To all the idiots blaming Manu for Game 7; I bet you'd be upset to see Manu jump ship

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kidd K

I haven't looked this up yet (and it wouldn't be too hard to do I guess so I might soon), but I would not be the least bit surprised if Manu had the worst total +/- of the series for the Spurs by a large margin. Even with his game 5 really stopping it from dropping into oblivion.

---

He did, by far:
http://stats.nba.com/teamPlayers.htm...cope=&splits=Y

But when you look at the playoffs overall, he actually was top 3 positive for our team, pretty much tied with Duncan for #2 on +/-:

http://stats.nba.com/teamPlayers.htm...cope=&splits=Y

The reality is that Miami is a lot of notches above any other competition we had this postseason, and it's clear they focused on stopping our creators. Tony is young and had the speed to overcome it for stretches, but Manu did not.
On the other hand, when you look at the entire playoff run numbers, Manu was key to even get there. That will probably get lost in the mist of the Finals, but on this team, a Gino with his shot broken was still producing at peak rate for this team. On that note, Kawhi playoff run was phenomenal...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

He did, by far:
http://stats.nba.com/teamPlayers.htm...cope=&splits=Y

But when you look at the playoffs overall, he actually was top 3 positive for our team, pretty much tied with Duncan for #2 on +/-:

http://stats.nba.com/teamPlayers.htm...cope=&splits=Y

The reality is that Miami is a lot of notches above any other competition we had this postseason, and it's clear they focused on stopping our creators. Tony is young and had the speed to overcome it for stretches, but Manu did not.

On the other hand, when you look at the entire playoff run numbers, Manu was key to even get there. That will probably get lost in the mist of the Finals, but on this team, a Gino with his shot broken was still producing at peak rate for this team. On that note, Kawhi playoff run was phenomenal...

---

First round was irrelevant though, and that's where Ginobili got most of his postseason +/-. He did decent overall in the 2nd round (in +/-), but the Warriors weren't an elite team. It's kinda deceptive since his +/- got steadily worse as the postseason went along.

Manu's +/- against LA: +19, +19, +6, +9. So that's +53 total over 4 games)

Manu's +/- vs Warriors: +17, -7, +13, 0, +17, +10 (+50 total over 6 games)

Manu's +/- vs Grizzlies: +2, +2, +13, +8 (+29 total over 4 games)

Manu's +/- vs Heat: +3, -23, +6, -22, +19, -21, +6 (-32 over 7 games)

Slid down further and further as the playoffs went on, and completely dropped off in the Finals. You expect most guys' +/- will slide a bit, but the massive dropoff? Shit's crazy.

His +/- was by far the worst of the major Spur players in the Heat series too.
+/- of major minutes players vs Heat:

Timmy: +29 total, 252 minutes
Kawhi: +11 total, 255 1/2 minutes
Tony: +6 total, 246 1/2 minutes
Danny: +6 total, 248 minutes
Gary: -3 total, 171 minutes
Tiago: -7 total, 107 minutes
Manu: -32 total, 198 1/2 minutes


Manu was also the only Spur to get worse than -10 +/- 3 times. Only two other guys did it twice (Neal and Splitter). Of course, Manu's 3 -10s. . were actually all worse than -20. Three -20s in the same series.

As for being key to getting there, I don't really agree. He was pretty key in the Warriors series for a few of those games, but not in the Lakers series whom we stomped. . .or the Grizzlies series where he bagen to taper off and Duncan and Parker carried us.

I think we could've gotten past them with a good but not unrealistic repleacement player for him. Manu's not irreplaceable anymore like he was a couple years ago. He's declined so much we could replace him without really losing much of anything besides the new guy having to learn the system being the major hiccup. I'm all for being loyal and bringing him back, just not in the same role or for anywhere near what he's been gettin paid.

The main reason I'm down on this dude because he's supposed to be our 3rd best guy, but played the 5th most minutes and posted the worst +/-, including 3 of the worst +/-'s of the series. :( It isn't because I hate him or anything; he's been a favorite for me for nearly a decade.

Lastly with the stats. . .he only had two double figures +/-'s in the WCF and Finals combined, and a net total -3 +/- in WCF/Finals compared to +103 in the (comparatively) easy two rounds. -106 points worse in the last two rounds than the first two. :\ It's a really big drop.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kidd K

First round was irrelevant though, and that's where Ginobili got most of his postseason +/-. He did decent overall in the 2nd round (in +/-), but the Warriors weren't an elite team. It's kinda deceptive since his +/- got steadily worse as the postseason went along.

Manu's +/- against LA: +19, +19, +6, +9. So that's +53 total over 4 games)

Manu's +/- vs Warriors: +17, -7, +13, 0, +17, +10 (+50 total over 6 games)

Manu's +/- vs Grizzlies: +2, +2, +13, +8 (+29 total over 4 games)

Manu's +/- vs Heat: +3, -23, +6, -22, +19, -21, +6 (-32 over 7 games)

Slid down further and further as the playoffs went on, and completely dropped off in the Finals. You expect most guys' +/- will slide a bit, but the massive dropoff? Shit's crazy.

His +/- was by far the worst of the major Spur players in the Heat series too.
+/- of major minutes players vs Heat:

Timmy: +29 total, 252 minutes
Kawhi: +11 total, 255 1/2 minutes
Tony: +6 total, 246 1/2 minutes
Danny: +6 total, 248 minutes
Gary: -3 total, 171 minutes
Tiago: -7 total, 107 minutes
Manu: -32 total, 198 1/2 minutes


Manu was also the only Spur to get worse than -10 +/- 3 times. Only two other guys did it twice (Neal and Splitter). Of course, Manu's 3 -10s. . were actually all worse than -20. Three -20s in the same series.

As for being key to getting there, I don't really agree. He was pretty key in the Warriors series for a few of those games, but not in the Lakers series whom we stomped. . .or the Grizzlies series where he bagen to taper off and Duncan and Parker carried us.

I think we could've gotten past them with a good but not unrealistic repleacement player for him. Manu's not irreplaceable anymore like he was a couple years ago. He's declined so much we could replace him without really losing much of anything besides the new guy having to learn the system being the major hiccup. I'm all for being loyal and bringing him back, just not in the same role or for anywhere near what he's been gettin paid.

The main reason I'm down on this dude because he's supposed to be our 3rd best guy, but played the 5th most minutes and posted the worst +/-, including 3 of the worst +/-'s of the series. :( It isn't because I hate him or anything; he's been a favorite for me for nearly a decade.

Lastly with the stats. . .he only had two double figures +/-'s in the WCF and Finals combined, and a net total -3 +/- in WCF/Finals compared to +103 in the (comparatively) easy two rounds. -106 points worse in the last two rounds than the first two. :\ It's a really big drop.

---

:toast

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mouth is Bleeding

He runs the system morons.

We made the finals because we're a great team. No other team has this many assists, when the assisted baskets go down the Spurs lose. Manu is still (increasingly even) a chief system administrator creating team baskets over iso-ball (that also if you just use your brain a little bit means living with risk of more turnovers). The last two years this Spurs team would not be a serious contender without.

---

Last year I will give it to you! Yes! This year not so much.. He had some games but in some no doubt he hurt more than he helped with some riduculous TO's at key times in the game. He is not the only one who effed up I know but he was still key in it and was near the top of things that stand out. I have no clue how he got so bad so fast? He is older and years caught up I guess but last year he was just going for 30+ in the WCF a few times. I wish we had that Manu back.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Capt Bringdown

It seems that you've never been a fan of a team before, or have never seen your favorite player grow old.
All players grow old and ineffective. Manu has reached that point, the jury is in, there is no ambiguity, no equivocating. This year proved that he is not capable, for mental and physical reasons, to adapt his game to changing circumstances and conditions. In fact, that has always been his trademark: he always plays one way. Well, now that one way sucks and he's stuck on bad. This year we saw what he had left, we gambled on his abilities, and it cost us a ring.
He is no longer needed. To keep him is a liability. No more. No thanks.

To say that does not mean we do not appreciative his prior contributions, not at all. But it's time to move on.

I'm a Spurs fan first. Love the individual players, but for each there will be a time to go. That time is now for Manu.

---

This is a great post!

I do want Manu back for a year though at a cheaper cost and different role! I am fine with him on this team unless it is the role he was given this year and that is a no no.

if he plays for the Heat next year we may win the finals..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dallasmaverickslose

Without Manu we wouldn't have even gotten to the finals. Moron.

---

No...

We got there in spite of him this year.. What series did he even play well in??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kidd K

Splitter wasn't that neccessary in that series, so if he shat the bed it didn't matter. No one expected him to be a big piece. Manu on the other hand, we needed, and he didn't come through.

---

We didn't need Manu to be a big piece. As the finals went on, all he needed to do was to recognize that Miami's defense wasn't allowing his sloppy, forced passes and self-correct. Pretty simple. The fact that he was unwilling or unable to deal with this rather basic adjustment is the tell.

who wants to make a bet that i will be upset? i am willing to bet. put your money where you manuer love is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Capt Bringdown

We didn't need Manu to be a big piece. As the finals went on, all he needed to do was to recognize that Miami's defense wasn't allowing his sloppy, forced passes and self-correct. Pretty simple. The fact that he was unwilling or unable to deal with this rather basic adjustment is the tell.

---

We can't win a title without a significant scoring and ballhandling threat to Tony Parker. Manu can't fill the role anymore, so we need to bring someone new in while Duncan's still able to play at this level. Waiting, or just going to Manu who failed us each of the last two years (and has been unhealthy each of the last 4 years before that), would be dooming our team to not getting another title without tremendous luck.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by And1Mak

who wants to make a bet that i will be upset? i am willing to bet. put your money where you manuer love is.

---

I bet that no matter what someone bets you will feel, you will claim the opposite so you win the bet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kidd K

First round was irrelevant though, and that's where Ginobili got most of his postseason +/-. He did decent overall in the 2nd round (in +/-), but the Warriors weren't an elite team. It's kinda deceptive since his +/- got steadily worse as the postseason went along.

Manu's +/- against LA: +19, +19, +6, +9. So that's +53 total over 4 games)

Manu's +/- vs Warriors: +17, -7, +13, 0, +17, +10 (+50 total over 6 games)

Manu's +/- vs Grizzlies: +2, +2, +13, +8 (+25 total over 4 games) <-- +25 here

Manu's +/- vs Heat: +3, -23, +6, -22, +19, -21, +6 (-32 over 7 games)

---

What are you comparing against to say 'decent' or anything like that? TP was +3 overall for the entire Warrior series, basically a wash. He was +33 against the Grizz.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kidd K

Slid down further and further as the playoffs went on, and completely dropped off in the Finals. You expect most guys' +/- will slide a bit, but the massive dropoff? Shit's crazy.

...

---

His Finals dropoff was crazy bad. Completely agree.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kidd K

As for being key to getting there, I don't really agree. He was pretty key in the Warriors series for a few of those games, but not in the Lakers series whom we stomped. . .or the Grizzlies series where he bagen to taper off and Duncan and Parker carried us.

I think we could've gotten past them with a good but not unrealistic repleacement player for him. Manu's not irreplaceable anymore like he was a couple years ago. He's declined so much we could replace him without really losing much of anything besides the new guy having to learn the system being the major hiccup. I'm all for being loyal and bringing him back, just not in the same role or for anywhere near what he's been gettin paid.

---

That's silly. He was far and away the most productive player in the Warriors series, even with his shot broken.

http://stats.nba.com/teamPlayers.htm...cope=&splits=Y

Tony was +3 for the series, Timmy was -11 for the series. Danny Green was -30 (:wow). I didn't dig into the numbers until you brought this thread up, and it's pretty crazy actually.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kidd K

The main reason I'm down on this dude because he's supposed to be our 3rd best guy, but played the 5th most minutes and posted the worst +/-, including 3 of the worst +/-'s of the series. :( It isn't because I hate him or anything; he's been a favorite for me for nearly a decade.

---

I think at this age he's much easier to plan for. And he shat the bed in the Finals, which magnifies absolutely everything. Hit shot was broken almost all season, which didn't help either.

But I think he can bounce back and be an integral part as the #4 guy. Kawhi has come along well enough to be #3 going forward. With Manu my concern is more about health than anything else.

I won't shed a tear when he leaves

Best thing Manu can do is retire. Spurs don't need older players. Manu's salary can be better used elsewhere. End of conversation. Manu retiring would force the FO to really look at the FA market.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TrainOfThought5

is this real life?? people are saying "We need manu to make it to the finals?"

Need him to do what? seriously. Bad passes, clang 3's, and sit on the bench injured or half injured half the season for more money than another team would pay him??

seriously shed light on what we "NEED" manu for next year.

---

Brilliantly posted. I could NOT agree more.

scitzophrinic bastard choked away a championship

Disagree. Manu would be a great player to have for the right amount. People forget it takes at least 1-2 seasons for new players to make an impact in general in our system, and these Spurs might not have that much time left.

At the very least, I expect the Spurs to give him another year to take a good look at what he has left. Makes sense, too. Unless he wants to retire, that is.

Nono, Manus time here has effectively come to an end. he is no longer an asset to this franchise, except at a dollar amount that im sure he would consider insulting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

Disagree. Manu would be a great player to have for the right amount. People forget it takes at least 1-2 seasons for new players to make an impact in general in our system, and these Spurs might not have that much time left.

At the very least, I expect the Spurs to give him another year to take a good look at what he has left. Makes sense, too. Unless he wants to retire, that is.

---

Sure if he takes the vet's min.

It's going to be a long, long offseason...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bruno

It's going to be a long, long offseason...

---

Yup

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TrainOfThought5

Nono, Manus time here has effectively come to an end. he is no longer an asset to this franchise, except at a dollar amount that im sure he would consider insulting.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheGreatYacht

Sure if he takes the vet's min.

---

Disagree on both counts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

What are you comparing against to say 'decent' or anything like that? TP was +3 overall for the entire Warrior series, basically a wash. He was +33 against the Grizz.



His Finals dropoff was crazy bad. Completely agree.



That's silly. He was far and away the most productive player in the Warriors series, even with his shot broken.

http://stats.nba.com/teamPlayers.htm...cope=&splits=Y

Tony was +3 for the series, Timmy was -11 for the series. Danny Green was -30 (:wow). I didn't dig into the numbers until you brought this thread up, and it's pretty crazy actually.



I think at this age he's much easier to plan for. And he shat the bed in the Finals, which magnifies absolutely everything. Hit shot was broken almost all season, which didn't help either.

But I think he can bounce back and be an integral part as the #4 guy. Kawhi has come along well enough to be #3 going forward. With Manu my concern is more about health than anything else.

---

How is that a wash? TP was going toe to toe with the toughest lineups and players the Warriors had, while Manu always got 100% of the minutes against their worst lineups.

For example, game 3 against the Warriors, Parker players 35 minutes and scores 32 points on 57% FG% and 50$ 3pt% shooting with 5 boards and assists thrown in. His +/- was -6.

Manu played 27 1/2 minutes, scoring only 12 points with 5 boards and 4 assists. He had a +13 +/-.

Using the GameScore stat in addition to +/-, it begins to come clear how much more Parker was impacting the game. The stats are best when used together.

10.0 GameScore is considered "average". In 21 postseason games, Parker was below 10 5 times, once was 9.9, so basically 4 times. Only one of those four times was below 5.0 (4.5 the last game against the Warriors where he was hobbled with the calf injury and everyone was scaed he might've gone down for the postseason.). He cracked 20 GameScore 6 times, and almost got to 30 once (29.3, game 4 at Memphis)

Ginobili managed to crack 10 just 7 of 21 times. 3 of those 7 were barely at or above 10 (10, 10.8, 12.2). Only a single game with a GameScore over 20 (game 5 Finals, 21.0). Under 1.0 four times. Even under 0 once.
Here's a list of their total GameScores:

Parker vs Lakers: 73.3 (18.3 average)
Parker vs Warriors: 92.1 (15.35 average)
Parker vs Grizzlies: 80.5 (20.1 average)
Parker vs Heat: 78.3 (11.2 average)
Total: 324.2 (15.4 average, rounded down from 15.438)

Ginobili vs Lakers: 43.7 (10.9 average)
Ginobili vs Warriors: 58.8 (9.8 average)
Ginobili vs Grizzlies: 33.0 (8.25 average)
Ginobili vs Heat: 46.7 (6.67 average)
Total: 182.2 (8.7 average, rounded up from 8.676)

Long story short, Parker was keeping us afloat against the toughest runs by the opposing team. Manu rarely had to face it except when on the court with Tony and Timmy. And that's with Parker battling through the hamstring problem in the Finals, and the calf injury in the 2nd round. Tony had a much larger positive impact on every series than Manu did. Total difference being almost nearly double in Parker's favor even with battling through a couple injuries.

Manu didn't just shit the bed in the Finals, he was average in the first two rounds statistically and below average in the WCF then shit in the Finals. The average NBA player has a 10.0 GameScore and would have a positive +/- just by being on the Spurs. Now look at Manu's GameScore and +/-.

Yeah he shat the bed, but he wasn't some huge force in getting us there either. We need someone who can fill his role and do it better, we don't specifically need him anymore. He's not getting it done and he was steadily slipping the longer the postseason went. Meanwhile Parker stepped up his game against the Grizzlies and Duncan got stronger. Fuck even Green, Leonard, Diaw, and Neal all got better as the postseason went on. Everyone but Manu and Splitter.

Like I said, I'll take Manu back, but definitely not in the role he's been in. We need someone else, and technically we don't even need him anymore if we had someone else. But I'll take him back as an insurance policy and as a 2nd option off the bench rather than 1st.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kidd K

How is that a wash? TP was going toe to toe with the toughest lineups and players the Warriors had, while Manu always got 100% of the minutes against their worst lineups.

For example, game 3 against the Warriors, Parker players 35 minutes and scores 32 points on 57% FG% and 50$ 3pt% shooting with 5 boards and assists thrown in. His +/- was -6.

Manu played 27 1/2 minutes, scoring only 12 points with 5 boards and 4 assists. He had a +13 +/-.

---

What I mean by 'a wash' is that his overall production with him on the floor was basically zero (+3) for the series. And who they played against means absolutely nothing to the point I'm making: without Manu making a huge difference from the bench, I don't know we win that series, because the starters couldn't make the difference against their starters.

The individual numbers don't really matter, because Manu isn't just scoring for himself. He creates for guys like Tiago, and opens the game for guys like Neal to produce anything off the bench.
This is what people completely ignore about Manu's game, why they just think you can throw any player out there and get the same production from Tiago, Neal, etc. The 'commanding attention' factor.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kidd K

Using the GameScore stat in addition to +/-, it begins to come clear how much more Parker was impacting the game. The stats are best when used together.

...

---

I disagree, unless you're looking to establish individual production over lineup productions, which isn't my point at all. Gamescore is much more directly impacted by personal numbers. As a matter of fact, Gamescore and +/- have very little to do with one another at all. One is a stat that seeks to establish personal production (GameScore) and the other is a stat that gauges lineup combination (+/-). Individually, Manu didn't have a good playoff run. As part of lineup combos, he had a major impact on every series except the Finals.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kidd K

Long story short, Parker was keeping us afloat against the toughest runs by the opposing team. Manu rarely had to face it except when on the court with Tony and Timmy. And that's with Parker battling through the hamstring problem in the Finals, and the calf injury in the 2nd round. Tony had a much larger positive impact on every series than Manu did. Total difference being almost nearly double in Parker's favor even with battling through a couple injuries.

---

You're misconstruing what I'm saying. I didn't say Parker wasn't great or played any worse than Manu in any series. I'm stating that in the Warriors series we couldn't make the difference with our starters, even if they were playing absolutely great, and levels above than the bench guys. Simply because the other teams starters were matching that production. Take a look again at the +/- in the Warriors series, and it's the bench guys + Kawhi that completely put us over the top.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kidd K

Manu didn't just shit the bed in the Finals, he was average in the first two rounds statistically and below average in the WCF then shit in the Finals. The average NBA player has a 10.0 GameScore and would have a positive +/- just by being on the Spurs. Now look at Manu's GameScore and +/-.

---

I would've agreed with this with Manu's role a few years ago, where he looked more for his own individual numbers than trying to get everyone involved. Not this season though. Could he have put better individual numbers? Sure. But the Spurs needed production from other players than can't create anything for themselves, and by just playing Manu in the lineup with them, he made a huge difference. This is clearly reflected in the +/- numbers. Which personally I think also a part of the reason why the fall was so severe in the Finals... Manu individually was pretty bad, but all the other guys he created for were too. It was just a really bad combo that the Spurs couldn't exploit in that series.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kidd K

Yeah he shat the bed, but he wasn't some huge force in getting us there either. We need someone who can fill his role and do it better, we don't specifically need him anymore. He's not getting it done and he was steadily slipping the longer the postseason went. Meanwhile Parker stepped up his game against the Grizzlies and Duncan got stronger. Fuck even Green, Leonard, Diaw, and Neal all got better as the postseason went on. Everyone but Manu and Splitter.

---

Completely disagree with this too. I don't think you just throw CJ or DeColo in there and we get the same production from the bench. Actually, seeing both of them extensively during the season, I would argue we do not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kidd K

Like I said, I'll take Manu back, but definitely not in the role he's been in. We need someone else, and technically we don't even need him anymore if we had someone else. But I'll take him back as an insurance policy and as a 2nd option off the bench rather than 1st.

---

I have no problem with him with being option #1 off the bench at all, but he can't be the backup PG against certain teams that pressure the ball as much. I rather we get his offense off the ball, through screens, etc. But we need to have a solid ball handler for that, and another player that commands certain attention so Manu isn't the only person the other team's defense has to focus on. I also think his shooting in general was an aberration, and he can work his way into getting that back in serviceable form. He was damn bad on floaters all season long, a shot he hit at a high rate just a season ago.

But obviously, he has to decide to come back for that to happen.

In a way, I think we're somewhat at a similar juncture as we were with Tim a few seasons ago. You couldn't just throw stiffs (ie: Bonner) with Tim and expect him to keep carrying the load. He needed help, and Tiago and Kawhi provided that. And I think this is the same juncture with Manu. He needs some help, having other players commanding enough attention to help him open up his game, especially on that second unit, IMO.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kidd K

I bet that no matter what someone bets you will feel, you will claim the opposite so you win the bet.

---

no i promise on frabeezy

Manu played like a D leaguer in game 6(with apologies to CoJo). I blamed him for playing like a D leaguer in game 6, not for losing the game. He wasn't even on my radar in game 7. I was confident with what he was going to bring in that one. I won't be upset if he jumps ship. I would be upset if the Spurs gave him another contract and he decides to play summer ball anywhere else in the world. He's too old and beat up to play competition ball around the year. I do hope he comes back, but only if he's dedicated to the Spurs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

What I mean by 'a wash' is that his overall production with him on the floor was basically zero (+3) for the series. And who they played against means absolutely nothing to the point I'm making: without Manu making a huge difference from the bench, I don't know we win that series, because the starters couldn't make the difference against their starters.

---

It isn't a wash since Parker was doing a hell of a lot more work than Manu. Steph Curry was annihilating us and looking like the best player in the playoffs. Parker playing him even was a win in and of itself. You can't just brush his play under the rug, he was playing better than Manu. Their bench didn't have a lot as they ran their starters into the ground with minutes played. Manu had pretty much the most cushy role on the team. Play guys who don't play much or play tired guys.

Quote:

---

The individual numbers don't really matter, because Manu isn't just scoring for himself. He creates for guys like Tiago, and opens the game for guys like Neal to produce anything off the bench.
This is what people completely ignore about Manu's game, why they just think you can throw any player out there and get the same production from Tiago, Neal, etc. The 'commanding attention' factor.

---

Kind of a strawman there. Not that many people ignore Manu's playmaking. His playmaking isn't better than Parker's (though it's more aggressive and risky). I don't think "any" player can fill the role, that's why I said we needed to bring someone in. We don't have anyone else who can do it.

Quote:

---

I disagree, unless you're looking to establish individual production over lineup productions, which isn't my point at all. Gamescore is much more directly impacted by personal numbers. As a matter of fact, Gamescore and +/- have very little to do with one another at all. One is a stat that seeks to establish personal production (GameScore) and the other is a stat that gauges lineup combination (+/-). Individually, Manu didn't have a good playoff run. As part of lineup combos, he had a major impact on every series except the Finals.

---

They do go well together. We can look at a box score after a game and see that Matt Bonner has a +/- of +6, and that Parker has one of +2. Three times as good as Parker. Then you might think, hey Bonner helped the team more right~? Except he played 5 minutes and was 0-2, with no rebounds or assists. Meanwhile Parker had 32 points on 55% shooting, 7 assists and 4 rebounds and only 2 turnovers.

Parker wasn't magically "a wash" for the game, he was battling his ass off against the opposing team's best lineups, trying to stop runs and keep us in the game. The lineups that are trying to push the pace and beat you. Bonner got his minutes against the worst lineup on the floor and the Spurs happened to get a run in. +/- sometimes becomes a little deceptive when guys come off the bench and don't play as much as the starters. That's why looking at their GameScore is important too.

And I think you mean every series until after the 2nd round. He had a negative +/- in our sweep against the Grizzlies too, along with a still declining GameScore.

Quote:

---

You're misconstruing what I'm saying. I didn't say Parker wasn't great or played any worse than Manu in any series. I'm stating that in the Warriors series we couldn't make the difference with our starters, even if they were playing absolutely great, and levels above than the bench guys. Simply because the other teams starters were matching that production. Take a look again at the +/- in the Warriors series, and it's the bench guys + Kawhi that completely put us over the top.

---

Like I already said, the Warriors had a soft bench and ran their starters into the ground. I'm not surprised our team, who instead of stacking the top of their roster with stars looks to have a more balanced attack by having a better 2nd unit, that they did well against tired Warriors and guys who didn't get much playing time.

Quote:

---

I would've agreed with this with Manu's role a few years ago, where he looked more for his own individual numbers than trying to get everyone involved. Not this season though. Could he have put better individual numbers? Sure. But the Spurs needed production from other players than can't create anything for themselves, and by just playing Manu in the lineup with them, he made a huge difference. This is clearly reflected in the +/- numbers. Which personally I think also a part of the reason why the fall was so severe in the Finals... Manu individually was pretty bad, but all the other guys he created for were too. It was just a really bad combo that the Spurs couldn't exploit in that series.

---

So now you're blaming everyone else for not doing well? Don't break out the Kobefan argument man. :\ They couldn't do anything because Manu kept turning the ball over and being sloppy. He also had to go against a team with a good bench for once. Notice how as opposing team's benches got better, Manu started to look worse and worse in that role.

Quote:

---

Completely disagree with this too. I don't think you just throw CJ or DeColo in there and we get the same production from the bench. Actually, seeing both of them extensively during the season, I would argue we do not.

---

I didn't say Nando or Corey could replace Manu and get the same production. I'm saying we need to bring in someone like Jarret Jack or Nate Robinson to do it. The one time I mentioned that I'd rather use Joseph than Manu was game 6 (and I think that was in another thread). I've NEVER mentioned De Colo as a real option because I think he is a terrible player with no future. I have been listing De Colo as a bottom 3 worst Spur on the roster for nearly half a year.

Quote:

---

I have no problem with him with being option #1 off the bench at all, but he can't be the backup PG against certain teams that pressure the ball as much. I rather we get his offense off the ball, through screens, etc. But we need to have a solid ball handler for that, and another player that commands certain attention so Manu isn't the only person the other team's defense has to focus on. I also think his shooting in general was an aberration, and he can work his way into getting that back in serviceable form. He was damn bad on floaters all season long, a shot he hit at a high rate just a season ago.

But obviously, he has to decide to come back for that to happen.

---

I have a huge problem with it because he failed miserably at it when it mattered most. If we go deep into the playoffs with Ginobili as our primary backup ballhandler agaim, we will lose again and he will again be one of the main 2-3 reasons why. I'm also wanting him as our primary scoring option off the bench too since so much of his offensive game requires him having the ball.

The weirdest thing about Manu though is how off his shot was. Dude used to be a beast with shooting, now he's one of the worst shooters on the team besides our bigs. I always thought jumpshots never left shooters, but he's been bricking free throws and threes and rarely hits a stepback mid ranger anymore. Tony, Danny, and Gary are all better shooters now. Only Kawhi is less reliable but that may change if he works hard on it this offseason. Namely working on catching and shooting the ball faster. His catch and release takes so long. Dude has to be WIDE open to get a shot off. Similar to Manu actually, his shot is a tad slow. Neal, Green, and Parker can shoot from the inside of a matchbox.

I would really like Jack or Nate. Jack before Nate due to size and killer instinct. Nate is a bit of a joker and at times a chucker so it might not fly with Pop. Still, I think it'd be nice to have our 2nd unit come out and our backup PG will still ram the ball down your throat like Tony does. We could really have a high octane 2nd unit if we added a new PG (with Manu at SG).

The more I think about it, the more I feel it needs to happen tbh. Our team would be hugely upgraded if we had Nate Robinson or Jarret Jack.