230 lbs.

It would make the Spurs more versatile, but I doubt they'll be able to acquire one of those players. George is too rail thin to play small ball four. He's a long three and might even play some two. Babbitt, I'm skeptical of him playing small ball four. He'll probably be strictly a three. Jefferson, like I said, I think he's slightly undersized to play that role.

[Cant_Be_Faded]

Bonner failed the Spurs.
Pop screwed Mason, who then failed the Spurs.
The Spurs failed Ian.

not bad brah, not bad.

I'm going to have to give this post a "+4"

[MaNu4Tres]

The good teams do, though. The Lakers don't really (though Odom can make the three), but their three bigs collectively overwhelm teams inside, so they can get away with it. The Celtics have Wallace to shoot the three, plus Garnett and Davis are adept mid-range shooters. The Magic have Lewis and Anderson, both knock down three-point shooters. The Cavs have Jamison to shoot the three. The Suns have Frye, who's a knock down three-point shooter, plus Stoudemire who's adept from mid-range.

Those teams aren't successful just because they have players that can shoot the ball. Shooting is important, as are many other attributes.
Sheed, Jamison, and Lewis are valuable because they are capable of producing in more ways than just shooting. They are in the game because overall they are one of the top 8-10 overall players on the team. You don't see the top teams just having a stretch 4 in their rotation for the sake of them having an ability to make an open shot.IMO ( Reason why Anderson never played in the playoffs.)

Frye is the only one out of that group that might be in the rotation for that sole purpose, but he has the length and physical ability to defend the paint to a respectable degree. So I believe he is a threat on both ends to a degree.

Anderson never played when it mattered because of his inferior game outside of shooting. So he is irrelevant with the group of players mentioned because he wasn't a player in the rotation in the playoffs.

Like I said players like Horry are extremely hard to find. But those players' ability to stretch the floor isn't the main reason why those teams are successful when they play. ( Something Pop may have overvalued the past 2 years with Bonner.)It's their overall skill-set that makes them a significant piece to a contenders puzzle.




George is too rail thin to play small ball four. He's a long three and might even play some two. Babbitt, I'm skeptical of him playing small ball four. He'll probably be strictly a three. Jefferson, like I said, I think he's slightly undersized to play that role.

If we are judging the SF, "small ball four" on their ability to defend an offensive (big) post player, then I agree.

The premise of my opinion is based on when other teams go small. Spurs would have an instant advantage if they had an athletic small forward(s) with length to play the small ball four. Opposed to all the years we were forced to match up with undersized and nonathletic wings with small ball.

[TD 21]

Those teams aren't successful just because they have players that can shoot the ball. Shooting is important, as are many other attributes.
Sheed, Jamison, and Lewis are valuable because they are capable of producing in more ways than just shooting. They are in the game because overall they are one of the top 8-10 overall players on the team. You don't see the top teams just having a stretch 4 in their rotation for the sake of them having an ability to make an open shot.IMO ( Reason why Anderson never played in the playoffs.)

Frye is the only one out of that group that might be in the rotation for that sole purpose, but he has the length and physical ability to defend the paint to a respectable degree. So I believe he is a threat on both ends to a degree.

Anderson never played when it mattered because of his inferior game outside of shooting. So he is irrelevant with the group of players mentioned because he wasn't a player in the rotation in the playoffs.

Like I said players like Horry are extremely hard to find. But those players' ability to stretch the floor isn't the main reason why those teams are successful when they play. ( Something Pop may have overvalued the past 2 years with Bonner.)It's their overall skill-set that makes them a significant piece to a contenders puzzle.




If we are judging the SF, "small ball four" on their ability to defend an offensive (big) post player, then I agree.

The premise of my opinion is based on when other teams go small. Spurs would have an instant advantage if they had an athletic small forward(s) with length to play the small ball four. Opposed to all the years we were forced to match up with undersized and nonathletic wings with small ball.

That's obvious. I never said otherwise.

They are? Jamison is a fairly good rebounder, but he's a sub par passer and an inept defender. Lewis has a weak handle, is a poor rebounder and a mediocre defender. The difference is those teams prioritized having a stretch four who was better than a guy like Bonner, but they still prioritized having one all the same.

Anderson did play in the playoffs, just not against the Celtics, because the Magic were worried about being too soft.

I agree with this paragraph (in bold). But at the same time, those guys could stretch the floor all the same. Even if they were more than that. The point is, you don't see a lot of teams winning big nowadays with such limited shooting amongst theirs bigs. And it's not like this team is loaded with perimeter shooting, either.

A few months ago, I'd have been in complete agreement with you on this. But watching this team being so incapable down the stretch of making threes, it became apparent that it's more of an issue than I had previously assumed. Now you take Bonner and Mason out of the mix and it's only going to exacerbate the problem. Even if they add a guy like Jones to the mix, there's still a good chance (assuming Splitter signs) that their top nine-ten will be lacking in terms of shooting the three.

Yeah, I don't even want to see Udoka, Bogans, etc. (someone of that build) playing PF ever again.

[MaNu4Tres]

And it's not like this team is loaded with perimeter shooting, either.

A few months ago, I'd have been in complete agreement with you on this. But watching this team being so incapable down the stretch of making threes, it became apparent that it's more of an issue than I had previously assumed. Now you take Bonner and Mason out of the mix and it's only going to exacerbate the problem. Even if they add a guy like Jones to the mix, there's still a good chance (assuming Splitter signs) that their top nine-ten will be lacking in terms of shooting the three.

I think you are overlooking the fact that the Spurs only had 2 players out of the 6 (Manu, Hill, Parker, Jefferson, Bogans, Mason) in the rotation that were significant 3 point shooting threats on the wing this past season. * An important reason for the team's underwhelming season from 3*

You can't include Mason, Jefferson, Bogans and imply that the Spurs had 6 three point shooting threats on the team last year and imply "it wasn't enough". They were bad and shouldn't be credited.

If Spurs can turn that number to 4 (easily attainable) or 5 instead of 2 on the wing, that itself would be huge for the team's overall ability to shoot the 3. (Whether it be improvement among the players in the organization, the draft or free agency.) It can be done.

Having a big that can shoot the 3 doesn't need to be as such of a priority as you are implying to improve the Spurs' overall ability to shoot the 3, considering Splitter is more than likely going to make the leap. Which gives the Spurs a formidable and set 4 man rotation in the front-court.

This obviously leaves the Spurs without the assets to acquire a quality stretch 4 anyway. And even if I'm wrong and if they added a lower quality stretch 4, would he really help the Spurs' 3 point shooting "down the stretch" as you said or when it matters?

No he wouldn't.

Because he wouldn't step foot on the court ahead of the 4 players ahead of him. Making it more apparent that improving their 3 point shooting on the wing is about the only way the Spurs are going to improve their 3 point shooting when it matters or " down the stretch" if they use most of the MLE on Splitter (which is most likely the case.)

Concerning the 5th big spot in the rotation, I much rather draft a quality 5th big with upside, or sign a player with the quality of skills(athleticism, speed, 6'11" frame, ability to finish strong, alter shots around the rim, shot blocker, post up offense) like Mahinmi, that has the potential and significant upside to be a vital piece in the rotation in future years. Instead of signing an irrelevant lower caliber stretch 4 with much less upside and less skills.( Which is the case with the assumed resources available after the assumed signing of Splitter.)

All in all, I think the Spurs best bet is to try to attain Babbitt, George or Pondexter in the draft and to sick Coach Engelland on Jefferson this off-season. That would give them valuable option(s) (if they are consistent from 3) to use at the "small-ball" four when teams go small against the Spurs. (Suns with Dudley and Hill, Lakers with Odom/Artest, Mavs with Butler, Magic with Lewis, ect.)

If teams go big, I don't think Spurs should try to use a stretch 4 or go small and sacrifice other important areas like rebounding and defending, especially if Splitter comes over. Spurs finally may be adding a mobile big with significant length to be able to defend and rebound against the best teams. They need to utilize it.

[TD 21]

I think you are overlooking the fact that the Spurs only had 2 players out of the 6 (Manu, Hill, Parker, Jefferson, Bogans, Mason) in the rotation that were significant 3 point shooting threats on the wing this past season. * An important reason for the team's underwhelming season from 3*

You can't include Mason, Jefferson, Bogans and imply that the Spurs had 6 three point shooting threats on the team last year and imply "it wasn't enough". They were bad and shouldn't be credited.

If Spurs can turn that number to 4 (easily attainable) or 5 instead of 2 on the wing, that itself would be huge for the team's overall ability to shoot the 3. (Whether it be improvement among the players in the organization, the draft or free agency.) It can be done.

Having a big that can shoot the 3 doesn't need to be as such of a priority as you are implying to improve the Spurs' overall ability to shoot the 3, considering Splitter is more than likely going to make the leap. Which gives the Spurs a formidable and set 4 man rotation in the front-court.

This obviously leaves the Spurs without the assets to acquire a quality stretch 4 anyway. And even if I'm wrong and if they added a lower quality stretch 4, would he really help the Spurs' 3 point shooting "down the stretch" as you said or when it matters?

No he wouldn't.

Because he wouldn't step foot on the court ahead of the 4 players ahead of him. Making it more apparent that improving their 3 point shooting on the wing is about the only way the Spurs are going to improve their 3 point shooting when it matters or " down the stretch" if they use most of the MLE on Splitter (which is most likely the case.)

Concerning the 5th big spot in the rotation, I much rather draft a quality 5th big with upside, or sign a player with the quality of skills(athleticism, speed, 6'11" frame, ability to finish strong, alter shots around the rim, shot blocker, post up offense) like Mahinmi, that has the potential and significant upside to be a vital piece in the rotation in future years. Instead of signing an irrelevant lower caliber stretch 4 with much less upside and less skills.( Which is the case with the assumed resources available after the assumed signing of Splitter.)

All in all, I think the Spurs best bet is to try to attain Babbitt, George or Pondexter in the draft and to sick Coach Engelland on Jefferson this off-season. That would give them valuable option(s) (if they are consistent from 3) to use at the "small-ball" four when teams go small against the Spurs. (Suns with Dudley and Hill, Lakers with Odom/Artest, Mavs with Butler, Magic with Lewis, ect.)

If teams go big, I don't think Spurs should try to use a stretch 4 or go small and sacrifice other important areas like rebounding and defending, especially if Splitter comes over. Spurs finally may be adding a mobile big with significant length to be able to defend and rebound against the best teams. They need to utilize it.

No, I'm not overlooking that at all. I'm saying that the rotation is mostly set. Eight of their likely top ten players are already in place and the ninth is expected to be Splitter, which leaves essentially one spot to see consistent playing time. That spot is almost certainly going to a wing player who can shoot the three (and hopefully defend). Add that player in, but take out Bonner and Mason. Even if Jefferson improves from three, overall this doesn't figure to be a good three-point shooting team.

I never said that (referring to the part in bold).

Having a big to shoot the three would be a way for the Spurs to become a better three-point shooting team, even if whoever it is plays sparingly, as expected. This team is mostly set on the perimeter. It's unlikely they get a wing shooter out of the draft, so as I said we'll probably see one signed. Splitter would make the Spurs front court formidable, but at the same time shooting-wise they'd be lacking.

When I said "down the stretch", I meant towards the end of the season, not towards the end of games.

As you've alluded to in the past, the fifth big will be semi-important next season because of the age of Duncan and McDyess. It's not like this is the Lakers and we're talking about a completely inconsequential spot. Even though whoever it is won't be in the regular rotation, they will play some. So why not have it be someone who can do the one thing the other bigs can't?

Splitter may not be a big time shot blocker, but I'd be surprised if the Spurs don't look at him as their long, mobile rim protector. Can't see them prioritizing having a second, since they haven't prioritized having one (at least in the rotation) in a while.

It might be their best bet, but I can't see George or Babbitt being available at 20 and I doubt the Spurs will have serious interest in Pondexter. He's a better prospect than Hairston and Gee, but somewhat similar to both. My sense is the Spurs don't draft another wing who's not known as a range shooter. I've bought into them drafting Williams (go to the think tank and you'll find my reasoning for it if you care), who while not a great range shooter himself and not a PG, would offer more ball handling. I don't see that as a pressing need per se, but unless you're sold on Temple, the Spurs are not exactly loaded in this regard, either.

I agree (second bold), but that's precisely why it wouldn't be a bad thing to have a fifth big who is a threat from deep: because it would offer something different than the other big men provide.

[MaNu4Tres]

No, I'm not overlooking that at all. I'm saying that the rotation is mostly set. Eight of their likely top ten players are already in place and the ninth is expected to be Splitter, which leaves essentially one spot to see consistent playing time.

Having a big to shoot the three would be a way for the Spurs to become a better three-point shooting team, even if whoever it is plays sparingly, as expected.

You are contradicting your own self. If there's one spot only available in the rotation at the wing to see consistent minutes ( or to have an effect on the Spurs overall 3 point production when it matters). How will a lower quality shooting big help that problem, when your guy would be behind Duncan, McDyess, Blair and Splitter in the rotation.. Perhaps even behind Mahinmi or another big of better quality..?



This team is mostly set on the perimeter.

I disagree. There's many question marks right now concerning the spots behind Manu and Jefferson at the wing. We don't know who the Spurs will draft, sign via free agency, or which one of the players in the system steps up and earns that important 3rd wing spot in the rotation or 4th spot (and no I'm not including Hill, because I think 45 minutes a game is too much on Hill at both the SG and backup PG spot. And I think if Spurs want to have a size and match-up advantage (which is vital), Hill has to play all the minutes at back-up point;IMO hopefully leaving only around 15-20 minutes at the 2 sparingly, depending on how well the other players (Hairston,#20 pick, FA addition, Gee, Temple)improve or perform. )





As you've alluded to in the past, the fifth big will be semi-important next season because of the age of Duncan and McDyess.

The 5th big has always been semi-important. There's a reason why the 5th big has always been on the active roster. It has been needed in case of foul trouble, injuries, and rest purposes among the starters. That is why the Spurs went out and still signed Theo Ratliff after they signed Haislip because the 5th spot(made up of Haislip and Mahinmi) consisted of two enigma's.

Next year the 5th big will be important. Not semi-important. A quality 5th big will make the difference in the overall standings. In the 15 or so (maybe even more) games that Duncan or McDyess sit, having a quality 5th big can be the difference in Spurs going 6-9 or 12-3 during this stretch. Which is huge.



Even though whoever it is won't be in the regular rotation, they will play some. So why not have it be someone who can do the one thing the other bigs can't?

If he's of quality-all around, sure.. But realistically that won't be the case with the resources available.

Spurs shouldn't overlook the overall value for the 5th spot, to add a big that just has the ability to shoot a ball at a 30% clip from 22 feet out. IMO

To me that's not a smart if you are trying to win ball games. I don't care how many times he spreads the floor on the offensive end. You want to add the best quality as possible with the resources that are available for this important 5th spot. IMO If Spurs want to spread the floor, I rather the Spurs use Jefferson at the 4 during these moments than anyone like Novak, Kurtz and Cook. Tolliver is the better option, but I'm still skeptic on what his value truly is because of how inflated his numbers were, playing so many minutes and playing in that offensive lop-sided system.

And even with Splitter, Spurs won't have someone like Mahinmi. I know that sounds a bit biased and may be to a slight extent, but it is my honest opinion.

I was Mahinmi's biggest critic coming into last year, and didn't expect much out of him after being out a whole year. But I was wrong with him and he really opened up my eyes. And no I'm not basing that off of a stat sheet, where he fouled more than an ignorant critic can tolerate. Or for the fact that he's played more games in the D-League than the NBA. I'm basing my opinion on what I saw out of him every game he played this past year and all the times I've pressed the rewind button. I know my opinion isn't right 100% of the time, but he does offer an array of physical skills that can't be taught or replicated by Splitter, McDyess, Blair or Tim. IMO



Splitter may not be a big time shot blocker, but I'd be surprised if the Spurs don't look at him as their long, mobile rim protector. Can't see them prioritizing having a second, since they haven't prioritized having one (at least in the rotation) in a while.

They've always prioritized interior defense. Unfortunately with the resources available, it was tough to accommodate that area in the off-season. So unfortunately you are wrong about that.

Here are a few moves they've made in the past in regards of adding more interior defenders. (both successful and unsuccessful)

As you know Tim and David were interior defenders from 1997-2003. (With Perdue, Rose, Samaki Walker, Mark Bryant, Kevin Willis all as their main back-ups during these 6 years.)

In the summer of 2003 they gave Rasho Nestorovic a 48 million dollar deal. Then with the remaining amount of money available they signed Robert Horry, who was the best big left in free agency for the amount of money they had available. He too was a solid interior defender and could also spread the floor.

In February of 2005 they traded for Nazr Mohammed.

In the summer of 2006 ,they went after Joe Pryzbilla and offered him the MLE (24 million) for 4 years but he chose to stay in Portland for the extra 5th year at relatively the same price per year. After their unsuccessful pursuit of Pryzbilla and with Nazr still butt-hurt after the DNP's against Dallas and ignoring the Spurs' offer to join the Pistons; the Spurs were left with slim pickings to accommodate their need for a quality big. They ended up going after an athletic,capable shot blocker in Elson, and used the rest of the money available on the bad gamble that was Jackie Butler.

In the summer of 2007, Spurs were successful with the Elson/Oberto combination from the previous year ( winning the title). So they elected to keep their team.

In February of 2008 at the deadline, the Spurs wanted to improve their interior defense and the best thing available on the trade wire for the assets they had was Kurt Thomas. So they signed off on the deal giving up a 1st rounder.

In February 2009, they still weren't satisfied in their interior defense and their overall length inside. Because of it they went after Marcus Camby (http://blogs.mysanantonio.com/weblogs/courtside/2009/02/spurs-had-close.html).

In July of 2009, after the signing of Haislip(as a low risk gamble) and McDyess ( the best quality big man out there in Free Agency after Sheed) the Spurs signed Ratliff to have a sure thing at the 5th spot in the rotation. This was after the Spurs front-court already consisted of Duncan, Bonner, Blair, McDyess, Haislip and Mahinmi. Spurs didn't know what they had in Blair,Haislip, or Mahinmi ( coming off sitting out a year), which lead to the signing of Ratliff.

[Kamnik]

To be able to turn the page on these last 3 years of failure, the following players must GO:

Ian
Bonner
Mason

Hearing about Mason makes my stomach feel shitty... Please refrain from netioning him.

[TD 21]

You are contradicting your own self. If there's one spot only available in the rotation at the wing to see consistent minutes ( or to have an effect on the Spurs overall 3 point production when it matters). How will a lower quality shooting big help that problem, when your guy would be behind Duncan, McDyess, Blair and Splitter in the rotation.. Perhaps even behind Mahinmi or another big of better quality..?

That's not contradicting. That's saying that if you don't have a lot of something in your rotation, then you should make sure you have more of it from your depth players. It's the same reason the Spurs have continuously brought in athletic players to fill out the roster the past few seasons. Why? Because their rotation was devoid of it.



I disagree. There's many question marks right now concerning the spots behind Manu and Jefferson at the wing. We don't know who the Spurs will draft, sign via free agency, or which one of the players in the system steps up and earns that important 3rd wing spot in the rotation or 4th spot (and no I'm not including Hill, because I think 45 minutes a game is too much on Hill at both the SG and backup PG spot. And I think if Spurs want to have a size and match-up advantage (which is vital), Hill has to play all the minutes at back-up point;IMO hopefully leaving only around 15-20 minutes at the 2 sparingly, depending on how well the other players (Hairston,#20 pick, FA addition, Gee, Temple)improve or perform. )
Not really. We know Ginobili, Jefferson and Hill will play the majority of the minutes on the wings. Hairston will probably be on the fringe of the rotation and Gee will probably be primarily in the D-League. In terms of the draft, short of them drafting James, Pondexter, etc., my sense is any other wing they draft won't be in the rotation. We're probably going to see one veteran wing signed on the cheap. I expect that wing to be either ahead of Hairston, or, should Hairston take a step forward during the summer, then just behind Hairston. We may not know all of the players yet, but we can take a guess as to the type and caliber of player we're likely to see.


The 5th big has always been semi-important. There's a reason why the 5th big has always been on the active roster. It has been needed in case of foul trouble, injuries, and rest purposes among the starters. That is why the Spurs went out and still signed Theo Ratliff after they signed Haislip because the 5th spot(made up of Haislip and Mahinmi) consisted of two enigma's.

Next year the 5th big will be important. Not semi-important. A quality 5th big will make the difference in the overall standings. In the 15 or so (maybe even more) games that Duncan or McDyess sit, having a quality 5th big can be the difference in Spurs going 6-9 or 12-3 during this stretch. Which is huge.Yeah and that reason is because that's how teams construct their roster; it's not something unique to the Spurs. The two things you never want to get caught short in: size and ball handling.

We're debating semantics here, but I'd term it semi-important. Meaning it's important, but let's not overstate it's importance at the same time. It is, after all, still the fifth big spot, which means if the team is healthy it will not be part of the regular rotation. That was ideal last season and it didn't happen. You can't just say it like it's fact. Myriad factors will go into determining whether the Spurs can rest them that much or not.


If he's of quality-all around, sure.. But realistically that won't be the case with the resources available.

Spurs shouldn't overlook the overall value for the 5th spot, to add a big that just has the ability to shoot a ball at a 30% clip from 22 feet out. IMO

To me that's not a smart if you are trying to win ball games. I don't care how many times he spreads the floor on the offensive end. You want to add the best quality as possible with the resources that are available for this important 5th spot. IMO If Spurs want to spread the floor, I rather the Spurs use Jefferson at the 4 during these moments than anyone like Novak, Kurtz and Cook. Tolliver is the better option, but I'm still skeptic on what his value truly is because of how inflated his numbers were, playing so many minutes and playing in that offensive lop-sided system.

And even with Splitter, Spurs won't have someone like Mahinmi. I know that sounds a bit biased and may be to a slight extent, but it is my honest opinion.

I was Mahinmi's biggest critic coming into last year, and didn't expect much out of him after being out a whole year. But I was wrong with him and he really opened up my eyes. And no I'm not basing that off of a stat sheet, where he fouled more than an ignorant critic can tolerate. Or for the fact that he's played more games in the D-League than the NBA. I'm basing my opinion on what I saw out of him every game he played this past year and all the times I've pressed the rewind button. I know my opinion isn't right 100% of the time, but he does offer an array of physical skills that can't be taught or replicated by Splitter, McDyess, Blair or Tim. IMOWhat are the odds of acquiring a quality all around player to be the fifth big? I doubt Mahinmi re-signs if Splitter signs and I'd be surprised if a project like Sanders is drafted. The odds are that the Spurs, like most teams, have a fifth big who's minimal and probably one dimensional. Might as well have that dimension be something that no other big on the team possesses.

As I've said many times, I tend to agree with you, but I can also see (what I think will be their thinking, based on their history) the other side of it.

What do you mean by that (bold)?

I agree, I think Mahinmi will be a player in this league and I'd like to see him re-sign. Not a savior, not an All-Star, but a quality rotation player. But if Splitter signs, there is no incentive for him to stay.


They've always prioritized interior defense. Unfortunately with the resources available, it was tough to accommodate that area in the off-season. So unfortunately you are wrong about that.

Here are a few moves they've made in the past in regards of adding more interior defenders. (both successful and unsuccessful)

As you know Tim and David were interior defenders from 1997-2003. (With Perdue, Rose, Samaki Walker, Mark Bryant, Kevin Willis all as their main back-ups during these 6 years.)

In the summer of 2003 they gave Rasho Nestorovic a 48 million dollar deal. Then with the remaining amount of money available they signed Robert Horry, who was the best big left in free agency for the amount of money they had available. He too was a solid interior defender and could also spread the floor.

In February of 2005 they traded for Nazr Mohammed.

In the summer of 2006 ,they went after Joe Pryzbilla and offered him the MLE (24 million) for 4 years but he chose to stay in Portland for the extra 5th year at relatively the same price per year. After their unsuccessful pursuit of Pryzbilla and with Nazr still butt-hurt after the DNP's against Dallas and ignoring the Spurs' offer to join the Pistons; the Spurs were left with slim pickings to accommodate their need for a quality big. They ended up going after an athletic,capable shot blocker in Elson, and used the rest of the money available on the bad gamble that was Jackie Butler.

In the summer of 2007, Spurs were successful with the Elson/Oberto combination from the previous year ( winning the title). So they elected to keep their team.

In February of 2008 at the deadline, the Spurs wanted to improve their interior defense and the best thing available on the trade wire for the assets they had was Kurt Thomas. So they signed off on the deal giving up a 1st rounder.

In February 2009, they still weren't satisfied in their interior defense and their overall length inside. Because of it they went after Marcus Camby (http://blogs.mysanantonio.com/weblogs/courtside/2009/02/spurs-had-close.html).

In July of 2009, after the signing of Haislip(as a low risk gamble) and McDyess ( the best quality big man out there in Free Agency after Sheed) the Spurs signed Ratliff to have a sure thing at the 5th spot in the rotation. This was after the Spurs front-court already consisted of Duncan, Bonner, Blair, McDyess, Haislip and Mahinmi. Spurs didn't know what they had in Blair,Haislip, or Mahinmi ( coming off sitting out a year), which lead to the signing of Ratliff.I didn't say they haven't always prioritized interior defense. I specifically said "a long, mobile rim protector". That doesn't describe Oberto, Thomas, McDyess, etc., even though they're all solid post defenders. I also specifically said "in the rotation in a while". I'm not talking as far back as '03 or '05.

[Obstructed_View]

He should learn how to stop fouling from the bench. That's how all the great big men did it.

[GSH]

We've all seen the movie: a famous owner buys a horse nobody else wants, trains it in secret using unorthodox methods, and goes on to win the Kentucky Derby. Only in our movie, the horse has health problems and a tendency to get there a half step behind his opponents. Ian Mahinmi is Sea Biscuit with bad ankles.

And for the record - that half step delay is the reason Ian picks up so many fouls. And it's not because his feet are slow. That's not likely to change. If the prize winner gets to sign Mahinmi to a two year contract, then second place would be signing him to a four year contract.

[SenorSpur]

Dude is only 23, and his weaknesses are things that experience usually fixes. Horrible decision by Spurs to nit keep him around. I'd love to see more of him and less of Bonner. Why do they need a stretch 4 anymore? TD isn't dominant and the offense needs to change to reflect that.

:tu

Lol at those who are clamoring for the Spurs to jettison this young, athletic, 2-year-old center, who has yet to be given playing time and a substantial role in the rotation.

Meanwhile, the Fakers boast a huge size advantage over practically every NBA team, with a frontline that is fairly young and averages about 6'10". They ARE the team to knockoff in the West. They are young and not getting any smaller. If the Spurs are to get back to the Finals, they'll have to counter this disadvantage with with increased size and skill, along the frontline, not with a stretch 4. It is so obvious that the Spurs are lacking the necessary rebounding, shotblocking and post scoring that were hallmarks of Duncan's prime years. Now that he's fallen off, so has the overall production in those areas. Yet again, folks are clamoring to see Ian walk. Amazing.

It's also amazing that, after a couple of years of playoff shrinkage, how Bonner gets a free pass. Meanwhile folks are ready to kick out a young, talented, unproven player like Ian.

[objective]

I demand that objective be banned from this thread for fear of his own safety!

That is all. Carry on. :toast

:lol

Hey man, some people get it and some people don't.

Any GM out there with a clue will sign Mahinmi and give him an opportunity.

He was completely mismanaged by SA this year. And not just for the purposes of evalauting or using Mahinmi, the blunders hurt Duncan. Maybe Duncan would have had a little extra left had Pop not gone Pop in the regular season. I can think of two games off the top of my head where Duncan played and shouldn't have.

The road games against Toronto and NJ. The Toronto game was a disgrace, bringing Duncan off the bench after sitting him the entire first quarter and then burning him out in about 30 hard minutes to get the Spurs back from a double digit deficit was complete madness. And even if Mahinmi was too hated by the staff to give him a chance, it should have been Ratliff.

Then the NJ game, another one where Duncan should have been given the night off. But no, Pop couldn't sit him for one night, he just had to play him.

And the worst part? They lost both those games. It's not like those games were the absolute key to squeaking into the playoffs, they lost the damn games. They burned out Duncan in games like that for nothing. It sure looks like it was just to spite Mahinmi.

Mahinmi will be a success, the Spurs were wrong to not pick up his option (and I posted that at the time). Mahinmi deserves to go somewhere he'll be given a legit chance and not have the failures of a medical staff be held against him like some terrible vendetta.

[SenorSpur]

:lol

Hey man, some people get it and some people don't.

Any GM out there with a clue will sign Mahinmi and give him an opportunity.

He was completely mismanaged by SA this year. And not just for the purposes of evalauting or using Mahinmi, the blunders hurt Duncan. Maybe Duncan would have had a little extra left had Pop not gone Pop in the regular season. I can think of two games off the top of my head where Duncan played and shouldn't have.

The road games against Toronto and NJ. The Toronto game was a disgrace, bringing Duncan off the bench after sitting him the entire first quarter and then burning him out in about 30 hard minutes to get the Spurs back from a double digit deficit was complete madness. And even if Mahinmi was too hated by the staff to give him a chance, it should have been Ratliff.

Then the NJ game, another one where Duncan should have been given the night off. But no, Pop couldn't sit him for one night, he just had to play him.

And the worst part? They lost both those games. It's not like those games were the absolute key to squeaking into the playoffs, they lost the damn games. They burned out Duncan in games like that for nothing. It sure looks like it was just to spite Mahinmi.

Mahinmi will be a success, the Spurs were wrong to not pick up his option (and I posted that at the time). Mahinmi deserves to go somewhere he'll be given a legit chance and not have the failures of a medical staff be held against him like some terrible vendetta.

Well said. As disturbing as it was that the Spurs didn't pick up his option, it even more disturbing that Pop and the coaching staff deliberately stunted his development. Hopefully, they've seen the error in their ways and are committed toward striking a deal with him in July. Again, you're not going to beat a team like the Fakers with old bigs, and slow stretch 4's.

How insulting for the Spurs would it be if the Fakers picked up Mahinmi?

[objective]

Well said. As disturbing as it was that the Spurs didn't pick up his option, it even more disturbing that Pop and the coaching staff deliberately stunted his development. Hopefully, they've seen the error in their ways and are committed toward striking a deal with him in July. Again, you're not going to beat a team like the Fakers with old bigs, and slow stretch 4's.

How insulting for the Spurs would it be if the Fakers picked up Mahinmi?

Yeah, wouldn't even give Mahinmi a chance when the choking stretch 4 was injured and out.

I don't know if it'll be the Lakers, but a team with a clue will pick Mahinmi up, they'll get him relatively cheap and lock him up for 3 years.

Now, that's not too many teams. After all, Scola only had two teams interested in even giving up a 2nd rounder for him. All to get Scola on a deal a little over half the the MLE. Insane how stupid most of the NBA was and will be.

Most teams will be scared away from Mahinmi just like they were with Scola. They'll presume that there must be something wrong with the player because they never got time or were signed, and that the Spurs would never make a mistake on a player. If the Spurs who needed frontline help couldn't find a use for Mahinmi/Scola, then he must suck and not have a place in the NBA.

But I'm optimistic that somewhere somehow a team will either get Mahinmi through good decision making or just by dumb luck. And he will become a successful NBA player, and Spurs fans will continue to make excuses and blame the player while refusing to acknowledge truths.

Teams like NY and Miami who burn through most of their caproom on big name free agents but want a cheap starter could get him. I think an MLE limited team like the Pacers are another candidate. Murphy's expiring, Hansborough is too messed up to even play summer league, they don't have any big money to spend. Plus they have experience organizationally with getting a diamond in the rough big man and letting him blossom like Jermaine O'Neal. Similarly why the Knicks are an option with Walsh there.

[smrattler]

Secret Prize?

Reminds me of that scene on UHF... Wheel of Fish!

Ah, red snapper? You can keep the red snapper or go for the "secret prize" inside the box?

KEEP THE RED SNAPPER!!!!

KEEP THE RED SNAPPER!!!!

[Obstructed_View]

We've all seen the movie: a famous owner buys a horse nobody else wants, trains it in secret using unorthodox methods, and goes on to win the Kentucky Derby. Only in our movie, the horse has health problems and a tendency to get there a half step behind his opponents. Ian Mahinmi is Sea Biscuit with bad ankles.

And for the record - that half step delay is the reason Ian picks up so many fouls. And it's not because his feet are slow. That's not likely to change. If the prize winner gets to sign Mahinmi to a two year contract, then second place would be signing him to a four year contract.

It's posts like the above that convince me that some of you aren't even watching the kid play when he does, because there's not anything remotely accurate in it. Mahinmi's rotations are outstanding; you might as well say he has poor hands or that he's not very athletic. A large portion of his fouls are either because the refs don't know him or for moving picks, not because he's swinging with his hands at guys that get past him. Last but not least, he doesn't have bad ankles; resorting to the "injury prone" card on a guy who had undiagnosed floating bone chips in his foot for nearly a year is a sure sign of desperation.

The big question becomes, why do so many Spurs fans seem determined to spread misinformation about Mahinmi? Does it make them feel better that he's not going to be here?

[BronxCowboy]

The big question becomes, why do so many Spurs fans seem determined to spread misinformation about Mahinmi? Does it make them feel better that he's not going to be here?

It's just like when Malik Rose was traded. He suddenly became the most worthless scrub on the team.

[GSH]

It's just like when Malik Rose was traded. He suddenly became the most worthless scrub on the team.


Don't even mention Malik and Ian in the same discussion. Malik defended Shaq at his prime and did a damned good job of it. No way in hell Mahinmi could do that. If Malik had Mahinmi's height, he would have finished his career here. If Mahinmi was 2-3 inches shorter, he wouldn't have anything to offer a top-tier college team. He's tall. And not only that... he's tall. But the biggest thing he has going for him is, he's tall.

But I like the idea that he draws foul calls because the refs don't know him. I can hear the conversation between the refs:

"Who is the whistle on?"
"I don't know... who is that guy over there?"
"The tall one? I don't know him. You want to just put it on him then?"
"Yeah, sure. And the next one, too, if he's still in the game."

Sounds like Ian's problem is his agent. He needs to raise his profile, so those guys will quit giving him those phantom fouls.

[objective]

But I like the idea that he draws foul calls because the refs don't know him. I can hear the conversation between the refs:

"Who is the whistle on?"
"I don't know... who is that guy over there?"

Yeah, refs having no respect for unknown players and not even knowing who they were, that would never happen. Except for when it happened to Devin Brown and it was caught on tape.

[Chomag]

It's posts like the above that convince me that some of you aren't even watching the kid play when he does, because there's not anything remotely accurate in it. Mahinmi's rotations are outstanding; you might as well say he has poor hands or that he's not very athletic. A large portion of his fouls are either because the refs don't know him or for moving picks, not because he's swinging with his hands at guys that get past him. Last but not least, he doesn't have bad ankles; resorting to the "injury prone" card on a guy who had undiagnosed floating bone chips in his foot for nearly a year is a sure sign of desperation.

The big question becomes, why do so many Spurs fans seem determined to spread misinformation about Mahinmi? Does it make them feel better that he's not going to be here?

There are a few here that seem to have a personal vendetta against the Kid. Almost to the point I wonder if he ran over their dog or slept with their wife or something. I don't have any idea why the Kid gets so much hate here.

Not thinking the guy is good sure we are all entitled to that opinion but going as far as posting negatively in every Ian thread that they can in attempt to tarnish him is pretty lame..

As for me from what I have seen the kid still has alot of potential. Most of his flaws are fixed with consistant playing time.

[BronxCowboy]

Don't even mention Malik and Ian in the same discussion.

Wasn't comparing the two players at all. Just pointing out that Spurstalk has a history of turning against players, sometimes for no good reason.

Oh, and not only would Malik have finished his career in SA if he had Ian's height, he also would have been welcome to stay in SA if he had Ian's contract.

[Obstructed_View]

Don't even mention Malik and Ian in the same discussion. Malik defended Shaq at his prime and did a damned good job of it. No way in hell Mahinmi could do that. If Malik had Mahinmi's height, he would have finished his career here. If Mahinmi was 2-3 inches shorter, he wouldn't have anything to offer a top-tier college team. He's tall. And not only that... he's tall. But the biggest thing he has going for him is, he's tall.

But I like the idea that he draws foul calls because the refs don't know him. I can hear the conversation between the refs:

"Who is the whistle on?"
"I don't know... who is that guy over there?"
"The tall one? I don't know him. You want to just put it on him then?"
"Yeah, sure. And the next one, too, if he's still in the game."

Sounds like Ian's problem is his agent. He needs to raise his profile, so those guys will quit giving him those phantom fouls.

Can't wait to see your next anti-Ian post, since they seem to get a little bit more stupid as you go.

[Seventyniner]

Bonner failed the Spurs.
Pop screwed Mason, who then failed the Spurs.
The Spurs failed Ian.

And Ian fouled out.

[underdawg]

It's just like when Malik Rose was traded. He suddenly became the most worthless scrub on the team.

no, mr. 40 ball fakes was on the down slide before he left the spurs

[underdawg]

And Ian fouled out.

you'd think a young player that was given so many minutes (20 for the season right?) to adjust his game would figure out how to stop fouling

[underdawg]

There are a few here that seem to have a personal vendetta against the Kid. Almost to the point I wonder if he ran over their dog or slept with their wife or something. I don't have any idea why the Kid gets so much hate here.

Not thinking the guy is good sure we are all entitled to that opinion but going as far as posting negatively in every Ian thread that they can in attempt to tarnish him is pretty lame..

As for me from what I have seen the kid still has alot of potential. Most of his flaws are fixed with consistant playing time.

Bonner's relatives do not like the suggestion that he received too many minutes and possibly a longer player could have helped the spurs this year instead.

[wildbill2u]

Unfortunately, whether Ian makes it on another roster or goes to Europe--he will become another one of the hotly debated players whose partisans will argue for years about his perceived abilities or misperceived abilities, and whether he could have become our next great 'find' as a draftee and player.

Maybe we could just codify the arguments with a glossary attachment and then number them such as "Arguments 101, 102, 103, etc on the Pro Ian side and similarly 201, 202, 203, etc for the anti-Ian crowd to use.. Then all that would be necessary to put into a post is something like:

Poster X: "I call 102, 104 and 116! Take that motherfucker! You are owned."

Poster Z: "You have nothing. 231 back at you."

[GSH]

Can't wait to see your next anti-Ian post, since they seem to get a little bit more stupid as you go.

It's not anti-Ian, it's pro-Spurs.

Sorry - I didn't know you were looking forward to me dumbing down my posts for you. That explains a lot. I'll give it my best shot:

See Ian. See Ian jump. Jump Ian, jump! Ian is very jumpy. Sometimes when Ian jumps the nice men in the zebra suits whistle. They do not know who Ian is, so they whistle and whistle. Ian looks very happy today. He likes to make strangers whistle.

Ian is a "project". That means that the team likes him, and spends lots of time an money teaching him. Learn Ian, learn! Maybe if Ian keeps learning he can be a project forever. He thinks another team may pay him even more money to be a project for them. A nice man, called an "agent" told him so. Ian thinks being a project is the funnest thing in the world.

Bye-bye, Ian. Bye-bye, agent. Have fun with your new team.


I hope that was worth the wait. If you still need me to dumb it down more for you, let me know.