What other metric do you propose? There are many, so throw a few out there. Or is this about his stellar performance in last nights game?+10000
the Ian avg season argument is one of the dumbest I ever read in a while.
People can think what they want about him being a bust, solid, filler, worth a bench spot... but using the avg season to back up the fact he is a bust...
Ian Mahinmi was nothing short of an injury-plagued bust for us. The Spurs spent years trying to develop this project and he came up flat. He was foul prone (which shows a lack of listening and learning skills) and couldn't stay on the court.
If he develops or "gets it" for another team, then good for him. But he didn't cut it here. Bottom line. No harm. He'll show flashes of being an NBA player but the only thing consistent about his game is that he's inconsistent.
It seems like Bonner kept the Spurs from developing Ian, and now Bonner is keeping the Spurs from developing Splitter. If only these guys had a three-point shot.
Exactly.
For anyone that "ACTUALLY" watched the game, it was pretty obvious that Ian had a very productive outing. I kept expecting Carlisle to pull him during crunch time, in favor of Haywood. It turns out, he did not. His effort, energy and production were rewarded by the head coach.
The difference is the Mavs seem committed to giving the kid some occasional court time, as opposed to simply deactivating him every game.
On point again.
The book on Ian hasn't been written. All those that proclaim him to be a bust are no more accurate or knowledgeable than someone proclaiming that he'll have a long career in the NBA. The point is no one knows just yet.
However what is clear, is that is the kid has demonstrated flashes of some ability. He's come a long way since his his days as an extremely raw 18-year-old, kid in the French league. His most recent performance versus the Warriors was just another indication. It's just a damn shame that the Spurs discarded him without him having been given a full opportunity for regular minutes.
I've said this over and over, but once Dice hangs it up after this season, the Spurs are going to have yet another hole along the frontline. It'll be such a "kick in the groin" if Ian does become a solid rotation player on another team.
How do all of you Ian apologists think the Spurs FO feels ? They used a 1st round pick on him. They worked with him, gave him chance after chance and he just didn't cut it. He couldn't crack the rotation. Do you all really think you know better than the coaching staff that saw him play day after day ? Unbelievable.
As for Splitter, I'm sure he will get more floor time. He's already shown that he's a much smarter player than Ian. There is no comparison. We have the best record in the NBA without him playing many minutes. How can people complain ? What the Spurs are doing is working. Patience everyone, he'll play more in the future.
If Splitter was taking Blair's minutes, I'm sure people would be complaining about that too. Trust Pop, he's got 4 rings and knows what he's doing.
No hate here.
This is Ian's description in the most simplest terms.
Does everyone think that "floor time" is the only time that coaches evaluate players???? Quit thinking that just if Ian got some playing time, he would have been any different. Pop had plenty of more oportunites than us to see how Ian was not gonna get it. Be it practice, summer league, etc.
That's the real truth - and the real crime.
Pop fell in love with this player, who gets a longer leash, a new contract, and inordinate amount of court time. All while maintaining a rep for playoff choking.
Is Ian's departure the result of the dreaded "organizational arrogance" on the part of the Spurs?
Or is it Pop's sudden metamorphosis into Don Nelson, that has seen him fall in love with players that can shoot the 3-ball, but can't play defense? All the while moving away from players that play a traditional post game.
That is still very much to be determined.
Before last night's game, Ian had played only 39 minutes in the first 20 games of the season. His season's totals for one quarter of the season were 9 points and 9 rebounds.
Most importantly, he played more than 4:07 only once all season, in the game against the Spurs when Haywood was suspended. So, his only real PT with the Mavs came in one game when Haywood was not available and another game when Chandler was not available. He was also one of two little used French centers that set a career high in rebounding last night. Alex Ajinca (who had played only 3 minutes all) played in the first half when Haywood and Ian were in foul trouble and got 6 rebounds in 9 minutes.
We'll find out if the Mavs have any committment to play Ian once Chandler returns to the line-up. There's only 48 minutes at center and, outside of garbage time, they have been divided between Chandler and Haywood all season.
Another solid point. Seven-foot tall, athletic bigs are not falling out of the sky.+10000
the Ian avg season argument is one of the dumbest I ever read in a while.
People can think what they want about him being a bust, solid, filler, worth a bench spot... but using the avg season to back up the fact he is a bust...
I agree with posters saying that it's a pitty spending so much money and time to develop a young prospect to let him go on a rival squad for nothing.
BTW Mavs FO are saying thank you Spurs for teaching him the D fundamental ! Now they can work on a solid basis to improve his O touch.
IMHO baring injuries Ian could become a good big off the bench. I'm not saying he will but he worth the gamble: it's not like this kind of athlete was easy to find nowadays.
I think your latter argument holds more weight, albeit out of necessity rather than by choice as you seem to imply (apologies if I misread your intent).
Truth is, the 3 best defensive players (and the best post player) the Spurs had are no longer on the roster (Bowen, Horry, Duncan (yes Timmy!!!)). I see this as a case of Pop making due with what he's got available now. It's not pretty at times, but it's beginning to gel as evidenced by the start we've had.
This isn't an argument for Bonner playing X minutes, or Y minutes. What I am saying is that hindsight is always 20/20 and arguing Ian's potential is like getting on the carnival ride that never ends.
Let's not get all self-righteous and pretend that Pop, or any coach, for that matter, is above criticism or makes ALL the right decisions on personnel. I trust Pop too. He's one of the best coaches in the NBA and certainly one of the best "in-game" strategists the NBA has ever seen. However, that doesn't mean that he doesn't get some things wrong - and he'll probably be the first to admit that. He can be roundly criticized for his man-love attachments to players like Finley, Van Exel and Stoudamire. Veterans who were given long leashes and extended court time because of their resume, iwhen it was clear from their performances, that they were well past their primes.
Pop can be roundly second-guessed many of his decisions. How about benching Hill in the 2008 playoffs - at least up until the 5th and final game. All because he didn't trust him?
Or how about the long leash he continues to extend to the red-headed, 3-point chucker, Bonner? Giving him carte blance' court time, even during games, where he's obviously struggling with his shot.
How about the "slow development boat to China" that Splitter is currently on? The kid is supposedly smart and as Pop likes to say, "knows how to play". However, the decision to keep the kid on the bench - even for multiple games - can indeed be questioned.
Don't get it twisted. It's very possible that he could've erred on Ian.
You omitted the possibility that Ian is redundant with the arrival of Splitter, who even now is clearly more of a player than Ian may ever be even if the box score doesn't necessarily show it. Splitter is smart and experienced with competing at a much higher level, period.
Last season, Ian didn't beat Dice or Blair out of the rotation (despite having size, athleticism, and seniority over DeJuan), and comparing him to Bonner isn't apt since the Red Rocket is more of a role player than a post player. Add Splitter and the weak link is obviously Ian. Doesn't mean he's a bad player, just that he didn't develop enough in his time in SA to merit retention. Hope he continues to grow under Carlisle, even if it does suck we couldn't keep working with him.
As for the issue of the Spurs giving up on D... c'mon, man. We aren't the defensive monsters we've been in seasons past, but we're better than we've been in years, and we are demonstrably improving from game to game. Tony is playing more defense than I've ever seen from him, Neal and Jefferson have been pleasant surprises, Hill is no slouch, and Manu, Tim, and Dice are proving to be far beyond viable, contrary to what their mileage would suggest. Ignoring the possibility of injuries, this squad has nowhere to go but up from the 7th best (last I checked) D in the league.
Wow - 6 pages about nothing - Ian was given and opportunity and on this night against a bad team he took advantage of it - kinda like the Nets last year - go randomly look at scrubs on other teams that have been in NBA 3+ years and chances are a large number of them will have career highs of 16+ pts, or 10+ rebs, 2+ blks, etc - guys at this level have talent and on few nights when stars align put it together (Bonner has scored 28pts in a game, grabbed 17 rebs, and had 3 blocks at times in his career)
Spurs had 4+ years of observing/evaluating this guy and decided to move on - this game certainly doesn't show that decision to be a mistake - Ian is young and maybe he does go on to get it with a different organization - happens all the time in sports to every organization - you can't control guys maturity, effort, priorities, or injuries.
Bottom Line - At this point Ian is just as likely to disappear to the end of the Mavs bench as he is to become a regular contributor to his new team
He started playing hoops when he was 15
His first pro season was 2004-2005 (he played 3 games and 4 minutes in 2003-2004)... he was 18 and drafted at the end of that season.
Obviously he still had a lot of things to learn.
Then he had two solid season in Le Havre and Pau (considering he was playing for less than 5 years).
In the D-League he was considered the bigman with the biggest upside.
One season injured...
And no real opportunity since.
I don't miss Mahinmi much but he learned the game rather fast IMO.
Ian's big game on NBTV right now.
Lets all watch and see what could have been
I also don't think Mahinmi got a fair shot when he was healthy for the Spurs.
BUT, it doesn't really matter anymore. He's in Dallas, so it's time to move on.
I just hope the past "handling" of Mahinmi, doesn't spell a similar fate for Splitter.
One was MVP of the Euroleague Finals he won, the other was... not. That should be enough to assuage everybody's fears.
Anybody claiming Ian > Bonner is on some really good crack. Ian never proved he was more than a 12th insurance man. Some due to injuries, some due to poor play.
Your point is well taken, but Splitter was the Spanish League Finals and regular season MVP. He did not play in the Euroleague finals.
[QUOTE=admiralsnackbar;4805621][Last season, Ian didn't beat Dice or Blair out of the rotation (despite having size, athleticism, and seniority over DeJuan), and comparing him to Bonner isn't apt since the Red Rocket is more of a role player than a post player. Add Splitter and the weak link is obviously Ian. Doesn't mean he's a bad player, just that he didn't develop enough in his time in SA to merit retention. Hope he continues to grow under Carlisle, even if it does suck we couldn't keep working with him./QUOTE]
Very good point. And considering that Pop added Splitter this year, thats one more big in a crowded position. If It came down to signing either Bonner or Mahimni, IMO, the Spurs made the right call, with signing Bonner. We all know what Bonner can and cannot do. That one thing he can do(make 3's) makes him an asset. Mahimni, has always had the physical talent, but, he is still in a developmental stage, just like Blair and Splitter. It would make no sense to attempt to try and develop 3 young bigs on this Spurs roster. Not enough minutes.
not that far fetched of a claim - bonner's a one trick pony and that wouldn't be so bad if he came of the bench for situations that needed a 3 instead of averaging 20 min p/game as a big. Look at Ian's per minute numbers vs. bonner's - he's better in points, rebounds and blocks.
I'm sure I'll get the "Ian only plays in garbage time" argument, but I'd guess over 80% of bonner's shots are when he's wide open.
Actually, I think I would have rather had Tolliver instead of bonner - very comparible numbers at half the price.
If you're talking about 3's, he only shoots when wide open.
And then when you take into consideration that he has failed so far in the playoffs...
I agree with you that Ian over Bonner isn't too farfetched.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
