Pop can't coach backup point guards

[K-State Spur]

Steve Kerr was not past his prime when he joined the Spurs in 1999. He was 33 years old. His first time with the Spurs was painful to watch and he only regained his career through his time in Portland. His heroics in Dallas during his second stint were a direct result of his time in Portland not in San Antonio. And Remember, he only even played in that game bacause Tony got so sick.

Anthony Carter was declared useless and bought out by the Spurs 2003 and he is still playing in 2009 in the NBA logging 24 MPG.

Where is the thread saying Pop can't coach big men not named Duncan and Robinson? There has been just as much of a turnstile for those guys as for back-up PG's. Rasho-Nazr-Butler-Elson-Oberto-Bonner-Thomas. Maybe Pop simply can't coach average players.

33 is past prime for every guard in the history of the league with very few exceptions. As it was, most of his issues were with being asked to play a different role than he had in Chicago. What did he regain in Portland? His numbers that season were almost exactly the same as his numbers the year before and after...both in San Antonio.

And Anthony Carter received regular minutes as the back-up, he was just terrible with them. I don't know what he found after that to make him a league average player now, but he didn't have it then - or in his next two stops after SA.

[timvp]

To cover some broad points in this thread:

1. Jacque Vaughn can't be used as proof that Pop can coach backup point guards. JV has mostly been in an emergency third string role while with the Spurs. He, like every other backup PG, lost his job for stretches during the 2007 playoffs. The next year he lost his backup job for good. He's actually an example of Pop not really knowing what he wants from his backup point guard. He'll praise JV like he's the son of the basketball god ... and then bench him for there months a couple days later.

2. I don't think Hill is just benched until Manu comes back. Unless Manu is out for longer than is reported, why risk the confidence of your rookie backup point guard? Especially because Hill's main problem is a lack of assertiveness on offense. A demotion would, with most players, hurt rather than help.

3. I disagree that Pop needs to take a look at Mason's point guard skills prior to the playoffs. It's already obvious what he can do at that position -- not to mention that Mason already has started multiple games at PG. And Pop has a history of not caring about regular season experience at a position when making moves in the playoffs. Manu has played backup point in the playoffs after playing zero backup point guard minutes in the regular season. Barry went from shooting guard to point guard at the end of the 2005 Finals without Pop seeing him do it much prior to that point. (I would mention Finley at power forward in 2006 but that's too painful.)

Overall, I actually think Mason would make a good backup point guard. My wishing of Hill to be in the rotation isn't because I think Mason can't hack it. I actually mostly like what I see from him. But, like I said, I think he can play a similar role from the shooting guard position. Pop has plays for Manu to run pick-and-rolls so it's not like the offense is unable to handle pick-and-rolls initiated by the shooting guard.

Rather than anything negative towards Mason, it's more that I think Hill can help. And I don't like the idea of opening the door for more minutes from Finley and opening a door for Udoka to get the "we need a spark" role.

4. The Spurs have had some bad backup point guards over the years but they haven't been as bad as they've looked in Pop's system. Even old decrepit players like Stoudamire, Van Exel and Ward were somewhat useful in their previous stop. It can't be a coincidence that their careers all died the second the plane landed in San Antonio.

And cheapness isn't really a factor. Kerr was paid well. Porter was paid well. AD was paid well. Beno was on a rookie contract but he showed this summer that his actual value was much higher. Even a player like Jason Hart has gone on and gotten a decent amount of money throughout his career.

If Hill became a free agent this summer, he'd get quality offers. So equating contract value to playing ability doesn't make much sense in this situation. It's not like Pop has groomed backup point guards and then saw them leave after they blossomed. The opposite has mostly been true. The backup point guards have left with almost no value ... only to increase their value elsewhere (Beno, AD, Hart, AC, etc.)

5. Some are trying to broaden the scope of my complaint about Pop but I don't agree. He has a history of giving charity minutes to swingmen. Hedo did nothing to earn a starting job in 2004, yet Pop stuck by him through thick and thin. Pop never really liked Barry but it's not like he ever made it impossible for Barry to be part of the rotation. How many lives has he given Finley? Devin got his chances. Jack went from nothing to starter. The list of swingmen Pop has coddled can go on and on.

Same with bigmen. He got Nazr to play his best stretch of basketball in his career. He knew exactly how to coach Horry. He believed in Malik Rose when no one else did. He turned Rasho into a borderline great defender. The Spurs won a championship with the tag-team duo of Oberto and Elson ... possibly the worst pair of centers to ever win a championship.

So yeah, I only see this problem at the backup point guard position. You'd have to fight that battle on your own if you are trying to stretch my criticism to insinuate that Pop can't coach any bench players or coach any young players.

6. While Hill has regressed as of late and has definitely hit the rookie wall, I don't see how benching him and taking him out of the mix will help that. Every minute he gets on the court improves the likelihood that he'll be able to help during the playoffs. A player like Mason will play the same way at point guard whether or not he gets the job now or at some point in the first round. And honestly, the less scouting time the opposition has to figure out Mason's weaknesses, the better.

Playing time for Hill is extremely valuable at this point. Defensively, you have to play to be able to truly figure out player tendencies. Offensively, he needs to be a part of the rotation to figure out his niche as the team hopefully makes its stretch drive.

I wouldn't mind even Beno-style tough love. If you remember correctly, a lot of the time Beno would play in the first half and then after sucking Pop would go with someone else in the second half. Doing it that way at least gives Hill a chance. Being ready to serve Hill up with a DNP-CD against the Suns is even less trust than Pop showed Beno.

The bottomline is that playing Hill right now does nothing but help. The upside is you have a long, athletic, versatile defender who also draws fouls at a fantastic rate as the backup point guard. The downside is that Hill doesn't bounce back in time for the playoffs. Even in the downside scenario, letting Manu or Mason run the show in the 10 or so minutes Parker will rest in the playoffs is basically a plug-and-play option.

Playing Hill right now as the backup point can only help in the short term and the long term. But, as is always the case, Pop has a blind spot when it comes to handling backup point guards.

[timvp]

He's a Really Really undersized 2 who Pop is trying to make him transition to the 1 where he will be an oversized 1.

Don't really agree. Hill has all the tools needed to be a quality point guard. He can handle the ball well. He doesn't fold against pressure. He can defend the position. He's a willing passer. The only thing I see lacking from him is confidence and aggressiveness ... which have been his weaknesses from Day 1.

But when he's playing confidently and aggressively, he does everything needed from a point guard ... especially a point guard for a team that runs a low post oriented motion offense.

For example, he's more of a point guard than players like Pargo or Eddie House. Even compared to Beno, Hill might be more of a point guard.

[Spurs Brazil]

From what I see from Pop all those years I think Hill will have a lot of DNP-CDs in the playoffs.

Finley and Mason will start, Manu will replace Mason, who will replace Parker.

Hill D is very good but Pop just doesn't trust in his O

[xtremesteven33]

Good post from TIMVP but i still think that Hill is our backup PG and that Pop is just trying to see different options.

I dont think Hill has done so horribly that Pop would just totally not play him. We all know that as long as you can play good defense you will get minutes in the Spurs system. Hill plays good (borderline GREAT defense) when hes on the court. And i know the coaching staff knows this and i highly doubt they will can Hills minutes.

[K-State Spur]

4. The Spurs have had some bad backup point guards over the years but they haven't been as bad as they've looked in Pop's system. Even old decrepit players like Stoudamire, Van Exel and Ward were somewhat useful in their previous stop. It can't be a coincidence that their careers all died the second the plane landed in San Antonio.

I still really disagree with this point.

Stoudamire hadn't been good in 3 years, and that was getting regular minutes on a bad team.

Van Exel posted almost the exact same per-minute numbers in San Antonio that he did his previous 2 years in Portland & GS. We may remember him for still being a threat with Dallas, but that was 3 years before the Spurs were able to sign him.

Outside of being just flat out terrible in the playoffs that year, he was basically everything that the Spurs should have been able to expect - although many of us hoped for more.

Ward had more bad years than good years in his career. He was worse here than he had been in NY, but since he came in mid-season and had to adjust on the fly, some drop-off should have been accepted.

[rogcl1]

I do agree that I think it is important for Hill to get minutes now. I also believe though that on a team preparing for a champiomship run that it is hard to play him at the point at times when he plays with the lack of agression that he has lately. Hopefully Pop is trying to get him some time by playing him some at the 2. I do not claim to know all things. But yes , I do want him to get minutes as much as possible. As I said ,I do not always agree with Pops decisions but I certainly respect them.
I do disagree with you on Van Excel and Stoudamire. I think they were basically done when they got here. Correct me if I am wrong, but did either of them contribute anywhere after they left here?
Another stop gap backup that I thought did OK in a limited situation when called on was Hart and he also had a job after he left here.

[vander]

EPIC Fail

They won 3 rings playing together like 30 minutes and now they overlap?

Just let your Manu hate/TP homerism go and maybe you'll understand the Spurs system better...

wow, you are like... NEVER right about anything
manu hardly ever plays 30 minutes, let alone 30 with TP.

why do you think manu off the bench has always led to more success for the spurs? because TP and Manu are getting split up: for the first 6 minutes it's TP's show, then Manu comes in and it's his.

and that post wasn't even a dig on manu, I was praising him as our second best PG/Creator of offense, but you only saw what you wanted to see

[Bruno]

I still really disagree with this point.

Stoudamire hadn't been good in 3 years, and that was getting regular minutes on a bad team.

Van Exel posted almost the exact same per-minute numbers in San Antonio that he did his previous 2 years in Portland & GS. We may remember him for still being a threat with Dallas, but that was 3 years before the Spurs were able to sign him.

Outside of being just flat out terrible in the playoffs that year, he was basically everything that the Spurs should have been able to expect - although many of us hoped for more.

Ward had more bad years than good years in his career. He was worse here than he had been in NY, but since he came in mid-season and had to adjust on the fly, some drop-off should have been accepted.

100% agree.

Stoudamire was quite done when Spurs signed him. The best proof of that is that he tried to play this year without success. He had a workout for Phoenix and they choose Dee Brown over him.
NVE wasn't that bad before he injured his wrist. I guess the fact that Pop can't coach PG is the reason of this injury...

Since 2003, Spurs backup PGs have been damn limited (Hart, Carter, Vaughn), done (Ward, Stoudamire), injured (NVE) or a Diva (Beno). Pop hasn't been able to turn lead into gold but it doesn't mean that he can't coach backup PGs.

[Fabbs]

I still really disagree with this point.

Stoudamire hadn't been good in 3 years, and that was getting regular minutes on a bad team.

Van Exel posted almost the exact same per-minute numbers in San Antonio that he did his previous 2 years in Portland & GS. We may remember him for still being a threat with Dallas, but that was 3 years before the Spurs were able to sign him.

Outside of being just flat out terrible in the playoffs that year, he was basically everything that the Spurs should have been able to expect - although many of us hoped for more.

Ward had more bad years than good years in his career. He was worse here than he had been in NY, but since he came in mid-season and had to adjust on the fly, some drop-off should have been accepted.

Stoudimire came in and was doing really well. Distributing the ball, taking timely shots and making most of them. Timvp chronicled and i think it was (or became) common knowledge that Popped ordered him to shoot more, wayy more like almost Michael Finley type chucking more. Stoudamire complied and it screwed up his game. Remember that Timvp?

Meddling control freak who orders a player to change just so he can show who is in control is what it appears with the backup pgs. And now are we going to see the same thing with Hill?

As to Van Ex getting minutes and sucking, whose idea to sign him and who sent and left him in the game(s)? Popped.

[GSH]

I understand the rant. I'll throw in my 2 cents:

When they finally got to interview Pop about Drew Gooden coming to the team, one of the first things Pop said about him was, "He's a professional." That's a recurring theme with Pop. He places extremely high value on experience - guys who have "seen it all before". Especially in the latter part of the season and the playoffs. Tony Parker was a notable exception, but then again Pop didn't have much choice those first couple of years. Even so, for all the talk of Pop and Tony's special relationship, Pop would have brought in Jason Kidd in a heartbeat. That should tell you something about where George Hill stands.

Pop has also made it more clear than ever that they have 3 stars on the team, and everyone else has to fill a gap in the system. He's not looking for any skills in those positions, other than the ability and willingness to fill that gap. Think about it: Don Nelson will look at any group of 5 guys, figure out what he has, and fit them into a scheme. Pop's style is almost the exact opposite. A player who brings "something extra" doesn't add value, because something extra means something different. Pop will accept a guy with lesser (or aging) skills, if he believes that player executes the system more precisely. Under Pop, a backup PG is not a subs ute star - they Spurs have exactly 3 of those.

My guess is that Mason's experience (professionalism? age?) outweigh Hill's better ball-handling skills and speed, in Pop's mind. Pop looks for someone he can depend on in a crunch, and Hill has hit a rough patch lately. But I also think that Hill's defensive performance against Nash has pushed him back nearer the front of Pop's mental list. Because if there is one trait that fills the gaps in Pop's system, it's defense. Maybe, to some degree, he will start to think of Hill a little bit the way he learned to think of Manu, and "take the bad with the good". If Hill can excel on defense (within Pop' defensive scheme), I think Pop will accept some breakdowns on the offensive end.

I don't think anyone is immune to criticism, or improvement, including Pop. I think his style has probably not done justice to some players - Malik Rose, Turkoglu, and Ime being examples. But since his job is to win games and championships, I honestly don't think that there is another person on the planet who has the track record to say that his style is wrong. I catch myself thinking it from time to time - especially when they lose a couple of games they "should have won". And then I look at the fact that they are on pace to win probably 55 games in what feels like a "bad" season.

For the record, I think Hill is much better at the PG spot than Mason. He makes some rookie (and former 2 guard) mistakes, but his quickness and ball-handling skills get more people good looks. The offense always looks and feels stagnant to me when Mason is at the point. But I also thought Pops Mensah-Bonsu had some skills that the Spurs could use. Maybe throw him some alley-oops to punish the other teams for fronting our bigs, for instance? Bottom line, I don't think Coach Popovich is interested in adding any new dimensions to his system. Bonsu's best chance would have been to be a more athletic version of Fab. The same thing is going to apply to Drew Gooden. Maybe that's what Pop meant when he called Gooden "a professional"? I'd be willing to bet that was the centerpiece of their conversation - "Can you be satisfied by being a supporting piece for the Big 3?" That's all Pop asks of anybody not named Tim, Tony, or Manu.

[lurker23]

Good posts timvp. Hill's defense and rebounding are valuable commodities that this team needs to take advantage of. As far as the other side of the ball goes, I was planning on starting a thread about how to get Hill more involved in the offense, but I'll just post my thoughts here.

1. The bottom line in all of this is that Hill needs more minutes. I've produced statistics in the past that show that he performs significantly better offensively when he has quality minutes to get into the flow of the game (also, this statement is simply common sense- limited minutes means limited production for most players).

2. The best way to get Hill minutes is at backup PG. When Manu comes back, extra minutes at the 2/3 positions will be few and far between. Manu will get his 30 mpg come the playoffs, Mason will get more minutes, Finley will get at least as many minutes, and Bowen will get more minutes. There's simply no room for Hill (or Udoka/Hairston for that matter).

3. The way the coaches have Hill playing in the current offense is simply useless. They have him go to the corner in a Bruce Bowen type role, but here's the problem: there's no evidence that he can hit the corner 3. Therefore, not only does he get next to zero touches, defenses can sag off of him and crowd the lane.

4. As far as I see it, there are two major ways of getting Hill more involved in the offense:

a. Instead of sending him to the corner, allow him to play on the wing. At this point his offense is largely predicated on penetration, something that is much more easily accomplished from the wing. This would allow him to get more touches, use screens, and make cuts where he can be found by other players who get collapsed on in the lane (Parker, Duncan, etc.).

b. The more attractive and more successful solution is the simpler one: give him back the backup PG slot. Hill has good handles, good court vision, and generally knows when to get out of the way (sometimes to a fault). Putting the ball in his hands for every single possession gives him a chance to feel out the defense. In addition, given his prolific scoring in HS and college, Hill is quite simply used to having the ball in his hands as much as possible. While I imagine Pop is trying to ween him off of that role, that is where he is comfortable at the moment, and trying to rush him away from that cold turkey is likely to be unsuccessful.

[timvp]

Stoudamire hadn't been good in 3 years, and that was getting regular minutes on a bad team.

There's a difference between not being good and being flat out horrible. Prior to getting released by the Grizzlies, Stoudamire had a PER of 11.8 and a true shooting percentage of 51.4%. He comes to San Antonio and his PER drops to 4.6 and his shooting TSP drops to 36.2%.

And if you remember correctly, Stoudamire played well right out of the gates for the Spurs. He helped the Spurs win a few games and was shooting well and distributing the ball.

Then Pop told Stoudamire that he needed to shoot more, pass less and be more aggressive. The result? Stoudamire went from being a capable backup to someone whose career was over.

Van Exel posted almost the exact same per-minute numbers in San Antonio that he did his previous 2 years in Portland & GS. We may remember him for still being a threat with Dallas, but that was 3 years before the Spurs were able to sign him.

Outside of being just flat out terrible in the playoffs that year, he was basically everything that the Spurs should have been able to expect - although many of us hoped for more.

Van Exel's numbers were worse across the board. Worse scoring, worse shooting, less assists, more turnovers, less steals, less rebounding, worse PER ... basically it was a clean sweep for the worse.

And digging deeper into the numbers, Van Exel played by far his best basketball to begin the year. In the month of November, he was shooting great and his assists numbers were solid. Then came the "Nick needs to be Nick" card from Pop and Van Exel's career was over soon thereafter.

Ward had more bad years than good years in his career. He was worse here than he had been in NY, but since he came in mid-season and had to adjust on the fly, some drop-off should have been accepted.

Charlie Ward had an amazing drop in production after coming to the Spurs. Much more of a drop than a simple "getting adjusted" type drop. With the Knicks, he had a 17.5 PER. The Spurs get him during the same season and his PER drops all the way to 8.7. His true shooting percentage drops more than 11% and his rate of assists drops by more than half.

And, like the third straight example in this post, Ward played by far his best basketball early on during his Spurs stint. In his first two weeks with the team, he was stealing minutes from Parker and even finishing games. That adjustment period you talked about didn't appear to be an issue.

Flash forward a few more weeks and Ward was totally discombobulated and was soon out of the rotation.

In a case by case basis, there can be excuses. But when virtually every back up point guard comes to San Antonio and plays worse, the pattern must be noted. Especially when the point guards starts out playing well and then their production dips the more Pop coaches them.

(BTW, thanks for making me research this because I now believe my stance even more. There's just no other logical explanation. These players didn't get old overnight. They didn't struggle to adjust ... instead, they struggled to maintain under Pop.)

[tmtcsc]

Sorry Timvp, we don't see eye to eye on this. Stoudamire, Van Exel and especially Charlie Ward were just not very good anymore. Pop liked the fact that all 3 of these guys could take pressure off of Tim by offering some offense and by spreading the floor. They all failed to do that.

I think the defensive responsibilities within Pop's system may have something to do with it. You want to know who a success story is ? Matt Bonner. While he's limited on D, he finally gets it. He says it over and over in interviews.

"Pop says to shoot when I have an open shot. If I don't, I'm off the floor. It's pretty simple." He's gotten yelled at by Tim and by Pop but he's maintained his proffesionalism throughout. Those are the guys that stick around. If Pop puts you on the floor to shoot, you better shoot. That's why Brent sucked ass for so long.


Perhaps the early success of those other 3 players was due to Pop dumbing down the system for them as they got started. Once they had to start thinking, it was over. They had to start thinking about defensive rotations, had to actually defend and then they had to make OPEN shots. I think sometimes these guys also get caught up with the pressure of playing well on Championship caliber team. As in, they don't want to F-up the team by being a little selfish and letting the ball fly.

Mason gets it, thank God.

[timvp]

Stoudamire was quite done when Spurs signed him.

His stats on the Grizzlies would have been fine on the Spurs. So no, he wasn't done.

The best proof of that is that he tried to play this year without success. He had a workout for Phoenix and they choose Dee Brown over him.

Ah yes, because Kerr is such a super scout

I don't disagree that Stoudamire was done but using Kerr as your proof? Which of Kerr's moves tells you he knows what he's doing?

NVE wasn't that bad before he injured his wrist.

Elbow

And like I said, you can make excuses for each individual case but when they all follow a similar pattern, then there might be something more to it than "LOL they suck".

Since 2003

Pop has been the coach since 1997. Cherry-picking a time frame doesn't make sense since I'm talking about Pop's coaching on the whole. If you want to play the contract card, how do you explain Kerr, Porter and AD? All three were backup point guards making a good chunk of cash.

Spurs backup PGs have been damn limited (Hart, Carter, Vaughn)

So limited that Hart and Carter are still in the NBA a half decade later . . .

, done (Ward, Stoudamire)

Both players were brought in during the season. Both players saw their production slip by about half. How can they suddenly be "done" once they sign with the Spurs?

I can buy the done argument if these players were signed at the beginning of a season and they had just aged too much during the offseason. But they were signed during the middle of a season. They both played well to begin their Spurs careers. They both ended up playing worse and worse for Pop until they were in street clothes.

Pop hasn't been able to turn lead into gold but it doesn't mean that he can't coach backup PGs.

I'm not asking him to turn lead into gold. I would just like for him not to melt the lead.

[Old School 44]

Like some other posters believe, I think Pop’s just tinkering while Manu’s out.

I don’t agree with the notion that Pop can’t coach backup point guards. Hill will be the primary backup point guard in the playoffs. Defensively, he’s too valuable to not play. Pop still has his moments, but he’s actually softened up a bit, since TP’s rookie days and I think he taken this softer stance with Hill's development.

My thought about the failure of some of the other point guards and even other new players is that most initially tried too hard to fit in, deferring to the Big Three. The only one who I thought attempted to play his same game was Van Exel, but I don’t think he was ever really healthy during the time he was here. Because the expectations are so high here, with the 4 les and numerous playoff appearances, and the overall good guy image of the Spurs, I think players just press a little when they first put on the silver and black.

[Leetonidas]

Perhaps, timvp, all those players numbers plummeted because they were interchanged between 2nd and 3rd string and saw probably a substantial drop in their minutes. Plus, you can't compare Damon Stoudamire's numbers on a ty Grizzlies team where he was probably one of their better options to that of his on the Spurs, where he was basically a 8th-12th man, or IR fodder. Same with Ward and NVE.

[Leetonidas]

Oh, and Jason Hart and Anthony Carter are not very good.

Let's not forget about Mike Wilks. He sucked ass too.

[benefactor]

The thing I don't understand is that when we drafted Hill, all the talk was about him transitioning from the SG spot to the point. So have we gone away from that? Lately it seems like he spends more time at the two and much less time handling the ball.

I bet Hill is wondering what the is going on right now, but I think he is a tough kid and he will weather the storm of Pop's bizarre tinkering. But that being said, it would be nice to see some consistency with the game plan. Pop needs to allow Hill to develop as a point(as was initially planned) instead of yanking him out of one role and forcing another on him.

[ploto]

And Anthony Carter received regular minutes as the back-up, he was just terrible with them.

Carter played all of five games for the Spurs.

[ploto]

Jason Hart and Anthony Carter are not very good.

Not too bad for a guy who supposedly was not good enough to be the back-up PG in SA 6 years ago:

08-09 DEN
MPG 23.6
FG % .439
RPG 2.7
APG 4.5
SPG 1.2
PPG 5.5

[K-State Spur]

And if you remember correctly, Stoudamire played well right out of the gates for the Spurs. He helped the Spurs win a few games and was shooting well and distributing the ball.

Van Exel's numbers were worse across the board. Worse scoring, worse shooting, less assists, more turnovers, less steals, less rebounding, worse PER ... basically it was a clean sweep for the worse.

And digging deeper into the numbers, Van Exel played by far his best basketball to begin the year. In the month of November, he was shooting great and his assists numbers were solid. Then came the "Nick needs to be Nick" card from Pop and Van Exel's career was over soon thereafter.


Charlie Ward had an amazing drop in production after coming to the Spurs. Much more of a drop than a simple "getting adjusted" type drop. With the Knicks, he had a 17.5 PER. The Spurs get him during the same season and his PER drops all the way to 8.7. His true shooting percentage drops more than 11% and his rate of assists drops by more than half.

And, like the third straight example in this post, Ward played by far his best basketball early on during his Spurs stint. In his first two weeks with the team, he was stealing minutes from Parker and even finishing games. That adjustment period you talked about didn't appear to be an issue.

(BTW, thanks for making me research this because I now believe my stance even more. There's just no other logical explanation. These players didn't get old overnight. They didn't struggle to adjust ... instead, they struggled to maintain under Pop.)

You didn't research Van Exel's very well. Per minute - his scoring was virtually identical to what it had been the previous 2 years, his shooting percentage was higher, his 3 point percentage was right in the middle, he averaged 1 less assist per 36 in san antonio (which is normal in the spurs offense), his turnovers were the same, his steals were on par, and he actually had one of the best (per minute) rebounding years of his career.

I do know that Stoudamire played much better out of the gate with the team. My two points on that will be 1) that was the only time during the season where he was able to get regular heavy minutes with the team (Parker injury) and 2) i think it's just (if not more) likely that he went on a hot streak after getting to rest up a month, and then regressed back to his 34 year old self as it is that he came in, found out instantly how to turn back the clock 5 years, then let Pop into his head by telling him that he's a good shooter and should do so more. Stoudamire had been well below average for 3 years leading up to last, so when he finally falls off a cliff at 34, I can't say that it's his new coach's fault.

And Ward had so many prolonged stretches of bad basketball throughout his career and rarely had to try to fit into a championship contender, that I'm not sure case evidence of him proves much of anything. He was having a decent year when he joined the Spurs, but the two leading up to that had been pretty terrible. In addition, the numbers he was posting were on terrible teams.


I don't disagree with your overall thesis, I agree that Pop is misusing Hill at the moment. However, I still think the overriding reason that we haven't been able to find any long-term answer at the back-up PG is because...we haven't found any good players to be a back-up PG. When you consistently sign regressing or inconsistent players to man the position, it's not the coach's fault that they keep regressing (sometimes even magnified because of a new system and playing in meaningful games) and/or are inconsistent.

[Cane]

If a player has a weak mentality, ie wouldn't be able to make it through military boot camp mental games, then he's going to have trouble adapting to Pop's R. Lee Ermey-esque coaching style. He gets on everyone's case and some players don't thrive under that kind of pressure.

[GSH]

Oh, and Jason Hart and Anthony Carter are not very good.

Let's not forget about Mike Wilks. He sucked ass too.

Oh, and Jason Hart ... not very good.

Sorry, but that is just wrong. I may be one of the leading local expert on Jason Hart, since I followed him after he left. He's probably the best backup PG the Spurs have had in the last 10 years. He's solid. He distributes the ball well, he doesn't turn the ball over, and he defends. If he had a better jumper, he would have spent most of his career as a starter somewhere. But when he has been called on to start, and gotten starter's minutes, he has been a very solid and consistent performer.

The year after the Spurs let him go, he averaged about 11 points, 7 assists, and 3.6 rebounds as a starter. Tony Parker averaged 16.6, 6.1, and 3.7. Parker's assist/turnover was about 2.5/1, and Hart's was about 3.5/1. That season, Parker got to the line about 4.25 times per 36 minutes, and Hart went about 3.8 times per 36 minutes. And it wouldn't hurt to consider that Parker had Tim, Manu, and company to help him put up those numbers.

Hart is no Tony Parker, and he's more of a pure point guard in that he isn't a big scorer. But as a backup? He is way above average. And I think he's a very good example of what TimVP is talking about. People looked at him like he was garbage while he was here, because (it seemed) Pop clearly didn't value him. But he sure as had value to Charlotte the next year.

If Jason Hart had gotten the time with Chip Engellund that Parker has gotten, and/or gotten some quality minutes while he was here? You would think about him completely differently. Instead, there appeared to be a complete disinterest in him as a player. The point TimVP was making, I think, is that Hill is worth the investment. Not just in the future, but this season.

[callo1]

I think what Pop did was brilliant. He understands that rookies hit a wall at mid-season. Pop is limiting Hill's minutes so he will be fresh come playoff time.

Terry Porter was on his last leg when he came to the Spurs, and Kerr never played defense, but still had some excellent offensive games for the Spurs (2003 versus the Mavs and the Nets). We all know that you must play D to get on the floor for Pop. I think Pop putting Hill in the game yesterday actually shows how much confidence he really has in him.

Pop doesn't put up with mental midgets, just ask Beno, Hedo etc. How many rings did those guys win after leaving the Spurs? How many did the Spurs win after they left?