Ginobili is a starter . . .

[TD 21]

Yes Neal is a guard, a 6-4 wing that ended up being asked to defend 6-8 Jackson, 6-8 Derrick Brown, and 6-4 Gerald Henderson in Charlotte. Why, you ask? Because Pop went small so Neal had to defend them on the wing. The other choices were 6-7 wing Gerald Wallace or 6-7 wing Shaun Livingston. The plan worked because Neal bombed away for 15 points.

Why argue the obvious? Neal is a small wing that Pop has used to guard taller wings...but primarily because he wants him to outscore them, not shut them down.
Saying Neal is a 2 isn't a valud argument when reality with Gregg Popovich says I'll use players as I see fit, to create an edge. Twos and threes are interchangeable in San Antonio.

One thing we can agree on is the injury to Anderson has created a real hole behind RJ, especially when the Spurs have to play teams with size and physicality on the wing.

I know the two is technically a wing position, but Neal is more guard than he is wing. Anderson is a wing, because he can easily play both positions.

Twos and threes are interchangeable on the Spurs within' reason. It's one thing to guard Brown, it's another thing to guard James, Anthony, Durant, etc. Neal was shooting too well not to play extended minutes, so naturally at some point he was going to have to guard either Jackson or Wallace. But generally speaking, Pop will try to keep him away from disadvantageous match-ups. Guys like Brown, even though he has a significant size advantage, aren't as worrisome, because he's not much of a scoring threat.

I expect, in at least one of these two games this weekend, Gee to get a shot. But I also expect, unless he shows that he can be a reliable three-point shooter and keeps his mistakes to a minimum, him to be replaced at some point in the next two weeks. My guess is they sign Hayes.

[ohmwrecker]

Why is that? Because it's not about putting your best talent on the floor from the jump, it's about getting the most out of your individual talent in a team concept. And again, in a perfect world or the most ideal scenario, having a Big 3 of Duncan, Parker and Jefferson starting with the offensive and defensive skillsets of both Splitter and Anderson, you best address need and concern for both ends of the court to start and provide the type of second unit that can make a good lead grow, turn a close game into a lead or can even get the team out of the hole if need be.

But it ain't a perfect world. You do what you've got to do.

If the team needs Manu (or anyone else) to start, he (they) should. Whatever the team needs.

99% of time, getting the most out of your individual talent in a team and starting your best players is conceptually equative. I am all for giving Blair a little more time as a starter and it's possible that McDyess wouldn't be as productive as he currently is, as a starter. However, it's also possible that Blair would be just as, or maybe more, productive in the same role.

I think that Blair and Hill running the 2nd unit together could be the cure for what ails both players. After Manu, who has already proven he can do it, Blair seems to be the next most likely player on the team who can potentially be a bench sparkplug. He might need to be more of an an offensive focal point than being in the starting lineup can afford him.

In a perfect world, Splitter would be ready to start and morph into Arvydas Sabonis, but, like you said . . . it ain't a perfect world.

The Spurs are winning and there is no need to change too much, which is why I am advocating for Manu remaining a starter. Given Anderson's injury, it's understandable that one might want to make some adjustments to the rotation. That's fine. I just don't think that it's so severe that they have to make wholesale changes.

[Blackjack]

Get a clue

Mucca, what?!?!

99% of time, getting the most out of your individual talent in a team and starting your best players is conceptually equative. I am all for giving Blair a little more time as a starter and it's possible that McDyess wouldn't be as productive as he currently is, as a starter. However, it's also possible that Blair would be just as, or maybe more, productive in the same role.

You get the most out of your team when your individual players can get the most out of their talent while not deviating from the script. It's not about numbers or minutes, it's about their impact and effect on the team.

Now, if your best talent all happens to play the right positions and roles and be at the right stage (age) of their career, then there's no question you start them, play them as much as possible and let the chips fall where they may. But the Spurs' Top-4 only play the right positions, as in 1-5, not necessarily roles.

Somebody's got to be the the perimeter defender and both Manu and Duncan are to the point where you get diminishing returns -- no longer is there the assumption that more minutes means a better result. So if both Duncan and Manu are going to play around 30 minutes, what's the difference if someone like Manu comes off the bench?

I'm not telling you I believe that Manu should be coming off the bench at this point, I'm simply stating him becoming the 6th Man again isn't a ridiculous notion. I'm stating that playing your best talent from the jump doesn't necessarily mean your doing what's best for the team. There's only one ball, there are two ends of the court and it takes a team to win at the highest of levels, not a starting-5.

I think that Blair and Hill running the 2nd unit together could be the cure for what ails both players. After Manu, who has already proven he can do it, Blair seems to be the next most likely player on the team who can potentially be a bench sparkplug. He might need to be more of an an offensive focal point than being in the starting lineup can afford him.

I believe Blair will be a Sixth Man or first big off the bench for this team when all is said and done. At least, if all goes as planned and Splitter is the player most of us believe him to be. But I also believe his growth and development are pertinent to this team's success.

And with that in mind, I believe Blair needs the reps. He needs to iron out the wrinkles and figure things out alongside the Big 3 (or 4). It's a marathon not a sprint, the cliche of all cliches, and it just happens to be something I believe. You use the regular season as a means to an end so long as that means isn't to your end's detriment.

In a perfect world, Splitter would be ready to start and morph into Arvydas Sabonis, but, like you said . . . it ain't a perfect world.

That's a dream world, a chemically-induced world, not a perfect world -- I was simply saying if a team and its individual players could play to their potential or to the best of their ability.

The Spurs are winning and there is no need to change too much, which is why I am advocating for Manu remaining a starter. Given Anderson's injury, it's understandable that one might want to make some adjustments to the rotation. That's fine. I just don't think that it's so severe that they have to make wholesale changes.

I have absolutely no problem with that, Ohmnipotence. None what-so-ever . . .

If it ain't broke don't fix it. But if it should happen to turn out that the Spurs could spark Hill by starting him or find a better way to utilize their individual talent in another role for the betterment of their long-term outlook, I'd have no problem with that either.

I just happen to take a long-term approach when it comes to this team and I believe the Spurs do the same thing. And if it should turn out that having Manu come off the bench again makes players like Hill, Blair or anyone else contribute more to the cause, that's got to be something you're willing to accept. Ain't nothing wrong with it -- you're going to get the same Manu regardless.

[ohmwrecker]

I have absolutely no problem with that, Ohmnipotence. None what-so-ever . . .

If it ain't broke don't fix it. But if it should happen to turn out that the Spurs could spark Hill by starting him or find a better way to utilize their individual talent in another role for the betterment of their long-term outlook, I'd have no problem with that either.

I just happen to take a long-term approach when it comes to this team and I believe the Spurs do the same thing. And if it should turn out that having Manu come off the bench again makes players like Hill, Blair or anyone else contribute more to the cause, that's got to be something you're willing to accept. Ain't nothing wrong with it -- you're going to get the same Manu regardless.

We're just talking here, but I think we are on the same page. I don't think my proposal is going to affect the Spurs' long-term approach anymore than your suggestion of starting Anderson. These are just ideas. I agree that giving Blair and Hill reps is a positive tact, but I'm not convinced that has much to do with whether or not they start, or come off the bench.
I think the best approach for these young guys is to define their role, give them the challenge and coach them to the best potential result of that goal. Most of all these kids just need to get out and play ball. Trying to force the issue by making the 2nd unit play from a deficit isn't going to help their development.

Splitter and Neal are different animals. Those kids are pros. Ice cold killers.

[Solid D]

In the game versus Philly, Ginobili replaced Jefferson at SF. Gino went out half-way through the 1st quarter then came back in for Jefferson 3 minutes later. Gee was the other backup SF. It remains to be seen if Pop sticks with that formula.

[TMTTRIO]

Yes Manu's a little bit more injury prone but I've never understood why people believe that he's so fragile as glass that he's going to break down and why thinking that coming off the bench is better at saving him. If he's that frail like everyone wants to make him out to be then maybe it's not worth having. He's only suffered one or two major injuries since being with the Spurs all of these years and having played summers too. For all the punishment that he's taken he's done very well. I actually think he could've played more minutes (he's even said that he felt like he could) but being as conservative as he has Pop has just watched his minutes. Also coming off the bench actually put a lot more pressure on Manu to produce and have to be the target for other teams. Now that he's starting he can relax some of the time.