http://courtsideanalyst.wordpress.co...ective-height/
Spurs in this interesting analyses actually played taller than some taller teams and are not far behind the Lakers - and by this analysis height may be over-ranked. It is a year old but is food for thought and based on a system used by a prettly well respected statiscal analyst of basketball data.
I'm not sold at all by this composite stat. Blocks is arguably the most overrated stat and it has the most weight in it.
There is a simple stat that I find great to judge the "effective height": it's points allowed in the paint. It isn't perfect since it doesn't count fouls drawn in the paint and doesn't show FG% in the paint but it gives a damn good idea of this "effective height".
Spurs are this year 20th in points allowed in the paint...
Is that good or bad, Bruno? I'm too tired to understand.
Spurs let opponents score a lot of points in the paint, so, no, it's not a good stat.
I don't care about composite stats. As far as playoff basketball is concerned, the only thing I know is that the team that rules the glass and dictates the lower opp FG%, is the team that usually wins the game. FG% aside, it's tough to rule the glass when you're at a size disadvantage.
I'd like to see how many points are scored in the paint with Bonner out and Splitter in.
All of this makes me wonder if the annual Camby trade talks should begin. He is due back in a few weeks. What would be a possible scenario for getting him
concerning about size hahahaha
have u seen ghlll3 size?
No thanks, too injury-prone.
All the talk about the Lakers' frontline has gotten old, particularly when a rookie recently outscored that frontline all by himself. DeJuan also fared very well against them earlier this season.
The Lakers also don't have a lot of bench depth. The Mavericks were able to beat LA, who was only missing Barnes, without Butler and with a Dirk Nowitzki who is still trying to get back to pre-injury form.
I agree that it's gotten a bit old, but if you see the Spurs offensive machine dry up at any point in a 7-game series, the lack of size on the frontline will definitely start to matter. Points in the paint and rebounding are huge factors when attempting to beat a team 4 times in 7 tries. Yes, the Lakers frontline was smashed on by a rookie, but I certainly wouldn't pick that to happen 4 out of 7 times. Same goes for DeJuan, as much as I love that beastly young fella. It's a valid concern.
Rebounding is a huge factor, but the Spurs bigs, despite collectively being undersized, are better rebounders than the Lakers bigs and far and away better than the Celtics'. I don't care if those two teams have 8-footers, superior size and length does not a great rebounder make. Look no further than this team. Blair is barely 6-7 in shoes, Splitter is a legit 6-11, yet Blair is the far better rebounder.
If people are worried about the Spurs ability to guard the Lakers bigs, then I understand the concern, but rebounding shouldn't be a concern. They've more than held their own against the Lakers last season and in the one meeting this season. Granted, the Lakers have been missing one of their three bigs in a few of those games, but even the times they all played, it's not like they bludgeoned the Spurs on the glass. In fact, I'm fairly certain the Spurs have out rebounded the Lakers in that time.
At this point in their careers, Davis is a better player than Blair (Blair has the higher upside, though). But if Davis can not just play, but thrive against the Lakers bigs, then why can't Blair? He's even more acrobatic finishing around the rim and is a far better rebounder.
I'd argue that Splitter is a poor example to use, but I get your reasoning here. Love is better than Darko, etc.
I'd only be concerned if the nature of the playoffs-style game keeps the Spurs from playing the way they've played all year. I feel like the newer, and more mobile Spurs have thrived playing in the system they are now, and others (like Duncan, Dice, etc.) are growing accustomed to it. But I worry that things might change in a 7-game series against a team with greater size and/or ability to execute (offensively and defensively) in the half-court.
I'm not saying it can't happen, or that I don't hope it'll happen, and I'm certainly not conceding victory to the Lakers or Celtics. I'm just stating that it's a concern. Honestly, I've been impressed by Blair's gradual improvement in the starting role this year. It actually seems like Pop has had a plan in place for Blair from the end of last season. He's put him into the starting role, he hasn't deviated, and all he's done is limit his minutes when he struggles and turn it into a teachable moment. I hope the upward trend continues and DeJuan blows the Laker bigs out of the water. But am I a little wary still? Sure... the teams I feel are most in the Spurs' way have won the last three les.
wtf u comparing blair to big baby
big baby uses his body and just bulldozers up for a easy 2, his got the height advantage over blair and hustle...
blair does have better upside due to defense quick hands swatting the ball
He's an excellent example. He's a near 7-footer, with good mobility, yet he's a mediocre rebounder.
"The way they've played all year", I keep hearing that. As if this is the D'Antoni Suns and they've played at a blistering pace. For the Spurs, they've played at a blistering pace, but overall, they play at a good pace, but they've not exactly flying up and down the court relentlessly.I'd only be concerned if the nature of the playoffs-style game keeps the Spurs from playing the way they've played all year. I feel like the newer, and more mobile Spurs have thrived playing in the system they are now, and others (like Duncan, Dice, etc.) are growing accustomed to it. But I worry that things might change in a 7-game series against a team with greater size and/or ability to execute (offensively and defensively) in the half-court.
As if I said it wasn't a concern? In terms of flat out defending the post, specifically against the Lakers, it is. But rebounding wise, it isn't. Too many lump the two together, as if they're one and the same.I'm not saying it can't happen, or that I don't hope it'll happen, and I'm certainly not conceding victory to the Lakers or Celtics. I'm just stating that it's a concern. Honestly, I've been impressed by Blair's gradual improvement in the starting role this year. It actually seems like Pop has had a plan in place for Blair from the end of last season. He's put him into the starting role, he hasn't deviated, and all he's done is limit his minutes when he struggles and turn it into a teachable moment. I hope the upward trend continues and DeJuan blows the Laker bigs out of the water. But am I a little wary still? Sure... the teams I feel are most in the Spurs' way have won the last three les.
Blair is still up and down, but he's been more solid as the season has wore on. I don't see the amount of ridiculous shots or turnovers as before, nor as much sloppy defense. But if if turns out Blair can't cut it against the Lakers, they can just start McDyess and give Splitter McDyess' left behind bench minutes. It's probably going to take all five bigs playing a part to get through the Lakers anyway. Even if he's not in the rotation, there's probably going to come a game where one of the rotation bigs is in foul trouble, or are struggling defending the post, etc., where the Spurs will need to lean on Splitter.
It's fine to be concerned about the Lakers and Celtics (just as their fans should be about the Spurs). You'd be a fool not to be. But I don't give a damn what they've won. This team, at their core, has proven champions. When they last won is irrelevant. They've won and they've won many times over and health willing, they've got a heck of a chance to do so again this season.
Adding a guy like Camby isn't likely to end many scoring droughts when the machine "dries up."
This team isn't going to beat the Lakers trying to match up big with them (not many can) - but they have their own mismatches that LA is going to have all kinds of problems staying with as well. Blair wasn't a fluke - smaller/quicker post guys have given the Lakers problems most of the season (Baby last night, Landry went for a double-double Friday, Marion tore them up a couple weeks ago, etc).
But who says you have to match up with them? PHX was a few defensive stops (as always) from making things really interesting last year. On the other hand, how are the Lakers going to match up with the Spurs backcourt? The Lakers have the best guard in that matchup, but the Spurs then have the next 4 best players after that.
Personally, assuming everybody stays healthy from here on out (knock on wood), I think that potential series could well come down to Jefferson/Artest. If they both play like they have thus far this season - Spurs could win in a route. If both go back to the way they played last season, Lakers would be very hard to beat.
The reason he's not a good example, imo, is because Splitter has never been known as a good rebounder. Gasol and Bynum are known as good rebounders, and they also have a size advantage. If Gasol and Bynum rebounded like Splitter, I wouldn't be concerned at all.
You brought up the D'Antoni Suns, not me. It's obvious the Spurs are playing at a faster pace than they have traditionally, and it's pretty well known that the pace slows down even more in the playoffs for a variety of reasons. I hope the Spurs can keep up their current pace, and use that as a weapon (in addition to all the others they employ) against the Lakers.
I didn't lump them together. I think they're both a concern. If you don't agree, that's fine. Duncan and Blair are good rebounders, but so are Bynum and Gasol... and they're bigger. I'm not losing sleep over it, but I think it's a legit point in a 7-game series.
In my opinion, that wouldn't cut it for an entire series against the Lakers. Splitter is not a good rebounder. We need Blair in there performing at a moderate to high level on the glass. I'm not saying we absolutely need to go and get somebody else, like Camby, but if we did I do think it would help. The guy defends and rebounds well. What's the bone of contention?
Agreed.
Never said he would. All I said was that a guy like Camby would help us defend and rebound when droughts like that occur.
This will still be the case whether the Spurs add a player like Camby to the roster or not. I'm not saying the Spurs should try to match-up with the Lakers size for size. I'm just saying he'd be a help. I don't want the dude starting every game and playing 40 mins. He's just better than Splitter right now, and he'd help.
Camby plays good defense, alters shots, etc. He probably would have helped the Suns too.
Where did I say the Lakers could match the Spurs' backcourt? And how does the addition of Camby (or really any shotblocking, rebounding, defensive-minded big) change that? I'm not saying the Spurs should give up George Hill, or anybody, for him. I'm just saying he'd help because I think that rebounding and defending against points in the paint are a concern for the Spurs against the Lakers, Celtics, etc.
Agreed.
That's the whole point. Despite being 6-11, he's not a good rebounder. Gasol and Bynum may be known as good rebounders, but that's more a product of their size and how novice fans automatically equate that to being a good rebounder than it is sheer numbers. Bynum and Gasol are fairly good rebounders, but neither is anything close to dominant. Duncan and Blair are dominant rebounders. In fact, between the two teams, the Spurs have the top two and three of the top four players in rebound rate.
I know I did. They're an example of a team that played at a blistering pace; the Spurs don't. They play quicker than we're accustomed to seeing from them, but they're not playing so quick to where it's difficult to see it translating to post season success.You brought up the D'Antoni Suns, not me. It's obvious the Spurs are playing at a faster pace than they have traditionally, and it's pretty well known that the pace slows down even more in the playoffs for a variety of reasons. I hope the Spurs can keep up their current pace, and use that as a weapon (in addition to all the others they employ) against the Lakers.
I didn't say you did. But most do. As I already stated, Duncan and Blair are the two best rebounders between the two teams. Who cares if they're smaller than Bynum and Gasol? That's my point. Rebounding wise, it's not a concern. Post defense wise, it is.I didn't lump them together. I think they're both a concern. If you don't agree, that's fine. Duncan and Blair are good rebounders, but so are Bynum and Gasol... and they're bigger. I'm not losing sleep over it, but I think it's a legit point in a 7-game series.
It doesn't have to. One of the two have to give the Spurs quality rotation minutes, that's it. They don't need 30 mpg and a double double average out of both. What would Camby help in? His rebounding would help, but as I've repeatedly said, this notion that the Lakers bigs are better rebounders than the Spurs bigs is a myth. Camby's strength defensively is not as a straight up defender. He'd be overpowered by Bynum and out-quicked by Odom. His only chance would be against Gasol. The Spurs have Splitter, though, in terms of just having a second long post defender to throw up against them.In my opinion, that wouldn't cut it for an entire series against the Lakers. Splitter is not a good rebounder. We need Blair in there performing at a moderate to high level on the glass. I'm not saying we absolutely need to go and get somebody else, like Camby, but if we did I do think it would help. The guy defends and rebounds well. What's the bone of contention?
And if they had Camby, they'd have the top 2 and 4 of the 5 top players in rebound rate, yeah? Again, my only real point is that Camby would help. Duncan is not a young man anymore, and Blair is undersized, and I worry (not much, but a bit) that the Laker bigs might wear them down in a long series.
Again, I never mentioned anything about a blistering pace. I've never seen the Spurs play at the pace they do now and win a le. That's all. But honestly, I hope you're right, because if they can maintain they'll likely win the le.
His rebounding would help, you said it. He'd take all or some of Splitter's minutes and provide better defense and rebounding than Splitter would. He'd keep Duncan and Dice fresher throughout a 7-game series. He'd be another 7' big to worry teams facing the Spurs. That's how he would help, imo.
Blair can negate a size disadvantage with superior positioning and his brute strength.
Honestly, we're already one of the best defensive rebounding teams out there - so I don't think Camby would help much there.
In terms of defense - he's a terrific weak side shot blocker...but that's about it. Not sure he's ever been the stalwart he's been made out to be. The affect that his defense has on the floor this season (according to 82games) is about what the Spurs currently get out Blair.
He'd cost you a player or two and I'm not sure he wouldn't be a downgrade for any minutes that he would take from Blair/Dyess.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
