Noooo, Spurs re-sign Bonner

[ElNono]

But spreading the floor through Bonner has worked really well in the regular season and there is no reason why it shouldn't in the post-season with spot minutes for Bonner. The thing is ..if he made some of his threes and did better than Frye for the Suns, the Spurs had a chance to avert that 0-4, which didn't happen. I suppose RCB/Pop thought it was better to trust Bonner to "get it" rather than try getting someone without "corporate knowledge".

Sure there's a reason. In the playoffs you have the very best teams and the pressure mounts tenfold. Some guys thrive in that atmosphere (guys like Horry, Kerr, SJax) and other guys curl into a fetal position like Matt.

As far as 'corporate knowledge', we had 3 seasons of Matt Bonner in the system to see if he could "get it". Yet he still periodically misses rotations, he's an awful team defender (because he's an awful defender period). We're running out of Duncan seasons waiting for this guy to "get it". I think it's Splitter or Blair turn to see if they "get it", but the only way Bonner is not getting minutes is if he's not in the bench. So this was a wasted opportunity to get rid of the guy.

I also suppose that the seasons with Oberto/Rasho in the mix were those where Timmy was at his dominant peak and there were a lot more competent 3 specialists around him. I guess Bonner with his relatively better rebounding, a la Robert Horry as a sweet shooting PF made sense in the later seasons.

Bonner is an awful rebounder. And Bonner is not Horry.
Let me say that one more time: Bonner is not Horry.

As far as Duncan, now that he's definitely on the decline, wouldn't you want more help for him? Wouldn't you want somebody to help him defending the paint and help out with rebounding? Somebody to help banging with the top guys in the league? Why would you want somebody parking his ass on the perimeter, who is also a terrible defender and rebounder?

But there was definitely improvement from one season to another for Bonner since his arrival. What is not to say that ..if injury free.. he could deliver? There is a risk to take, but weighed against the fact that the alternatives include Steve Novak/ 3 shooting 3s, I guess, it was worth taking that risk. We have to wait till the '10-'11 playoffs to know for sure.

You didn't answer my previous question. He was injury free in 2008-2009. He got the looks, why couldn't he deliver then? How many more seasons are we going to wait for this guy to show up and deliver?

[ElNono]

I guess we should have re-signed Mason and Bogans for 4 more seasons too. Maybe they'll show up and deliver this time around. You know, Mason was injured!!!

[Dr. Gonzo]

Becuse the fans will now blame him for our failure for 4 more years instead of focusing on Pop.

Why couldn't they have fired Pop and hired Mike Brown. Popastink is a terrible coach.

[ElNono]

Why couldn't they have fired Pop and hired Mike Brown. Popastink is a terrible coach.

What happened to your 'hotdog-getting-a-mus -facial' avatar?

[ohmwrecker]

Mike Brown is a terrible coach.

[rmt]

With the exception of the part about O'Neal, I agree. I'm just saying, if you're going to judge a contract, you should judge it based off of market value and not let your personal opinion of the player cloud your judgment as to whether it was a fair contract or not.

So just because you can get him for market value, you should get him even though he has choked over and over in the playoffs. If you're going for market value, maybe we should re-sign Bogans and Mason for vet. min. If it's 3 point shooting we want, I'd prefer to roll the dice and hope that Anderson or Neal work out. I already know that Bonner doesn't. How about some toughness, grit and rebounding - you know, things that win championships?

I don't see the comparison between Bonner and Frye. Frye toasted us in the playoffs with clutch 3's. When has Bonner ever done that?

[TD 21]

So just because you can get him for market value, you should get him even though he has choked over and over in the playoffs. If you're going for market value, maybe we should re-sign Bogans and Mason for vet. min. If it's 3 point shooting we want, I'd prefer to roll the dice and hope that Anderson or Neal work out. I already know that Bonner doesn't. How about some toughness, grit and rebounding - you know, things that win championships?

I don't see the comparison between Bonner and Frye. Frye toasted us in the playoffs with clutch 3's. When has Bonner ever done that?

That's not at all what I said. You lack reading comprehension.

[boo_radley]

Terms of Bonner's deal

[rmt]

But Spurs should never have re-signed Bonner even if it was at his market value. When your goal is to win a NBA championship like Spurs, you don't spend money on players that disappear during the playoffs.

TD21, I apologize for not getting your point. This is my point above.

[TD 21]

TD21, I apologize for not getting your point. This is my point above.

No problem. I know that's your point and I agree with it.

[Mel_13]

Having Bonner is like buying a 55" flat screen TV for $600 that only works from October to March. Only in SpursTalk you'll be asked: 'Well, what other 55" flat screen TV could you buy for $600?'.

It's the wrong question, dammit.

I would have trust Blair, Duncan, Dice and Splitter to be my main PF/C rotation and for the 5th bigman spot, I would have signed a random player for the min.

[Nathan89]

A prime example of "butthurt"

I am not butthurt, my message was this should not be a thread. Look what happened it got merged. If you thought I was butthurt because my thread was vanished you are wrong. According to Kori Ellis my thread "Equality on Spurstalk" will comeback.

[Borosai]

Bonner's gonna crack some heads this year.

[benefactor]

Bonner's gonna crack some heads this year.

Damn straight. No lettuce head is safe around the Sandwich Guru.

[DesignatedT]

Damn straight. No lettuce head is safe around the Sandwich Guru.

lmao

[Spursfanfromafar]

Bonner is an awful rebounder. And Bonner is not Horry.
Let me say that one more time: Bonner is not Horry.

He is not. But he has done the best approximation in the regular season and that is revealed in all those advanced stats, the +/-s etc. Except that he hasn't replicated it in the playoffs, which was where Horry ruled. So the ability is there, the improvement is also there. His performance from last years's playoffs over the previous ones, despite winding recovery from a finger injury was an improvement, even if not enough. FOs and coaches want to see if the player has the ability and has the cojones to improve on their watch. They then judge whether failures can be lived up with, in light of evidence of possibility of improvement. Evidence is 50-50 and a palatable contract based on that is not too bad.

And I don't agree that he is a terrible or an awful player or all that. He is at best an inconsistent rebounder. But a very good three point shooter and a trier at defense. Check out all of timvp's game recaps last season and you will understand.

You didn't answer my previous question. He was injury free in 2008-2009. He got the looks, why couldn't he deliver then? How many more seasons are we going to wait for this guy to show up and deliver?

5 games in a series where the Spurs under-performed throughout. Too small a sample size.

[benefactor]

Look out...he pulled the +/- card.

[Spursfanfromafar]

Look out...he pulled the +/- card.

so? Its better than no card.

[The Truth #6]

I hear some players need six years to master the system. Trust the system!

But more seriously, Bonner has low BBIQ and shouldn't be seen as more than a one trick pony. He's never made a great pass or any other skilled basketball play other than shooting. Horry on average wasn't a great shooter for us but hit big shots and made big players. Bonner is the opposite of that.

[benefactor]

so? Its better than no card.

If anything Bonner is a prime example of why that stat is pure garbage.

[thOOdee]

sometimes stats don't paint the full picture....making threes one after another when the spurs are already up by 20 helps your stats and looks good, but if you watch the spurs games, even a child can tell he doesn't belong out there....
and on those occasions of bonner knocking down 3's...when the player your guarding comes back and negates your points, there is no point of even having him out there.

there should be a stat of how many points get scored on you...kinda hard to track, but i bet it will help a team realize what they have in players of bonners CALIBER.

[angelbelow]

He is not. But he has done the best approximation in the regular season and that is revealed in all those advanced stats, the +/-s etc. Except that he hasn't replicated it in the playoffs, which was where Horry ruled. So the ability is there, the improvement is also there. His performance from last years's playoffs over the previous ones, despite winding recovery from a finger injury was an improvement, even if not enough. FOs and coaches want to see if the player has the ability and has the cojones to improve on their watch. They then judge whether failures can be lived up with, in light of evidence of possibility of improvement. Evidence is 50-50 and a palatable contract based on that is not too bad.

And I don't agree that he is a terrible or an awful player or all that. He is at best an inconsistent rebounder. But a very good three point shooter and a trier at defense. Check out all of timvp's game recaps last season and you will understand.



5 games in a series where the Spurs under-performed throughout. Too small a sample size.

seriously bro? or are you a girl?

[ElNono]

He is not. But he has done the best approximation in the regular season and that is revealed in all those advanced stats, the +/-s etc. Except that he hasn't replicated it in the playoffs, which was where Horry ruled. So the ability is there, the improvement is also there. His performance from last years's playoffs over the previous ones, despite winding recovery from a finger injury was an improvement, even if not enough. FOs and coaches want to see if the player has the ability and has the cojones to improve on their watch. They then judge whether failures can be lived up with, in light of evidence of possibility of improvement. Evidence is 50-50 and a palatable contract based on that is not too bad.

We ain't getting the Larry O'Brien by winning the regular season +/- championship. This isn't the Dallas Mavericks.

And Horry freaking mailed it in the regular season, but showed up in the playoffs, when the games matter. This is where Matt is full of fail.

And I don't agree that he is a terrible or an awful player or all that. He is at best an inconsistent rebounder. But a very good three point shooter and a trier at defense. Check out all of timvp's game recaps last season and you will understand.

A career 3.5 rebound per game (2.0 in the playoffs) for a 6'10 PF is not awful? I mean, you have to almost purposely not want to grab boards.

Maybe you should revisit timvp's game recaps from the past two playoffs. I actually watch the games, all of them. That guy is a waste of a roster spot.

5 games in a series where the Spurs under-performed throughout. Too small a sample size.

He got the looks, he shriveled into fetal position. Two seasons in a row. Passing shots, throwing bricks, and letting scrubs like Dudley and ponytail toy around with him. What else you need to see? When he 3 threes in a row when we're up 20+? There's no more excuses for this guy.

[ElNono]

I hear some players need six years to master the system. Trust the system!

But more seriously, Bonner has low BBIQ and shouldn't be seen as more than a one trick pony. He's never made a great pass or any other skilled basketball play other than shooting. Horry on average wasn't a great shooter for us but hit big shots and made big players. Bonner is the opposite of that.

This is exactly why you can't pull the Horry card with Matt. He's a great guy, sandwich lover, and he hustles and tries hard. Nobody is taking that away from him. But he's just not a smart player like Horry was. You can't teach that. You either have it or you don't.

[ElNono]

-Matt Bonner was most responsible for losing the game for the Spurs. Point blank. With Frye going 5-for-6 from three-point range, San Antonio's bench bigman shooter responded by missing all four of his shots. That's a 15-point swing the Spurs simply can't overcome. You can now etch it in stone that Bonner is a playoff choker. He doesn't want to shoot open shots and he misses the ones he does take. He's now 10-for-32 from the field in the playoffs and 5-for-20 on threes. What makes it even worse is virtually all of those shots are without a soul around him. It's just a damn shame.