Some glaring statistics through 46 games..

[MaNu4Tres]

46 games into perhaps the most anticipated season in recent Spurs memory, the Spurs are a disappointing 27-19, struggling to hold on to the 5th seed in the Western Conference. So I sit here just like many nights and ask myself why? What is the culprit for the Spurs inconsistency game after game, and week after week? They show flashes one game and the next game it's back to square 1. Pop showed his frustration in his recent interview after the disappointing loss against Denver on how " We need players to step up and make some damn shots." And he is right. Our front court may have a length problem inside, but overall the front court has shown more consistency through the year than the wings by a wide margin.

Some stats for your pleasure....

In 27 wins this year here are the offensive statistics...


Posts

Duncan 54 FG% 18.7 Ppg
D.Blair 54 FG% 7.4 Ppg
McDyes 56 FG% 7 Ppg


Hybrid Post/ Wing( shoots high % shots from outside)

Bonner- 51FG% 52%3FG 8 ppg

Wings ( SG/SF is interchangeable in Spurs system)

Manu - 45 FG% 44% 3FG 14.4 ppg
Jeffer - 49 FG% 42% 3FG 14.0 ppg
Mason - 48 FG% 40% 3FG 8.5 ppg
Bogan- 45 FG% 43% 3FG 6.2 ppg
G. Hill - 51 FG% 43% 3FG 10.9 ppg
Finley- 48 FG% 53 % 3FG 5.4 ppg


The point guard

Parker- 48 FG% 17 ppg 6.6 apg 2.7 TO






In 19 Losses

Posts

Duncan- 50 FG% 21.1 ppg
D. Blair- 56 FG% 6.7 ppg
McDyes- 44 FG% 5.0 ppg

Hybrid post/wing( shoots high % shots from outside)

Bonner- 41 FG % 26%3FG 6ppg



Wings( SG/SF is interchangeable in Spurs system)

Manu - 32FG% 27 %3FG 11 ppg
Jeffer- 42 FG% 27 %3FG 10 ppg
Mason- 38 FG % 38 %3FG 7.4 ppg
Bogan- 35 FG% 23 %3FG 3 ppg
G. Hill - 41 FG% 33 %3FG 10 ppg
Finley- 38 FG% 28 %3FG 4.3 ppg


The point guard

Parker- 50 FG% 17 ppg 4 apg 2.8 TO


Some thoughts
-As you can tell Duncan and Parker are not the problem and have been consistent throughout the year win or lose. The big problem has been the inconsistent play from the wings. Most specifically Manu Ginobili. Spurs need to find a way to get more consistent production offensively from the 2/3 spot. In my opinion Spurs should package Bonner/Mason or Finley/ 1st rounder for a more all around consistent player on the perimeter. This player could easily take on Mason and Bogans 36 mpg they average together and take some of the load off Manu's back in offensive sets to make him more effective for the team by being more selective offensively.


-It's easy to point out that the Spurs just need to hit their shots from the outside. There's a lot more to it than just that. Good teams in the league are sharper on their rotations, close out harder, are more disciplined in their P &R defense, don't over commit as often, and contest effectively to name a few. With Parker being hobbled by PF, and Manu's mileage getting up there it's evident how the efficiency is so erratic in the games we win and the games we lose. They simply can't score and get to spots on the floor as efficient as they used to. Which leads to easy rotations and close outs to our shooters for the opposition to contest effectively. Spurs need to get Parker some help and let Manu be the best role player in the NBA. IMO

-I would suggest to give George Hill more responsibility in half court sets with the ball, but that's not his strength and he has yet to prove he can do this efficiently. Hill's strengths and efficient scoring comes from transition, and cut's off the ball( which is something he is great at might I add, good teams limit these opportunities).
-Jefferson is in Hill's boat. Whether it be P&R opportunities or isolation plays for him, he simply can't deliver against the good teams in the league at an efficient rate.

-In the perfect world or video game world I would love for the Spurs to make a move for more length and a more complete all around wing. But if I had to chose one move or the other, I'd have to go for the wing.

[Chieflion]

Would be good if you post the field goal attempts of the players. I am sure Duncan and Parker take more shots when the team is losing. If the Spurs get to win, I wouldn't mind seeing Duncan and Parker put up weak performances.

I would also add that there is only one play Jefferson is part of, the alley-oop off the back screen. The Spurs almost never use him in pick and roll situations and his lateral quickness is terrible. I heard about this from Bucks fans, but I never thought he would be this bad, and his handles affect his drive to the basket, he can only attack in a straight line.

[Bruno]

The big problem has been the inconsistent play from the wings. Most specifically Manu Ginobili. Spurs need to find a way to get more consistent production offensively from the 2/3 spot. In my opinion Spurs should package Bonner/Mason or Finley/ 1st rounder for a more all around consistent player on the perimeter.

I don't get it.

You're saying that Spurs have a consistency problem on the wings and Manu is the main reason of that. To solve that you propose that Spurs keep Manu and trade other players?

I don't see where the logic is.

[MaNu4Tres]

I don't get it.

You're saying that Spurs have a consistency problem on the wings and Manu is the main reason of that. To solve that you propose that Spurs keep Manu and trade other players?

I don't see where the logic is.

Everyone is inconsistent not named Tony Parker.

But Manu is responsible for more possessions and has the ball in his hands more than any other wing not named Parker.

I believe it would benefit the Spurs if they take some offensive responsibility off Manu and attain a more consistent all-around player to replace the Mason/Bogans/ Finley combination.

This player would take on some responsibility in the play-making role and let Manu exploit the intangibles that he's great at.

[Bruno]

I believe it would benefit the Spurs if they take some offensive responsibility off Manu and attain a more consistent all-around player to replace the Mason/Bogans/ Finley combination.

This player would take on some responsibility in the play-making role and let Manu exploit the intangibles that he's great at.

Manu takes 10.1 field goals per games. That's the lowest of his career since his rookie year. If you think that it's a too big load for him while he is paid $10.7M, Manu should be the first one you include in trade proposals.

[MaNu4Tres]

Manu takes 10.1 field goals per games. That's the lowest of his career since his rookie year. If you think that it's a too big load for him while he is paid $10.7M, Manu should be the first one you include in trade proposals.

Um...Not really. Manu only had one year in his career where he averaged more than 11.4 shots a game and that was in the 2007-2008 season. Every other year besides his rookie year was between 10 and 11.4 shots a game, which really isn't a big difference. He still is in charge of a lot of responsibility with the ball in offensive sets. Shot attempts don't show that. I think the combination of the play making he is in charge of in games, his mileage(age), and his loss of explosiveness to some degree is the reason for his inefficient offensive production this season. It's too much.

I rather replace the Mason/Bogans/ Finley combination in the rotation with an upgrade of an all around player ......instead of trading Manu for Caron Butler or Kevin Martin ( who has been just as inefficient as Manu) and keeping the Mason/Bogans/Finley combination in the rotations filling in 30-35 minutes a night.

[MaNu4Tres]

If that can't happen/\,

Then the F.O needs to really consider parting with R.J or Manu without a doubt.

And please don't tell me

" Well come playoff time, Mason/Bogans and Finley's playing time will be cut drastically."


If Manu has to play 35 plus minutes a night in the playoffs we won't last past the first round.

And if Jefferson plays 37-40 minutes a night come playoff time with the way he is playing, we won't get past the first round. If R.J is given that much time in the playoffs with the way that he is playing that speaks volumes about the quality of our depth behind Manu and R.J.

[mountainballer]

sorry, but you realize that you just tried to break down the Spurs strengths and weaknesses by comparing the isolated offensive numbers?????
such a method wouldn't be very meaningful, not even for the Warriors.
and as pointed out in many other threads by many other posts: the Spurs major problems are not on the offensive end.
any trade for a quality player who helps to upgrade the overall defense, will help this team, no matter what position. a quality big will likely have the bigger impact, but if such a quality big can't be had, a quality defensive wing would help either.
it's pretty simple IMO. (not to in fact get this players. that's the tricky part)

[Bruno]

Um...Not really. Manu only had one year in his career where he averaged more than 11.4 shots a game and that was in the 2007-2008 season. Every other year besides his rookie year was between 10 and 11.4 shots a game, which really isn't a big difference. He still is in charge of a lot of responsibility with the ball in offensive sets. Shot attempts don't show that. I think the combination of the play making he is in charge of in games, his mileage(age), and his loss of explosiveness to some degree is the reason for his inefficient offensive production this season. It's too much.

If you think that Manu can't carry his current load, that is reasonable, then you seriously had to wonder if the best for Spurs isn't to trade him.

I still think that Manu can play better and be more consistent.

I rather replace the Mason/Bogans/ Finley combination in the rotation with an upgrade of an all around player ......instead of trading Manu for Caron Butler or Kevin Martin ( who has been just as inefficient as Manu) and keeping the Mason/Bogans/Finley combination in the rotations filling in 30-35 minutes a night.

It isn't an "either" situation, Spurs could do both.

Trading Mason/Bogans/Finley for a good two way player would help Spurs for the simple reason that Mason/Bogans/Finley aren't that good.

[Spursfanfromafar]

From both PER and advanced +/- stats, it can be gleaned that Tim Duncan and Manu Ginobili are the best performers in the team this season.

This advanced +/- stats calculated on a pro-Rockets blog, Red 94 - show that Ginobili is No. 6 (Timmy is No. 4) in adjusted +/- in entire NBA (among top players). That despite the universal fact that Ginobili's performance has been underwhelming offensively especially in FG%. That tells me few things (to go along with Manu4Tres' post -)

a) Ginobili's record is very good against mediocre teams (below .500 teams) and not so much upto mark against + .500 teams - since Spurs have a terrific record against below .500 and mediocre/average record against +.500 teams.

b) Despite Ginobili's underwhelming performance based on his own record..he still plays a major role in Spurs' winning through various means - playmaking being the primary one.

c) RJ's average numbers show that his is the poorest record thus far among the Top 4 in performance.

d) Parker is definitely playing worse than last season, but is doing much better than RJ atleast in PER.

Now that means that the output from the wing position due Manu's offensive liabilities must be supplemented by better efforts by RJ, TP and the rest. And since we have very little evidence of that so far, the options are to either expect RJ to pick up in the next few games or simply to trade him for a better wing option.

Except he has a difficult contract to move. Therein lies the major problem.

[MaNu4Tres]

sorry, but you realize that you just tried to break down the Spurs strengths and weaknesses by comparing the isolated offensive numbers?????
such a method wouldn't be very meaningful, not even for the Warriors.
and as pointed out in many other threads by many other posts: the Spurs major problems are not on the offensive end.
any trade for a quality player who helps to upgrade the overall defense, will help this team, no matter what position. a quality big will likely have the bigger impact, but if such a quality big can't be had, a quality defensive wing would help either.
it's pretty simple IMO. (not to in fact get this players. that's the tricky part)

I thought I'd look at our losses and wins from an offensive perspective. That was the point of the thread. To recognize the inconsistent offensive production and it's from our wings obviously.

What big man do you think we can get that would unseat McDyess' spot in the rotation and earn 25-30 minutes a night? Not to mention take minutes from Blair as well?

[MaNu4Tres]

If you think that Manu can't carry his current load, that is reasonable, then you seriously had to wonder if the best for Spurs isn't to trade him.

I still think that Manu can play better and be more consistent.



It isn't an "either" situation, Spurs could do both.

Trading Mason/Bogans/Finley for a good two way player would help Spurs for the simple reason that Mason/Bogans/Finley aren't that good.

Regardless Spurs need better consistent play from our perimeter players on both ends. I'm all for doing whatever it is to help this situation.

[will_spurs]

Thanks for these stats, I think they are very telling. Basically (at least as far as shooting is concerned) win or lose the bigs and Parker are shooting with the same efficiency. But the wings shooting % go down by 10-15, which is enormous. It shows that against weak teams (wins) the wings shoot 50% FG and 40% 3pt, but against strong teams (losses) they shoot 40/30 (or worse).

They are obviously the most affected by teams who actually show up on the defensive end. In other words, our wings can't score contested shots.

[mountainballer]

What big man do you think we can get that would unseat McDyess' spot in the rotation and earn 25-30 minutes a night? Not to mention take minutes from Blair as well?

not sure. there were so many (sometimes insane) proposals in the last weeks. and things are changing quickly. look at Hornets. Paul will be out for maybe 2 months. I wouldn't be surprised if today they will decide to finally dump the season and move on. Okafor might be on the block soon. could Spurs get him? very likely not.
what would it take?
the big expiring contract (Manu), the young talent (Blair) and the 2010 1st round pick. this would be an offer the Hornets will consider.
the Spurs? they could see it that way: now they have 4 big contracts, 3 for back court players, one for a front court player. change Manu to Okafor makes it 2BC and 2 FC players with big salary. Okafor's 4 more years are a huge risk. on the other hand, he is only 27 and seems to have left his injury problems behind him. he would be a player who would allow the Spurs to go back to Spurs ball and might not have that much problems to adjust to the Spurs system.
again, a highly unlikely scenario, but just for the sake of discussion, who could be the big man, who might be available and who would help the Spurs most for this season and the next one.

[polandprzem]

i still thinks that most of the probolems are mental here.

Spurs players still thinks they are contenders and that they can flip the switch somewhere at the end of a season.

so we have RJ who before the season said that the system is not that much different and he will be fine. he is not.
We got manu that waits for the 'it will come' and waits for the game rythm. That was the case last year and this as well.
We got dyess who was not used to that type of basketball ...

[jeez guys you are pros right?]

Mason who says he can't get into rythm because Pop gives him incosistent minutes and roles.

Then you've got everybody on the spurs team who are not on the same page and seems to be lost on the court. Ofensively and defensively.

then goes Pop who pulls out soft card once ina while and it really do not works.
Those players looks like they are burned out

[draft87]

not sure. there were so many (sometimes insane) proposals in the last weeks. and things are changing quickly. look at Hornets. Paul will be out for maybe 2 months. I wouldn't be surprised if today they will decide to finally dump the season and move on. Okafor might be on the block soon. could Spurs get him? very likely not.
what would it take?
the big expiring contract (Manu), the young talent (Blair) and the 2010 1st round pick. this would be an offer the Hornets will consider.
the Spurs? they could see it that way: now they have 4 big contracts, 3 for back court players, one for a front court player. change Manu to Okafor makes it 2BC and 2 FC players with big salary. Okafor's 4 more years are a huge risk. on the other hand, he is only 27 and seems to have left his injury problems behind him. he would be a player who would allow the Spurs to go back to Spurs ball and might not have that much problems to adjust to the Spurs system.
again, a highly unlikely scenario, but just for the sake of discussion, who could be the big man, who might be available and who would help the Spurs most for this season and the next one.

Not saying any trade is a good idea or a bad idea but I thought I bring up Manu's spot in the rotation. This isn't news but doesn't really come up in the trade talk. If Manu gets traded the small forward rotation is going to be RJ and then who? Manu's been playing a decent amount of minutes at the 3. Is Finley going to take up some of those? Can he even contribute? Doesn't seem like he will. Getting an impact big would be great but won't be totally cooked at the 3 if we send Manu away to get one?

[vander]

too late to trade Manu now, Spurs went all-in with this group. FO should have listened to me and traded Manu in the 08 offseason.

[mountainballer]

bottom line: cover the back up SF spot is more important than the 2nd starting big?
that's the problem with most proposals on this board.
try to make a somehow realistic proposal (which already has a lot of reach potential) and someone will point out that you just gave up something. and that's why those proposals always end at a point when someone thinks he is a genius to propose a trade of Matt plus Fin plus the Sanikidze rights for a borderline star player, because "we didn't give up so much"

[SpurNation]

From both PER and advanced +/- stats, it can be gleaned that Tim Duncan and Manu Ginobili are the best performers in the team this season.

This advanced +/- stats calculated on a pro-Rockets blog, Red 94 - show that Ginobili is No. 6 (Timmy is No. 4) in adjusted +/- in entire NBA (among top players). That despite the universal fact that Ginobili's performance has been underwhelming offensively especially in FG%. That tells me few things (to go along with Manu4Tres' post -)

a) Ginobili's record is very good against mediocre teams (below .500 teams) and not so much upto mark against + .500 teams - since Spurs have a terrific record against below .500 and mediocre/average record against +.500 teams.

b) Despite Ginobili's underwhelming performance based on his own record..he still plays a major role in Spurs' winning through various means - playmaking being the primary one.

c) RJ's average numbers show that his is the poorest record thus far among the Top 4 in performance.

d) Parker is definitely playing worse than last season, but is doing much better than RJ atleast in PER.

Now that means that the output from the wing position due Manu's offensive liabilities must be supplemented by better efforts by RJ, TP and the rest. And since we have very little evidence of that so far, the options are to either expect RJ to pick up in the next few games or simply to trade him for a better wing option.

Except he has a difficult contract to move. Therein lies the major problem.

This here. RJ's inability to BE what he was suposed to provide is the most glaring and evidential factor so far.

We knew. The team knew. Ginobili knew himself. That he probably could not return as the Ginobili of the past. But he still provides in ways that others on the team can't/don't to still be an integeral part of a winning team.

Jefferson...pffft. Biggest waste of player salary I've seen on a Spurs team. There are bench players on other teams making far less than Jefferson that do much more both offensively and defensively.

But the other teams know this and would never take on his contract in order for the Spurs to fix what never should have been done.

[ElNono]

Who is going to take on RJ's bloated contract when all his numbers are considerably down from his career?

That the Spurs took a gamble doesn't mean other teams will...

[draft87]

bottom line: cover the back up SF spot is more important than the 2nd starting big?
that's the problem with most proposals on this board.
try to make a somehow realistic proposal (which already has a lot of reach potential) and someone will point out that you just gave up something. and that's why those proposals always end at a point when someone thinks he is a genius to propose a trade of Matt plus Fin plus the Sanikidze rights for a borderline star player, because "we didn't give up so much"

I'm not sure I follow. I did start off saying something like, "this is not a critique of the quoted trade or any trade just something to consider" because the front office is absolutely going to consider this a factor and again, I wasn't criticizing your trade. It sounds like you read it as "your trade is a bad idea" which, as you can see, is not the case. All I'm saying is that anyone who wants a trade and is trying to figure out what to expect should consider things that the Spurs front office is considering.

It seems like you would like your trade to be considered. That being said I'll give it some thought.

I think you did a good job presenting the idea because you offered a motivation for both teams involved. I agree that the common trade idea that gives the Spurs something good and the other team nothing is simple fantasy. But if you're trying to put the small forward issue in the same category as, "giving up something" then I have to disagree. Since you obviously realize that the other team has to want what's in the trade you should know that a team can't suffer from giving a player away to the point that what they get just makes up for what they lost and now they're either at the same level or worse.

If you're saying the main point should be that 2nd starting big is more important than Manu Ginobili(backupSF), I'm sorry but I have to disagree. I'm basing this on what I've seen this year and what I know about the organization. First, McDyess was signed for the MLE so he could be the 2nd contributing big. It looks like he may have come around and stay like this and if that's so his development from now on should be good enough for the 2nd starting or contributing big. McDyess playing his "A" game positively impacts the game plan, and tone of the rotations.

We have two centers-Ratliff and Mahinmi sitting on the bench not being worked into the mix. Whether Pop truly is leaving Ratliff out until the end remains to be seen but there's still a chance to get something, not necessarily the world, but some kind of big man type contribution of defense, shot blocking, rebounding out of both of those guys. Why trade for a big when there's two 'available'?

So with one or both of those guys filling the role of bench big we can focus our attention to the lack of perimeter D. We've got a lot of wings-RJ, Manu, Mason, Bogans, Finley, and Hill(I don't think Hairston's getting called up) but haven't found a consistent rotation that can score consistently and cover the opponent's wings. The size we have is RJ who's not really getting it done; Finley-he's not going to contribute at a high level; and Manu-I think he plays better as a bigger 2 than a smaller 3. We're asking a lot of Hill to guard a big 3 and it probably won't work in a 7 game series. Manu's going to play the minutes he's playing at small forward because we've got a ton of 2s and no size. Trading him and not getting a backup SF will nullify any positives we get from a productive big. Bogans and Finley will get hammered on defense at small forward. And there won't be much offensive production as well.

[Galileo]

The Spurs aren't going to make a trade on the eve of or during the rodeo road trip.