G. Temple - what do you guys think?

[DaDakota]

I know we had him in Houston and he looked promising. I was sort of sad to see him go.

If you look at his TS% and EFG% they are both above average to very very good.

I know he was on some type of deal that increased in guarantee after Aug 5th did you guys hold onto him?

And, if you did, what do you guys think of his future potential?

Thanks,

DD

[Chieflion]

He was good for us as a stop-gap when Parker went down last season. He knew his role and played it close to perfection. The Spurs did keep him but I don't think he is going to get valuable minutes, only maybe as a insurance PG/SG when someone goes down.

[slick'81]

pop likes him and hes played pretty well at worst spurs have hopefully found their backup pG

[Nathan89]

pop likes him and hes played pretty well at worst spurs have hopefully found their backup pG

The spurs backup pg is g.hill.

[Solid D]

He became Pop's new favorite player in Summer League...but then, of course, he sprained his ankle.

[Chieflion]

pop likes him and hes played pretty well at worst spurs have hopefully found their backup pG

I see what you did there.

[wildbill2u]

It was remarkable that Pop played him in the playoffs, considering he was a rookie and also came late to the team so that he didn't know the plays and defenses as well as some other players.

[Ditty]

It was remarkable that Pop played him in the playoffs, considering he was a rookie and also came late to the team so that he didn't know the plays and defenses as well as some other players.

I only remember him playing in blowouts he never came during the middle of a close game

[Hooks]

I think he'll be a solid role player, maybe around 6 ppg in limited minutes? I'm not really sure how much playing time he'll get though, I can see him knocking down that corner 3 though. He looked real good in the SL, his defense will help us quite a bit.

[EricB]

If healthy IMO, from day 1 of camp it should be established that Hill and parker are the starting backcourt and Temple and Manu are the backups. Garrett Temple has shown he can run the offense, he has shown a clear ability to hit the corner three and other offensive attributes. The best of all is his defensive tenacity that he has shown ALL the time.

Huge Garrett Temple fan.

[gospursgojas]

It was remarkable that Pop played him in the playoffs, considering he was a rookie and also came late to the team so that he didn't know the plays and defenses as well as some other players.

This...I think speaks the loudest on his future with the team.


If healthy IMO, from day 1 of camp it should be established that Hill and parker are the starting backcourt and Temple and Manu are the backups. Garrett Temple has shown he can run the offense, he has shown a clear ability to hit the corner three and other offensive attributes. The best of all is his defensive tenacity that he has shown ALL the time.

Huge Garrett Temple fan.

I with Eric on this one

[Nathan89]

If healthy IMO, from day 1 of camp it should be established that Hill and parker are the starting backcourt and Temple and Manu are the backups. Garrett Temple has shown he can run the offense, he has shown a clear ability to hit the corner three and other offensive attributes. The best of all is his defensive tenacity that he has shown ALL the time.

Huge Garrett Temple fan.

Hill should get all the backup pg minutes and whatever minutes manu doesn't play at sg. Temple will not play.

[EricB]

Hill should get all the backup pg minutes and whatever minutes manu doesn't play at sg. Temple will not play.


That would be great if George Hill was a point guard, which he isn't.

[Interrohater]

Hill should get all the backup pg minutes and whatever minutes manu doesn't play at sg. Temple will not play.

I think you're mistaken. I think that George Hill will play spot minutes at point and Temple might get the majority of minutes as the backup point. It seems that the only reason Pop had Hill playing PG was out of necessity. If we indeed have found a true backup PG, then Hill will probably move back to his more natural position of SG.

[EmptyMan]

I liked his energy last season. I'm looking very forward to seeing more of him this upcoming season.

[ChuckD]

Guys like Temple and Gee are the reason that Hairston bailed. Both of them have shown that they are not afraid of the big stage, Temple here, and Gee with the Wiz.

Temple showed up, and was told "you're going to play...oops, you're going to start, and don't worry, they're only critical stretch games for our playoff seeding". He fucking delivered.

[urunobili]

I think he'll stay with the Spurs for a long time :)

[Cane]

He's got potential and seemed like one of the better values available. Temple brings in a lot of energy, corner 3 point shooting, and looks more comfortable and confident than what you expect from a rookie much less an undrafted one like Temple. Also was a part of the most impressive run that the Spurs had in the regular season.

[Shifty]

If healthy IMO, from day 1 of camp it should be established that Hill and parker are the starting backcourt and Temple and Manu are the backups. Garrett Temple has shown he can run the offense, he has shown a clear ability to hit the corner three and other offensive attributes. The best of all is his defensive tenacity that he has shown ALL the time.

Huge Garrett Temple fan.

What about Anderson, Neal and Gee? If Temple gets in the rotation, even for spot minutes, it means Anderson and Neal are our 5th and 6th guards? Or do you have them as SF backups?

I believe we will have some combination of TP, GH, Manu and Anderson playing all of our guard minutes and backup SF minutes. TP, GH and Manu would be point guards depending who is playing with them and Manu and Anderson would play the 15 minutes behind RJ at SF. Neal and Temple would only play in blowouts or if injuries happen. This not because they are not good, I believe they very easily be in the rotation but it's just that we are stacked in PG, SG.

[nkdlunch]

he doesn't choke or back down a la Beno, Bonner

and he's quicker and much more talented than previous backup PGs like Vaughn.

Really, really good for a 3rd string PG. Good to have in case of injury

[DrSteffo]

What about Anderson, Neal and Gee? If Temple gets in the rotation, even for spot minutes, it means Anderson and Neal are our 5th and 6th guards? Or do you have them as SF backups?

I believe we will have some combination of TP, GH, Manu and Anderson playing all of our guard minutes and backup SF minutes. TP, GH and Manu would be point guards depending who is playing with them and Manu and Anderson would play the 15 minutes behind RJ at SF. Neal and Temple would only play in blowouts or if injuries happen. This not because they are not good, I believe they very easily be in the rotation but it's just that we are stacked in PG, SG.

this is possible but if Temple turns out to be a better PG than Hill or Manu then he could be backup PG or at least get spot minutes. Hill and Manu are not PGs to begin with. I don't care what the rotations will be as long as we win games and I think Pop will use the first half of the regular season to experiment a bit as usual. I hated GHs defense in the Suns series. No one seem to remember Nash absolutely destroyed him.

[BillMc]

I like Temple and love his atitude and potential. A great find and he seems like he'll fit right in. Crowded situation, but I hope we see him play some...

[Bruno]

Temple has played well with Spurs but the sample size isn't big enough to claim that is NBA material. He could very well be cut at the end of the preseason.

Spurs have their roster filled with unproven players (Jerrells, Temple, Neal, Anderson and Gee) on the perimeter. Let's hope at least one of these gambles will be a good one. If two pans out, it would be great. If they all suck, it will be a disaster for Spurs.

[Nathan89]

Temple has played well with Spurs but the sample size isn't big enough to claim that is NBA material. He could very well be cut at the end of the preseason.

Spurs have their roster filled with unproven players (Jerrells, Temple, Neal, Anderson and Gee) on the perimeter. Let's hope at least one of these gambles will be a good one. If two pans out, it would be great. If they all suck, it will be a disaster for Spurs.

The sample size is really small. He is not going to get cut but if he did some forum member would jump off the ledge.

[tomtom]

Temple has played well with Spurs but the sample size isn't big enough to claim that is NBA material. He could very well be cut at the end of the preseason.

Spurs have their roster filled with unproven players (Jerrells, Temple, Neal, Anderson and Gee) on the perimeter. Let's hope at least one of these gambles will be a good one. If two pans out, it would be great. If they all suck, it will be a disaster for Spurs.

I very much doubt that they'll cut him but I agree his sample size has been too small to make such large assumptions. Nevertheless he handled himself very well given the playing time he had so it should be interesting to see how much time he'll actually and if he can play consistently enough at the point. The sure thing is he has excellent size and can probably guard 3 positions.

[slick'81]

i feel jerrells is gone no way he sticks imo- out of neal,anderson,gee and temple two better pan out or spurs are in trouble

[Bruno]

I very much doubt that they'll cut him but I agree his sample size has been too small to make such large assumptions.

For the record, I also don't see Temple being cut as the most likely outcome.

[Shifty]

i feel jerrells is gone no way he sticks imo- out of neal,anderson,gee and temple two better pan out or spurs are in trouble

I think Anderson is the most likely to. I have his cellar at Malik Hairston and his ceiling as very solid player, perhaps very good starter.

[bigfan]

I really think Temple is a keeper and I hope Neal and Anderson make it as well. Jerrels, Gee I think will be gonners.

[DaDakota]

Sounds like he is a diamond in the rough for you guys. I liked him when he was with the Rox, and wanted to keep him....

As a rookie he has a nice set of skills to build upon and has good athleticism and size.

I don't know what his ceiling is, but if it is only as the 12th man, it is nice to have someone in that spot that can actually play in the NBA.

DD

[TD 21]

If healthy IMO, from day 1 of camp it should be established that Hill and parker are the starting backcourt and Temple and Manu are the backups.Garrett Temple has shown he can run the offense, he has shown a clear ability to hit the corner three and other offensive attributes. The best of all is his defensive tenacity that he has shown ALL the time.

Huge Garrett Temple fan.

I don't know why the concept of a three guard rotation is so difficult to grasp for so many. This notion that if Hill starts at SG, that he also can't backup at PG, is foolish. Against quality opposition and in the playoffs, that's probably exactly what is going to happen. Against lesser opposition, obviously more players will play, which would open up minutes in the back court for either Neal or Temple. If Hayes or someone of that ilk is signed, then Anderson too. If they stand pat, then Anderson will likely play almost exclusively at SF.

It's true that Hill is more of an SG than a PG, but that's irrelevant on this team. With a healthy Parker, all the Spurs will need is about 15 mpg out of their backup PG. With a guy like Ginobili, you don't need a pure PG next to him, since he's essentially a de facto PG. What you want with a guy like that is a guy who can relieve him some of the ball handling/play making responsibilities, as well as a guy who's a good spot up shooter and a versatile defender. Hill is a perfect fit.

And let's face it, Temple is no more a PG than Hill. They're both SG's masquerading as PG's, but that's fine, because the Spurs already have two primary ball handlers. So the other guards don't have to be pure points.


What about Anderson, Neal and Gee? If Temple gets in the rotation, even for spot minutes, it means Anderson and Neal are our 5th and 6th guards? Or do you have them as SF backups?

I believe we will have some combination of TP, GH, Manu and Anderson playing all of our guard minutes and backup SF minutes. TP, GH and Manu would be point guards depending who is playing with them and Manu and Anderson would play the 15 minutes behind RJ at SF. Neal and Temple would only play in blowouts or if injuries happen. This not because they are not good, I believe they very easily be in the rotation but it's just that we are stacked in PG, SG.

Neal can't play SF, but Anderson can and will. The only question is, do they sign a true SF, or stand pat and fill the position by committee? That would be stupid because if Jefferson get's injured, then a combination of Anderson, Ginobili, Temple and Gee would be forced to play SF, which is ridiculous.

As much as most of us expect Anderson to contribute in year one, there's never a guarantee with a rookie. That's why it makes sense to have insurance in the form of a veteran such as Hayes. He shouldn't automatically be be given playing time over the young players though.

When Neal was signed, word was he could take Mason's minutes. Temple, Pop's called his new favorite player. So maybe they don't want a veteran like Hayes, who'd probably expect to play ahead of guys like that automatically, because they don't want to bury these two and to a lesser degree, Gee and want to have minutes available for one of these guys to play at least semi consistently.

[BackHome]

Temple can't play SF unless he hit the weight room big time this summer he is jut to skinny to guard the big SF's in the leauge. But you are right we need another SF and I would sign Walter Hermman for whart we have left in the kity.

The thing I like Temple is that when he plays you just know he is going to do OK. He is a basektball player vs an athletic player with potential and we all know that potential has gotten alot of coaches fired over the years.

[lmbebo]

he'll gain wait if he keeps eating what tyrus thomas is serving in Charlotte.

http://www.twitvid.com/B4DJ1

[GSH]

We always pull for the rookies who show a flash of potential. Darius Washington comes to mind as an example. I liked what I saw out of Temple last year, and I hope he can step up and earn some solid minutes this year. I think he will, but we'll see in a few weeks.

The thing I really like about him is that he could complement Hill so well, because of his height. Hill could play his natural 2 guard position on the offensive end, and Temple's height could let him defend some bigger guys on the defensive end. I know Hill is long, but there's no substitute for honest inches in height. Hill is still going to pick up assists from slashing to the paint and dishing, but if Temple can be a legit backup PG, I think it would be a huge luxury to have him in there. An oversized 1 to complement an undersized 2.

I sort of think that if he makes the final cut, it will be because he is better at running the point than Hill. I'm not so sure they would keep him as a pure 2 guard, given the rest of this roster.

[Muser]

Spurs won't cut him, he's like a good Marcus Williams

[ceperez]

The thing I really like about him is that he could complement Hill so well, because of his height. Hill could play his natural 2 guard position on the offensive end, and Temple's height could let him defend some bigger guys on the defensive end. I know Hill is long, but there's no substitute for honest inches in height. Hill is still going to pick up assists from slashing to the paint and dishing, but if Temple can be a legit backup PG, I think it would be a huge luxury to have him in there. An oversized 1 to complement an undersized 2.

I sort of think that if he makes the final cut, it will be because he is better at running the point than Hill. I'm not so sure they would keep him as a pure 2 guard, given the rest of this roster.

Agree 100%

He is not that great a Pg, but he is better than Hill in handling the ball.

[G-Dawgg]

If Garrett Temple can do the same things that Jacques Vaugn did for this team on offense (just protect the ball, keep turnovers to a minimum, shoot effeciently, and initiate offensive sets, and keep fg attempts down) he will be a very valuable player to this organization. Because at his size, he is big enough to defend opposing teams 2guards while running the point position. Which in turn allows Parker and Hill to slide to the 2 guard and frees them up offensively to look for their own shots and not have to distribute the ball and still defend opposing point guards...Alot like how Ginobili assumes the role of the facilitator on offense when he enters the game.

[pjjrfan]

The thing that stands out for me about Temple is that he played with confidence, the games where he was the starter late in the season he showed great poise and maturity for a guy whose future hinged on performing big, he didn't overplay, he wasn't nervous to the point where it showed. This is a huge trait in my view, he has the talent, but so do a lot of players in the NBA, it's how you use that talent, and how you handle the pressure when the ball is in your hands, this kid really impressed me with his ability to play within the system and himself. I personally think this guy is a steal and will pay off big for the Spurs.

[will_spurs]

I don't know why the concept of a three guard rotation is so difficult to grasp for so many.

You seem to be part of "many" so let's review the reality of the Spurs backcourt situation, which is either:
- Parker (PG) + Hill (SG)
- Parker (PG) + Manu (SG)
- Manu (PG) + Hill (SG)

In those 3 scenarios Hill is never the PG, either starting or back-up. I agree with you that Hill can relieve some other guy of ballhandling duties for a short period of time, which is not at all the same as being a legit backup PG. Manu is the only player the Spurs have who can really play SG and PG at a top level.

Putting Hill as a backup PG always makes me laugh, especially when it's coupled with the good old "we can trade Parker now that we have another legit PG in Hill". He is not. Hill is Manu's replacement. Parker's replacement hasn't surfaced yet, which is why Parker will be signed to an extension around April.

It's pretty clear that Parker's replacement is not Jerrells. The jury is still out on Temple.

[silverblk mystix]

...well...

I don't believe he is gay...and I wouldn't care if he was...

is that what you were asking?

[BackHome]

I agreed with everything you said until the "Hill is Manu's replacement" that I have to say made me laugh. People get sold to fast on stuff just look at all the posts that were made about Ian, Pop, and now Hairston.

Hill is a decent player but he is a tweener and those are a dime a dozen. The funny thing is that the most sucessful tweeners are players who bring instant offense which is not Hill game. To be honest I put Hill just above Bonner in that Hill is a better defender then Bonner.

The guy who should be backing up Manu is Anderson but that all depends what happens at the SF postion.

[ohmwrecker]

The best thing about Temple is that he has a pro attitude. He looks like he belongs out there. He is smart and fearless and he has a good set of skills that translate to the pro level. He needs more time to develop, but I think he could a very good NBA player.

[TD 21]

You seem to be part of "many" so let's review the reality of the Spurs backcourt situation, which is either:
- Parker (PG) + Hill (SG)
- Parker (PG) + Manu (SG)
- Manu (PG) + Hill (SG)

In those 3 scenarios Hill is never the PG, either starting or back-up. I agree with you that Hill can relieve some other guy of ballhandling duties for a short period of time, which is not at all the same as being a legit backup PG. Manu is the only player the Spurs have who can really play SG and PG at a top level.

Putting Hill as a backup PG always makes me laugh, especially when it's coupled with the good old "we can trade Parker now that we have another legit PG in Hill". He is not. Hill is Manu's replacement. Parker's replacement hasn't surfaced yet, which is why Parker will be signed to an extension around April.

It's pretty clear that Parker's replacement is not Jerrells. The jury is still out on Temple.

If I'm the one talking about and explaining the concept, then how could I be one of those "many" who seemingly aren't grasping it?

When he plays with Parker, Ginobili is never the PG. When he plays with Hill, they share the responsibilities offensively, but defensively, Hill is more often than not the PG. What Ginobili is, is a de facto PG. Just like James, Wade, Bryant, Pierce, Roy, Johnson, etc. Obviously, you lack the cranial capacity to distinguish between the two.

Using the Lakers as an example, is Fisher not the PG just because he plays the role of spot up shooter in their offense?

It shouldn't make you laugh, considering that's what he is: the backup PG. I definitely agree that his presence doesn't make Parker expendable though.

Wrong again. Hill is Ginobili's AND Parker's replacement. When you have three guards of this caliber, you don't get caught up in whether a guy is a "true PG", because they can all handle the ball. Look at the Hawks. Last season, they used Johnson, Bibby and Crawford as their back court rotation. Did they care that Crawford was more of an SG than a PG and resort to playing Teague just because he's technically more of a PG? No. They rotated three guards generally because those were three of their best players and they needed them to play as much as possible. The same logic applies to the Spurs.

If the Spurs were to use Temple as the backup PG, then that only further cuts into the minutes of their three top guards and unlike the Hawks, who have a guard in Johnson, who's capable of playing SF, the Spurs don't really have that amongst their three. Ginobili plays there some when the matchups allow for it, but he's really strictly a guard.

[Darkwaters]

What about Anderson, Neal and Gee? If Temple gets in the rotation, even for spot minutes, it means Anderson and Neal are our 5th and 6th guards? Or do you have them as SF backups?


Who else do you propose we play at the 3 when RJ sits? Bonner?

[will_spurs]

The guy who should be backing up Manu is Anderson but that all depends what happens at the SF postion.

So the idea Hill being Manu's replacement is ludicrous (despite Hill showing numerous times that he could play well and had room for improvement), but saying that an unproven rookie is Manu's backup makes sense? uh?

Or maybe you read Temple when I said Hill.

[will_spurs]

but defensively, Hill is more often than not the PG.

Defensively? I guess my cranial capacity is indeed definitely too small to understand that one.


What Ginobili is, is a de facto PG.

There can only be one PG at the same time on the floor, since (as far as I know) there's only one ball: Parker is the main PG, and Ginobili is a de facto PG (with the second unit), which leaves Hill not being a PG at all. Thanks for agreeing with me.

[Leonard Curse]

If I'm the one talking about and explaining the concept, then how could I be one of those "many" who seemingly aren't grasping it?

When he plays with Parker, Ginobili is never the PG. When he plays with Hill, they share the responsibilities offensively, but defensively, Hill is more often than not the PG. What Ginobili is, is a de facto PG. Just like James, Wade, Bryant, Pierce, Roy, Johnson, etc. Obviously, you lack the cranial capacity to distinguish between the two.

Using the Lakers as an example, is Fisher not the PG just because he plays the role of spot up shooter in their offense?

It shouldn't make you laugh, considering that's what he is: the backup PG. I definitely agree that his presence doesn't make Parker expendable though.

Wrong again. Hill is Ginobili's AND Parker's replacement. When you have three guards of this caliber, you don't get caught up in whether a guy is a "true PG", because they can all handle the ball. Look at the Hawks. Last season, they used Johnson, Bibby and Crawford as their back court rotation. Did they care that Crawford was more of an SG than a PG and resort to playing Teague just because he's technically more of a PG? No. They rotated three guards generally because those were three of their best players and they needed them to play as much as possible. The same logic applies to the Spurs.

If the Spurs were to use Temple as the backup PG, then that only further cuts into the minutes of their three top guards and unlike the Hawks, who have a guard in Johnson, who's capable of playing SF, the Spurs don't really have that amongst their three. Ginobili plays there some when the matchups allow for it, but he's really strictly a guard.


i agree with most of this but got lost at the end, do you want parker ginobili and hill out there at the same time? or are you saying having temple cut into other players time is destructive?

[TD 21]

Defensively? I guess my cranial capacity is indeed definitely too small to understand that one.



There can only be one PG at the same time on the floor, since (as far as I know) there's only one ball: Parker is the main PG, and Ginobili is a de facto PG (with the second unit), which leaves Hill not being a PG at all. Thanks for agreeing with me.

:lol

No, there can be two playing simultaneously, but technically, only one person can be playing a position at each time.

I'll give you another example: The brief moments that the Cavs paired O'Neal with Ilgauskas last season, were they not still both centers just because they happened to be in the game at once?

Hill is more of the point guard with the second unit than Ginobili. Basically, because they share the responsibilities offensively, but Hill guards the position more often than not defensively, he's designated as the point guard. The line is definitely blurred some though, it's not like Nash and Richardson.


i agree with most of this but got lost at the end, do you want parker ginobili and hill out there at the same time? or are you saying having temple cut into other players time is destructive?

At times, when the matchups allow for it.

Generally speaking, yes. This team, because Pop is focused on keeping the minutes down of the key veterans, spreads the minutes around more than any other in the league. So against inferior opposition or during a hectic stretch in the schedule, I fully expect to see an expanded rotation. But when this team plays against elite or near elite teams and eventually, when they set a playoff rotation, I full expect to see a three guard rotation.

[ChuckD]

I really think Temple is a keeper and I hope Neal and Anderson make it as well. Jerrels, Gee I think will be gonners.

??? Why would the Spurs cut any of them? We have an open roster spot, and don't need salary relief for tax purposes. We're under.

BTW, Anderson and Neal are guaranteed for the season, and won't be cut under any circumstances.

[Dex]

Temple showed some real promise and poise when he stepped in for that stretch last season. The Spurs were in the dog days of their season and needed every win to keep pace with the wild West, and it looked like Parker going down was going to be a harbinger of doom. Instead, GT came in and, though he didn't really do anything spectacular, he ran the offense and helped keep the team steady when both Hill and Ginobili couldn't be on the floor. Without Garrett Temple, it's entirely possible the Spurs face the Lakers in the first round.

I think the most important thing he did is the one thing other D-League hopefuls, despite whatever other tools they had to provide, couldn't do: he shot the ball well. Especially from three. Unfortunately, thirteen games is a small sample size, but if he can continue to shoot .40 on his threes, then he should definitely find a place on this team.

[ChuckD]

Temple showed some real promise and poise when he stepped in for that stretch last season. The Spurs were in the dog days of their season and needed every win to keep pace with the wild West, and it looked like Parker going doing was going to be a harbinger of doom. Instead, GT came in and, though he didn't really do anything spectacular, he ran the offense and helped keep the team steady when both Hill and Ginobili couldn't be on the floor. Without Garrett Temple, it's entirely possible the Spurs face the Lakers in the first round.

I think the most important thing he did is the one thing other D-League hopefuls, despite whatever other tools they had to provide, couldn't do: he shot the ball well. Especially from three. Unfortunately, thirteen games is a small sample size, but if he can continue to shoot .40 on his threes, then he should definitely find a place on this team.

Actually, while he didn't play for us, Gee shot the ball quite well from long range for the Wiz last year. It's probably why the Spurs stole him right out from under their noses.

[ceperez]

Actually, while he didn't play for us, Gee shot the ball quite well from long range for the Wiz last year. It's probably why the Spurs stole him right out from under their noses.

It is interesting that we haven't signed a backup SF at this time.

Maybe, Gee will in fact make the Roster.

He's bigger than Anderson (by about an inch) and seems to be willing to take punishment while driving to the lane. His ball handling skills are pretty raw though, but on the other hand, Finley never developed any ball handling skills either.

[ChuckD]

It is interesting that we haven't signed a backup SF at this time.

Maybe, Gee will in fact make the Roster.

He's bigger than Anderson (by about an inch) and seems to be willing to take punishment while driving to the lane. His ball handling skills are pretty raw though, but on the other hand, Finley never developed any ball handling skills either.

Gee was a PF at Alabama, so he should be able to help D up the big wings that tear us up with their post up games. As a backup SF, he wouldn't be expected to do much other than spotting up, or running the floor on offense.

[ceperez]

Gee was a PF at Alabama, so he should be able to help D up the big wings that tear us up with their post up games. As a backup SF, he wouldn't be expected to do much other than spotting up, or running the floor on offense.

Didn't know he was d-league rookie of the year. here's some nice clips:

9dNmBu28s8w

seems to handle the ball better than I thought.

[GSH]

:lol

No, there can be two playing simultaneously, but technically, only one person can be playing a position at each time.

I'll give you another example: The brief moments that the Cavs paired O'Neal with Ilgauskas last season, were they not still both centers just because they happened to be in the game at once?



Heh... I saw Don Nelson put three 7-footers on the court at the same time, along with a 6-7 SF. So which one of the 7-footers was the 2-guard? Those oddball rotations make a lot of the usual position labels meaningless.

When Ginobili and Hill are on the floor at the same time, it's hard not to call Hill the PG because he is shorter. And it's hard not to call Manu the PG, because he is generally running the offense. (It was also hard to call Roger Mason a PG, even when he was running the offense, because he was so inept doing it.) Last season, Hill played 2276 total minutes vs. 2150 for Manu, but Manu recorded 370 AST while Hill had just 226. Like it or not, Manu was the backup PG.

A good stat to look at is AST / 36 minutes. Parker usually averages around 6.5 - 7, which is a little light for a top-tier NBA PG. (Guys like Kidd, Nash, Rondo, Paul, etc. average 9+) Ginobili usually averages around 4.5-4.8, but last season he averaged 6.2. To me that says that he spent more time in a PG capacity than normal. By comparison, Hill averaged 3.6 AST/36 last year.

And Temple? Even though he played well last season, he averaged just 2.2 AST/36 minutes. Those aren't PG stats. They aren't even adequate backup PG stats. (In three seasons with the Spurs, Jacques Vaughn averaged 6.8, 5.0, and 6.2 AST/36 off the bench.)

To be successful, the Spurs need their backup PG to put up around 6 AST/36minutes. Last season, that player was Ginobili. If Hill or Temple can step up their game to that level, it will make a huge difference to the team. If they can't, those guys will be 2 guards, plain and simple, with Manu being the backup PG again.

[kaji157]

I think pop will try to use him as a backup SF mainly.

[ceperez]

he Last season, Hill played 2276 total minutes vs. 2150 for Manu, but Manu recorded 370 AST while Hill had just 226. Like it or not, Manu was the backup PG.


Majority of the Spurs plays revolve around the big 3, who make the majority of the assists.

Everyone else is a role player that either hits their 3's or drive it hard into the lane. They simply just don't have the experience to setup the play themselves.

Despite what we say about Parker being selfish, his stats however back up the fact that he makes a ton of assists.

I don't expect Temple to be making a lot of assists, however I expect him at least to bring the ball up and protected it while he has it.

[TD 21]

Heh... I saw Don Nelson put three 7-footers on the court at the same time, along with a 6-7 SF. So which one of the 7-footers was the 2-guard? Those oddball rotations make a lot of the usual position labels meaningless.

When Ginobili and Hill are on the floor at the same time, it's hard not to call Hill the PG because he is shorter. And it's hard not to call Manu the PG, because he is generally running the offense. (It was also hard to call Roger Mason a PG, even when he was running the offense, because he was so inept doing it.) Last season, Hill played 2276 total minutes vs. 2150 for Manu, but Manu recorded 370 AST while Hill had just 226. Like it or not, Manu was the backup PG.

A good stat to look at is AST / 36 minutes. Parker usually averages around 6.5 - 7, which is a little light for a top-tier NBA PG. (Guys like Kidd, Nash, Rondo, Paul, etc. average 9+) Ginobili usually averages around 4.5-4.8, but last season he averaged 6.2. To me that says that he spent more time in a PG capacity than normal. By comparison, Hill averaged 3.6 AST/36 last year.

And Temple? Even though he played well last season, he averaged just 2.2 AST/36 minutes. Those aren't PG stats. They aren't even adequate backup PG stats. (In three seasons with the Spurs, Jacques Vaughn averaged 6.8, 5.0, and 6.2 AST/36 off the bench.)

To be successful, the Spurs need their backup PG to put up around 6 AST/36minutes. Last season, that player was Ginobili. If Hill or Temple can step up their game to that level, it will make a huge difference to the team. If they can't, those guys will be 2 guards, plain and simple, with Manu being the backup PG again.

So now we're basing this off of who has more assists? Then I guess Bryant, Wade, Roy, Johnson, etc. are all point guards on their respective teams.

Ginobili did spend more time as a point guard than normal, but that was because when Parker got injured Mason was playing so awful that Pop was forced to use Ginobili as the backup point guard.

The positional designation is mostly irrelevant though. My original point was Parker, Ginobili and Hill can and most likely will be used as a three guard rotation against quality opposition and once the playoff rotation is set.

[superbigtime]

I expect him to be better than Jacques V.