Reply With Quote
Well until RJ and Tony are a little more reliable with their jumpers, Spurs have no legitimate outside threat in the starting lineup. If Roger stays hot, I'd be for it. Bogans' defense has been suspect against the better teams anyway.
Okay Pop gave Roger the nod over Bogans tonight and he produced and played decent defense, unfortunately it wasn't the outcome I would have expected.
It's time to get him in the starting lineup, especially since McDyess, TP and RJ are all struggling right now.
And while we're at it, lets just move Hairston up to take those 8-10 leftover minutes. Bogans can fill the water coolers.
Thoughts?
Well until RJ and Tony are a little more reliable with their jumpers, Spurs have no legitimate outside threat in the starting lineup. If Roger stays hot, I'd be for it. Bogans' defense has been suspect against the better teams anyway.
He should have been starting from the get-go. Bogans D is nice, but has yet to prove he can hit shots consistently. In his time, he's proving quite the opposite..
Only problem with that would be our starting backcourt defense suddenly being the worst in the NBA lol
Mason had a great game and a thread like this was expected
But I agree. It makes sense to start him. Spurs need the offense and his energy on defense has improved this year. I have said this for a while and I was surprised when he was not the opening day starter.
Leave the starting five alone.
Team needs Finley.
Mason's D is average to poor, but he had a great game and was hustling tonight and he deserves Props. But, our D will definitely get worse with Mason starting in lieu of Bogans.
Who knows what Pop will do now.
Roger Mason is instant offense. So is Blair. They are both better coming off the Bench. What Spurs Management should be thinking about is starting Ginobili and Benching Jefferson. Just a thought.
We're in a tough spot..
We need a defender on the perimeter, so Bogans starts..Bogans is limited offensively..Bogans, RJ and Parker aren't 3-point shooters, so this kills our spacing and hurts the offense..
We need a shooter on the perimeter, so Mason makes sense..the problem is that Parker and RJ are poor defenders, so is Mason..so we'll have 3 poor defenders on the perimeter, which is going to kill our bigs..McDyess is just an average defender, so how exactly is this going to help?..
We don't have a guy on the roster that can defend and make 3s like Bruce did..it's a huge hole..we're going to be hurt against the better teams no matter who we start at the 2..the only way to make up for this without trading for that guy is to trade for a legit big, or maybe even try starting Ratliff to start the game to establish some kind of rhythm..
What about starting Ginobili again? That might kill the second unit's playmaking abilities though.
Or start Manu... You can save our not-so-good defenders for the other's team second unit...
I still think Bogans should start, and we need to start sticking with some kind of rotation... I actually thought we kind of knee-jerked today and pulled him out too quickly, when the problem we were having was on the pick and roll, and had little to do with Bogans...
The whole 'lets win by outscoring' is fool's gold... we need to keep on working on the defense even if some nights we're getting wrecked out there... if we shelve it like today, then what are we really about?
Roger's defense has been good in the games I've seen and he brings x100 more offense than Bogans. Until RJ finds some consistency in his offense, I think its a no-brainer to get Mason in there.
Thoughts? I may be wrong, and I will stand corrected if you say so, but weren't you one of the "Mason Sucks" advocates?
I'm thinking we should let this team play. It's really tiring to go through all this "Official ___ had a bad game they suck"
"Official ____ had a good game they should start"
back and forth, over and over. The same player is often thrown between both sentiments.
I also think that there's way too much of misunderstanding that front-loading your starting lineup makes you twice as good. That doesn't always work that way. We've been dealing with that since 2004. More noticeably 2005 when Pop started Barry so he could get Ginobili more touches off the bench. If you put 5 guys who average 20ppg in the starting lineup you are going to ruin the potential of at least 2 players. You'd have to shoot 92% to get anywhere near full productivity otherwise someone like Mason would go from 'Shooting well, Bench Assassin' to 'Not getting the ball, Duncan, Parker, Ginobili, and Jefferson have it'
Start Manu and put RJ on the Bench. We would have our Big 3 Starting. They would set the tone and make happen. Meanwhile, we still got Hill, Mason, RJ, Blair and Bonner coming off the Bench. That is still a really good Bench.
C: Antonio McDyess/Matt Bonner/Theo Ratliff
PF: Tim Duncan/Dejuan Blair
SF: Keith Bogans/Richard Jefferson/Michael Finley
SG: Manu Ginobili/Roger Mason
PG: Tony Parker/George Hill
Make it happen Pop.
Ah, who am I kidding? This ain't happening.
easy solution: start george hill instead of bogans
hill is a much better offensive player than bogans, and just as good a defender.
and i'd take hill over mason any day.
Defense is important but Roger is playing as good as Bogans and he's light years ahead of him on offense. Bogans' should have never been annointed the starter in the first place after that awful pre-season. Heck, he should have never been signed, period. Thanks to the Bogans' signing we won't get to see how good Hairston could have been. He could have been very ing good in 10-15 mins a game.
roger has to start man, he even said it best in a recent article i read that quoted him saying its rough to come in and just be ready to play, last year he started thats when he made those big game winners, now him coming off the bench makes it harder for him to get in rhythm.....ya dig
I don't mind starting Manu to see how it would look..it's tough to determine whether or not to try new starting lineups or to stick with a rotation..
I.. a.. g.. r.. e.. e..
..
How did Bogans become a Starter in the first place? It just happened didn't it? Well, I just want to see Manu start just once. Just to see how it goes.
When he was first signed I didn't like him, thought he was too 1 dimensional. He's improved his all around game since then. That fast break layup he made over an outstretched Grant Hill was beautiful.
As far as front loading the starting lineup goes, you may have a point. However, after watching 3 of the starters struggle to find offense I don't know if the spurs can afford not to if they wanna keep up in the standings. The alternatives are bench your core players Parker, RJ, and Dice. Which obviously isn't going to work.
The next step if this don't work would be to look at trade scenarios but even that is gonna be tough.
+1
And it has got to be a huge blow to his ego and confidence that a guy who shot something like 1-19 in the preseason on a veteran's minimum salary walks in at the last second and eclipses his role on the team.
pop just has so much to choice from he has to just figure out the best way we match up with the team, im been telling people just wait til we go on the rodeo road trip and we mesh, once we see how to do that we are bout to take over.....hopefully lol
Pop clearly doesn't know how to handle Mason right now. The other day he logs single-digit minutes and tonight he gets a lion's share.
The problem with Mason is that he's a feast or famine offensive player. One minute he's lights out and the next he's ice cold. Factor in that his defense can sometimes be a liability and the much more "stable" choice is Bogans.
The only other wildcard I'll throw in is Hill. Pop obviously wants to get the kid more minutes and he's got the length to guard the 2-spot. I wouldn't be entirely shocked to see Hill starting alongside Parker in the future.
As for Mason though, I think he'll eventually settle into the "shooter" role off the bench. How much he plays will depend on how well he shoots.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
