What's up with Bertans?

[MaNu4Tres]

Did anyone notice Davis had his knees wrapped up in a heat pad in the bench?

I think it's foolish to expect him to handle starter's minutes. He's had two ACL tears in one knee, is slight of build/frame and weight and he has to get physical blocking out players for rebounds and such. He plays at a fast pace and is really a gunner at heart. I know Spurs don't want him to be just a gunner (RC said this during summer league), but the rest of his offensive game, including his passing follows from his aggressive shooting mentality and his quick release causing aggressive close outs. He has microwave like potential (he's like a 6'10" Paddy in that sense)... For now, I tend to think Davis is better as a bench sparkplug, kinda like how Chinook describe his optimal use..

I don't think anyone would want him playing starter minutes.

The only two starters worthy of playing "starter minutes" are LaMarcus and healthy Kawhi -- and to a lesser extent Danny when he's locked in. I would only start Bertans or Kyle at the 4 to balance out the rotation. That doesn't mean I'd want either to play " starter minutes". I think a 20 minute role for Bertans or Kyle is great. I think Spurs will need to trade one of Kyle or Davis if they smell the roses and look to trade Patty to free up minutes for Murray, White ....and when Spurs are fully healthy -- free up minutes for Forbes.

I don't see Spurs hanging on to both Kyle and Davis after this season anyway. May as well move one if it means Patty is off the books. I'd prefer trading Davis personally if all money were equal.

The

[spurraider21]

if we didnt trade parker when he was TOSB i dont see us trading mills, unfortunately

[Chinook]

:tu

He's just upset because he knows the only possible way Bertans could have a meaningful role on this team when healthy, is if he usurps his precious Anderson in the rotation.

Lame attempt at an ad homenim. There's room for Bertans, Gay and Anderson to all play if they don't play a guard between Manu and Patty. Just a cursory examination of my posts talking about the rotation show that I consider Bertans, Joff, Murray, Paul and Forbes essentially fighting for one spot.

Then again, you're the same guy who turtled into the "Thad Young is a small-forward" position, so I am not surprised you see things so inflexibly.

[Chinook]

Bertans is a much more versatile/better player than prime Bonner was.

Bertans would have been a Danny Ferry (SF) on roids a decade ago.

Whenever Bonner had a significant role on the Spurs (outside of the 2 games vs OKV in 14') the Spurs had early vacations (09-11').

Bonner could actually play his position on both ends, which is something Bertans hasn't show he can do consistently. Davis is better in a lot of ways that don't matter without a better foundation. Dude is too old to just assume he will clean up the holes in his game.

[MaNu4Tres]

Dude is too old to just assume he will clean up the holes in his game.

Since when is 25 old?

And every role player has holes in their games, that's why their role players. That's why Bonner was a role player -- he had holes too and was a very easy cover in the playoffs against prepared teams ( check out his playoff numbers vs. his regular season numbers).

[Chinook]

I was referring to your Bertans/Lauvergne comparisson..

It might amaze you, but Joff as a 26-year-old big should be earlier in his development curve than Davis as a 25-year-old shooter. I know Joff is terrible and Bertans has more hope, but the point is that youth isn't good enough to justify giving a guy minutes.


Bertans >>> Bonner

Only when he's hitting shots at a good clip. Even then, it's close when both guys shoot well. Davis is only viable because of the changes to the modern NBA. No way could he have survived if he had to check the Randolphs and Odoms on the other end like Matt had to.


Also, it is a lie that Bertans has been a negative impact player. He has a positive 1.6 BPM and positive 0.4 VORP.

It's a "lie" to say I said Bertans has been negative on the year. I can read just like you can. I said when he's been pulled early it's because he was a negative. That's the principle reason why his minutes are so sporadic. When you only play a guy when he's playing well, you'll skew his numbers toward the good side of the spectrum.


And lastly, this season Bertans has 20 games of 5 minutes or less, and that's only because the Spurs have been plagued with injuries. If not, he would have played even less. That's not giving the guy enough opportunities. And in the opportunities he did have he did more than OK. I don't know why you are acting as if he has been complete garbage.

I'm "acting like" Bertans has been garbage in those "five minutes or less" games. Again, there's no evidence that Bertans is a rhythm player who plays better the longer he's out on the court, he should have the same rate stats no matter the mpg split. He doesn't, though. He's about half as effective in his low minute games than he is in his high-minute games. You proposed one explanation that I think is faulty for the reasons I've already outlined. Mine seems to fit better with the "eye-test" explanation that his minutes depend on his performance, not vice versa.

[Chinook]

Since when is 25 old?

And every role player has holes in their games, that's why their role players. That's why Bonner was a role player -- he had holes too and was a very easy cover in the playoffs against prepared teams ( check out his playoff numbers vs. his regular season numbers).

25 is old for a perimeter player. It's not old for a traditional big. Bertans has been a pro for going on a decade now. He shouldn't still be a project. There's no reasonable explanation why he's not at least a 6-9 Gary Neal at this point.

[SAGirl]

I don't think anyone would want him playing starter minutes.

The only two starters worthy of playing "starter minutes" are LaMarcus and healthy Kawhi -- and to a lesser extent Danny when he's locked in. I would only start Bertans or Kyle at the 4 to balance out the rotation. That doesn't mean I'd want either to play " starter minutes". I think a 20 minute role for Bertans or Kyle is great. I think Spurs will need to trade one of Kyle or Davis if they smell the roses and look to trade Patty to free up minutes for Murray, White ....and when Spurs are fully healthy -- free up minutes for Forbes.

I don't see Spurs hanging on to both Kyle and Davis after this season anyway. May as well move one if it means Patty is off the books. I'd prefer trading Davis personally if all money were equal.

The

DAF86 argued he should start... which I was neutral about. I had no argument for or against... whatever makes the team better. However, watching him on the bench with his surgically repaired knee heavily wrapped after having played 30 minutes the last game, which was 2 days ago was telling for me in terms of his body's resilience. After 2 days rest that knee is acting up. It wouldn't surprise me if that is the reason he played 16 or so minutes, maybe 20 is the ideal max he should play from a physical standpoint... I don't think his body can handle more. So I was responding to that statement DAF86 made, and obviously anyone who agreed with him.

I agree with you, they only can afford one of the two unless Rudy opts out and wants out, which I don't expect. Rudy has had an ok first season, but I think his body is going to require Pop's minutes management from now on to extend his career. I expect him to value the Spurs organization rest/injury management and opt in. In the end it may end up being whoever is most affordable this summer between Kyle and Davis, and whoever has the best playoff showing that they prioritize to keep, so they may want to hold on to both guys for now and make that decision later. That is if they aren't trading anyone and mostly standing pat.

I still think Davis is a long shot to stay. He's definitely a talented shooter, but he wasn't getting playing time at all when the team was at its best earlier this season. They were quite fine without him until Rudy got hurt. If that knee of Davis' is acting up, and they think he won't be durable... paying to keep him, when they would already have a brittle Rudy Gay in the team (and an injury prone Kawhi Leonard in a potential supermax) is not smart. I tend to think due to all these factors they likely prioritize Kyle (he's more versatile position wise, and has been durable).

Davis has been shooting well though and the team is very lacking in good bigs this season, so dealing him is a current blow. I don't think they can afford to deal either guy until they get fully healthy or get someone back that can play their spots.

Otherwise I agree with your points though.

[MaNu4Tres]

25 is old for a perimeter player. It's not old for a traditional big. Bertans has been a pro for going on a decade now. He shouldn't still be a project. There's no reasonable explanation why he's not at least a 6-9 Gary Neal at this point.

He's not a project. He's a young role player with still some sharpening to do.

[Chinook]

I think Bertans as a guy who plays the last three minutes of the first three quarters and the first two or three of the fourth with some situation subbing makes the most sense. Those are perfectly fine tenth man minutes.

[Chinook]

He's not a project. He's a young role player with still some sharpening to do.

That's a pointless semantic argument. He's a player who has about as many bad games as he does good games and who needs to develop skills to be able to fundamentally play a position. However you want to categorize that, he's too old to be there.

[TD 21]

Lame attempt at an ad homenim. There's room for Bertans, Gay and Anderson to all play if they don't play a guard between Manu and Patty. Just a cursory examination of my posts talking about the rotation show that I consider Bertans, Joff, Murray, Paul and Forbes essentially fighting for one spot.

Then again, you're the same guy who turtled into the "Thad Young is a small-forward" position, so I am not surprised you see things so inflexibly.

I specifically said meaningful, as in something more than the spot minutes available for the 10th man when fully healthy.

:lol Digging deep into the archives, I see. How long you been waiting to pull that one out? I remember saying Young was drafted as an SF first, which he was. This was also probably about 3 years ago, when he was obviously younger and before the game had completely shifted to Warriors ball. Clearly, he's a PF in today's game.

[MaNu4Tres]

That's a pointless semantic argument. He's a player who has about as many bad games as he does good games and who needs to develop skills to be able to fundamentally play a position. However you want to categorize that, he's too old to be there.

First off, Bertans hardly has had opportunities and he's been a victim of the quick hook Pop gave Splitter for 2 years.

Second, do you not realize that every role player has as many bad games as good games on offense? That's why they are role players. That's why its imperative that role players can't be liabilities on defense because that's the one side of the floor that CAN be consistent -- which is invaluable.

When Bertans gets the green light to play through mistakes and sees 16+ minutes a night he's averaging 11.8 points, 3.4 boards, .8 blocks on 52% shooting and 43% from 3. This is in 14 games... 14 of the 39 games he's appeared in he's seen more than 16 minutes. On the othe r end of the spectrum, in 14 of the 39 games he's seen 5 minutes or less ( mop up duty/ irrational dumb quick hooks).

[Chinook]

I specifically said meaningful, as in something more than the spot minutes available for the 10th man when fully healthy.

Bertans wasn't even getting minutes in a rotation without Kawhi, yet you think Pop would look to give him Anderson's spot? Makes no sense. Pop will likely only have one designated shooter in the regular rotation, if that. If it's Forbes, it's likely not Bertans. Back in the olden days, Bryn being a guard and Davis a forward would matter, but it doesn't now with how many guys Pop has who can play the middle positions.


:lol Digging deep into the archives, I see. How long you been waiting to pull that one out? I remember saying Young was drafted as an SF first, which he was. This was also probably about 3 years ago, when he was obviously younger and before the game had completely shifted to Warriors ball. Clearly, he's a PF in today's game.

No. But you've always been keen to have inconsistent standards when it comes to defining where a guy is supposed to play. You simultaneously argued that Thad was an SF because of his size alone and that Turner was a two-guard because of his skill alone. It made no sense because using either standard consistently wouldn't support your view. When I kept bringing that up, you turtled into the phrase "natural three" and "natural two" with no desire to explain beyond repetition. Definitely the most surreal exchange we've had, and why I've been reluctant to get into discussions about positions since.

[Chinook]

First off, Bertans hardly has had opportunities and he's been a victim of the quick hook Pop gave Splitter for 2 years.

This isn't a remotely good comparison. Fuck, even Murray is a better comparison to Splitter than Davis is.


Second, do you not realize that every role player has as many bad games as good games on offense? That's why they are role players. That's why its imperative that role players can't be liabilities on defense because that's the one side of the floor that CAN be consistent -- which is invaluable.

Role players who are inconsistent (especially when the bad parts are abysmal) usually get inconsistent minutes to match. If we were just talking about Davis' shooting going up and down, that would be fine. We're not. We;re talking about Bertans making awful decisions on O combined with a tremendous lack of defensive aptitude. There's very little excuse for those when they happen. Pop has benched better players than Bertans for those lapses.


When Bertans gets the green light to play through mistakes and sees 16+ minutes a night he's averaging 11.8 points, 3.4 boards, .8 blocks on 52% shooting and 43% from 3. This is in 14 games... 14 of the 39 guys he's appeared in he's seen more than 16 minutes. 14 of the 39 games he's seen 5 minutes or less ( mop up duty only-- which is like zero opportunity).

More like, when Davis doesn't make those mistakes, he gets 16-plus minutes and has good stats. Again, if he were simply a good player getting inconsistent minutes, his rate stats between the 14 games you're highlighting and the other 25 wouldn't be nearly a factor of 2-to-1.

[TD 21]

Bertans wasn't even getting minutes in a rotation without Kawhi, yet you think Pop would look to give him Anderson's spot? Makes no sense. Pop will likely only have one designated shooter in the regular rotation, if that. If it's Forbes, it's likely not Bertans. Back in the olden days, Bryn being a guard and Davis a forward would matter, but it doesn't now with how many guys Pop has who can play the middle positions.



No. But you've always been keen to have inconsistent standards when it comes to defining where a guy is supposed to play. You simultaneously argued that Thad was an SF because of his size alone and that Turner was a two-guard because of his skill alone. It made no sense because using either standard consistently wouldn't support your view. When I kept bringing that up, you turtled into the phrase "natural three" and "natural two" with no desire to explain beyond repetition. Definitely the most surreal exchange we've had, and why I've been reluctant to get into discussions about positions since.

No, I don't . . . but there's still a better chance of that than him benching a veteran.

I did explain, by saying they were drafted as SF and SG first, respectively.

You've been reluctant to get into discussions period, which is ironic given how argumentative (and serious) you are.

[coachmac87]

If Bertans had a midrange game he’d play more..

[Chinook]

No, I don't . . . but there's still a better chance of that than him benching a veteran.

I guess. But there's no much of a chance of him making such a big change either way.


I did explain, by saying they were drafted as SF and SG first, respectively.

Even if that were true (which is probably wasn't), that would be pointless to a discussion four years into their careers in which they had already been playing in their current positions for a long time. The point wasn't that you believed what you believed. It's that you turtled and just kept repeating "natural position" like it was some self-evident standard.


You've been reluctant to get into discussions period, which is ironic given how argumentative (and serious) you are.

I've been posting at a rate like five times yours. I have little problem getting into discussions on topics that interest me (including enough with you that you seem weird making this point). I usually don't go for the doom and gloom threads where you do most of your work. So that might be biasing your view a bit.

[Chinook]

If Bertans had a midrange game he’d play more..

Bertans just needs a better BBIQ to play more. Otherwise, he'll just be a situational shooter. That's a fine role for him to play and master first, but some folks seem offended at the suggestion.

[pad300]

If Bertans had a midrange game he’d play more..


Bertans just needs a better BBIQ to play more. Otherwise, he'll just be a situational shooter. That's a fine role for him to play and master first, but some folks seem offended at the suggestion.

If'd he'd rebound, he'd play. But he's got a TRB% of 8.6 That's an SG, not a PF, stretch or not...

[Chinook]

Bruh, Bertans has high BBIQ. Whenever he is on the floor he usually makes the right switches on defense and can read screens and plays pretty well. Doesn’t mean he can execute at a high rate on defense. On offense he makes the right passes when he isn’t forcing because he has high bbiq.

Would love to see examples of how he doesn’t have high BBIQ

He doesn't and especially didn't do either of those to start the year. Just go back and read those game threads where everyone was pissed at Davis leaving guys open or turning it over.

[TD 21]

I guess. But there's no much of a chance of him making such a big change either way.



Even if that were true (which is probably wasn't), that would be pointless to a discussion four years into their careers in which they had already been playing in their current positions for a long time. The point wasn't that you believed what you believed. It's that you turtled and just kept repeating "natural position" like it was some self-evident standard.



I've been posting at a rate like five times yours. I have little problem getting into discussions on topics that interest me (including enough with you that you seem weird making this point). I usually don't go for the doom and gloom threads where you do most of your work. So that might be biasing your view a bit.

It was true and the fact that you're questioning it without having any knowledge of it is further proof of you being argumentative. No, the point was and is, it was their natural position. Then the game evolved and they, like many, moved up a position. End of story.

Nah, you rarely respond when I quote you, clearly trying to avoid a potential back and forth; the type I otherwise see you repeatedly flood the board with. Yeah, I do tend to post in the realistic, non blind faith threads.

[SAGirl]

Too good of a shooter to not be playing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DhvPA4ySc_Q

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3ounob3RVU

He had a good game as the 3rd big tonight. Still just the 1 rebound but whatever, I think he's in the rotation to stay.

[Mr. Body]

I'm stunned a guy that size can only get zero or one rebound a game.

[r0drig0lac]

amazing, some of us already knew their potential since Partizan, but it's good to see him put on the court by SA, his gravity is the most important, really opens the game to others players

[BillMc]

The "Who do you keep? Kyle, Davis or Forbes" question continues. As SAGirl and others have said, you can't keep shedding young (or relatively young) players. All three are RFAs, I'd be shocked if the Spurs manage to retain all 3. Davis still is the most likely to go, which would be a real shame.

[r0drig0lac]

The "Who do you keep? Kyle, Davis or Forbes" question continues. As SAGirl and others have said, you can't keep shedding young (or relatively young) players. All three are RFAs, I'd be shocked if the Spurs manage to retain all 3. Davis still is the most likely to go, which would be a real shame.

1- Davis
2- Kyle
3- Forbes

[cd021]

The "Who do you keep? Kyle, Davis or Forbes" question continues. As SAGirl and others have said, you can't keep shedding young (or relatively young) players. All three are RFAs, I'd be shocked if the Spurs manage to retain all 3. Davis still is the most likely to go, which would be a real shame.


1- Davis
2- Kyle
3- Forbes

Kyle is an actual RFA and most likely to be retained. Bertans is the clear second, imo, with Forbes coming in at a distant third. Even with Gay probably being retained, Kyle and Davis should be higher priorities.

[cd021]

Officially leading the team in 3pt % (51-120, 42.5 %)

[jermaine]

The way I see Cavs or GS sign their players to stay on top, I'd stop watching the Spurs if Davis or Anderson walks an the Spurs let them.

[MaNu4Tres]

The way I see Cavs or GS sign their players to stay on top, I'd stop watching the Spurs if Davis or Anderson walks an the Spurs let them.

Spurs would rather pay money for the past & pay 50 million for culture alone more than preserving money or paying money for the future.

Don't be surprised if they let Forbes & Kyle or Bertans go, so they can give Parker his 30 Mil 2 +1 deal.

And don't be surprised to see posters like Chinook, FkLA, and others to support it because it's "good value" compared to what FAs got paid in summer of 2016.

[wildbill2u]

Bertans is a great shooter. If he'd show more in more important games against better competition, there wouldn't be any questions about his relative value. Hitting 6 3s against a GS or Thunder would seriously cement his value IMO.

[Stabula]

Bertans is a great shooter. If he'd show more in more important games against better competition, there wouldn't be any questions about his relative value. Hitting 6 3s against a GS or Thunder would seriously cement his value IMO.

[Chinook]

It was true and the fact that you're questioning it without having any knowledge of it is further proof of you being argumentative. No, the point was and is, it was their natural position. Then the game evolved and they, like many, moved up a position. End of story.

Nah, you rarely respond when I quote you, clearly trying to avoid a potential back and forth; the type I otherwise see you repeatedly flood the board with. Yeah, I do tend to post in the realistic, non blind faith threads.

I'm not questioning it so much as dismissing it. Who cares? They have been drafted years in the past. Nevermind that you were using the "natural SF" argument to say that Young wouldn't have been part of the Spurs' big rotation had he been acquired. Draft position doesn't give some superseding natural order to a discussion about where a player fits on a roster.

First, you're saying that I am not inclined to discuss in general because I don't respond as much to you as you'd like. That sounds way too ceds-y for my taste. Sometimes things are worth discussing and sometimes they aren't. You don't even respond to people individually a lot of the time. You just mass quote a bunch of people and either go line by line or give the same reply to each. Don't see why you think everyone should pick through your mass post for things to reply to when you can't even type separate them for convenience.

And you're "realistic" in the same way Darius Bieber is.

[BackHome]

Why is Forbes name even coming up as us wanting to keep him. They need to ship him and Mills and get guys who can defend and just play ball they both suck so bad as many people say “Net Negative “

[dabom]

Nothing. We got Gay taking all the minutes and no garbage time this year.

Gay goes out and we get more Bertans. Always on point.

[LittleCriminal]

Gay goes out and we get more Bertans. Always on point.

and hopefully when gay comes back we get less Anderson, Bertans needs those minutes.

[dabom]

and hopefully when gay comes back we get less Anderson, Bertans needs those minutes.

Fathead should have never been drafted. :lol

[ace3g]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DTh_JUWU8AA2pCg.jpg:large

[Stabula]

Why is Forbes name even coming up as us wanting to keep him. They need to ship him and Mills and get guys who can defend and just play ball they both suck so bad as many people say “Net Negative “

Forbes is legit IMO

[LittleCriminal]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DTh_JUWU8AA2pCg.jpg:large

Lol wtf

[LittleCriminal]

https://i.pinimg.com/736x/14/0a/d3/140ad3f55439b54ba4cfce4e4efe5ec8--a-christmas-story-story-inspiration.jpg

[LittleCriminal]

Fathead should have never been drafted. :lol

I get why he was drafted but what I don't get is why he was drafted in the 1st round.

[SAGirl]

If he truly becomes a difference maker in the playoffs I think they keep him. You don’t just luck into a difference maker and then let him go. If he’s not a difference maker then it becomes unpredictable.

[dabom]

The thing about Bertans that I like is that he can drive if someone closes out on him. That opens things up for the passing game.

[LittleCriminal]

I know some 1 on the roster who is not a diffrence maker...

[TD 21]

I'm not questioning it so much as dismissing it. Who cares? They have been drafted years in the past. Nevermind that you were using the "natural SF" argument to say that Young wouldn't have been part of the Spurs' big rotation had he been acquired. Draft position doesn't give some superseding natural order to a discussion about where a player fits on a roster.

First, you're saying that I am not inclined to discuss in general because I don't respond as much to you as you'd like. That sounds way too ceds-y for my taste. Sometimes things are worth discussing and sometimes they aren't. You don't even respond to people individually a lot of the time. You just mass quote a bunch of people and either go line by line or give the same reply to each. Don't see why you think everyone should pick through your mass post for things to reply to when you can't even type separate them for convenience.

And you're "realistic" in the same way Darius Bieber (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=29744) is.

Definitely more questioning than dismissing. As I recall, the debate was about their natural position; I stated it and you proceeded to get upset because someone had the gall to question you.

:lmao I don't care when or how much you respond to me (difficult as it might be to believe, posters on message boards aren't exactly important to me), I was just pointing out the irony. I do respond to people individually even if I do multi-quote frequently.

I'm far more realistic than you blind faith types.

[BackHome]

Forbes is legit IMO
Yeah Legit On getting scored on his defense is terrible

[SPURt]

952549299119972353

[8FOR!3]

Ginobili and Bertans are the only bench players who have really earned minutes with their play as of late. Patty/Forbes/Kyle can switch off with the rest of the minutes, bc Ginobili/Gay/Bertans need to be apart of the rotation.

[SAGirl]

The "Who do you keep? Kyle, Davis or Forbes" question continues. As SAGirl and others have said, you can't keep shedding young (or relatively young) players. All three are RFAs, I'd be shocked if the Spurs manage to retain all 3. Davis still is the most likely to go, which would be a real shame.
Been thinking that with all this Kiwi supermax talk and cap issues, whoever can get more than a veteran minimum is going to be gone. At the most, maybe they can be convinced to sign a 1+1 deal. The players themselves may bear the brunt of this difficult market. But the less the Spurs can offer the more likely it is they are all gone. I don’t know how you can pay off Pau and Patty generously and then expect these guys to come back super cheap

The more the cap constraints are highlighted the more this becomes apparent. Any team can read the Spurs situation and take anyone they want from their RFA.

[spurraider21]

952549299119972353
my thoughts too but zach lowe's opinions dont carry much weight these days

[BillMc]

Been thinking that with all this Kiwi supermax talk and cap issues, whoever can get more than a veteran minimum is going to be gone. At the most, maybe they can be convinced to sign a 1+1 deal. The players themselves may bear the brunt of this difficult market. But the less the Spurs can offer the more likely it is they are all gone. I don’t know how you can pay off Pau and Patty generously and then expect these guys to come back super cheap

The more the cap constraints are highlighted the more this becomes apparent. Any team can read the Spurs situation and take anyone they want from their RFA.

My hunch is they keep 2 of 3, but I have no idea which 2 those are.

[SAGirl]

My hunch is they keep 2 of 3, but I have no idea which 2 those are.
I used to think that, but this supermax/cap issue and the Spurs current commitments lead me to believe they really can’t afford to pay them much, which just opens up the door for market situations to tip the scales away from the Spurs. Any other team can read the situation and steal whoever they want after they miss on other targets.

Their best bet might be to prioritize whoever it is that they really want from the 3 and aim to keep at least that guy. I think playoff performance likely tips the scales toward one guy, the rest are going to be really easy to steal.

Some team might get frisky and aim for Davis anyways. Got to be happy for him if that happens.

[Chinook]

Definitely more questioning than dismissing. As I recall, the debate was about their natural position; I stated it and you proceeded to get upset because someone had the gall to question you.

:lmao I don't care when or how much you respond to me (difficult as it might be to believe, posters on message boards aren't exactly important to me), I was just pointing out the irony. I do respond to people individually even if I do multi-quote frequently.

I'm far more realistic than you blind faith types.

The debate was about trading for them. No one cared about their "natural positions" but you. You made that term up and proceeded to not defend it.

There's no irony. I post all the time, plenty of it in response to people. I'm sorry you don't feel like I do it to you enough. I'll try harder.

You're realistic in the sense that you think team is going to fail every year. That's mostly true simply by the odds, but when the team is actually in the Finals, it gets old. More importantly, it's not interesting to discuss that over how the team would win if they do.

[TD 21]

The debate was about trading for them. No one cared about their "natural positions" but you. You made that term up and proceeded to not defend it.

There's no irony. I post all the time, plenty of it in response to people. I'm sorry you don't feel like I do it to you enough. I'll try harder.

You're realistic in the sense that you think team is going to fail every year. That's mostly true simply by the odds, but when the team is actually in the Finals, it gets old. More importantly, it's not interesting to discuss that over how the team would win if they do.

I don't remember the exact details, but I'm going to go out on a limb and guess I mentioned their natural positions because I felt it was relevant. I see you're now speaking for others.

There clearly is.

No, that's how you blind faith types spin it. I don't think they're going to fail every year so much as I've said they don't have a chance since '15. There's a difference. As a guy who always considers himself the smartest person in the room, you should know that.

[BackHome]

This team needs and identity they are caught between the past and present

1. Mills I love this guy but he is playing terrible I have no problem trading him.
2. Forbes every year we fall in love with some scrub player that everyone thinks is going to be our next starter. He is just like Mills undersized and a terrible defender which is not going to really help this team.
3. Tony I love this dude to many fans forget how good he was in his prime but he is well past that time hang it up Tony.
4. Bertans I like this kid only issue is he can’t rebound worth a shit but he can handle the ball has a freaking beautiful three ball and his mid game is better then what he has played.
5. Gay he started great but you could start to tell his injury was effecting his game would like him at the right price .
6. Green love him or hate him only he is the only SG in the league who can’t dribble a ball. Lol
7. Gasol WTF.........

[ace3g]

953293245181722631

953296464012333057

[ace3g]

Not the best headline by SaEN

Bertans hoping to put the ‘D’ in Davis

“It’s always been kind of a weakness for him,” Popovich said. “But he’s starting to figure out how to move his feet, how not to foul, and how to do his work early and get in position.”


“I just try to think more on defense,” Bertans said. “You can’t really improve much physically during the season or get quicker or faster. It’s just knowing the other players, their strengths and weaknesses and trying to play off of that.”

http://www.expressnews.com/spurs-nation/article/Spurs-notebook-Bertans-hoping-to-put-the-D-12502007.php#photo-14893571

[SAGirl]

953631262803152897

[ace3g]

954609464061190144

[jyra]

954609464061190144

[tholdren]

Not the best headline by SaEN

Bertans hoping to put the ‘D’ in Davis




http://www.expressnews.com/spurs-nation/article/Spurs-notebook-Bertans-hoping-to-put-the-D-12502007.php#photo-14893571

You cant get quicker or faster in the season? You play 12 mpg. Wtf. Bye strength coach

[FuzzyLumpkins]

You cant get quicker or faster in the season? You play 12 mpg. Wtf. Bye strength coach

Playing is the antithesis of allowing your body to recover after strength training particularly with a dynamic activity like basketball. It does sound like a good way to get injured.

[TheGreatYacht]

This flaming faggot is the complete opposite of good-to-great.

SOB has never seen a shot he didn't like. Too bad he doesn't have that problem with rebounds

[vander]

how is 1 for 8 even possible with that stroke? man he better not have any more games like this

[ElNono]

He's building Trump's wall, tbh...

[Ice009]

He seems like a chucker that throws up a lot of bad shots. Some of those shots are shots I'd see in my local gym with a guy jacking up a shot just because he could.

Another player that people overrated (good shooter, but the rest of his game sucks) that the Spurs should have tried hard to include in trade packages during free agency and the draft.

[jermaine]

Davis aint the best, but he's pretty damn good!!! No one makes every shot an everyone has bad games. Even that unicorn Curry!

[TheGreatYacht]

Get healthy, Rudy. It's not a coincidence the L streak happened when this scrub became part of the rotation

[MaNu4Tres]

Bertans has been pretty solid and consistent this year whenever he gets 15+ minutes.

It's all about opportunity.

Pop is slow as molasses to make the necessary personnel adjustments, so it doesn't surprise me to see how it took him 3 months to move Bertans ahead of Joffrey in the rotation.


Bertans has played over 16 minutes in only 14 games this year.

In these 14 games,

He's averaging 11.8 points. 3.4 boards .8 blocks on 52% shooting and 43% from three.

He needs consistent minutes.

Those quotes were from earlier this season.

Anyone know how Bertans has been doing lately?

I'll share it with you.

Over the past month Bertans is avg. 24 minutes per game in 13 games, averaging 11 points, 3 boards, .5 blocks on 45% shooting and 37% from 3.

It was all about the people in-front of him being healthy and playing well ( Kyle and Rudy). With Rudy and Kawhi out and off nights for LA/Pau, Bertans has finally been given consistent time. And its not surprise that his numbers are pretty consistent when he gets quality time, even if he makes a mistake here or there ( all players make mistakes).

Bertans is a real player. Has been all season. He just needed an opportunity.

[MultiTroll]

https://static.giantbomb.com/uploads/square_medium/0/5201/229734-ralphnose.jpg

Get healthy, Rudy. It's not a coincidence the L streak happened when this scrub became part of the rotation
Bertie has been given 30+ minutes a grand total of 4 times this season.
The Spurs are 3-1 in those games.

20+ minutes the Spurs are 10-5.

[Seventyniner]

Bertans is a real player. Has been all season. He just needed an opportunity.

It's one thing to be objectively good, and Bertans has shown that he would be a good 4th big in a rotation. But he has to beat out other guys when the team is healthy. Bertans being good doesn't mean Gay isn't better.

Bertans's poor rebounding and slight frame is a real liability the way this team is constructed, with plenty of minutes at the 5 available but tons of players competing for minutes at the 3 and 4 when Kawhi and Gay are healthy.

And 37% from three isn't good enough for a shooting specialist. League average is 36.1%. As SAGirl has pointed out, he seems to take too many contested shots and shots well behind the line so yeah, he's a better shooter than the numbers would indicate. But 37% is 37%, and I would like to see him work on his shot selection.

[DAF86]

It's one thing to be objectively good, and Bertans has shown that he would be a good 4th big in a rotation. But he has to beat out other guys when the team is healthy. Bertans being good doesn't mean Gay isn't better.

Bertans's poor rebounding and slight frame is a real liability the way this team is constructed, with plenty of minutes at the 5 available but tons of players competing for minutes at the 3 and 4 when Kawhi and Gay are healthy.

And 37% from three isn't good enough for a shooting specialist. League average is 36.1%. As SAGirl has pointed out, he seems to take too many contested shots and shots well behind the line so yeah, he's a better shooter than the numbers would indicate. But 37% is 37%, and I would like to see him work on his shot selection.

If Pop makes the moves he needs to make, there's space in the rotation for all 3 of Bertans, Gay and Anderson.

[SAGirl]

If Pop makes the moves he needs to make, there's space in the rotation for all 3 of Bertans, Gay and Anderson.

I hope Pop sees the light ...

I think I told you last month that I had stopped caring about hypothetical healthy rotations bc the team wasn't going to be healthy for a while and it ended up being prophetic (with really no desire to make it so... it's not like I was Robz4000 saying Kiwi would be out the entire season).

But yea, assuming a fully healthy team and everyone in tip top shape... Pop can make space for all 3 guys if he so wants. There are some guards who will lose some playing time and some like me are inclined to believe Pop has his pets that he needs to play. But I hope that isn't the case this year like MaNu4Tres argues.

[Seventyniner]

If Pop makes the moves he needs to make, there's space in the rotation for all 3 of Bertans, Gay and Anderson.

What moves do you mean? Do they involve Kawhi or Anderson playing some 2, splitting Aldridge and Pau to keep one on the court at all times, or playing one of those three guys at the 5 for short stints? If so then I guess you mean trading or benching Mills and benching Forbes, or extending the idea of "the rotation" past 10 players.

Gasol
Aldridge/Anderson/Bertans
Leonard/Gay
Green/Ginobili
Murray/Parker

Something like that?

[MaNu4Tres]

It's one thing to be objectively good, and Bertans has shown that he would be a good 4th big in a rotation. But he has to beat out other guys when the team is healthy. Bertans being good doesn't mean Gay isn't better.

Bertans's poor rebounding and slight frame is a real liability the way this team is constructed, with plenty of minutes at the 5 available but tons of players competing for minutes at the 3 and 4 when Kawhi and Gay are healthy.

And 37% from three isn't good enough for a shooting specialist. League average is 36.1%. As SAGirl has pointed out, he seems to take too many contested shots and shots well behind the line so yeah, he's a better shooter than the numbers would indicate. But 37% is 37%, and I would like to see him work on his shot selection.

When roster is whole, LaMarcus and Pau should be staggering all the minutes at the 5, with them starting 1st and 3rds together for first 4-5 minutes. If this happens, more minutes will open up for Kyle, Rudy, Bertans at the 4/ back up 3.

[spurraider21]

When roster is whole, LaMarcus and Pau should be staggering all the minutes at the 5, with them starting 1st and 3rds together for first 4-5 minutes. If this happens, more minutes will open up for Kyle, Rudy, Bertans at the 4/ back up 3.
that would certainly open things up, but i still think that position is too cluttered. going to be tough to get everybody meaningful minutes.

[DAF86]

What moves do you mean? Do they involve Kawhi or Anderson playing some 2, splitting Aldridge and Pau to keep one on the court at all times, or playing one of those three guys at the 5 for short stints? If so then I guess you mean trading or benching Mills and benching Forbes, or extending the idea of "the rotation" past 10 players.

Gasol
Aldridge/Anderson/Bertans
Leonard/Gay
Green/Ginobili
Murray/Parker

Something like that?

A pretty standard 10 man rotation of:

Murray, Green, Kawhi, Bertans, Aldridge

Mills or Parker (whoever is playing better), Manu, Anderson, Gay, Pau.

[MaNu4Tres]

that would certainly open things up, but i still think that position is too cluttered. going to be tough to get everybody meaningful minutes.

When it counts in the playoffs and when competition is tight, I highly doubt more than 9 guys will see more than 5 minutes. Not everyone will be getting time when it matters most.

[SAGirl]

A pretty standard 10 man rotation of:

Murray, Green, Kawhi, Bertans, Aldridge

Mills or Parker (whoever is playing better), Manu, Anderson, Gay, Pau.
Sounds good in paper...
Still it's a travesty to bench Pau and Kyle who have been stalwarts this season and rank among the top 3 players this year. Anderson is subservient to whatever Pop wants to do with him and when Kawhi comes back his minutes were going to go down drastically anyways, still I think he's going to be a factor this year. He has played well against GSW all the way back to last year. He's always streaky with his scoring but man the deflections and steals he gets on Durant, and co... you can't afford to lose that in the playoffs. I don't know how this ends up... but Kyle I think remains a factor for this team.. would not be above believing he starts instead of Bertans IMO.

[r0drig0lac]

What moves do you mean? Do they involve Kawhi or Anderson playing some 2, splitting Aldridge and Pau to keep one on the court at all times, or playing one of those three guys at the 5 for short stints? If so then I guess you mean trading or benching Mills and benching Forbes, or extending the idea of "the rotation" past 10 players.

Gasol
Aldridge/Anderson/Bertans
Leonard/Gay
Green/Ginobili
Murray/Parker

Something like that?
I think

Murray/Parker/Mills
Green/Manu/Mills
Kawhi/Kyle/Manu
Aldridge/Gay/Bertans
Gasol/Aldridge

[DAF86]

What's with the obsession of Keeping Pau on the starting lineup when we know that come playoffs time against the Rockets or Warriors we are going to have to get him come off the bench?