Is this guy really going to be demoted to a 10mpg role? The guy is a monster on the boards and an energy guy from the bench.
Thoughts?
Printable View
Is this guy really going to be demoted to a 10mpg role? The guy is a monster on the boards and an energy guy from the bench.
Thoughts?
Great Rebounder..... Good Energy..... But Is Horrible On Defensive Rotations....Seems to only Play Well When Manu Is On The floor Running the O....
To be honest, our interior D has been so bad overall for so long that it's hard to remember what is supposed to look like...
This just in...Pop is an idiot.
So yes, Blair could be demoted to a 10-minute per game role.
And Ian Mahinmi could sit on the bench or even be inactive for the entire year. And by the way, we're paying him for the entire year as well.
No because Bonner is playing...
I think im gonna be sick to my stomach. :pctoss
The latest obsession is with pairing one big who can stretch the floor with one post-up big, which is why we're seeing McDyess playing almost exclusively with Duncan and Blair almost exclusively with Bonner. Never mind the lack of a center-sized player and rim protection/shot blocking with that second pair and never mind about having two dominant rebounders/post-up scorers on the floor at once to punish the other team down low, it's all about being able to "stretch the floor". That outweighs everything for this coach. Not to compare the two front lines, but just as an example, do you think the Lakers give a shit about "spreading the floor" with their front line? No, they know that those three can punish teams down low and that's precisely their modus operandi. Not one is a great shooter (one can't even shoot with any distance), but none of it matters if you can dominate the game in the paint. Duncan rarely get's doubled anymore any way, so how much more space does he need to operate?
Don't get me wrong, I like McDyess with him more than any of the other bigs and in theory that makes some sense, but not to the point of exclusivity. As seen yesterday, despite Blair being the third best big on the roster, because the Spurs were playing an elite team and Duncan was going to be inevitably counted on for 36-38 minutes, that meant that Blair was bound to play only 10-12. Never mind the fact that he was highly productive in his first rotation, he still only played 10 minutes. Apparently attempting to work back in the struggling Bonner in the biggest game of the year to date (this loss essentially ended any chance of claiming the second seed), just for the threat of his making a couple of three's, was more important than playing superior talent, which also happened to be more productive.
I can't figure out why Blair didn't get more playing time either. It's not like the Nuggets have an army of skyscrapers.
Blair's future (as suggested by Sean Elliott) will be at the SF position. I hope he plays the summer league exclusively at the position and develops a consistent 15-20 foot jump shot. If he is successful with the transition he could become an all star. For now, he probably is best suited for 15 min per game. His size inside and inexperience will get exploited by the bigger teams if he is on the floor for longer stretches.
No chance Blair's future is at the SF position. If anything, he's more likely to play more C than SF. But let's face it, he should be strictly a PF. He lacks the lateral quickness to stay with face-up PF's, so there's no way he could go out to the perimeter to guard fleet footed SF's, who have superior ball skills. He'd be totally exposed off the dribble.Quote:
Originally Posted by dbestpro
What? When did he say that? I watch every game, because I'm local.Quote:
Originally Posted by dbestpro
DeJuan Blair will never make even a passable SF. He's relatively quick for a big, but as a SF, he could only be considered a plodder without a jumpshot. Even if he develops a jumper, it's never going to be that effective, because he's not going to be able to break people down off the dribble. Without that threat, you play him close.
Dejuan is a PF with room temperature defense. He can score in the paint against pretty much anyone, and rebound like a motherfucker. Don't fix what ain't broken.
conversely what small forward could stop him from posting up. Sean knows a thing or two about the sf position, so if he thinks Blair can do it then that's good enough for me.Quote:
Originally Posted by TD 21
As for the minutes against Denver, I'm sure Pop was matching up. If you play Bonner, you pull Birdman WAY away from the hoop and neutralize his shot blocking, especially in "help mode".
When did Sean say it?Quote:
Originally Posted by dbestpro
Sean spoke about it in a post game show about 10 games back.
Blair is clearly a PF. Are Davis, Powe, Maxiell, Smith, Diogu, Bass, Brand, Evans, or Millsap playing SF? They all have similar body types. The reality is in today's NBA, where speed, quickness, athleticism and shooting ability are at a premium, no one is going to play an undersized PF at SF. If anything, those guys play some undersized C, but never SF. The Jazz experimented with Millsap playing some SF a few years back, then quickly went away from it. Theoretically, he could have bullied SF's in the post too. But defensively, if you can't guard a position, then you can't play it. Offensively, Blair would have to be paired with a PF or C who was a perimeter threat, otherwise there would be a serious lack of outside shooting on the floor.Quote:
Originally Posted by dbestpro
I call BS. Sean never said that.
Maybe this is a better list to illustrate how unlikely it is that we ever see Blair play SF and what direction the NBA is going in: Smith, Diaw, Thomas, Odom, Harrington, Jeffries, Green, Lewis, Jamison. All players, with the exception of Diaw (SG), who broke into the NBA with their primary position being SF. Granted, again with the exception of Diaw, all were considered combo forwards, but PF was considered their second position. Now, the majority of them play almost exclusively PF. Blair playing SF would not only go against his strength's (while exposing his weaknesses), but would be the opposite of the direction the NBA is going in, which is smaller, rather than bigger.
lol @ Blair at SF. Not nearly enough quickness and speed, no midrange game. And tbh, I'll take Blair's D over Bonners any day, and his rebounding and inside presence over Bonners 3 point shooting as well. I don't understand what Pop's thinking bring Bonner as the first big off the bench, but I'm hoping its just cuz of health issues with DeJuan's knees that he doesn't want to risk by playing him big minutes
blair as a sf lmao
Blair should be the first big off the bench and Bonner should be cleaning toilets at the arena.
Plenty of effective undersized PF/C in the league... off the top of my head: Millsap, Hayes, Landry...
I thought we were past the whole "Duncan need a big that spreads the floor" myth while Bonner was out and TD was scoring as good as ever? Heck, I'm sure he appreciates somebody else sharing the rebounding load...Quote:
Originally Posted by TD 21
I'd rather him see the minutes than Bonner. His defense is questionable but more so on the rotations than just straight up D. He's already got 26 blocks which is Bonner's season total for last season so it's not like Bonner is a better shot swatter. And there's no question his rebounding is right there with some of the best in the league.Quote:
Originally Posted by ElNono
My only real complaint of him lately is that he seems to not hold the screen out on the perimeter long enough for the guards because he's trying to roll inside for the pass.
Guess you need to watch the post game show more often.Quote:
Originally Posted by benefactor
Actually, it's called slipping the screen (you never really set one) , and it's VERY effective (read:layup) when they double the ball handler, which they usually do with Manu or Tony.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice
At this point the Spurs should have a three headed beast of Duncan-Blair-McDyess, and that's not necessarily a slight to Bonner. I'd like Bonner and Ratliff to essentially split the left over minutes depending on matchups, but Blair should definitely be getting more than 15 MPG (last 3 games). Blair's defense can leave something to be desired (he's not the most observant on D), and Bonner's D tends to be underrated, but both are no more than average at keeping up with starting bigs (IMO). Neither equates to a seven footer in the mold of Przybilla, Haywood, or Rasho. Having said that, Blair may be undersized but his game is not. He's not 'perfect' next to Duncan and he's inexperienced, but he's more athletic than he looks, has great hands, and feel for the game in the paint ala Fabricio Oberto. In half of a NBA season (18 mpg, 20 starts and spotty minutes early on), at about 6'7 maybe, the 20 year old rook Blair has already blocked as many shots as Bonner did in his 1900+ minutes and 81 games of being our (sometimes) starting center last season. That's crazy. Using Per-36 minutes, Blair blocks 1.1 shots per game, which is serviceable for a Milsap-type power forward if you ask me (Bonner 0.7 this season per-36, career 0.6 ). Given that DeJuan is locked up to a multi-year deal and may have more of a finite career than most, I really hope he becomes our clear #2 or #3 big man like really soon (barring a major trade). Meaning, I hope he doesn't get the George Hill-09 treatment as the season goes on, that would be counterintuitive.
He never said it. Video or it didn't happen.Quote:
Originally Posted by dbestpro
I don't see how anyone can really say Blair only deserves 10 minutes. You have to find a way to get him on the court, especially when the team is lacking energy such as in the Denver game. Then you have to keep him on the floor when he has it going.
Quit trying to over think the match ups and let the kid play.
Blair will be a fine PF as long as he stays healthy. He's got the beef to keep his opponent from getting inside position. He'll have trouble with the taller guys shooting over him, but other than he'll be fine.
I think there is a chance that he can become a serviceable shot blocker. He has already shown some pretty good timing on a few blocks this year.Quote:
Originally Posted by tlongII
Chuck Hayes is around Blair's height but definitely not as heavy and they're both forward-centers. Hayes based his game from another undersized bigman - might be worth a look.
Once he gets some defense and a solid midrange shot he'll be even more of a force. He's also got great chemistry with Manu.
Manu and Blair on the pick and roll is a thing of beauty. They should run that play 15 times a game.
YES!! Release the KRAKEN!!!
I purposely left Hayes off because he's a non-scoring threat, unlike the rest of the guys I listed. As for Landry, I initially had him on the list before thinking better of it and removing him. The reality is he's supposedly a legit 6'9'', so he's not really an undersized power forward. 6'8'' or under is undersized.Quote:
Originally Posted by ElNono
You'd have thought so, huh? Apparently Pop thinks it's better for the 240 pound, 33-year old Duncan to not only battle behemoths who are either some combination of younger, more athletic, longer, or heavier, almost on a game-to-game basis, but to do so without the benefit of playing with another big man who plays like a traditional big man. Why would he want that? Granted, he is playing the majority of his minutes next to McDyess now, but he wasn't for much of the season and played almost exclusively with Bonner last year.Quote:
Originally Posted by ElNono
You make some very good points. I have no problem, in most games, where the Spurs are either up or playing a relatively even game in the first half, to see Pop throw Bonner in for a 6-9 minute rotation, let him eat up some minutes, rest Duncan and/or McDyess and hope he get's hot from the outside. Second half, assuming the game is tight either way, which it usually is with this team, a three man big rotation should be deployed. Those three are clearly the three best bigs on the team and amongst the top seven players on the team. Any of their minutes going to Bonner in those situations is irrational.Quote:
Originally Posted by SCdac
Unfortunately, I wouldn't be the least big surprised if Blair got the Hill treatment. It already looks like that's becoming the case as he's slowly but surely being phased out. Eventually, I suspect some time down the stretch Ratliff to take over the role of backup center, while Blair (and if he doesn't pick it up soon) Mason being phased out of the rotation.
Like everyone but Duncan and sometimes Parker, apparently he can't play for more than 9 minutes at the absolute most. And when he plays 9 minutes, that apparently means he can't play for the rest of the half. There's no thinking with this coach. Blair was playing well in his initial rotation against the Nuggets, so instead of getting him a quick blow and letting him finish the half, he barely plays at all the rest of the game.Quote:
Originally Posted by DPG21920
I tend to agree with the not over thinking the match-ups. The reality is, talent-wise Blair is already top seven on this team. Production-wise he's even higher. This team isn't overflowing with talent at the big positions and because of the age of Duncan and McDyess, they can't play extended minutes every game, which is all the more reason to play Blair more.
Says you, which don't mean any more than says me except I don't post BS. So it happened, I heard him say it and if you don't like it so what?Quote:
Originally Posted by benefactor
Who cares if Sean said it anyway? He isn't going to play small forward unless we are ahead by 25pts and Pop decides to play him with Ratliff, Haislip, Mahimi and Mason...and at that point he will be a SG anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by dbestpro
Even with all the new players. Pop has pretty much made this team with the same roster as last year and we all know how well that turned out. Dammit...
Great post. I suggest making multiple paragraphs for your longer thoughts, but other than that the takes in this post are spot on. Great job. :tuQuote:
Originally Posted by SCdac
Blair is a poor defender and that's why he is more suited to be the 4th bigman who bring energy for 15mpg.
He also need to improve his FT%. If eh continue to be that bad at the line, I can see teams doing "hack a Blair" during the playoffs which would force Pop to put him out of the game.
We didn't have a healthy Manu for the playoffs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chomag
------------------------------------
McDyess has been playing well recently. I'd still like to see Blair get 20 minutes a game. Timmy averaged 34 minutes a game in January. That is way too much. Blair's no Timmy but playing him more than 15 minutes a game would be beneficial long term.
I think he'd suck at that too.Quote:
Originally Posted by baseline bum
What about the whole "Gingers are good at cleaning toilets" stereotype?Quote:
Originally Posted by Buddy Holly
Outside of Duncan, so far, who has been better? McDyess is supposed to be better, and he's starting to show some light, but so far this season Blair has been flat out better than the rest (and that really tells you how poor our interior D has been overall).Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruno
Same goes for McDyess... Blair is at 60%, Dice is at 69%. And I'm thinking playing Blair midway through games, which reduces the possibility of such tactics. I still want a more experienced player to close out the game alongside Tim.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruno
Being better than crap doesn't make you good.Quote:
Originally Posted by ElNono
And there is a reason why half of my posts have been lately about Spurs needing to trade for a quality defensive bigman. Blair isn't the answer, a trade is the answer.
Blair FT% is 51.2% and I guess you don't know what "hack a player" is if you think it's a tactic for the end of the game.Quote:
Originally Posted by ElNono
Don't disagree with that. However, this is the roster we have right now. With this roster, right now, do you agree he's the 2nd best big in the team?Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruno
Dice is 62%.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruno
I know what 'hack a player' is, and I know you can't use it in the last 2 minutes of the game. I also know that you don't want to foul repeatedly and get in the penalty early in a quarter either. This is basic basketball stuff, and you know it as well as I do.
Blair gets abused by back screen cuts. Duncan is not quick enough anymore to cover that area.
Teams have a field day when they figure that out and have exploited that weakness.
But who else on the team can guard that aspect while on defense. Horry was the last person who could defend well in that area. It also happens to be the last time the team won a championship.
Blair is not Horry. And Bonner is the closest thing to Horry this team has.
If Blair could be paired with someone that could defend the weak side like Horry used to...perhaps Blairs minutes will be attributed to how many minutes Duncan is going to play.
Ian Mahinmi says hi.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpurNation
Offensively, yes. On the defensive side of the ball, not even close. Horry could bang up with bigs, experienced enough to poke balls all the time, and occasionally soar to block a shot.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpurNation
Now, I fully expect zosa to show up and claim I'm a Bonner hater, but the reality is that the FO has been trying to find somebody to play next to Duncan since last season (Gooden, Dice). Matt should be serviceable coming from the bench, and that's about it. At this point, I also think Blair should be an energy guy off the bench and I agree that we should keep on looking for another big on the market.
Thanks to Bonner, Blair is is seeing reduced minutes. I'm sorry but the Bonner experiment IMO is over. It should have never started. In order for that too work he needs to shoot lights out, but it's too risky to leave him out throwing brick after brick. Blair is not going to get those long rebounds. He's a better clean up player than Bonner is a long range shooter. I agree that Bonner and Ratliff should split the minutes after TD, DB, and Dice. Bonner is no Horry, who at least could do other things like defend and knock people on their ass. Bonner gets a broken hand by getting high-fived?!:(
Spurs have lost their grind it out game, so they may as well just play high energy and hold on to leads. Spurs are missing a junk yard dog type of player like Bowen. So yes.. free the Beast!!
At least you make sense, unlike senseless Bonner haters who say he is counter productive and tons of other bullshit.Quote:
Originally Posted by ElNono
If McDyess continues to play like he did lately, he is better than Blair.Quote:
Originally Posted by ElNono
I agree that with Spurs' current roster, Blair deserves more than 15mpg but I also think that with Spurs current crop of bigmen, Spurs aren't contender.
Now, If Spurs do nothing at the trade deadline, I will have nothing against giving 25-30mpg to Blair. It likely won't work but it's not like giving more minutes to Ratliff or Bonner has a better chance to work.
I agree with you. What I was eluding to was that Bonner on defense in the post...though not even close to Horry...is still better than Blair.Quote:
Originally Posted by ElNono
It's a catch 22 situation. Blair can rebound like no other on the team except for maybe Duncan. But he is horrific in defending the post.
Does Blair's rebound ratio make up for his lack of defensive ability? I'm not sure. But Bonner's defense in the low post is better than Blair's...so do less points allowed in the paint outweigh the rebounds Blair might garnish?
If Bonner is hitting his shots...I would say yes.
No doubt. Agree with the rest of your post.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruno
Blair is simply getting the Pop rookie treatment. Look at what situation it took for Hill to get a spot in the rotation come playoffs.. Blair's minutes dropping off must be expected.
I'm not sold in that Bonner's defense in the post is really that much better than Blair. I think they're both pretty catastrophic. They both play hard, but neither can really contain the bigger guys. Also, as already pointed out, Blair is starting to show a knack for blocking shots, which is a good sign. He flat out can rebound misses and prevent second chance points, which to me is much more important than whatever points Bonner is going to give you (around 8 ppg?).Quote:
Originally Posted by SpurNation
Plus you still don't know what Blair's ceiling is... on the other hand, Matt is not going to give you more than what he has so far.
In the end, we're not contenders if either has to start. But I still take Blair off the bench ahead of Matt...
Bonner sticking his hands straight up in the air isn't exactly playing "good" D. He's taller than Blair, that's about it. He's got no fire in his gut, that's the biggest difference. Bonner has more range than Blair on the offensive side, that's his advantage, unless he's bricking those shots of course.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpurNation
Bonner is nowhere the rebounder Blair is, but I think the Spurs need his ability to shoot from the outside. If Bonner is hitting his shots he becomes a pretty important piece to the puzzle. If I'm Pop I'm distributing the 96 minutes of center/pf time with 36 minutes to Tim, 20 minutes each to Bonner, Blair, McDyess.
Of course I'd of loved to see what Ian could do too, but it appears Pop isn't willing to try to work him into the fold.
Yep, I would not be surpised to see Blair gets DNP's towards the last half of the season such as with Hill last season. Pop is still in control here after all...Quote:
Originally Posted by z0sa
I don't think we will ever know what Pop's hang ups are with rookies.
IMO , I think somewhere along the line...maybe the `06 Mavs series...Pop became obsessed with ``Matching Up''...
since then, I believe Pop has lost sight of who the spurs are..and became worried about what the other team is running...
used to be the spurs imposed their will and ---win or lose-- the game usually came down to a few possessions of lockdown defense to decide games---with the spurs playing their best PLAYERS---
now..it is not the best players on the floor---it is the best MATCHUPS---but by matchups--it is matching up to what the other team is doing.
Blair, Hill, are players (Hairston could be one-but will never get a chance)...and players need to play...they have done this their whole lives and excelled...
if they are thrown out there and allowed to play,to make mistakes, to get comfortable---they will begin to play as they always have...
Bonner is a possible bench energy guy, and every minute he is on the floor ---he is robbing a player of a chance...
but Pop is in charge ---we aren't..so if Pop does not prove us all wrong and is still a genius--and the Spurs win the title...
then i guess this season is gonna be really (more) frustrating to endure...
my two cents...