Buyout Watch Thread

[Richie]

I think you're only worrying about the offense with regards to this last roster spot. A lot of people here want to add another defensive player in case Kawhi gets in foul trouble or injury. My ideal acquisition would be somebody who can give us solid minutes on Durant or LeBron, in which case, Clark would be the best out of the bunch tbh.

Why do you think Clark would be a better defender for those guys than Granger?

[Chinook]

What's the point? He's not any better than Bonner.

Everyone is talking about rotations when everyone is healthy and playing, but that hasn't been the case all year and will continue. The closer we get to the playoffs the more rest the Big 3 and Kawhi will get, and in those situations Granger would be more useful in the rotation than Clark.

Also, I'm not filled with confidence with Green defending 3's, he's too small. We've seen that throughout the year, hence why everyone has been calling out the front office for not signing a backup 3 in the offseason.

Green isn't even small for a SF. People have it in their heads that he's small. He's taller than average and is stronger in the post than most players his size. He's been great at the three since January 2013. I can't think of a team with a better backup three. The problem is he's the best guard defender on the team, so playing him at SF is wasting him, also, he wears down if he has to play big minutes at the three, which he does when Leonard is out multiple games. That's why not getting another SF was an issue. It was to spelk Danny not replace him.

[Mugen]

Why do you think Clark would be a better defender for those guys than Granger?

The times i've watched Granger this season, his rotations have been pretty slow and just doesn't look the same after his injuries. He's coming off major knee surgery plus calf issues and it's definitely affected his mobility.

Clark is still young and has shown to be competent on defense whenever he's gotten the minutes. I just like his chances better of a) staying healthy this season b) defending KD/LeBron if needed.

[Richie]

No, we haven't. Green has played the majority of his minutes at the 3 and his opponents' PER is 8.1.

Stats like that mean nothing without context. He's only played there because we literally have nobody else, not because he excels in that position. He can do a job, better than anyone else on the team at least, but not much more than that.

[Richie]

The times i've watched Granger this season, his rotations have been pretty slow and just doesn't look the same after his injuries. He's coming off major knee surgery plus calf issues and it's definitely affected his mobility.

Clark is still young and has shown to be competent on defense whenever he's gotten the minutes. I just like his chances better of a) staying healthy this season b) defending KD/LeBron if needed.

I watched Clark on the Lakers a fair bit last year and I can't say there was anything that made me think he was a good defender. To be fair to him though, it was a Mike D'Antoni team.

[Mel_13]

Stats like that mean nothing without context. He's only played there because we literally have nobody else, not because he excels in that position. He can do a job, better than anyone else on the team at least, but not much more than that.

Sorry, but that's beyond stupid. An opponent PER of 8.1 is excellent, period. The numbers could only be disregarded if the sample size was too small. It's not. Danny Green is an excellent defender of NBA SFs without qualification.

[Richie]

Green isn't even small for a SF. People have it in their heads that he's small. He's taller than average and is stronger in the post than most players his size. He's been great at the three since January 2013. I can't think of a team with a better backup three. The problem is he's the best guard defender on the team, so playing him at SF is wasting him, also, he wears down if he has to play big minutes at the three, which he does when Leonard is out multiple games. That's why not getting another SF was an issue. It was to spelk Danny not replace him.

At best, Green has average size for a small forward, but I'd say he's more likely below average. Especially when you consider you'd be asking him to defend players who are freakishly big like Lebron and Durant.

That's not to say size is the be all and end all, Iguodala is just a bit bigger than Green for example, but I just don't rate Green that highly when it comes to defending bigger players. He is however excellent at defending players his size and smaller.

Also off the top of my head, I'd say Barnes and Turner are better backup 3's.

[Richie]

Sorry, but that's beyond stupid. An opponent PER of 8.1 is excellent, period. The numbers could only be disregarded if the sample size was too small. It's not. Danny Green is an excellent defender of NBA SFs without qualification.

Where are you getting your numbers? Does he have an opponent PER of 8.1 against all players? Just players playing at the 3? Backups or starters? Is this including the opponent is effectively a 2 guard playing as a small ball 3?

With few exceptions, any time the Spurs play a team with a serious threat at SF Kawhi defends them. Context is important with all stats, no stat can ever be declared excellent without qualification.

[Mel_13]

Where are you getting your numbers? Does he have an opponent PER of 8.1 against all players? Just players playing at the 3? Backups or starters?

With few exceptions, any time the Spurs play a team with a serious threat at SF Kawhi defends them. Context is important with all stats, no stat can ever be declared excellent without qualification.

Yes, Leonard is the starting SF and Green is the backup SF.

This particular discussion, which you started, was about Green as a backup SF.

Since the numbers were against all SFs, that would include starters and reserves. Since the number is excellent overall, it stands to reason that it's even better when he guards reserves.

I got the stats from 82games.com, which is a much better source for information on the qualities of NBA basketball players than "off the top of your head".

@ barnes as a better SF than Green.

[cd021]

At best, Green has average size for a small forward, but I'd say he's more likely below average. Especially when you consider you'd be asking him to defend players who are freakishly big like Lebron and Durant.

That's not to say size is the be all and end all, Iguodala is just a bit bigger than Green for example, but I just don't rate Green that highly when it comes to defending bigger players. He is however excellent at defending players his size and smaller.

Also off the top of my head, I'd say Barnes and Turner are better backup 3's.

Turner isn't really a good starting 3. A bad defender and a high volume scorer who can't shoot the 3. Every season he has been a net negative player (the team is essentially worse off when he is on the floor) The Pacers took a gamble on his talent, because their bench has underperformed even with the additions of Watson, Scola and Copeland. They absolutely need a bench of some kind for a deep run.

Green is a better backup SF than him and probably Harrison Barnes as well.

[Mel_13]

Turner isn't really a good starting 3. A bad defender and a high volume scorer who can't shoot the 3. Every season he has been a net negative player (the team is essentially worse off when he is on the floor) The Pacers took a gamble on his talent, because their bench has underperformed even with the additions of Watson, Scola and Copeland. They absolutely need a bench of some kind for a deep run.

Green is a better backup SF than him and probably Harrison Barnes as well.

I thought he meant Matt Barnes, but Danny is better backup SF than Harrison as well.

[Richie]

Yes, Leonard is the starting SF and Green is the backup SF.

This particular discussion, which you started, was about Green as a backup SF.

Since the numbers were against all SFs, that would includes starters and reserves. Since the number is excellent overall, it stands to reason that it's even better when he guards reserves.

I got the stats from 82games.com, which is a much better source for information on the qualities of NBA basketball players than "off the top of your head".

@ barnes as a better SF than Green.

I'd trade Green for Barnes in a heartbeat.

82games says Green has a better opponent PER than Kawhi. Do you think Green is a better defender at the 3 than Kawhi? Harrison Barnes also has a better opponent PER at the 2 than Green, is Barnes a better defender of 2 guards than Green?

These stats are too simple to be used so authoritatively. They only take in to account the PER of the player they are guarding at the time in which the statistician decides the player is playing in that position. There's nothing to say whether the player Green is guarding when he is in that position is actually a small forward.

For example if we're playing the Rockets and Green is on the floor with Parker and Manu, it may be assumed that he is playing as the SF. However if the Rockets are playing Harden and Garcia at the 2 and 3, Green would almost certainly guarding Harden and Manu guarding Garcia. There's simply not enough information in these statistics to make the sweeping generalisations you are making.

Much more useful would be the net difference in the opponents PER while be guarded by the player in question when compared to being guarded by other players.

[Mel_13]

I don't know if you're trolling or clueless, but you're all over the place.

Good night, Richie.

[Richie]

Turner isn't really a good starting 3. A bad defender and a high volume scorer who can't shoot the 3. Every season he has been a net negative player (the team is essentially worse off when he is on the floor) The Pacers took a gamble on his talent, because their bench has underperformed even with the additions of Watson, Scola and Copeland. They absolutely need a bench of some kind for a deep run.

Green is a better backup SF than him and probably Harrison Barnes as well.

I think it's tough to compare a player in a winning situation like Green to someone in a losing situation like Turner. Evan Turner is a more talented player though and may have the chance to prove himself in a better situation.

We'll have to agree to disagree about Harrison Barnes, I think the kids showed some flashes of real talent in the series against us. With the right team he could be a legit #2 or #3 option.

[Spursfanfromafar]

Danny Green has been great. But I think the Spurs seek him to be a defensive swing-man, sometimes guarding SGs and even PGs rather than SFs who are Kawhi's assignments. In a small ball lineup, Green might be asked to guard SFs but if say that the opposing lineup has Stephen Curry or a Chris Paul or a Dwyane Wade, Green might be given those assignments. IN that case/ scenario, there needs to be another backup SF for defensive purposes and who is also Kawhi insurance.

As things stand, with the only three options being MWP, Earl Clark and Danny Granger... the last mentioned with playoff nous, experience seems to be the better choice and fit than the first two.

I envisage a situation where the lineup on the floor could be TP, Manu, Green, Leonard, Duncan which could be backed up by Mills, Belinelli, Granger, Diaw & Splitter. That should be a great 10 man rotation that the Spurs can live with in the playoffs against possibly any team.

Granger could be useful spot up shooter at the corners and at the top of the key and perhaps if he rehabs well, could recover some of his separation and the off-the-bounce shots. He could also post-up against smaller lineups and be useful as a defensive subs ution. There are a few ways when even a hobbled Granger could serve as the Kawhi insurance/backup well enough.

[Chinook]

Trading Green for Barnes would slam the window shut. He's one of the best defenders in the league--yes, better than Leonard. Actually Green is the Splitter to Leonard's Duncan. He does a ton of yhe dirty work that allows Leonard to freelance. Difference is Danny picks up a good number of steals and blocks himself. There are VERY few players who'd be a net upgrade from him, and they're all making the max, or are going to.

[Mel_13]

Harrison Barnes also has a better opponent PER at the 2 than Green

Not true. Not even close.

Good night, Richie.

[Richie]

I don't know if you're trolling or clueless, but you're all over the place.

Good night, Richie.

Fair enough, I'm pretty tired and reading that last post back it is somewhat confusing. Put simply, I don't think the statistic necessarily says what you think it says.

[Mel_13]

Fair enough, I'm pretty tired and reading that last post back it is somewhat confusing. Put simply, I don't think the statistic necessarily says what you think it says.

No statistic tells the whole story, but in the absence of hours and hours of direct observation, they have to suffice. In the case of Green as a backup SF, the numbers support extensive observation. If you're honest, you have to admit that you've put forth precious little to support your initial position that Green is too small to play backup SF or that the PER numbers do not generally reflect the reality on the court.

[Richie]

Trading Green for Barnes would slam the window shut. He's one of the best defenders in the league--yes, better than Leonard. Actually Green is the Splitter to Leonard's Duncan. He does a ton of yhe dirty work that allows Leonard to freelance. Difference is Danny picks up a good number of steals and blocks himself. There are VERY few players who'd be a net upgrade from him, and they're all making the max, or are going to.

Don't get me wrong I'm a fan of Danny Green (while accepting he is a limited player) but he's just a 3&D guy. He can't do anything else on the offensive end except shoot 3's. You don't need to spend the max to upgrade on him.

[Richie]

No statistic tells the whole story, but in the absence of hours and hours of direct observation, they have to suffice. In the case of Green as a backup SF, the numbers support extensive observation. If you're honest, you have to admit that you've put forth precious little to support your initial position that Green is too small to play backup SF or that the PER numbers do not generally reflect the reality on the court.

My opinion is based on simply watching basketball. By the statistic you quoted Green has a better opponent PER than Leonard at the SF position (8 v 16), but that's not what I see when I watch the games. That alone leads me to think of it as a flawed statistic.

I've looked but I don't see anything on how these stats are calculated by the website. Im sure it's the best that is available to fans, but that still doesn't mean it is very useful.

[Mel_13]

Danny Green has been great. But I think the Spurs seek him to be a defensive swing-man, sometimes guarding SGs and even PGs rather than SFs who are Kawhi's assignments. In a small ball lineup, Green might be asked to guard SFs but if say that the opposing lineup has Stephen Curry or a Chris Paul or a Dwyane Wade, Green might be given those assignments. IN that case/ scenario, there needs to be another backup SF for defensive purposes and who is also Kawhi insurance.

As things stand, with the only three options being MWP, Earl Clark and Danny Granger... the last mentioned with playoff nous, experience seems to be the better choice and fit than the first two.

I envisage a situation where the lineup on the floor could be TP, Manu, Green, Leonard, Duncan which could be backed up by Mills, Belinelli, Granger, Diaw & Splitter. That should be a great 10 man rotation that the Spurs can live with in the playoffs against possibly any team.

Granger could be useful spot up shooter at the corners and at the top of the key and perhaps if he rehabs well, could recover some of his separation and the off-the-bounce shots. He could also post-up against smaller lineups and be useful as a defensive subs ution. There are a few ways when even a hobbled Granger could serve as the Kawhi insurance/backup well enough.

I really like your posts and I agree with your conclusion that Granger would be a better choice to serve as Kawhi insurance. I differ with you on his usefulness alongside Kawhi in the small ball situations you describe.

If Miami, for example, goes Bosh/LeBron/Battier/Wade/Chalmers or Bosh/LeBron/Battier/Allen/Wade. As I read your post, I believe you suggest Duncan/Leonard/Granger/Green/Parker in response. I still see Duncan/Leonard/Green/Manu/Parker as the best response. Green can still guard Wade and leave Battier for Manu.

It would, however, be great to have the option of using Granger, and he would be a great insurance policy against injury to any of our wings.

[Mel_13]

My opinion is based on simply watching basketball.

Well, we're going to have to leave it there. You're certainly en led to your opinion.

When you can support that opinion with any reasonable source, I'd be happy to extend the conversation.

[Chinook]

Don't get me wrong I'm a fan of Danny Green (while accepting he is a limited player) but he's just a 3&D guy. He can't do anything else on the offensive end except shoot 3's. You don't need to spend the max to upgrade on him.

Green isn't just a 3&D guy. Green is the best 3&D guy. He's not just a spot-up shooter on O. He can put pressure on the defense by moving without the ball. He moves around the three-point line better than anyone of the team. He also does a lot of little things on offense like set screens, boxing out, calling out rotations, etc. Not to mention defense is half the damned game. Keeping the opponent from scoring is just as good as scoring yourself, even better when you're a role-player. Danny's hard to upgrade from. Beli showed that being better at scoring doesn't make for a better starting two. 10ppg from Danny is worth 18ppg from another guard.

[Robz4000]

The more I think about it the more I think the Spurs are waiting on Butler and only Butler. They've had interest in him as lately as last season/two seasons ago. Unfortunately he'll more than likely join the Heat if he's bought out and could fill the Mike Miller role. Once that happens the Spurs prolly resign Brown (sigh...) and settle into their playoff rotation from last year, which is still good enough to win but it'll be tougher than last year.