Having the league's best bench is fool's gold come playoff time

[TDfan2007]

Last season the Spurs were arguably a James Harden 3-point dagger away from reaching the finals. In their series against the Thunder, San Antonio's defensive strategy was pulverized over and over again by a myriad of long 2's and 3's.

Many reasons have been outlined for the Spurs' defeat, and one could argue that the Thunder not only received a favorable whistle, but also somehow caught fire at the right time. However, those factors were and always will be out of the Spurs' control. In my opinion the main reason why OKC beat our guys is because their best players were able to play longer than our best players.

Minutes for big 3's:

Spurs: Parker (37.8) Ginobili (30) Duncan (34.3)

Thunder: Westbrook (38.5) Harden (32) Durant (42.8)

Of course, minutes aren't the only important factor. It's what you do with them that counts, and a closer look at PER differences between the regular season and the playoffs for our big 3 brings more light to this problem. Our guys play less minutes during the regular season, but do so at a fantastically efficient level. Below are the PER's for our big 3 for the 2011-2012 season:

Duncan - 22.5
Ginobili - 24.1
Parker - 22.0

However, come playoff time the picture becomes less rosy, as Parker and Ginobili saw significant drops in their efficiency during the playoffs:

Parker - 19.4 (-2.6)
Ginobili - 17.0 (-7.1 :wow)

Timmy's PER actually shot up during the playoffs to a 22.9, but as I stated before, he only played 33 mpg in the playoffs. The Spurs still need more than 33 minutes from him during the playoffs, especially defensively, where the Spurs become sieve-like without Timmy's presence.

Bottom line: Our big 3 is no longer seems to be conditioned for approximately 36 minutes of peak performance thanks to Pop's micromanaging of minutes during the regular season. If the Spurs can't count on at least 36 minutes of elite level play from their big 3 (okay, fine...maybe 32-34 for Manu), then they're toast come playoff time.

Solution: For the most part, I agree with Pop's minute management, and Timmy has cited such micromanagement as a reason for his resurgence, but everything has its limits. In my opinion the Spurs should treat the last couple of months of the regular season as a kind of "pre-playoffs" minutes-wise. They should gradually start increasing the minutes of our big 3 so as to ease them into playoff shape.

Thoughts?

[DejuanorwhatDude]

I think everybody knows this is all true. A bench will get you in the best position to win in the postseason, but cant win you the chip. Your stars have to beat their stars. We will probably be the 3-4 seed this year and have to hope for the best. You can't ask for much more.

[DesignatedT]

This argument happens every year. It's a real fine line and there are no right or wrong answers. Both philosophies have plus and minuses. Obviously Pops line of thinking is having the big 3 healthy come playoff time, even if they aren't as well conditioned as they should be. The latter in his mind is pushing them too hard at the end of meaningless regular season games and one of them seriously gets hurt and we are out in the 1st round.

In my opinion I would rather see the Spurs did what they did last season and use the 1st round or two to give more minutes to the guys. Seems like he was still managing minutes throughout the Utah series and sweeping through the first two rounds certainly didn't help that either.

[justinandimcool]

The 08 Celtics and the 11 Mavs say hi.

Our guys (namely Neal/Bonner/Splitter/Green) just have to step up, and Pop needs to not panic in the first quarter of game 5 at home.

Agree with OP's bottom line though.

[Leetonidas]

hey, you posted something painfully obvious to us for years now, an obvious to anyone that watches basketball. depth is overrated, we all know this, but it will allow the big three rest and that's what is important. more than likely this team won't be challenging the likes of LA or Miami but if you expect a title every year, why even watch?

however, if certain players didn't choke hard versus OKC we probably make it to the Finals. also it is arguable that the Spurs have the league's best bench

[Leetonidas]

also i completely disagree with the last part. burn them out right before the playoffs start? they need to be fresh for the playoffs, that certainly wasn't the issue last season. bottom line is, if the thunder don't go red-hot from midrange and someone like Danny Green steps up and hits his shots, Spurs advance. they were well rested and were shitting on the league for awhile, everyone was clamoring about the spurs being a top all-time team. i think you need to just appreciate the Spurs for what they are. i don't think running them 40mpg before the playoffs or during the playoffs is the answer

[DesignatedT]

also i completely disagree with the last part. burn them out right before the playoffs start? they need to be fresh for the playoffs, that certainly wasn't the issue last season. bottom line is, if the thunder don't go red-hot from midrange and someone like Danny Green steps up and hits his shots, Spurs advance. they were well rested and were shitting on the league for awhile, everyone was clamoring about the spurs being a top all-time team. i think you need to just appreciate the Spurs for what they are. i don't think running them 40mpg before the playoffs or during the playoffs is the answer

this. The Spurs were really close last year and it just didn't go their way. Happens to the best of them. I don't see how the Spurs or Pop or RC could have put the players in any better situation than they did last season. Win our home games and we make it to the finals. Thunder got hot and eventually that wore down against Miami. Wasn't due to increased defense either. Harden got the same looks against Miami and all of a sudden couldn't hit.

[DPG21920]

The reason depth worked for the Mavs is because they had a legit superstar playing like a superstar. As amazing as TP was last season, we clearly saw he is no where near the level of a Dirk (or other prime superstar). That is not to knock TP, but you might have a shot to win with depth (although very rare) if you have a true superstar capable of beating any game plan.

Spurs do not have that which is why the path is faulty (not that it was all bad - they did reach the WCF and had a legit shot to win that).

[TDfan2007]

hey, you posted something painfully obvious to us for years now, an obvious to anyone that watches basketball. depth is overrated, we all know this, but it will allow the big three rest and that's what is important. more than likely this team won't be challenging the likes of LA or Miami but if you expect a title every year, why even watch?

however, if certain players didn't choke hard versus OKC we probably make it to the Finals. also it is arguable that the Spurs have the league's best bench

I haven't expected a title since the Lakers beat us in 2008, but this team plays for the chance to win the title. It's what they're about. So therefore I decided to chime in with my 2 cents as to how to better compete in the playoffs.

I'm not saying that Pop should play the guys 40mpg right before the playoffs, even when the games are throw away games. That's ridiculous. Here, how about this:

Tim averages around 28mpg for the season, so why not bump him up to 30 in march, then 32 in april. That way playing around 36 minutes a game come playoff time won't be so much of a shock. Athletes are all about rhythm and habit after all.

[TDfan2007]

The reason depth worked for the Mavs is because they had a legit superstar playing like a superstar. As amazing as TP was last season, we clearly saw he is no where near the level of a Dirk (or other prime superstar). That is not to knock TP, but you might have a shot to win with depth (although very rare) if you have a true superstar capable of beating any game plan.

Spurs do not have that which is why the path is faulty (not that it was all bad - they did reach the WCF and had a legit shot to win that).

Agreed. Also, Dirk played about 39mpg during the Mavs' 2011 championship run, so while the Mavs used their depth, they also made sure that their best player was on the court for almost the entire game.

[DesignatedT]

Keep limiting the minutes during the regular season and bump it up once the playoffs start. Should usually at least have 5 games in the first round to play the guys some more minutes and get them ready for the heavy competition. If we can get the 1 seed we will likely avoid OKC and LAL until WCF. That gives two rounds to give the guys some more minutes in a game.

That's just my opinion. I don't see any reason to play our 35+ year olds more minutes in pointless games just to try and get them a little more conditioned. Just them being able to play once the playoffs begin is first priority at their age.

[DPG21920]

I don't think increasing their minutes a lot during the playoffs will help for a variety of reasons. You can't just condition a body to do something over several months, then expect to change that in a couple weeks. Just does not work like that. The other issue is that while guys like Tim and Manu have excellent per minute numbers, I firmly believe you would get severely diminished returns if you tried to expand their minutes. The reason they are able to be productive per minute is because they are at optimal playing time for their age/bodies. If you tried to go beyond that too much I think you would see a massive dip in their production on a per minute basis.

[FYM]

I don't think increasing their minutes a lot during the playoffs will help for a variety of reasons. You can't just condition a body to do something over several months, then expect to change that in a couple weeks. Just does not work like that. The other issue is that while guys like Tim and Manu have excellent per minute numbers, I firmly believe you would get severely diminished returns if you tried to expand their minutes. The reason they are able to be productive per minute is because they are at optimal playing time for their age/bodies. If you tried to go beyond that too much I think you would see a massive dip in their production on a per minute basis.

absolutely therefore the need to stick with what you were doing during the RS especially for a vet team like the spurs.

[DesignatedT]

I understand the concept. I'm not saying that upping their minutes in a playoff series or two would have the same impact if you did it over a period of a few months. The risk involved when increasing their minutes over a couple months, in games that are meaningless, is not a risk I would want to take though.

However, I don't see how playing the guys more minutes in the playoffs compared to their regular season average would cause "massive" dips in production. They're other ways of keeping guys in relatively good shape without them having to play 5 on 5 and risk injury. Obviously, nothing compares to real game conditioning but the coaching staff should be doing other things off the court to make sure these guys can handle more minutes when it's needed.

[DesignatedT]

And in reality, under both scenarios, our fate is still going to come down to our role players and how they perform.

[DPG21920]

Well I just use logic - I watch the games and see what happens when they tire out. It's not as if Pop won't play them more minutes on purpose. He knows that if you play them too many minutes they can't produce per minute like they do now. It's why he does not extend their minutes even in the playoffs IMO.

[DPG21920]

I agree - I was supporting your theory that there is no other option (unless trades come into play).

[Kidd K]

That is sort of a trick argument though.

Of course every team's bench's efficiency goes down in the postseason. You don't get to stat pad against bad teams. Every team in the playoffs is good unless you're a top 3 seed in the east, then your first round is pretty much a bye. It's expected that their production would go down. Tougher opponents.

Our bench sucked this year for two particular reasons. 1: We didn't have a real backup point guard (with TJ Ford retiring). 2: Ginobili got shifted back to the starting lineup which made our bench even worse.

As for Timmy. . .dude's old. Can't expect much more than 33 good minutes imo. I'm happy as hell we're even getting that. Duncan is still quality, but there'sonly so long he can perform that well. Much more than 33 and you're probably going to see a diminishing return. We just need better support in the post.

Mills has to pan out as our backup PG, Diaw and Green need to hit their open shots, and Splitter needs to finally step it up. I think those are our biggest needs/requirements right now to be successful. And everyone important has to be healthy of course.

[therealtruth]

I remember reading somebody's analysis a while back about championship teams and the amount of minutes their major players play. Basically we are below the limit mark for championship teams. Pop's been trying to prove his approach works for several years and I am not sure. It's a gray area and the injury excuse bugs me. Unless someone can show me a stat that says above a certain limit minute injuries increase dramatically I am not sure I buy his minute limits.

For bench depth to be really useful at playoff time I think it has to be on defense. If you can constantly throw new guys to wear down your opposition of the bench that has to have some effect. However if your bench guys don't play defense like the Spurs it's much less useful.

[therealtruth]

also i completely disagree with the last part. burn them out right before the playoffs start? they need to be fresh for the playoffs, that certainly wasn't the issue last season. bottom line is, if the thunder don't go red-hot from midrange and someone like Danny Green steps up and hits his shots, Spurs advance. they were well rested and were shitting on the league for awhile, everyone was clamoring about the spurs being a top all-time team. i think you need to just appreciate the Spurs for what they are. i don't think running them 40mpg before the playoffs or during the playoffs is the answer

That's why you play defense. You can't hope for teams not to get hot at playoff time. There's always going to be some team that gets hot.

[therealtruth]

The reason depth worked for the Mavs is because they had a legit superstar playing like a superstar. As amazing as TP was last season, we clearly saw he is no where near the level of a Dirk (or other prime superstar). That is not to knock TP, but you might have a shot to win with depth (although very rare) if you have a true superstar capable of beating any game plan.

Spurs do not have that which is why the path is faulty (not that it was all bad - they did reach the WCF and had a legit shot to win that).

I'll go further than that and say the legitimate superstar needs to have a post game or move that allows him to get the shot he wants on demand. TP is still to easy to gameplan for. Pack the paint and hope the shooters miss. TP still can't beat that kind of defense. He has to hope the shooters hit their shots.

[therealtruth]

Agreed. Also, Dirk played about 39mpg during the Mavs' 2011 championship run, so while the Mavs used their depth, they also made sure that their best player was on the court for almost the entire game.

Good point. The Mavs probably would not have won if Dirk played a minute less. Maybe I can understand the arguments against playing Duncan and Manu more minutes but there is no reason Parker can't average 39 mpg when necessary except for the fact Pop babies him through the season. If TP was capable of playing more minutes we could have probably won the WCF because it means less Gary Neal and his poor defense.

[wildbill2u]

I'll go further than that and say the legitimate superstar needs to have a post game or move that allows him to get the shot he wants on demand. TP is still to easy to gameplan for. Pack the paint and hope the shooters miss. TP still can't beat that kind of defense. He has to hope the shooters hit their shots.

good point. Since two of our Big 3--Manu and TP-- depend on slashing to the hoop, a collapsing zone to fill the lane will stop them. Manu, at least, has an outside 3pt. shot to fall back on, but TP doesn't and his short jumper wasn't falling.

Then add the absence of any production out of Diaw and Green and you wind up sitting at home.

[Proxy]

They need it to give the TOSBs a chance to be healthy.

I think the bench being a negative come playoff time is exaggerated. They swept the first two rounds and went up 2-0... lost some close games in the back door sweep. OKC was just a really good team with Ibaka playing on a level we will never see him play at again. Taking statistics from one lost series and claiming that supports that a bench is fool's gold doesn't seem very intuitive. I could go to any series in the past and claim the losing team's formula doesn't work if statistics were completely telling.

[rmt]

Duncan will be 37 by next playoffs. It's unrealistic to expect him to play 36 intense playoff minutes. He can't play an entire game (even in his prime) like Lebron and Durant do. It's simple - SAS' main players are old and during playoff time, that means the Durants and Westbrookes go up against bench-type players for longer stretches = SAS losses.

[TD 21]

Timmy's PER actually shot up during the playoffs to a 22.9, but as I stated before, he only played 33 mpg in the playoffs. The Spurs still need more than 33 minutes from him during the playoffs, especially defensively, where the Spurs become sieve-like without Timmy's presence..

He only played 33 mpg because he wasn't needed for extended minutes for the vast majority of the first two rounds.

But if Garnett, who looks gassed every couple of minutes, can consistently play 34-38 minute games in the playoffs, without his play suffering (for the most part), then I see no reason why Duncan couldn't. It's obviously not ideal and he'd be hard pressed to hold up through three rounds (depends on match-up, of course, but there's a good chance they won't need it for the first round) of it, though.

It's not that having the best bench is inherently fools gold, it's what it generally symbolizes that is: That a team lacks a bonafide superstar.

[therealtruth]

He only played 33 mpg because he wasn't needed for extended minutes for the vast majority of the first two rounds.

But if Garnett, who looks gassed every couple of minutes, can consistently play 34-38 minute games in the playoffs, without his play suffering (for the most part), then I see no reason why Duncan couldn't. It's obviously not ideal and he'd be hard pressed to hold up through three rounds (depends on match-up, of course, but there's a good chance they won't need it for the first round) of it, though.

It's not that having the best bench is inherently fools gold, it's what it generally symbolizes that is: That a team lacks a bonafide superstar.

The problem is the Spurs ask to much of TD. Get another good big and then ask TD to just play a supporting role and concentrate on defense and rebounding. It will extend his career much longer than lowering his minutes. Alot of people were hoping Splitter could be that big however Pop hasn't allowed him to develop into that role.

[dunkman]

Duncan and Manu are old, they can't play more minutes. About the bench, it depends. Manu plays from the bench. The idea of the sixth man is that a star quality bench player goes vs other team tired starters or normal bench players.

At this point, imo the Spurs lack an all-star PF. The rest of the roster is really good, there are 3 PG's to choose from for the backup position, Jack can bring it when Manu rests or doesn't play well, Diaw is an very good big, Leonard was a great addition, Green was good too.

[elemento]

Good point. The Mavs probably would not have won if Dirk played a minute less. Maybe I can understand the arguments against playing Duncan and Manu more minutes but there is no reason Parker can't average 39 mpg when necessary except for the fact Pop babies him through the season. If TP was capable of playing more minutes we could have probably won the WCF because it means less Gary Neal and his poor defense.

TP played almost 38 minutes/game against OKC. In fact, all BIG 3 increased their minutes against OKC. For SA, they do need their bench to win games. You can't expect Parker to carry the same load of Lebron or Dirk in the playoffs and blame him after SA's loss against OKC. He is not in their level and he isn't a superstar that can carry a team to the title. We can't put the loss only on him.
Not only the BIG 3 has to play well as a group, but the role players and the bench have to step up for the challenge if SA wants to win it all again. That's what it takes when your franchise player is already 36 and your 2nd best player is already 35.
And Neal's defense was not the reason SA lost against OKC. Neal in fact played more minutes in the OKC series than the Clips/Jazz series because of Green's major choking job in the WCF, going from 12ppg/4rpg @ 72.6TS% and 57.9% 3P in the previous series to 3ppg/2rpg @ 32.3TS% and 17.4% 3P. And not only Neal played more, but he also had to take care of the 2nd unit alone because Pop didn't trust Green anymore and had to start Manu instead of bring him off the bench.
I understand the frustration about Neal's defense, but he was asked to do too much. He isn't a PG and he definitely can't lead the 2nd unit by his own.

[BadOne]

.

[BadOne]

I don't think increasing their minutes a lot during the playoffs will help for a variety of reasons. You can't just condition a body to do something over several months, then expect to change that in a couple weeks. Just does not work like that. The other issue is that while guys like Tim and Manu have excellent per minute numbers, I firmly believe you would get severely diminished returns if you tried to expand their minutes. The reason they are able to be productive per minute is because they are at optimal playing time for their age/bodies. If you tried to go beyond that too much I think you would see a massive dip in their production on a per minute basis.

TRUTH

[DeadlyDynasty]

The reason depth worked for the Mavs is because they had a legit superstar playing like a superstar. As amazing as TP was last season, we clearly saw he is no where near the level of a Dirk (or other prime superstar). That is not to knock TP, but you might have a shot to win with depth (although very rare) if you have a true superstar capable of beating any game plan.

Spurs do not have that which is why the path is faulty (not that it was all bad - they did reach the WCF and had a legit shot to win that).
Well said.

[diego]

conditioning the players to play more minutes makes sense, but I think that boat has sailed. as DPG said, pop always fools us into thinking he's saving them for the PO, but when they come their minutes barely increase. Last PO they definitely looked tired in front of the young thunder, thats not going to change unfortunately.

a better question is why does Pop not have more options when the roleplayers are choking?

and as far as PO fools gold, i think more than "best bench" the problem is using a platoon. bonner (no d, no boards, choker), blair (bad d, inconsistent/immature), and to a lesser extent splitter (made of glass, choker?) and diaw (fat and passive, though hopefully recovering from both). that's 80% of our bigman rotation, and between them you're lucky to get 2 decent players. those "2 decent players" work in the regular season, you can shuffle them around and even squeeze more out of them. but in the PO you can't play them all together to get decent production, nor can you hide them all at once. we cant have decent D, rebounding and a little scoring coming from the middle unless duncan is playing. so as it has been for at least 4 years now, the problem is not having another big to rest and complement duncan.
I think it would be better to have 3 similar players all competing for the same spot, and one specialist, than to have so many niche roles. obviously the specialist of choice for pop is the legendary floor spacer but honestly, I'd rather play athletic small ball than neutered specialist big man ball (ie, stephen jackson can play bonner's role way better than bonner does). There is a tactical advantage to having specialists but in the PO it just doesnt work out, they get exposed more often than not.

[aal04]

What do I think?

The 1st/2nd round were amazing. We dominated. We can ignore numbers from these 2 series because we destroyed these teams and could still afford to rest our big 3.

I think last year we were unlucky against OKC.

OKC has a level of expectation of their roleplayers.

SAS has a level of expectation of their roleplayers.

what happened in the finals against OKC was their role players had career highs. And SAS roleplayers disappeared. They didnt have to lift, they just had to play like they did all season (relatively to other teams). But they completely and utterly disappeared. Green/Bonner/etc. This was a COMPLETE reversal of the season. if both teams roleplayers had average games, we would have won.

The most worrying thing for me was the post-loss interview with Ginobili - who stated that he believes they cant beat OKC as theyre too young - too fast. This hurt me deep because it wasnt like "Oh we can play better". It was like throwing in the towel.

[Ice009]

I don't recall Manu saying that. You got any links?

[therealtruth]

What do I think?

The 1st/2nd round were amazing. We dominated. We can ignore numbers from these 2 series because we destroyed these teams and could still afford to rest our big 3.

I think last year we were unlucky against OKC.

OKC has a level of expectation of their roleplayers.

SAS has a level of expectation of their roleplayers.

what happened in the finals against OKC was their role players had career highs. And SAS roleplayers disappeared. They didnt have to lift, they just had to play like they did all season (relatively to other teams). But they completely and utterly disappeared. Green/Bonner/etc. This was a COMPLETE reversal of the season. if both teams roleplayers had average games, we would have won.

The most worrying thing for me was the post-loss interview with Ginobili - who stated that he believes they cant beat OKC as theyre too young - too fast. This hurt me deep because it wasnt like "Oh we can play better". It was like throwing in the towel.

For me what hurt the most was the manner we lost. Like Pop has said our identity was stolen. I would have been fine losing if we continued to believe in each other and make the extra pass. The shots would have eventually fell. The shots not falling and role players not contributing weakened us defensively since they weren't on the court as much.

[PublicOption]

SHOT BLOCKER NEEDED.

[racm]

SHOT BLOCKER NEEDED.

Udoh for Bonner.

[SpurPadre]

That is sort of a trick argument though.

Of course every team's bench's efficiency goes down in the postseason. You don't get to stat pad against bad teams. Every team in the playoffs is good unless you're a top 3 seed in the east, then your first round is pretty much a bye. It's expected that their production would go down. Tougher opponents.

Our bench sucked this year for two particular reasons. 1: We didn't have a real backup point guard (with TJ Ford retiring). 2: Ginobili got shifted back to the starting lineup which made our bench even worse.

As for Timmy. . .dude's old. Can't expect much more than 33 good minutes imo. I'm happy as hell we're even getting that. Duncan is still quality, but there'sonly so long he can perform that well. Much more than 33 and you're probably going to see a diminishing return. We just need better support in the post.

Mills has to pan out as our backup PG, Diaw and Green need to hit their open shots, and Splitter needs to finally step it up. I think those are our biggest needs/requirements right now to be successful. And everyone important has to be healthy of course.

The bench got worse? Well, our starting lineup got BETTER and you win with your stars and starters. If you noticed, Games 5 and 6 were much more competitive than Games 3 and 4, which were games Danny Green didn't belong in the court. I've said it before and I'll keep saying it, you win with your stars and in the playoffs, Manu MUST start. You can say he'll get his minutes playing off the bench anyways but him starting sets a tone off the bat where you match your best players against their best players. The Big 3 don't have the time to take a chance to see if Danny Green won't choke in a starter's role in the playoffs again.

[SpurPadre]

[QUOTE=DPG21920;6155326]I don't think increasing their minutes a lot during the playoffs will help for a variety of reasons. You can't just condition a body to do something over several months, then expect to change that in a couple weeks. Just does not work like that. The other issue is that while guys like Tim and Manu have excellent per minute numbers, I firmly believe you would get severely diminished returns if you tried to expand their minutes. The reason they are able to be productive per minute is because they are at optimal playing time for their age/bodies. If you tried to go beyond that too much I think you would see a massive dip in their production on a per minute basis. /[QUOTE]

Wasn't a stat brought up recently that showed the team actually spent more energy when Manu wasn't on the court? If you buy that stat, which I would, then expanding their minutes wouldn't necessarily get diminished returns as you claim. They may even thrive because they feed off each other and wouldn't have to work as hard, individually.

[DPG21920]

Well, what I said is just my opinion based on observation. You always have the guys that are the Per 40 minute all stars, then they get more time and their numbers are no where close to those Per 40 minute stats. That's natural - even for younger players. I think it is even more true for aging guys like Manu/Tim especially factoring in the increased likelihood of injury.

[PublicOption]

Udoh for Bonner.


YES DO IT As soon as possible.

[dunkman]

Increasing the minutes to +35 years old players won't solve anything. However, what the Spurs should is run an 8 man more talented rotation, instead of a 10 man flawed rotation with 3-4 players that don't show up, are too small or slow to play defense.

That should be: 2 PG's, 3 Swings, 3 Bigs - all have to be good playoffs players. And RC had to set that rotation before the training camp. Efforts were made to solve the backup PG problem, but the Spurs are still short of an all-star bigman.

[Sean Cagney]

The 08 Celtics and the 11 Mavs say hi.

Our guys (namely Neal/Bonner/Splitter/Green) just have to step up, and Pop needs to not panic in the first quarter of game 5 at home.

Agree with OP's bottom line though.

Bonner will not step up, just end that thought right now because he has had years to do it and never does. Neal needs to step up, Green and Splitter I agree, hell Jax can step up we know but we will need him as well! De Colo? Mills? I would say them far before Bonner, who is what he is. BTW the 08 Celts had a few guys in their prime still! Pierce was defintely in his prime and KG played great D along with Ray Allen still a very good player. 11 Dirk played out of his mind, he was on the elite list of playoff performers with that performance kind of like 03 Tim was for us carrying us (Would not lose). If we have a guy step up to superstar level then maybe, but otherwise as someone said your stars have to outplay their superstars and age is not on their side.

[elemento]

The bench got worse? Well, our starting lineup got BETTER and you win with your stars and starters. If you noticed, Games 5 and 6 were much more competitive than Games 3 and 4, which were games Danny Green didn't belong in the court. I've said it before and I'll keep saying it, you win with your stars and in the playoffs, Manu MUST start. You can say he'll get his minutes playing off the bench anyways but him starting sets a tone off the bat where you match your best players against their best players. The Big 3 don't have the time to take a chance to see if Danny Green won't choke in a starter's role in the playoffs again.

I agree with you that the best players have to start, but when Manu starts, it creates a big problem with Neal having to take care of the ball. He isn't a PG and he has poor ball-handling skills. Our opponents simply put some pressure on him and he struggles.

I think SA should really consider some small-ball (a la Heat) in the 2nd unit with: Mills or Nando as the starting PG, Neal as the SG, Green as the SF, Jackson playing the Battier role as a PF and Splitter as the starting Center. Way better than Blair or Bonner getting minutes IMO.

[therealtruth]

I agree with you that the best players have to start, but when Manu starts, it creates a big problem with Neal having to take care of the ball. He isn't a PG and he has poor ball-handling skills. Our opponents simply put some pressure on him and he struggles.

I think SA should really consider some small-ball (a la Heat) in the 2nd unit with: Mills or Nando as the starting PG, Neal as the SG, Green as the SF, Jackson playing the Battier role as a PF and Splitter as the starting Center. Way better than Blair or Bonner getting minutes IMO.

Why are we trying to accommodate a backup player at the expense of what is good for the team?

[elemento]

Why are we trying to accommodate a backup player at the expense of what is good for the team?

Don't ask me, ask Pop :lol

But to be fair with Pop, SA was in a tough situation after Ford got injured. Neal was given a really tough task but he was the best option SA had at the time.

I've always hated the idea of Manu coming off the bench. I hated when Barry started over him, when Findog started over him and I still hate it. But it's hard to argue with results and Pop won the title 4 times playing his way.

I think Neal is a SG and that's by far his best position. With Manu and the addition of Green, he is pretty much a lux 3rd string SG. I think he is too good to be a 3rd string SG.That's why I agree with some posters with the idea of trading him. A lot of teams could use him and actually would love have him.

Anyway, let's see what happens after Curry's episode. I'm very optimist and I am still hoping for a Bonner/Blair trade :lol

[therealtruth]

Don't ask me, ask Pop :lol

But to be fair with Pop, SA was in a tough situation after Ford got injured. Neal was given a really tough task but he was the best option SA had at the time.

I've always hated the idea of Manu coming off the bench. I hated when Barry started over him, when Findog started over him and I still hate it. But it's hard to argue with results and Pop won the title 4 times playing his way.

I think Neal is a SG and that's by far his best position. With Manu and the addition of Green, he is pretty much a lux 3rd string SG. I think he is too good to be a 3rd string SG.That's why I agree with some posters with the idea of trading him. A lot of teams could use him and actually would love have him.

Anyway, let's see what happens after Curry's episode. I'm very optimist and I am still hoping for a Bonner/Blair trade :lol

It's definitely Spurs tradition to start one dimensional shooters over Ginobili. To get better I think that has to change. For me and I think most coaches believe that the best defenders should start. You can always bring offense of the bench. To me that's the argument for starting Green over Ginobili.

[dunkman]

Manu is better suited to play from the bench, because he get his offense going from there, most star players can't do that. He also never could log many minutes, like Parker and Duncan can or could. When he starts from the bench, Pop can manage the rotations in a way that at least one of the big three is always on the floor.

I think that Pop is one of the best setting the rotation. The Spurs were just too slow replacing and finding help for the players that declined after the '07 title. Bowen role has finally adequately addressed with Leonard, Green, Jack and Parkers defensive improvement. This season, between Mills, De Colo and Cory the Spurs will have a good backup for Parker. But Duncan has to be complemented with a more capable bigman than Diaw or Splitter, that are excellent bench bigs. Perhaps Jack at PF could replace Horry, his game vs OKC was impressive.

[Kidd K]

The bench got worse? Well, our starting lineup got BETTER and you win with your stars and starters. If you noticed, Games 5 and 6 were much more competitive than Games 3 and 4, which were games Danny Green didn't belong in the court. I've said it before and I'll keep saying it, you win with your stars and in the playoffs, Manu MUST start. You can say he'll get his minutes playing off the bench anyways but him starting sets a tone off the bat where you match your best players against their best players. The Big 3 don't have the time to take a chance to see if Danny Green won't choke in a starter's role in the playoffs again.

When your bench doesn't have a viable ballhandler and playmaker, and the starting lineup is already pretty good, taking Ginobili off the bench and starting him just makes the best part of our rotation better and the weakest part a LOT worse. We got destroyed when both Parker and Manu were on the bench. That's actually usually the case even during the regular season.

Manu starting takes away from his time with the second unit and adds maybe 2 minutes of extra playing time for him. The tradeoff wasn't worth it. Especially when you consider Manu had multiple bad games in that series anyway, so in hindsight, it was a poor move that didn't pay off. Can't see how you can argue it since we already know how it panned out. Half of his starts were awful and all of his games @OKC sucked too.

Fact: every game Ginobili played @ OKC in the playoffs, he sucked.

Ginobili's averages @ OKC:

10.3 PPG
3.7 RPG
2.0 APG
0.0 SPG
0.0 BPG

37.5% FG%
38.5% 3pt%
2.6 FTAs/game
4.3 turnovers
4.3 fouls commited


Pretty big reason why we were 0-3 @OKC. Ginobili blew it all 3 games there. I'd rather keep him on the bench and basically running plays when Parker's resting if we don't have anyone who can lead the 2nd unit properly. . .and clearly we don't. Worst thing that happens is that Manu gets 2-3 less minutes of playing time overall. Big deal, he can use the rest anyway. We always close out halves with him on court, so there's no particular loss of ability except the first 2-3 minutes of the game which we usually do well in anyway.

[bus driver]

i dont believe so. we just lost to a team with a better bench at that time; plus their team was in the zone.
hopefully they can get back on a winning streak and continue that through out the finals.

[Horse]

Until we get a fair shake or another all-time great like Timmy who can overcome officiating and a whole league against his team, none of this matters.

[ohmwrecker]

If everyone already knows this, it isn't really "fool's gold", is it? I appreciate the analytical effort though . . .