Monroe: Splitter figures to start

[EricD]

Okay it's obvious, TJastal has no life outside of Spurstalk.

[TJastal]

One quick look at statistics shows that Dirk is by far the best PF in the NBA and he averaged a higher playoffs PER than his career average.

No one's arguing that he's in his peak but he's in the tail-end of his prime like Hakeem and Malone were. His mileage, game, height, etc. is responsible for his prolonged prime. Dirks a MVP candidate that outplayed the league's best stars on both sides of 30 not too long ago.

First off who gives a about playoffs. Guys always raise the bar come playoff time. It's not a reliable indicator of a player's prime. And what allowed Dirk to save all that up for the playoffs anyway? The addition of Chandler of course, which allowed Dirk to focus in on what he does best which is to shoot the basketball and close out games. That's been the point all along. Pair up today's prime Chandler with Dirk back in 2004 when Dirk was in his prime and Dirk would have went ape every year and rang several times.

But that is not even the argument we are having here. We are trying to find Dirk's "prime years".

Looking at regular season numbers Dirk had his highest PER back in 2005 @ 28.2. It's been dropping ever since, to 22.6 this year. If you really can't figure out that THAT was his prime then you are a complete moron.

[ChumpDumper]

Damn he says some stupid .

[MaNu4Tres]

In short, physically, Dirk was not and is not in his prime (he's not the athlete he was 10 years ago). But skill-wise, Dirk definitely proved to be in his prime by being the best player on the planet from April through mid-June. That itself definitely enhanced the Mavs' chances to win the le.

[Cane]

First off who gives a about playoffs. Guys always raise the bar come playoff time. It's not a reliable indicator of a player's prime.

You can troll better than that. Well, maybe you can.

And what allowed Dirk to save all that up for the playoffs anyway? The addition of Chandler of course, which allowed Dirk to focus in on what he does best which is to shoot the basketball and close out games. That's been the point all along. Pair up today's prime Chandler with Dirk back in 2004 when Dirk was in his prime and Dirk would have went ape every year and rang several times.

Maybe but Mavs still needed solid perimeter defenders and could probably use Carlisle as well. Mark Cuban also was maybe too active back then.

But that is not even the argument we are having here. We are trying to find Dirk's "prime years".

Your argument is that Dirk isn't in the tail-end of his prime. You also argued that I didn't even say "tail-end" originally which turned out to be further stupidity from yourself. No one is arguing that Dirk is in his peak physical form or seasons, and I compared it to Hakeem and Malone's later seasons when they too weren't physically their best but still in their primes.

Looking at regular season numbers Dirk had his highest PER back in 2005 @ 28.2. It's been dropping ever since, to 22.6 this year. If you really can't figure out that THAT was his prime then you are a complete moron.

Its been dropping but he's still in the tail end of his prime with playoffs PER like 25.3, 4th best in the NBA and being a MVP candidate that outplayed stars on both sides of 30. Even someone that gets caught up in losing arguments such as yourself should realize that Dirk's near 28 PPG on 48% shooting is up there with the best he's had. And yes, having Chandler helps a lot. Along with Kidd, Stevenson, and Marion playing good defense, Barea's rise, Haywood coming off the bench, etc.

[Cane]

Damn he says some stupid .

In short, physically, Dirk was not and is not in his prime (he's not the athlete he was 10 years ago). But skill-wise, Dirk definitely proved to be in his prime by being the best player on the planet from April through mid-June. That itself definitely enhanced the Mavs' chances to win the le.

That basically sums it up.

[TJastal]

In short, physically, Dirk was not and is not in his prime (he's not the athlete he was 10 years ago). But skill-wise, Dirk definitely proved to be in his prime by being the best player on the planet from April through mid-June. That itself definitely enhanced the Mavs' chances to win the le.

Again, a good playoff run does not indicate that a guy is in his prime. As mentioned before, Dirk's best PER was back in 2005. That was his prime year right there. His teams have always struggled because of no interior shotblocking & paint defense. If Dirk had a prime Chandler back in 2005 when he was playing his best basketball the spurs might perhaps have only two trophies in their case.

The skill-set argument you present is really inconsequential IMO. He recently evolved a few moves; the step back jumper and a left handed driving hook. Neither of which really make up for the loss of athleticism and mobility that age has robbed him of.

If you want to argue he is still in his prime because of a few refined moves in his offensive aresenal that's your business. I'll stick with my line of thinking and sleep well at night.

[TJastal]

Dirk @ the "tail end" of his prime.

Sincerely,

Cane, Blake, & Manu4tres

[myhc]

If you want to argue he is still in his prime because of a few refined moves in his offensive aresenal that's your business. I'll stick with my line of thinking and sleep well at night

I don't know whether to feel bad for you or point my finger at you and laugh uncontrollably....I'll go with

[MaNu4Tres]

Dirk @ the "tail end" of his prime.

Sincerely,

Cane, Blake, & Manu4tres

End of his prime or not, the guy was the best player in the league when it mattered. Obviously him being out of his physical prime had little to no effect on his overall ability or effectiveness towards winning a le-- much like the player in Chicago did in 97'-98' (being out of his physical prime didn't effect him still being on top of his game).

[TJastal]

End of his prime or not, the guy was the best player in the league when it mattered. Obviously him being out of his physical prime had little to no effect on his overall ability or effectiveness towards winning a le-- much like the player in Chicago did in 97'-98' (being out of his physical prime didn't effect him still being on top of his game).

Nowitzki would have flamed out like he does every year without Chandler's paint defense, rebounding, and at ude. Would have been the same story, different year, sissy Dirk would have been pushed around and beat up in the paint and not been able to focus himself on the offensive end. So pretty much what happened to Timmy this year would have happened to Dirk.

Yet, there are people like you who think Dirk somehow turned back time and are back to playing in their prime. It's kind of comical, really.

[DPG21920]

TJ, you are being absolutely obtuse.

[TJastal]

For anyone interested in what type of player Nowitzki was in his prime, check out this clip from 2006.

[cantthinkofanything]

For anyone interested in what type of player Nowitzki was in his prime, check out this clip from 2006.

Not sure what your point was. But I think the clip made the case that he isn't far off from his prime. Maybe he had a little more hops back then but not much difference from top plays he made this year.

[TJastal]

TJ, you are being absolutely obtuse.

Dirk is still a great player even at his age, but people need to understand he always has been. Doesn't mean he's in his prime. Only reason he was able to do what he did this year was because of Tyson Chandler (and to a lesser extent Haywood).

Imagine if he actually had quality frontcourt partners like those two all these years and not the likes of Shawn Bradley, Danny Fortson, Keith Van Horn, Erick Dampier, Dasagana Diop....

[TJastal]

Not sure what your point was. But I think the clip made the case that he isn't far off from his prime. Maybe he had a little more hops back then but not much difference from top plays he made this year.

You must be blind. I can tell a huge difference in his athleticism and explosion to the rim in those clips.

[TD 21]

Excellent analysis.

But TD's PER (21.9 according to basketball-reference) was the lowest its been ever - even lower than his rookie year. So was his offreb%, defreb% and just about every other per 36 minute stat available. The telltale one is his offensive win shares (down to 3.7).

When you get a little more in-depth, TD was outplayed by Chandler, M Gasol, Nene, Howard and Bynum was close (keep in mind that TD was moved to PF and Blair moved to C at times).

I realize Duncan's PER was a career low, but it was still good enough for second amongst C's and 14th overall in the league. In comparison to his prime, he's not even close. In comparison to the vast majority of the league, he's still amongst the best.

It makes sense that his rebounding -- offensive, in particular -- was slightly down. Blair, an elite rebounder -- offensive, in particular -- started next to him for the first 63 games.

Duncan's offensive win shares was partially a product of low minutes, field goals and usage. I don't care who you are, you're not going to be dominant offensively playing roughly 28 mpg and taking roughly 11 fg's/game.

PER is in depth, because it encompasses every major offensive stat. Defensively, only Howard and maybe Chandler were superior. The only time Duncan was "moved to PF" was one of the games in Denver, when he started on Williams and Blair started on Nene. Other than that and the brief times he played with Splitter and guarded Randolph in the Grizzlies series, he strictly defended C's the entire season.

Blake, I didn't say or infer that Pop should have been expected to win the championship based on the talent he had to work with. What I meant was, the talent he had to work with is better than Tyrone Jenkins (among others) inferred.

[Tyrone Jenkins]

I realize Duncan's PER was a career low, but it was still good enough for second amongst C's and 14th overall in the league. In comparison to his prime, he's not even close. In comparison to the vast majority of the league, he's still amongst the best.

It makes sense that his rebounding -- offensive, in particular -- was slightly down. Blair, an elite rebounder -- offensive, in particular -- started next to him for the first 63 games.

Duncan's offensive win shares was partially a product of low minutes, field goals and usage. I don't care who you are, you're not going to be dominant offensively playing roughly 28 mpg and taking roughly 11 fg's/game.

PER is in depth, because it encompasses every major offensive stat. Defensively, only Howard and maybe Chandler were superior. The only time Duncan was "moved to PF" was one of the games in Denver, when he started on Williams and Blair started on Nene. Other than that and the brief times he played with Splitter and guarded Randolph in the Grizzlies series, he strictly defended C's the entire season.

Blake, I didn't say or infer that Pop should have been expected to win the championship based on the talent he had to work with. What I meant was, the talent he had to work with is better than Tyrone Jenkins (among others) inferred.

Offensive Wins share is a stat "normalized" for a full game - it's not just for the minutes he's in. Even if it was, his #s wouldn't have been as good if he were required to play MORE minutes as the wear and tear would've most certainly taken its toll. As the season wore on, his #s would've depleted.

I don't disagree w/ you that TD still has something in the tank. But being one of the best CENTERs in the NBA is not as important as being one of the best POWER FORWARDs. The only center of note is Dwight Howard - all the rest, including TD, are there to complement the PF.

Pop, for whatever reason, didn't utilize Splitter or anyone else in the same fashion he used TD when he was a PF. Also, don't mix up the PF and C position because of defensive assignments, being the PF on offense deals w/ play calling (pick and rolls, post ups, etc.) which TD certainly wasn't asked to do as he had in the past. From 2001-2007, TD was the primary option in the offense, now he's not.

I think a lot of what we're both saying is the same . . .

[ace3g]

Evaluating Splitter: An anniversary still in the making

http://blog.mysanantonio.com/spursna...in-the-making/

[Blake]

Dirk @ the "tail end" of his prime.

Sincerely,

Cane, Blake, & Manu4tres

I have no clue what prime means and my humor sucks.

Sincerely,

TJastal

[TD 21]

Offensive Wins share is a stat "normalized" for a full game - it's not just for the minutes he's in. Even if it was, his #s wouldn't have been as good if he were required to play MORE minutes as the wear and tear would've most certainly taken its toll. As the season wore on, his #s would've depleted.

I don't disagree w/ you that TD still has something in the tank. But being one of the best CENTERs in the NBA is not as important as being one of the best POWER FORWARDs. The only center of note is Dwight Howard - all the rest, including TD, are there to complement the PF.

Pop, for whatever reason, didn't utilize Splitter or anyone else in the same fashion he used TD when he was a PF. Also, don't mix up the PF and C position because of defensive assignments, being the PF on offense deals w/ play calling (pick and rolls, post ups, etc.) which TD certainly wasn't asked to do as he had in the past. From 2001-2007, TD was the primary option in the offense, now he's not.

I think a lot of what we're both saying is the same . . .

His offensive numbers would have been better had he played the minutes and attempted the field goal's/free throws he did the season before. Obviously, if he were playing 34-36 mpg, he'd have worn down.

It's not an opinion whether he still has something left in the tank or not; it's a statistical fact. He's indisputably one of the best all around bigs in the league. The problem is, he, more than any other player, get's compared to the player he once was, rather than compared to the compe ion. You could argue that being an elite C is more important than being an elite PF, because of the scarcity of top flight C's. McDyess/Blair/Bonner were there to compliment him, not the other way around.

You are what you primarily guard. They might still call "four down" to get him the ball on the block, but he's clearly been a full time C since '08. He was the primary offensive option from 97-09.

[Tyrone Jenkins]

You are what you primarily guard. They might still call "four down" to get him the ball on the block, but he's clearly been a full time C since '08. He was the primary offensive option from 97-09.

Incorrect sir. As a basketball coach, this is one of the essential facts that we teach to kids as early as possible.

You are NOT what you guard - that is just your defensive position. You are the position you maintain on offense. Amare Stoudamire is a PF on offense almost every time down the floor even though he may guard the center of the other team from time to time. Same w/ Bosh, Boozer and many others. KG does play C, even at his age, but playes PF more often. He is quoted as being very upset when Perkins was traded as he new that meant he would be asked to play C more often.

Plain and simlpe, PF is different than C - even in the Spurs system. Play calling is different. Who sets the pick up top for the pick and roll is different. Who lines up on what block and which side of the floor the 1st pass goes to depends on who's the PF and who's the C. The movement of the ball around the perimeter is different.

TD has always been listed as a F-C but played the PF role almsot exclusively when David Robinson and Will Perdue played C. Then it was Kevin Willis and Nesterovic, then Nazr Mohammed, Mahinmi and so on. As you mentioned, he has played C more and more as he aged and as different individuals came and went (Horry, Bonner, Oberto to some degree and even at times w/ McDyess) but he still plays PF some as well.

Regardless of all that, the domination by a C been pretty much non-existent since Shaq's decline (w/ the exception of Dwight Howard). You don't really need a DOMINANT center to win championships as the Lakers, Celtics, Mavericks, Bulls, Cavs and Heat all proved you can make it to the finals w/ dominant guards/forwards. Likewise, having a dominant C, even one playing as well as you say TD is playing, certainly doesn't put you any closer to a championship w/o the other pieces. Splitter isn't the PF that will put the boys over the top next year - the year after that, TD will be gone.

So, while your point is valid, it's also somewhat mute. The thread is about Splitter starting next year - who, in my humble opinion, plays more like a center. Whether he becomes dominant in the next few years isn't as important as the other pieces the team has (Leonard, Anderson/Butler, Blair, etc.) and whom ever they can pick up to play PF.

[TD 21]

Incorrect sir. As a basketball coach, this is one of the essential facts that we teach to kids as early as possible.

You are NOT what you guard - that is just your defensive position. You are the position you maintain on offense. Amare Stoudamire is a PF on offense almost every time down the floor even though he may guard the center of the other team from time to time. Same w/ Bosh, Boozer and many others. KG does play C, even at his age, but playes PF more often. He is quoted as being very upset when Perkins was traded as he new that meant he would be asked to play C more often.

Plain and simlpe, PF is different than C - even in the Spurs system. Play calling is different. Who sets the pick up top for the pick and roll is different. Who lines up on what block and which side of the floor the 1st pass goes to depends on who's the PF and who's the C. The movement of the ball around the perimeter is different.

TD has always been listed as a F-C but played the PF role almsot exclusively when David Robinson and Will Perdue played C. Then it was Kevin Willis and Nesterovic, then Nazr Mohammed, Mahinmi and so on. As you mentioned, he has played C more and more as he aged and as different individuals came and went (Horry, Bonner, Oberto to some degree and even at times w/ McDyess) but he still plays PF some as well.

Regardless of all that, the domination by a C been pretty much non-existent since Shaq's decline (w/ the exception of Dwight Howard). You don't really need a DOMINANT center to win championshipsas the Lakers, Celtics, Mavericks, Bulls, Cavs and Heat all proved you can make it to the finals w/ dominant guards/forwards. Likewise, having a dominant C, even one playing as well as you say TD is playing, certainly doesn't put you any closer to a championship w/o the other pieces. Splitter isn't the PF that will put the boys over the top next year - the year after that, TD will be gone.

So, while your point is valid, it's also somewhat mute. The thread is about Splitter starting next year - who, in my humble opinion, plays more like a center. Whether he becomes dominant in the next few years isn't as important as the other pieces the team has (Leonard, Anderson/Butler, Blair, etc.) and whom ever they can pick up to play PF.

Maybe you were right earlier when you said "I think what we're both saying is the same . . .". What I'm saying is, whether they still refer to Duncan as the four in the offense or not, he's clearly the five. Blair and McDyess, who started next to him all season, are flat out not fives, so if it isn't Duncan, who is it?

Stoudemire, Bosh, Boozer, even Garnett, they're all different players, in that they're more natural fours. No matter how much the game changes or how they age, they'll always be fours. Duncan was always a four and a half, so it made it natural for him to move to the five almost full time as he aged.

I didn't say "you need a dominant C to win championships" or that "having a dominant C puts you any closer to the championship w/out other pieces". All I said was he's the second best C in the league, in response to your claim that the Spurs "didn't have a player who is top five at their position".

I still expect the Spurs to trade for a starting four. It's clear from their comments that they're not enamored with Splitter starting next to Duncan -- because they view both as fives -- nor are they with the prospect of Blair starting again.

[mountainballer]

I still expect the Spurs to trade for a starting four. It's clear from their comments that they're not enamored with Splitter starting next to Duncan -- because they view both as fives -- nor are they with the prospect of Blair starting again.

same expectations here.
in general it's not a bad position, if a team can claim to already have two legit centers and is just in need of a quality 4. I wrote before that if Tim doesn't play more than 25 MPG (which he shouldn't), we would need a high quality back up anyhow. so Tiago will also play about 25 MPG, maybe up to 30. the 4th big could still be either Blair or Bonner (the other is traded), playing about 15 MPG.
so, as you also say, what Spurs need is a 30 MPG PF. other than most here I don't think this needs to be a defensive player in the first place. he should be a decent defender, but in the first place he must be able to score efficiently at a 14-17 PPG level. the other team must not be able to focus their post defense on Tim.
that's why I'm high on Landry as a FA target, but I'm aware that he will likely get better offers (Indiana). an interesting trade target could be Millsap, another is Bass. (Millsap reportedly is on the market, Bass was rumored in trade talks last deadline. Bass likely isn't good enough for the mentioned role. Millsap and Landry would be IMO).

[TJastal]

Incorrect sir. As a basketball coach, this is one of the essential facts that we teach to kids as early as possible.

You are NOT what you guard - that is just your defensive position. You are the position you maintain on offense. Amare Stoudamire is a PF on offense almost every time down the floor even though he may guard the center of the other team from time to time. Same w/ Bosh, Boozer and many others. KG does play C, even at his age, but playes PF more often. He is quoted as being very upset when Perkins was traded as he new that meant he would be asked to play C more often.

Plain and simlpe, PF is different than C - even in the Spurs system. Play calling is different. Who sets the pick up top for the pick and roll is different. Who lines up on what block and which side of the floor the 1st pass goes to depends on who's the PF and who's the C. The movement of the ball around the perimeter is different.

TD has always been listed as a F-C but played the PF role almsot exclusively when David Robinson and Will Perdue played C. Then it was Kevin Willis and Nesterovic, then Nazr Mohammed, Mahinmi and so on. As you mentioned, he has played C more and more as he aged and as different individuals came and went (Horry, Bonner, Oberto to some degree and even at times w/ McDyess) but he still plays PF some as well.

Regardless of all that, the domination by a C been pretty much non-existent since Shaq's decline (w/ the exception of Dwight Howard). You don't really need a DOMINANT center to win championships as the Lakers, Celtics, Mavericks, Bulls, Cavs and Heat all proved you can make it to the finals w/ dominant guards/forwards. Likewise, having a dominant C, even one playing as well as you say TD is playing, certainly doesn't put you any closer to a championship w/o the other pieces. Splitter isn't the PF that will put the boys over the top next year - the year after that, TD will be gone.

So, while your point is valid, it's also somewhat mute. The thread is about Splitter starting next year - who, in my humble opinion, plays more like a center. Whether he becomes dominant in the next few years isn't as important as the other pieces the team has (Leonard, Anderson/Butler, Blair, etc.) and whom ever they can pick up to play PF.

Does that make Bonner a SG?