-
Re: We should have signed Monte over Manu
Harping on whether he's missed the benchmark o 30 games or not is irrelevant to the actual issue. Yes, that poster was wrong to claim 30 games was incredibly common, but he has missed 20+ games in 3 of the last 5 years. 30+ twice, That's kind of a lot.
2003: Misses 13 games
2004: Misses 5 games
2005: Misses 8 games
2006: Misses 17 games
2007: Misses 7 games
2008: Misses 8 games and is significantly injured in the postseason
2009: Misses 38 games and is injured for (misses) the entire postseason.
2010: Misses 7 games, but also plays hurt for the first half of the year. Not injured in postseason, plays well.
2011: Only misses 2 games and plays well all season, but breaks his elbow last day of the season and plays hurt in playoffs
2012: Misses 32 games in a season with only 66 in it and plays hurt for most of the year anyway
2013: Misses 22 games and plays hurt for most of the year. Drops the ball in the playoffs, slowly getting worse with each series then dropping off a cliff in the Finals. Injuries? Or just bad now? I don't even know.
So he's missed at least 20% of the season 4 times in 11 years due to injury. 3 times in the last 5 years. One of the two times he didn't, he got hurt right at the end of the season and we lost in the first round.
He missed a total of 159 of 886 possible games. Or 18% of the time. He missed 101 of 394 games the last 5 seasons (25.6% of them). He was also playing hurt or missed the playoffs 3 to 4 times (depending on whether you want to excuse his poor play last year on injuries) in 11 years (or 27-36%of the time), and all of that is within the last 6 years (50-67%).
I'm sorry, but that's a lot of missed time, and a very unreliable health record in the postseason the past half dozen years. No one denies this guy was a big part of at least our last two titles, but the guy is always injured lately and been incredibly unreliable to just be healthy in the postseason and put up average Ginobili games for us. The odds are high that he won't. He's always been noticably hobbled or significantly injured in any of the last 5-6 seasons.
Of course, we're stuck with him for another couple years now. . .so there's no point in talking about what we should've done instead. Just hope that he plays better, because if he shits the bed again we can't win a title due to not signing any other legitimate playmakers or replacement SGs.
-
Re: We should have signed Monte over Manu
^ Silly stuff. When you take into account how many deep playoff runs we had those years (which the vast majority of NBA players don't go through), he more than made up for the 10 or so missed regular season games.
As a matter of fact, he's ranked #17 amongst all active players for total amount of games played since 2002-2003.
He only played 46 less games than Dirk in his NBA career, even though Dirk entered the league 4 seasons earlier. Lots of miles on those legs.
-
Re: We should have signed Monte over Manu
Last night's game:
- Mavs down 3 with just over a minute left
- Ellis has the ball the entire possession and ends up missing a stepback 3
- Nowitzki never touched the ball the entire possession
That alone is enough for me to consider OP's entire argument inane and pointless.
-
Re: We should have signed Monte over Manu
Quote:
Originally Posted by
PlayNando
One has to admit that Manu hasn't had any real severe injuries over the course of his career, at least. Considering all the injuries he's sustained, we're damned lucky he hasn't done something severe like tear an ACL or something.
Hi timvp. :toast
-
Re: We should have signed Monte over Manu
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Johnny RIngo
And yeah, any objective Spur fan knew Manu's recent contract was undeserved. He played at the level of a $4 mil/year player last year(massively overpaid considering he was making 14 mil) and he looks even worse this year. Sad thing is Ginobili hasn't even had his annual 30 game injury yet so expect much worse from him as the season progresses.
ESPECIALLY when he's coming off being the highest paid spur but played the worst out of anyone during the whole playoffs. don't know how anyone could fix their mouth to say he deserved that contract..
-
Re: We should have signed Monte over Manu
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Johnny RIngo
Monta's averaging 23 ppg on 47%. Manu's at 10 ppg on 42%. I wouldn't throw the word "volume shooter" around so carelessly when Manu's shooting has been much, much worse.
Do you not put assists, rebounds, and all around game in factor?
Ellis shoots way more = more shot opportunities. He averages less assists than Manu and Manu plays roughly half the time Monte does. Do you not want anyone else on the bench to score?
Fucking idiots man
-
Re: We should have signed Monte over Manu
Quote:
Originally Posted by
james evans
ESPECIALLY when he's coming off being the highest paid spur but played the worst out of anyone during the whole playoffs. don't know how anyone could fix their mouth to say he deserved that contract..
My name is James Evans and the only reason I post is to talk about something that happened five months ago. I literally have nothing else to do with my life or to talk about on these forums.
I like to throw one of the best players in our history of the sport under the bus by having a gif made by TGY, and other jokes on these forums, yet I wonder why no one takes me serious.
-
Re: We should have signed Monte over Manu
Quote:
Originally Posted by
PlayNando
Stupid thread is stupid per par. Monte is an overrated hero chucker.
So what he's shooting 47% from the field now? We're barely 1/10th through the season. SMH!
He's playing like an MVP dumbass. Do you even watch the NBA? You're just another manu apologist who can't handle that he's way over the hill.
-
Re: We should have signed Monte over Manu
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ElNono
I guess if we had Monta we would be 9-1.... instead of 9-1...
The spurs talk know it alls have to bitch about something.
-
Re: We should have signed Monte over Manu
Quote:
Originally Posted by
anakha
Last night's game:
- Mavs down 3 with just over a minute left
- Ellis has the ball the entire possession and ends up missing a stepback 3
- Nowitzki never touched the ball the entire possession
That alone is enough for me to consider OP's entire argument inane and pointless.
To be fair though, how many times did Duncan touch the ball when Turnobili kept throwing it to LeBron?
-
Re: We should have signed Monte over Manu
:pop: "Corporate knowledge"
-
Re: We should have signed Monte over Manu
-
Re: We should have signed Monte over Manu
At least I'm glad we didn't go for Josh Smith, like *some* people here whined about all summer (you know who you are)...
28 years old, also posting a 15.1 PER so far... talk about mailing it in :lol
-
Re: We should have signed Monte over Manu
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Spanklin
He's playing like an MVP dumbass. Do you even watch the NBA? You're just another manu apologist who can't handle that he's way over the hill.
Those are not MVP numbers, and MVPs don't play on .500 teams. Better than expected, yes.
By your math, Kevin Martin and Evan Turner are MVP-worthy too (with Aaron Afflalo not far behind!).
-
Re: We should have signed Monte over Manu
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Spanklin
He's playing like an MVP dumbass. Do you even watch the NBA? You're just another manu apologist who can't handle that he's way over the hill.
GTFO, scrub. We can talk about your hero chucker at the end if the season after he reveals himself. The wanker is useless. He does NOTHING except score.
Some STalkers are really dumb and can't see that there's more to being a good basketball player than scoring, so they overrate hero chuckers like Monte and Gary, per par.
-
Re: We should have signed Monte over Manu
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Johnny RIngo
Monta's averaging 23 ppg on 47%. Manu's at 10 ppg on 42%. I wouldn't throw the word "volume shooter" around so carelessly when Manu's shooting has been much, much worse.
Manu's shot looks terrible. He isn't right.
-
Re: We should have signed Monte over Manu
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Spanklin
He's playing like an MVP dumbass. Do you even watch the NBA? You're just another manu apologist who can't handle that he's way over the hill.
Nandouche is an idiot. Per par.
-
Re: We should have signed Monte over Manu
Quote:
Originally Posted by
N0 LyF3 ScRuB
My name is Low Lyfe Scum and the only reason I post is to divert attention away from what is happening NOW. I literally have nothing else to do with my life or to talk about on these forums except that Manu can do no wrong.
I like to blow one of the (formerly) best players in the history of the Spurs who now is completely washed up, and I do my best to distract people from that by lying and insulting those smarter than me, yet I wonder why no one takes me seriously.
I like to claim I ignore Skull-1 but I reference his remarks repeatedly.
I go to college.
Skull-1 is always correcting my poor grammar.
I go to college.
Fixed.
-
Re: We should have signed Monte over Manu
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Skull-1
TGY/Skull-1/James Evans is an idiot. Per par.
Fixed.
-
Re: We should have signed Monte over Manu
Quote:
Originally Posted by
PlayNandouche
I am a troll and a liar. I am stupid. Forgive me for being a douche.
Fixed.
-
Re: We should have signed Monte over Manu
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Skull-1
Fk me.
Fixed
-
Re: We should have signed Monte over Manu
If we were going for the hypos, I would take Iguodala as the first choice.
-
Re: We should have signed Monte over Manu
Quote:
Originally Posted by
PlayNando
I like to deflect all attention away from how shitty Manu was before we signed him for $30,000,000.00
The Church of Manu has spoken.
-
Re: We should have signed Monte over Manu
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Spanklin
The Church of Manu has spoken.
:toast :rollin