A big ??

[ChuckD]

Ian could be a great player, but hes dumb as rocks and SA has failed to hire a good big man coach.....Outside Tim and D Rob who are one in a decade players we have failed to draft and develop a quality big.

Splitter shows no signs of improvement, and Blairs improvement is minimal at best. We have been good at drafting underrated players and getting the most out of them but as far as bigs......forget it.

Ian would have been the second best big on our roster this year and foul prone or not would have been a nice big to run with the second team. I would love him with Blair.

Think REEEEEAAAL hard: what's different about the other bigs we've drafted and David and Tim? That's right!!! David and Tim were #1 overall picks!!!

Seven footers come and go in the NBA. Very few late picks are ever developed into anything even close to a high pick big man by anyone. It's not a deficiency in our staff. It's real life in the NBA. Deal with it.

[underdawg]

Think REEEEEAAAL hard: what's different about the other bigs we've drafted and David and Tim? That's right!!! David and Tim were #1 overall picks!!!

Seven footers come and go in the NBA. Very few late picks are ever developed into anything even close to a high pick big man by anyone. It's not a deficiency in our staff. It's real life in the NBA. Deal with it.

I'm not saying that t2s is right, but what big has this coaching staff developed?

[objective]

Ian developed his game, he was just never allowed to play. There's a big difference in him now with the Mavs or even his rare opportunities his last year in SA compared to his rookie year when he was playing garbage time against the Bucks.

[ChuckD]

I'm not saying that t2s is right, but what big has this coaching staff developed?

Great bigs aren't developed, they're born.

[underdawg]

Great bigs aren't developed, they're born.

I'm not specifically talking about "great" bigs - just bigs that were developed - like LaMarcus Aldridge, Andrew Bynum, Tyson Chandler, DeAndre Jordan, Serge Ibaka, etc.

[ChumpDumper]

I'm not specifically talking about "great" bigs - just bigs that were developed - like LaMarcus Aldridge, Andrew Bynum, Tyson Chandler, DeAndre Jordan, Serge Ibaka, etc.

lol three of those guys were lottery picks.

Why can't we develop players like #2 overall selections?

And what other big men have the Spurs drafted and kept for 3+ years?

[ChuckD]

lol three of those guys were lottery picks.

Why can't we develop players like #2 overall selections?

And what other big men have the Spurs drafted and kept for 3+ years?

Not to mention:

Blair 11.9/6.4
Serge 7.9/6.3
DeAndre 8.4/7.4
Tiago 6.3/5.3

Stop obsessing about height people, and start looking at results. The Spurs "develop" non lottery bigs about the same as anyone else.

[underdawg]

lol three of those guys were lottery picks.

Why can't we develop players like #2 overall selections?

And what other big men have the Spurs drafted and kept for 3+ years?

Ibaka and jordan were not lottery lottery picks - the rest were just examples of bigs that weren't immediately good and were developed into the players they are now.

[underdawg]

Not to mention:

Blair 11.9/6.4
Serge 7.9/6.3
DeAndre 8.4/7.4
Tiago 6.3/5.3

Stop obsessing about height people, and start looking at results. The Spurs "develop" non lottery bigs about the same as anyone else.

all fine and good unless you are trying to improve your defense - why don't you list the blocks per game too?

[ChuckD]

all fine and good unless you are trying to improve your defense - why don't you list the blocks per game too?

Players selected outside the lottery all have flaws. The offense of Ibaka and Jordan is rudimentary at best. Blair doesn't block shots. He's a monster with those quick hands and long arms, though, and isn't a turnover a turnover?

[ChumpDumper]

Ibaka and jordan were not lottery lottery picks - the rest were just examples of bigs that weren't immediately good and were developed into the players they are now.

Why were they lottery picks in the first place?

And you never answered my question.

Don't bother.

[underdawg]

Why were they lottery picks in the first place?

And you never answered my question.

Don't bother.

sorry dude, but I was on a tablet and in the middle of something, so my response was limited - lighten up.

I kind of touched on your question when I asked chuck what big this coaching staff had developed and of course the answer is none.

Lottery picks are lottery picks for several different reasons (skill, size, athleticism, etc.) - Aldridge had a good college career, Chandler had a decent college career and Bynum was drafted mostly because of size and athleticism. All 3 were also picked high because of potential, but that potential had to be developed.

Spurs can't afford a big man - I get it and I think pretty much everyone gets it. The Spurs FO has shown itself to be mediocre at best in bringing in quality free agents (not all stars - just quality free agents) over the past few years.

That's why I believe that until either of the above issues are resolved, the Spurs only hope in getting help for the front line is to take a chance on 1 or 35 raw or undeveloped bigs and hope that they can develop said player into a serviceable big (utility type player). Maybe there are better options, but I don't see any this year other than a trade and it's only a matter of time before the Spurs start to get punished in important games because of the lack of depth on their front line.

[underdawg]

Players selected outside the lottery all have flaws. The offense of Ibaka and Jordan is rudimentary at best. Blair doesn't block shots. He's a monster with those quick hands and long arms, though, and isn't a turnover a turnover?

I like Blair but at the end of the day, he's not what the Spurs need to be a better defensive team - Blair would do better on a team like the Knicks or the Clippers.

He'll get some steals early on for sure, but over time teams will adjust and you're still left with an undersized center with a limited post game.

[jjktkk]

I like Blair but at the end of the day, he's not what the Spurs need to be a better defensive team - Blair would do better on a team like the Knicks or the Clippers.

He'll get some steals early on for sure, but over time teams will adjust and you're still left with an undersized center with a limited post game.

Unless your owner has deep pockets, or your picking in the lottery, your success rate in developing bigs good enough to at least be a rotation player is hit and miss.

[underdawg]

Unless your owner has deep pockets, or your picking in the lottery, your success rate in developing bigs good enough to at least be a rotation player is hit and miss.

I get that, but you don't stand pat as other teams improve or keep trying to make something ineffective work.

I think it's great that Neal got a chance, that Green's getting a chance (leonard too) and I would welcome a young undeveloped big get a shot this year or next. Other than a trade or a miracle in FA, I don't see any other option.

[ChumpDumper]

Such drama.

[jjktkk]

I get that, but you don't stand pat as other teams improve or keep trying to make something ineffective work.

I think it's great that Neal got a chance, that Green's getting a chance (leonard too) and I would welcome a young undeveloped big get a shot this year or next. Other than a trade or a miracle in FA, I don't see any other option.

Easier to find guards than bigs.

[SenorSpur]

That's a point.
And another is that Ian would have played for us not at the same price of his rookie contract (more than one million dollars in his last year) but at the some amount of money that Dallas was throwing to him (less than one million dollars per two seasons).
True that Ian was a foul machine, but also true that he knew our defensive play book and that he had the defensive skills our team desperately needed (and still needs, also if for a littlle lesser extent given the rising of Splitter minutes).

This.

[SenorSpur]

The Mavs coach has been very happy with Mahinimi's progress so he's getting more minutes. He played 28 last night compared to 19 for the starter

"Mahinmi hit all six field goal attempts, went 7 for 11 from the free throw line, and added five rebounds and two blocked shots.
“I know this was a career high in points for him, but the last two nights he’s given us a really high level of energy,” Mavs coach Rick Carlisle said.“He’s given us a physical presence, he’s a combative guy, and he was really big for us tonight.”

More importantly he's learning to control his PF (4) and only had one turnover. I watch a lot of Mavs games and he really is better now than he showed here. There were several times where he moved without the ball and was open down low for a layup or dunk but didn't get the ball. He runs the court hard on offense and defense.

The guy never played much here and had very little BB background so it took him more time to develop than the Spurs were willing to invest. I don't remember the other options the FO preferred when they let him go but they weren't young athletic big men.

And this.

It may not be as simple as this, but it certainly appears to me that the FO chose Bonner over Ian. A decision which makes sense to no one but Pop. Bonner is proven mental midget and the team's resident playhoff choker. Yet he gets instantly rewarded. The Spurs rushed to resign him immediately upon the July start of free agency. Ian, on the other hand, got nothing but a low-cost offer by their division rival.

The mere fact that we're even having a discussion concerning the Spurs "lack of bigs" to start this season, while one year ago, the FO brass made the decision allow a young, developing big to walk without so much as an attempt to try and retain him at a lower price, really makes that decision appear foolish one year later. Absolutely no foresight on the part of the FO on this.

[SenorSpur]

Ian developed his game, he was just never allowed to play. There's a big difference in him now with the Mavs or even his rare opportunities his last year in SA compared to his rookie year when he was playing garbage time against the Bucks.

And this too.

Ian may still have a lower ceiling than expected, but at least he's starting to look like a serviceable rotation player. A big who has a skill set the Spurs are certainly missing.

[ChumpDumper]

Never can say goodbye....

[SenorSpur]

Never can say goodbye....

I know man.

And having to watch Bonner's on-court dufusness only makes it worse.

Good news is this will be my last rant.

[ChumpDumper]

I know man.

And having to watch Bonner's on-court dufusness only makes it worse.

Good news is this will be my last rant.

Until the next one.

[venitian navigator]

As of now, we're evidently still a big short...'cause Diogu (like Blair), also if could be developed in a good player in our system (we need scoring bigs in the paint), doesn't have the skills I think are necessary for playing with a "small" unit...I mean, more than all, being a defensive presence in the middle (shot blocking).
What is fun, is that still now (aside of Mahinmi, that's playing too well for dallas to be traded), more than one big with these skills are on the market and most of them are free agents that could probably be signed for the minimum or, however, for an amount of money we still have the chance to use.

Just for putting some names out :

via trade : Thabeet

free agents : Fesenko, Gadzuric, Przybilla, E. Thomas, Elson, Dampier, Skinner.

imho It's frankly weird that the F.O. is not trying to at last talk with some of these player's teams or agents.

[TDMVPDPOY]

And this too.

Ian may still have a lower ceiling than expected, but at least he's starting to look like a serviceable rotation player. A big who has a skill set the Spurs are certainly missing.

his force to play cause the mavs have all at centre and bigs....brenda lol and no chandler...