Reply With Quote
It's time for Matt to leave. The Spurs need size.
Matt “the Mendoza Line” Bonner
by Jesse Blanchard
Watercolor by Jesse Blanchard
The geeks may have yet to inherit the courts, but basketball has long been in the midst of a statistical revolution.
To the casual fan the revolution has yet to take hold. Identifying superstars hardly requires advanced statistics beyond points per game and the number of SportsCenter highlight appearances. More often than not what analytics reveals are the unsung role players. Box score deficient yet unique skill sets awaiting their next contract from Daryl Morey.
Matt Bonner represents the ultimate quandary for number crunchers–from Wayne Winston to John Hollinger, Bonner’s plus-minus and advanced statistics paint a valuable basketball asset. The eye test often suggests otherwise.
Admittedly, statistical formulas are not my forte, but the theories they produce are something I can wholeheartedly grasp onto. In trying to sum up Bonner’s value to the San Antonio Spurs an answer came back that traces back to sport analytics baseball roots. Matt Bonner is the Mendoza line of “stretch fours”.
Keep reading →
It's time for Matt to leave. The Spurs need size.
As long as he's signed on the cheap I don't mind him coming off the bench since more rest for TD and McDyess, the better. 15 minutes per game sounds about right too; play him longer if he's on fire or the rest of the bigs have a cold night.
Defensively he seems to instill confidence in the opposing player but there is one guy that Bonner can defend well (while the rest of the Spurs got abused) but he's not a PF: Ron Artest. Artest bullied the Spurs earlier in the season but when Bonner guarded him, his size really messed up Artest's game and Ron's not fast enough to beat Bonner with speed or agility.
I hated his and the Spurs FO guts for making him a starter back in 2008 but I suppose thats not really the Red Rocket's fault.
Pretty good drawing/painting of Bonner, 48MoH.
Last edited by Cane; 06-10-2010 at 12:29 PM.
2 things I took from this piece:
1. Those that feel we overvalue Matt Bonner at times on this site fail to see what we view him as: a valuable contributor on a good team when given a minor role.
Bonner is overvalued - by Pop. That is precisely the problem. He should be limited to a minor role, where his flaws and deficiencies can be minimized. Instead, and because of roster limitations, he's been forced into a major role on a playoff-contending team. And he's come up way short.
2. When losing a replacement level player, it’s probably best to have his replacement in place.
I agree, however, if the Spurs were following that formula they would've had an adequate replacement for Bowen on the roster.
Bonner on the team was fine 3-4 years ago but it's time to move on. We need size and to go more traditional. This constant search for the next Robert Horry is played, just build a good INTERIOR with length and if possible athleticism. Bonner would be better suited elsewhere like New York or Phoenix.
The line that separates Bonner being an asset and a liability to the Spurs is the line between the regular season and the post season. During the regular season he's just fine for what is, but he can't hit the broad side of barn in May.
It never ceases to amaze me how few people really understand the dynamics of a five man squad on hardwood.
An individual player's stats only tell half the story. The other half consists of things like:
1. Chemistry. Gelling with teamates is huge. This allows the sum to be greater than the parts. This is an absolute necessity if you are going to compete for a championship.But since these can't be quantified into a numeric statistical value, these things go vastly underappreciated by the modern fan.
2. DEFENSIVE ABILITY! I still haven't seen a modern stat that could truly quantify a player's ability to "shut down" the opposition.
3. Making the players around you better. Bottom Line: without this ability, a player is expendable. Anyone in this league can put up points. But to have a mind for the game, to make the game easier for the guys around you, that is a rare gift. It takes a combination of skill, vision, and intelligence. These abilities put guys in the hall.
4. The heart of a killer. Gonads. Webos. Cajones. The ability to play your game in the face of death without wilting and cowering under the threat. I totally agree with Red Auerbach on this one...stats only COUNT if they are in the final minutes.
We used to have guys with heart in the starting five as well as on the bench. Now...not as many.
You want proof that these things make for winners, and that losers lack them? Mike Finley had none of these. Neither does Matt. And the lack of intangibles leave Matty's glass half-empty. Quit with the stats already.
Last edited by Parker2112; 06-10-2010 at 02:00 PM.
Damn this is fine comment. Watching the finals and the play offs in general, I am always asking myself who the 'clutch' guys are? Kobe, is the best example of this, but Fisher is a another quality clutch player. He plays well, in the system, and is reliable in pressure situations. (As we well know...)
We did not seem to have enough of these players this year against the Suns.
Hopefully, we can pick up or train a few more for these important roles.
I hear you.
yeah, really nice watercolor by the author.
Finley was decent under pressure wasn't he?Mike Finley had none of these. Neither does Matt.
More than decent. Any Spursfan who says otherwise is a subjective Finley hater.
Finley was fearless, I'll give him that. But after '07, his long dry spells left us short more than half the time. You can't be a killer if you can't drain the shot, fearless or not.
That haterade can be blinding!
Huevos perhaps?
Web-OS is something that my Palm Pre uses.
But agreed, Bonner gets a serious case of blueball come playoff time.
The problem imo is not whether or not Bonner is productive or not. He is productive. It is simply that his production does not translate to winning. Especially in the playoffs.
I'd say the problem is his production consists of a sweet plus-minus in the regular season and a foul pant-load in the postseason. He's definitely a producer, though; of boxscore mastery and skid-marked laundry.
If Bonners on this team another year, the Spurs.
There's really not much left to say. It's simply time to move on.
How in tha did I come up with wee-bos...I think I'm going to call them that from now onHuevos perhaps?
Web-OS is something that my Palm Pre uses.
But agreed, Bonner gets a serious case of blueball come playoff time.
Much props on that sig, sir
Bonner's win share/48 minutes was actually pretty decent at .153. Anyone wanna know what Bogans' win share/48 was?
Look if you dare!
Hopefully this is a closed chapter in Spur's history...
Good job by 48MoH.
The key to appreciating players like Matt Bonner is to understand what they are, and understand what they are not. Either by overestimating what Bonner is, or simply out of necessity, the Spurs have often put Bonner in positions disproportionate to his skill level; this put him in a position to fail in the eyes of the fans.
Matt Bonner is a good shooter, but he should not be the 1st, 2nd, or 3rd offensive option the court. Matt Bonner competes well on defense, but he is not a defensive force, nor should he be put against the opposing team's best big man. Matt Bonner is a hard worker, a hustle player, and an all-around good guy, but he should not be relied upon to be anything more than a role player.
After watching him for several years, I think this sums up my opinion of Matt Bonner as a player:
5. He can be the 5th best big man on a championship team.
4. He can be the 4th best big man on a great team.
3. He can be the 3rd best big man on a decent to good team.
2. He can be the 2nd best big man on a decent to bad team.
1. He can be the best big man on a very bad team.
If the Spurs want to bring him back and expect him to be #5 on that list (perhaps #4 when injuries occur), then I'm all for it. However, there are two potential problems with this: a.) Bonner's familiarity with the system may cause Pop to play him as one of the first two big men off the bench on a regular basis, which could hurt the team, and b.) With Bonner's skill set, it's very possible that he gets more money from another team to be #2, #3, or #4 on the above list. (For what it's worth, I believe #1 on the list would probably only happen in the NBA due to injuries.)
Just 5 blocked shots in over 25 games/300 minutes of playoff basketball isn't going to cut it from a "power forward/center". He's become a tetris piece that just doesn't fit, IMO. If we need shooting, I'd honestly rather have a kyle Korver or Jason Kapono in our rotation at this point, rather than force Tim Duncan and DeJuan Blair to play center next to Bonner and his less than 1 three pointer per game in post-seasons. Having a stretch four is pointless if he's not stretching anything. Bonner, to me, should have a Sean Marks type of role, but he'll probably want/get more money than that - I say pass. The Raptors had no problem trading him and his expiring deal for Rasho's bloated contract, we shouldn't treat Bonner as irreplaceable either.
Bonner's a one-trick pony who usually forgets his trick when the games matter. The Spurs can't afford to be rolling big men out who couldn't guard their shadow or grab a board. Picking him over Scola is one of the biggest mistakes the front office has ever made, and it's time for them to acknowledge that and cut their losses.
Really can't say it any better than that.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
