'Jack Says ...

[Blackjack]

I'm both sick and drunk, so take with a huge grain of paprika, but Anderson should start and Jefferson should come in with Hill to give Parker and Anderson a blow.

Why? Other than I said so ... Anderson is a small forward in the NBA. He's the best option they've got currently to compliment and augment the inside game of Duncan, Blair and Parker to start, and he's shown enough for me to believe he'll guard on the perimeter as well as any of their bigger guards/swing players. Plus, RJ comes in as option 1 or 2 and is forced to engage early. It's been quite apparent if he doesn't get involved early or see the ball go in the hole a couple of times early on, he becomes essentially a wallflower -- catch the ball, move the ball, don't-do-much-if-anything unless Moses has parted the sea or the only option is to make a play for himself.

Bottom line, this team's success -- as currently constructed -- depends upon their growth potential. If the team's able to get it done without a trade -- and maybe even with a trade -- it'll be because their youth became relevant; legitimate players the team's success is dependent upon. Thus, let them get their hacks in early; they need the reps (Blair and Anderson, specifically).

So if it's me, my starting 5 to start the season: Parker - Ginobili - Anderson - Blair - Duncan. Do it to it.

Whatcha thank 'bout dat?

[TD 21]

Not with how little Anderson has played since being drafted (and even before then, in the workout phase of the draft process). He's not just a rookie, he's not even in game shape yet and the season is fast approaching. He needs to be eased in.

While it's true that perimeter shooting isn't going be a strength of the starting lineup, people often either forget or neglect to mention the fact that Ginobili is a good three-point shooter. And the more he plays with Duncan and Parker, theoretically he won't have to create as much as he does coming off the bench, which means he should get more spot up opportunities.

It may struggle against a certain team(s), but for the most part, more often than not, the starting lineup should win the battle of starting lineups. There's a lot of talent and a lot of strengths in it.

The Lakers are a perfect example of how, if you have enough other strengths, you can overcome shaky perimeter shooting. Besides, it's not like the starting lineup is going to last for more than 7 minutes tops, to start each half.

[Blackjack]

I'm that confident in Anderson to believe him starting would be better for him, RJ and the team overall in the long term.

It's not solely about skill set with Anderson. What I'm saying is, starting him puts everyone in their best position to succeed. We know the Big 3 will be fine together and I believe Blair makes the most sense to start, all things considered ('Dyess' age, Splitter's inexperience and acclimation period, Bonner's Bonner-ness and the fact that Blair is their most talented big outside of Duncan and needs the reps), so why not put a young fella out there who can shoot the ball and defend as well as anyone else at the 3 and allow Jefferson to come off the bench looking to score right off the bat?

Go watch those YouTubes 'Tres put up a couple of days ago. RJ was a completely different player when it was essentially he and Manu having the offensive onus put on them. If he's able to come in and get things going mid-way or later through the first, it'll benefit he and the team for the duration of the game - it's about getting the individual to succeed in order to make the team succeed, which is all about putting the players in the right position -- at the right time -- to be the best player possible. That's why I'm suggesting RJ should come off bench.

Anderson and Blair are going to have to come through for this team to go deep. Get them their reps early, let them both sink or swim and -- at worst -- you know what you need to go after in the trade market. You don't believe you know what you need, you know what you need.

[ducks]

jack says you got to know when to fold them and when to hold them

[Blackjack]

That's Kenny Rogers, tbh.

[Cessation]

RJ is far better then Anderson. Spurs will not experiment as much this year, they want to get a good playoff seed. Looks like you're overestimating the rookie.

[Blackjack]

RJ is far better then Anderson. Spurs will not experiment as much this year, they want to get a good playoff seed. Looks like you're overestimating the rookie.

According to ...

So Manu Ginobili's been the Spurs' sixth best player all these years?

[TheSpursFNRule]

Anderson hasn't even played in a regular season game....

[Blackjack]

Anderson hasn't even played in a regular season game....

And?

I tend to make my assessments off of what I see and not arbitary things like "he hasn't even played a regular season game."

Again, it's about doing what's best for the team and the individuals. Starting Anderson isn't saying he's one of your five best players, it's saying he's the right cog for that particular role.

Manu's been a 6th Man for years, is it because who was starting in front of him was better; and why is it the Spurs played their best last year when Bogans was in the lineup and RJ and Manu werer coming off the bench?

Could it have something to do with continuty and chemistry, getting players involved and going at the right times?

[mingus]

no, i think the SL should be:

Parker
Manu
RJ
TD
Splitter

Splitter and TD gives as the best interior defensive possible. we need to take advantage of this. RJ i think should start because i see a lot of improvement in his 3-point stroke and i think he can shoot around 37% this year for us. one RJ gets his 3-point shot down consistently--i'm of the opinion that it will happen--it'll open up his driving game, which is his stongest asset and which he hasn't had a real opportunity of doing since people aren't respecting his 3. defensively, the jury is still out on Anderson. Unless he can prove that he is significantly better on D than RJ, then maybe you insert him in the starting lineup.

[mingus]

btw, i really dig Anderson's game though. his stoke is smooth and he has shown that he has a level of comfort on the court that is impressive. his stats don't show this. he's been real hesitant. he will only get better.

[mystargtr34]

I agree with BlackJack... RJ just simply can not play with Tony Parker... he stands around doing almost nothing and every 6 or 7 possessions he gets the ball and goes one on one and throws up a tough contested jumper... rinse and repeat. Not necessarily pointing any blame to RJ or Parker... its just their style of play - they dont mix.

The only problem is... it looks like Manu is going to start .. although i would probably put my money on Pop returning him to the bench. If he does in fact start, then bringing RJ off the bench is reducing the amount of time he gets with Manu. If Pop goes with Manu off the bench and starts Hill then i think RJ and Manu spelling Anderson and Hill at the 6-8 minute mark of the 1st would benefit RJ the most. But then.. your matching up Hill with the opponents starting 2 guard which isnt ideal.. and your left undersized in 3 positions out of 5.

[mystargtr34]

The spurs just have an awkward mix of talent at the 1 through 3 positions... there really isnt an ideal combination that will benefit each and every one of the 5 guys who will see minutes in the rotation. Pop will just have to figure out something that works the best.. or 'least worst' .. so we will probably see a bit of chopping and changing through November and December.

Personally... i think the team starts best when Tony is aggressive early and puts the defense on the back foot from the get go... with Manu and RJ out there.. for them to be effective or at their best it means Parker has to defer .. which takes away from his game. I love the idea of bringing RJ and Manu off the bench together.. but i hate the idea of starting Hill and Anderson at the 2-3.

[Blackjack]

no, i think the SL should be:

Parker
Manu
RJ
TD
Splitter

Splitter and TD gives as the best interior defensive possible. we need to take advantage of this. RJ i think should start because i see a lot of improvement in his 3-point stroke and i think he can shoot around 37% this year for us. one RJ gets his 3-point shot down consistently--i'm of the opinion that it will happen--it'll open up his driving game, which is his stongest asset and which he hasn't had a real opportunity of doing since people aren't respecting his 3. defensively, the jury is still out on Anderson. Unless he can prove that he is significantly better on D than RJ, then maybe you insert him in the starting lineup.

I believe that will probably end up being one of their starting lineups at some point this season, but not to start.

Splitter's coming off a long summer, injuries and all, and he'll be playing in a new league. Chances are he'll have an acclimation period and time in which to see how everything looks and feels before he's given the starting nod.

The problem I see with RJ starting is he gets in to deferrential mode. He's passive and only looking to score in obvious situations. And when that's been the case since he's been a Spur, it tends to carry over for the rest of the game.

I've recently come to the thinking that Tony Parker is the equivalent to the running quarterback. A "Michael Vick," if you will - RJ's simply the pretty one-dimensional deep threat that suffers.

So if he comes in with Hill and has Manu playing alongside of him, it stands to reason he'll find some better seams and opportunities with that group than he would the starting 5 (one in which he becomes an afterthought).

And let's be real here, Anderson has looked like a legit NBA player even without the stats. And we're not talking about some unknown Summit League player, we're talking about last year's Big 12 Player of the Year.

I honestly don't think it's a stretch at all to start him. Weighing everything and all things put into consideration, Anderson just makes the most sense for the long term (as in, this year's end).

But remember the paprika. I'll reassess tomorrow.

[TDMVPDPOY]

u dont pay a scrub 10m+ to play off the bench

[analyzed]

Black jack actually has a point. I know this is all up to Pop. and I'm not sure what condition Anderson is at the moment. But what do we have to lose if we start Anderson? If you ask me , if it's true he is deferring at the moment. Doesn't it make sense that he plays with the Big 3. where the preasure is off him to create his own shots. Starting doesn't mean Anderson has to play heaps of minutes. But I do think in the limited minutes he get to play that he plays off the big 3 as much as possible. That will only increase his learning curve, which is so critical to our success this season.

[ElNono]

I am not sick or drunk, but I did get stung by a bee and my car died in a pool of oil this week, which makes it one of the worst weeks in a while, but as far as RJ is concerned, I just still don't know where he's going to be more effective at yet.

What I think we've seen a bit of in the Caja game is what is most likely going to be the rotation that is going to start the season: Bonner comes in for Duncan, Dice comes in for Blair. I expect Hill to come in for TP, Anderson for RJ and Neil for Manu.

That would make a starting lineup of: TP, Manu, RJ, TD, Beast
Bench: Hill, Neil, Anderson, Bonner, Dice

We'll see where room is made for Tiago once he's ready to play.

[Blackjack]

u dont pay a scrub 10m+ to play off the bench

So there's no such thing as an $8M 6th Man or bench player?


Black jack actually has a point.

Equivalent to, "had me at hello." :tu


I am not sick or drunk, but I did get stung by a bee and my car died in a pool of oil this week, which makes it one of the worst weeks in a while, but as far as RJ is concerned, I just still don't know where he's going to be more effective at yet.

What I think we've seen a bit of in the Caja game is what is most likely going to be the rotation that is going to start the season: Bonner comes in for Duncan, Dice comes in for Blair. I expect Hill to come in for TP, Anderson for RJ and Neil for Manu.

That would make a starting lineup of: TP, Manu, RJ, TD, Beast
Bench: Hill, Neil, Anderson, Bonner, Dice

We'll see where room is made for Tiago once he's ready to play.

I agree that's what will happen, I just don't believe it's what should happen.

Sorry about the bee and car ... can't do much about the bee but what about the car? Blow a gasket or worse? Rear-main?

Al-key-hall and car-talk. That's what I'm talkin' 'bout! :elephant

[Man In Black]

I don't think of Anderson starting as a bad thing. I do thing there will be an acclimation period for him with refs. He'll need to do that thing Devin Brown did...introduce himself to the refs. If he's not given the chance to play physical ball, then the potential fouls add up to an advantage to the opponents. RJ has some cache with the refs. But all in all, it doesn't matter whether he starts or comes off the bench because, essentially, when he's on the court...he needs to attack within the flow. The days of dribble, dribble, step back J, need to go away.

[Blackjack]

The thing is, I think people need to look at it this way:

What do you expect from the small forward in the starting 5?

Me, I expect someone who's able to get his offense off others' in the half court, a spot-up shooter or catch-and-shoot player. They also need to be able to defend out on the perimeter to keep someone like Manu from being the primary wing defender; Anderson seems a pretty logical choice given the options.

Bringing RJ off the bench allows him to come in as a scorer and as an offensive aggressor, allowing him to get in the flow and not become an afterthought while Tim, Tony, and Manu go to work. He comes in looking to get his offense instead of moving the ball and being average-or-below defender.

Fact of the matter is, this team is ill-fitted when it comes to their best talent. So in order to get their players together, they need to play them in the right combinations at the right time.

Start Parker, Ginobili and Anderson, then substitute Hill and Jefferson in for Parker and Anderson, and you've got some decent continuity. Anderson gets the reps and looks he needs, Jefferson gets the quality of touches he needs, and he gets them against an opposing second unit, mostly.

Do it to it, I say . . .

[Cessation]

Spurs played best when bogans was in the starting lineup? LOL ...Uhh..No they played best at the end of the year when hill, manu, rj started together, during parkers injury.

RJ is a 9 year vet, career: 17 ppg 47% fg 35% 3fg, 5 rpg, 3 ast
James Anderson is 20th pick, an unproven rookie, who has yet to play a regular season game.


Ive seen them both play enough, no way is Anderson ready to start, over RJ, he's inconsistent like most rookies, looks lost, hesitant and cant create his own shot, in preseason games. No way is he a better overall player than rj.

Jefferson needs to get set up to be at his best, like tp and manu, who's gonna set him up on the bench? hill? neal? He'll be far less effective on the bench.

Jefferson would be the more logical choice, he's more of a sure thing to produce as a starter, based on his past play. Rather than gambling on a rookie, and hoping he'll develop.

This is similar to those, 'start hairston' threads lol.

[Leonard Curse]

And?

I tend to make my assessments off of what I see and not arbitary things like "he hasn't even played a regular season game."

Again, it's about doing what's best for the team and the individuals. Starting Anderson isn't saying he's one of your five best players, it's saying he's the right cog for that particular role.

Manu's been a 6th Man for years, is it because who was starting in front of him was better; and why is it the Spurs played their best last year when Bogans was in the lineup and RJ and Manu werer coming off the bench?

Could it have something to do with continuty and chemistry, getting players involved and going at the right times?

i agree with you and have been saying myself to get rj off the bench and hell fit and help the spurs so much more. although i was a lil dissapointed with andersons lack of endurance. i saw his body really struggling out there! but thats norm, after an injury i suppose.

so what the heck i agree with starting anderson as i stated in previous posts once this kid gets his legs under him whoa watch out!! and alot of you guys forget pop is forcing him to ONLY play defense not create his own so thats something we have to think about as well when evaluating the young buck

[Leonard Curse]

btw, i really dig Anderson's game though. his stoke is smooth and he has shown that he has a level of comfort on the court that is impressive. his stats don't show this. he's been real hesitant. he will only get better.


whats strange is andersons playing below standard but alot of us are staying calm i think its because we can see he has that talent and hes holding back. i can also see the determination in his stature/face when playing so i know he'll eventually get there

[tav1]

Pop's not going to crush RJ's confidence by replacing him with a rookie. And besides, James Anderson's postseason minutes will be scrawny, no matter how well he plays in the regular season. Pop needs a confident RJ come May and June.

I like Anderson, and he seems to understand the game. He's not forcing anything, he plays competent defense, and he moves well on offense. But ultimately, I think the Spurs will bring in/use a vet behind RJ.

From what I've seen, this player shouldn't be Bobby Simmons. So the Spurs will watch the wire and look for a trade. If someone like Brandon Rush is cut, the Spurs might offer him a contract. (I use him as an example only because he's in the news). Otherwise, the Spurs will move for the best available player with their limited assets.

[disciple]

Starting Lineup:

TD
Splitter
Anderson
Manu
Parker

Book it!

[NASpurs]

Pop's not going to crush RJ's confidence by replacing him with a rookie. And besides, James Anderson's postseason minutes will be scrawny, no matter how well he plays in the regular season. Pop needs a confident RJ come May and June.

If RJ's confidence is that shaky that he can't come off the bench with Manu, then he shouldn't be on the team. Sometimes I feel like the Spurs are freaking running some kind of battered women's group with RJ. The guy should get his head out of his ass and play basketball. Anyway, the Spurs are trying to win a championship and if he thinks that coming off the bench is some kind of demotion, he should listen to what Manu says when he says that he doesn't matter if he starts or not, he just wants to be there in the 4th quarter.

I like Anderson starting over RJ and I feel that the top three coming off the bench should be Manu, RJ and Blair. I think with the way Manu passes, he could get the most out of those two in the offensive end.

The starters should be Parker, Hill, Anderson, TD and Splitter by the end of the season. RJ doesn't help spread the floor with his unreliable shot, he just clogs things up and maybe with enough minutes and burn, Anderson can help in places that RJ can't. I feel the Spurs are trying to make RJ something he's not and we'll see when enough is enough. I think RJ flourishes when he has someone with the kind of passing ability like Manu.

Although now that I think about it, defensively I think my starting lineup would get killed by guards and small forwards but that's why I like Splitter in there and hope the guards would funnel guards towards Duncan and Splitter.

[Cane]

I think 'Jack tends to overrate and bandwagon players: THC :hat

Anderson has yet to earn a starting role and looks kind of chunky and out of shape out there as well. Its fine to be excited about players but this is just anxious haste brought about by being drunk imo. I see Anderson getting Blair-esque minutes though however I don't see him in a starting role unless someone gets injured or if Pop does some experimenting in the regular season.

[BackHome]

I will say this the best way to get Anderson, Splitter, Temple, and even Jefferson confidence, and to put them in easy positions to score is to have them play with MANU.

I agree Manu should start but in all honesty he is our second best PG and probably our best true PG. Yes, I love Tony but he is a scoring PG not someone who creates and passes alot though I think he is getting better. And NO I would not trade Parker.

Having Manu makes the other players focus more on the details understanding they never know when they are going to get a fast ball and they better be ready or let it him them in the face.

I wouldn't mind seeing this:

PG. Manu
SG. Temple
SF. Anderson
PF. Dice
C. Splitter

[ohmwrecker]

So, lemme get this straight . . . Jack's proposed line-up is TP, Manu, JA, Beast and Timmy Duncs? OK . . . It's not bad. Especially if you want to maximize Jefferson's offensive punch, but is GHill going to be the guy to run with RJ? I guess I can see that happening. A running 2nd squad is actually a really good idea, but I don't know if the Spurs have the personnel to pull it off. They don't really have any running bigs and you need at least one . . . unless, dare I say it? Simmons at the 4? We saw it last night. RJ at the 3, Simmons at the 4 . . . I don't know if I am quite there with you, Jack, but I am intrigued.

In other news, I went to the game last night and thought that Neal, Simmons, and Temple looked a whole lot better. Temple got away with a whole lot of feet shuffling. Bonner had a monster 1st half. How about that block?! I just wish he could play like that for a full 48 . . . or consistently, over the course of a whole season . . . or in the playoffs . . .

[ElNono]

Sorry about the bee and car ... can't do much about the bee but what about the car? Blow a gasket or worse? Rear-main?

Rear main looks like... car has 127k+ miles on it, so I'm basically shopping for something...

[TD 21]

I'm that confident in Anderson to believe him starting would be better for him, RJ and the team overall in the long term.

It's not solely about skill set with Anderson. What I'm saying is, starting him puts everyone in their best position to succeed. We know the Big 3 will be fine together and I believe Blair makes the most sense to start, all things considered ('Dyess' age, Splitter's inexperience and acclimation period, Bonner's Bonner-ness and the fact that Blair is their most talented big outside of Duncan and needs the reps), so why not put a young fella out there who can shoot the ball and defend as well as anyone else at the 3 and allow Jefferson to come off the bench looking to score right off the bat?

Go watch those YouTubes 'Tres put up a couple of days ago. RJ was a completely different player when it was essentially he and Manu having the offensive onus put on them. If he's able to come in and get things going mid-way or later through the first, it'll benefit he and the team for the duration of the game - it's about getting the individual to succeed in order to make the team succeed, which is all about putting the players in the right position -- at the right time -- to be the best player possible. That's why I'm suggesting RJ should come off bench.

Anderson and Blair are going to have to come through for this team to go deep. Get them their reps early, let them both sink or swim and -- at worst -- you know what you need to go after in the trade market. You don't believe you know what you need, you know what you need.

Maybe later in the season. Right now, I'm fine with the current starting lineup. If Jefferson falters with that group and they need to shake things up, then he could come off the bench.

How do you know for certain that Jefferson isn't in the best possible position to succeed starting? There isn't three years of evidence to go off of here. There's one disjointed season.

Anderson can defend as well as anyone at the three? I'm not ruling it out, but I'm not going to say that definitively at this point, either.

You can still know what you need with Jefferson starting and Anderson coming off the bench.

[Cessation]

I think RJ earned his starting job, being here last year, working out in the summer to improve his game. No way pop and his coaching staff after putting so much effort this offseason to help him out, are going to send him to the bench and start a rookie. I like Anderson, but it makes no sense to start him based on what he MIGHT do, its like going to your boss and saying, 'hey give me a raise, and then I'll work harder'.

Manu is unique, how many borderline allstars getting 10+ mill would be ok coming of the bench in the nba? Saying that Jefferson is bit of a prima donna, isn't completelly fair, he's definetly in the majority when it comes to that in the nba.

Sure it might seem like a good idea to start Anderson after a couple of brewskies, but lets see Anderson show us something, before we let our fantasies run wild.

[Blackjack]

Some of you are hlarious. The reigning Big 12 Player of the year and someone who passes the eye-test -- while not even being in game-shape just yet -- can't be viewed as a potential starter? RJ earned his starting role? Manu must be pissed. :lol

I'll put together a piece the next opportunity I get. But I'm essentially hoping for Anderson to be the Spurs' Courtney Lee of sorts. Different player but the same kind of prominent role from Day 1 (or early on).

Just too many mouths to feed if the Big 3, RJ and Blair are out there together. ... The cohesion and fit just isn't good enough on either end of the court -- they need some specialists or players whose skill set works for a specialized role.

That's why Anderson makes sense, and that's why the Spurs played their best stretch of ball once everyone was back healthy had Bogans starting. It put people it better, more opportune spots -- I'm gonna go out on a huge limb (one that could be seen through a microscope) and say Anderson's a better basketball player than Bogans. I realize he hasn't played an official NBA game yet, but I tend to make my assessments off things like watching players play and stuff.

[lurker23]

I think this could be an interesting experiment down the line. If I were to do this, I would make this the starting lineup:

Parker
Hill
Anderson
Duncan
Splitter

Partially because I feel Splitter will probably be the starter in the long run, and because I support starting Hill at the 2 and bringing Manu off the bench. However, if nothing else, this should be tested because of the sick 2nd unit it would create:

Hill/Temple
Ginobili
Jefferson
Blair
McDyess

[JustinJDW]

Start both Anderson and Blair at our Forwards? What are we trying to start the smallest players possible at each position?

[Cessation]

Fact is spurs played their best basketball at the end of the year, when they were in danger of missing the playoffs, boguns was not in the starting lineup then. Some people can't get past their love of a promising rookie, to see clearly enough, luckily Pop is incharge.

As I said, I like Anderson alot, he's the quiet type, putting extra pressure on him at the get go, wouldn't be smart. Pop will bring him up slowly it appears, which is the smart thing to do, let him get comfortable first.

[analyzed]

I think a lot of you are confusing starting with playing more minutes. I'm not for Anderson getting more minutes ahead of RJ at this point or even finishing games in place of RJ. What's the big deal with starting ? If you've been following Pop at all these past years. Starting dosen't mean anything

[Man In Black]

Starting like the way PHX uses Collins for a few minutes and then brings in Frye.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/2/28/Philip_Fry.png/180px-Philip_Fry.png

[RodNIc91]

Hey 'jack who does Anderson remind you? Personally he reminds a little bit of finley but better defensively.

[phxspurfan]

I'm both sick and drunk, so take with a huge grain of paprika, but Anderson should start and Jefferson should come in with Hill to give Parker and Anderson a blow.

Why? Other than I said so ... Anderson is a small forward in the NBA. He's the best option they've got currently to compliment and augment the inside game of Duncan, Blair and Parker to start, and he's shown enough for me to believe he'll guard on the perimeter as well as any of their bigger guards/swing players. Plus, RJ comes in as option 1 or 2 and is forced to engage early. It's been quite apparent if he doesn't get involved early or see the ball go in the hole a couple of times early on, he becomes essentially a wallflower -- catch the ball, move the ball, don't-do-much-if-anything unless Moses has parted the sea or the only option is to make a play for himself.

Bottom line, this team's success -- as currently constructed -- depends upon their growth potential. If the team's able to get it done without a trade -- and maybe even with a trade -- it'll be because their youth became relevant; legitimate players the team's success is dependent upon. Thus, let them get their hacks in early; they need the reps (Blair and Anderson, specifically).

So if it's me, my starting 5 to start the season: Parker - Ginobili - Anderson - Blair - Duncan. Do it to it.

Whatcha thank 'bout dat?

I see the reasoning behind giving Anderson time with the starters and giving him development opportunities. But I don't think the Spurs are going to see it that way. They want to win games quickly, early and often this season. It will be a different approach to the early season games that we as fans will have seen in awhile. I think Manu or Tony even quoted it in one of these articles...they will place more emphasis on winning regular season games so they can get a good (HCA) seed in the playoffs.

So basically I don't think the reward (having Anderson prove to develop into a solid option on this year's team) is worth the downside risk -- falling behind early in regular season games and have to

a. play the big 3 heavy minutes to make comebacks in early regular season games, because they fell behind by playing a rookie and having him try, in vain, to D up some legit NBA SFs

b. lose some regular season games they should have won, and regret it later

[wontstartdumbthreads]

and Jefferson should come in with Hill to give Parker and Anderson a blow.

Seriously???

[DPG21920]

I see where you are coming from, but Anderson has not shown me nearly enough to warrant this.

I am more concerned with the Manu starting compared to Hill vs. the RJ/Anderson thing. Is it inconceivable that Anderson starting could work out best? No. But Anderson really has not shown to be anything more than a hot potato guy right now.

RJ is also not like Manu mentally. He is much, much weaker mentally. RJ would take it as a demotion imo and I can't see Pop doing that to his confidence. RJ needs to be coddled seemingly and moving him to the bench for a rookie could be a death knell to RJ's already fragile confidence.

But, if Anderson can be the guy the he was in college (a pure scorer and silky shooter), then I can see this working out. But I just have not seen anything to indicate that at this point.

I would bring him off the bench, and the first signs of him catching on, I would consider it (depending on how RJ/Manu in the starting lineup is functioning).

[TJastal]

If RJ's confidence is that shaky that he can't come off the bench with Manu, then he shouldn't be on the team. Sometimes I feel like the Spurs are freaking running some kind of battered women's group with RJ. The guy should get his head out of his ass and play basketball.

:lmao

[Chomag]

Hey 'jack who does Anderson remind you? Personally he reminds a little bit of finley but better defensively.

He reminds me a hell of alot of Vinnie(microwave) Johnson