Why does Bonner get more minutes that Splitter?

[Bruno]

As a fan, it sucks to see the team you root for losing games but it is ten times harder because the coach refuse to see the obvious.

And remember sooner this season the reason given by Pop for not giving minutes to Tiago: "it isn't fair to the team". Basically he didn't want to develop Tiago because it would hurt Spurs record. What "isn't fair to the team", is to continue giving major minutes to Bonner while he is in a huge shooting slump. Bonner isn't the only reason why Spurs have lost 6 in a row but he is a big one.

Pop is damn stubborn. He decided that it wasn't a year for Splitter and that Bonner was a major piece of the team. It's time for him to look at the facts, admit he was wrong and change his rotation.

[objective]

To top it all off . . .

When the Spurs have won in the playoffs, they've done it IN SPITE of Bonner's garbage play.

They beat Dallas last year when Bonner for the series shot 35% from the field and 31% from 3pt. He was -16 for the series. He failed every way, he bricked open threes, bricked contested threes, and passed up open threes.

When it matters most, the postseason, he's never helped the Spurs win anything, ever.

He's been carried by the rest of the team.

How Pop became convinced that it wouldn't be fair to the team to sit Bonner at the end of the bench where he belongs is one of the great mysteries.

We need Ludden to write a Jack McCallum-style book about this team. Call it "Spreading the Floor: the Spurs Road to Failure".

[Capt Bringdown]

When it matters most, the postseason, he's never helped the Spurs win anything, ever.

He's been carried by the rest of the team.

How Pop became convinced that it wouldn't be fair to the team to sit Bonner at the end of the bench where he belongs is one of the great mysteries.

You reckon Kobe, MJ, Bird, Hakeem etc would let this situation reach this point?
This is a superstar's league...so is Duncan down with Bonner as much as Pop is?

[analyzed]

How does a player over the last 14 games, still get significant playing time when hitting 35.4 percent from the field, 24 percent from 3-point territory and averaging 5.2 points per game in 25 average minutes per game ?

This must be some kind of record, for a player to play so bad for so long and yet get so many minutes.

I'm trying to see where Pop is coming from, and give him the benefit of the doubt , after all he is the coach and Im just a fan'. but I really can't figure it out. I think sometimes things are just wrong , no matter whose making the decision ( hall of fame coach etc) . And sometimes things are just right , even If I'm just an average no body fan. The stats seems to suggest that I am and Pop is wrong

[TampaDude]

Pop is insane. That's the only explanation.

[objective]

well, despite how terrible Bonner has proven himself to be, there are contrary opinions. Like Tim Varner from 48 MoH when he was a guest on the ESPN NBA Today podcast on 1-17

my transcript, around the 22:45 mark:

[regarding the Spurs vs. the Lakers] "This will sound crazy, but hear me out: I think Matt Bonner is a real match-up problem for them. Because when he opens the floor it opens things up for Parker [and] Ginobili to drivel; the Lakers don't have great point guard defense. And Matt Bonner forces someone like Andrew Bynum or Pau Gasol to come away from the rim which again helps Parker and Ginobili out.

Now, that sounds plausible on paper if one ignores everything that's ever happened in the playoffs as far as Bonner's play or how Phil Jackson has in the past forced choking Spurs to miss or not even take 3s.

But there you go, straight from the media . . .

Matt Bonner will be a match-up problem for the Lakers!

[analyzed]

Being objective that does make sense, to counter the twin tower combination of LA with a 4 who can shoot from three, (typical euro int'l ball). however this can only be done for extended minutes if your 4 is not a liability on defense, (such as when horry played for LA and was matched up vs TD) otherwise the match-up favors LA. There is no way Bonner guards Bynum or Gasol for extended minutes, situational minutes yes, but he has no business playing 20 plus minutes

[biskvito]

Pop got tired of Spurs being labeled as "boring". So he pulled a Phoenix Suns. Sure is a bumping ride for the Spurs fans.

[SA210]

As a fan, it sucks to see the team you root for losing games but it is ten times harder because the coach refuse to see the obvious.

And remember sooner this season the reason given by Pop for not giving minutes to Tiago: "it isn't fair to the team". Basically he didn't want to develop Tiago because it would hurt Spurs record. What "isn't fair to the team", is to continue giving major minutes to Bonner while he is in a huge shooting slump. Bonner isn't the only reason why Spurs have lost 6 in a row but he is a big one.

Pop is damn stubborn. He decided that it wasn't a year for Splitter and that Bonner was a major piece of the team. It's time for him to look at the facts, admit he was wrong and change his rotation.

that piece of coach will do no such thing. I loved Pop when he was defensive minded. He isn't the same anymore. He's a stubborn asshole who will continue to do what he shouldn't just because people question him.

[SenorSpur]

Splitter, as is, is a better choice for the playoffs than Bonner. This team needs defense - not offense (not that Bonner is giving them offense recently- 12 of 50 3pters = 24%). Splitter is already more physical and stronger than Bonner. Today 0 pts in 25 mins for Bonner. 4pts in 3:48 for Splitter.

That's the whole point right there. So all this talk about Splitter not being ready for the playoffs - whether it comes from Pop or people on this forum - is bull .

If Bonner was clearly a better option than Splitter and was producing for the team, no one could argue or question Pop's decision to keep Splitter chained to the bench. However because he's not, it makes Pop decision even more idiotic.

Another reason I'm not going to trust Pop's decision on this is because he said the same thing about Hill back in 2009 playoffs. Even though Hill was surprisingly effective when he got his chance to play, Pop only inserted him into the Game 5 after the series was already lost. Still it was a revelation that Pop isn't always right in his prejudice towards rookies.