Top 5 Offseason Priorities:

[SenorSpur]

By now, you'd be blind not to see why we can't stand him and his play.

Bonner is one of a few players whose jump shot annually goes on summer vacation at the end of each regular season - regardless whether the Spurs are in the playoffs or not.

[BronxCowboy]

Right? I mean, he was so useful in the playoffs.

He actually was one of the 2 or 3 useful players off the bench.

By now, you'd be blind not to see why we can't stand him and his play.

I can see it why you can't stand him. It's called selective memory.

Bonner is one of a few players whose jump shot annually goes on summer vacation at the end of each regular season - regardless whether the Spurs are in the playoffs or not.

Actually have to give you props for the witty comment. That said, Bonner shot 37% from downtown in these playoffs, and although that's down from his regular season %, that's better than anyone on the team not named George Hill. If Bonner's jump shot was on vacation, where was Manu's? What about Timmy's free throws? I also hear a lot of knocks on his defense. Yes, there are guys out there better on D than Bonner, but there are worse too (including on this Spurs team). The point is, Bonner has been consistently scapegoated, and the facts just don't support it. In the limited minutes that he plays, you could do a lot worse. Of course this is all open to debate, but I'm not seeing real debate here. Just a lot of "Yeah, Bonner Sucks!"

[EIC]

He actually was one of the 2 or 3 useful players off the bench.

On a bench full of useless players. That's like saying he was one of the taller midgets. Also, this fact (even if true, which I doubt) ignores the fact that no one else had a chance to unseat Bonner as one of "the 2 or 3 useful players off the bench" because Bonner was playing ~25 minutes. Meanwhile, Dice's fanny is planted on a chair. If you think Dice could not have done more than Bonner with the minutes Bonner got, then you're watching the wrong team. (The Spurs are the one's in black or white jerseys.)

That said, Bonner shot 37% from downtown in these playoffs, and although that's down from his regular season %, that's better than anyone on the team not named George Hill. If Bonner's jump shot was on vacation, where was Manu's? What about Timmy's free throws? I also hear a lot of knocks on his defense. Yes, there are guys out there better on D than Bonner, but there are worse too (including on this Spurs team). The point is, Bonner has been consistently scapegoated, and the facts just don't support it. In the limited minutes that he plays, you could do a lot worse. Of course this is all open to debate, but I'm not seeing real debate here. Just a lot of "Yeah, Bonner Sucks!"

You must have missed the part where he passed wide open three after wide open three. I mean, I could say Timmy shot 50% from the arc against the Suns, but that would be a misleading statistic and so is Bonner's. The difference is that Bonner's sole purpose on the team is to nail the wide open three off a swing pass. That is his job, not Manu's, not Parker's, not Dice's, not Blair's, not Timmy's. Bonner had one job to do and he didn't do it.

Note also that his stats are no doubt wildly inflated by his sudden burst of actually mediocre play against the Suns in Game 4. His suddenly mediocre play---punctuated by a few rebounds, an actually decent drive to the basket, and a few threes---was notable specifically because he had completely sucked sweaty, hairy, old balls up until that moment. And this just goes back to the biggest knock against Bonner: He only shows up when it isn't that important (i.e., regular season games and elimination games in the playoffs where his team is in an insurmountable 3-0 hole).

But honest to God, I could forgive all the aforementioned transgressions if it wasn't for the biggest problem with Bonner that everyone seems to overlook and which won't show up on most stat sheets: His unique ability to prevent the Spurs from developing even a whiff of momentum while he's on the floor, or more commonly, his knack for obliterating any momentum the Spurs have going the moment he checks in. It's totally bizarre; I have never seen anything like it in my life.

You know those scary times during the Mavs series where they'd go on their little 11-0 runs and put you on edge? Bonner had checked in the game. You know how the Spurs seemed to fend those runs off all of sudden and build their lead back? Bonner went to the bench.

You know those times against the Suns when we'd start to go on a little tear, get some steals, get some momentum going, and actually look like we might re-take the lead? Bonner wasn't in. You know how, all of a sudden our run would end and we'd start making turnovers and shooting bricks? Bonner had checked in.

I am dead serious. The dude is a jinxed idol. When he's in the game, it's like the Spurs are playing with four guys. I dare say that every single run the Mavs or Suns went on this year was sparked by Bonner checking into the game. This was most obvious at the end of Game 4 when he was checking in and out for short stretches and our ability to climb back into the game kept fluctuating wildly in perfect harmony with Bonner's status.

And that's really where my beef with him is: I might be able to overlook the fact that, Game 4 aside, he completely failed to do his job; that he acts like a scared little puppy in games that actually have some importance; and that he gets way too many minutes for being as unathletic and scared as he is. But I cannot overlook the way he makes the Spurs collectively worse off the second he checks in.

How's that for debate? Can we all just save our collective breaths and agree that Bonner is easily one of the worst Spurs to ever wear the uniform and should be ceremoniously discharged from the team? No veterans' minimum, no "Thanks for your play, big guy," no handshake. Just, "Get your out of your locker and get the out."

[BronxCowboy]

Bonner was playing ~25 minutes. Meanwhile, Dice's fanny is planted on a chair. If you think Dice could not have done more than Bonner with the minutes Bonner got, then you're watching the wrong team. (The Spurs are the one's in black or white jerseys.)

You make a good point that McDyess should have been playing more, but it isn't Bonners fault. He averaged 17.3 minutes in the playoffs; I don't consider that ~25. In fact there were exactly 2 games in which Bonner played more minutes than McDyess: Game 4 vs Phoenix (it's hard to fault a guy who scored 14 points on 5-6 shooting and 2-3 from long range) and Game 5 vs Dallas (when apparently Pop had decided to rest not just McDyess, but the rest of the starters as well.)

You must have missed the part where he passed wide open three after wide open three.

He did miss more than I expected against the Mavs, but I thought we wanted him to focus on chasing Dirk around? Against the Suns, he actually made 5/11. That's not bad at all by any standards. Maybe there are some inflated expectations here?

I mean, I could say Timmy shot 50% from the arc against the Suns, but that would be a misleading statistic and so is Bonner's.

If Bonner only shot two 3-pointers for the whole playoffs, you would have a great point.

Bonner had one job to do and he didn't do it.

Except when he did. And then you were pissed what he was getting too many minutes.

Because he had completely sucked sweaty, hairy, old balls up until that moment.

He actually contributed in some of the first round games even when his shot wasn't falling. And he had a decent outing in Game 3 against the Suns. More consistency would be nice, yes, but we're not talking about an All-Star or even a regular starter here. Just a minor role player. Again, not sure what you expect from the eighth guy in your rotation.

which won't show up on most stat sheets: His unique ability to prevent the Spurs from developing even a whiff of momentum while he's on the floor, or more commonly, his knack for obliterating any momentum the Spurs have going the moment he checks in.

There is a stat for that, at least roughly: plus-minus. But it only tells us what we already knew from watching the games. That is, there were a couple of times where what you described DID happen against the Mavs: Games 2 and 6. And of course he got owned in game 5, but so did everyone else other than Tony Parker. The Suns series was a different story; he was actually better than the alternatives in that series (McDyess and Blair) in terms of his impact on team success when he was on the floor.

This was most obvious at the end of Game 4 when he was checking in and out for short stretches and our ability to climb back into the game kept fluctuating wildly in perfect harmony with Bonner's status.

This would be a convincing argument if it was a regular pattern and not just one game; or if it was even true. Problem is that it isn't very true. The fact is that the Spurs did better in Bonner's minutes on the floor in that game than they did in George Hill's, Richard Jefferson's, or even Manu Ginobili's! Only Tony Parker, Antonio McDyess, and Tim Duncan had more team success when they were on th floor in that particular game, the one you chose as your ultimate example.

He gets way too many minutes for being as unathletic and scared as he is.

I think that's a point we can all agree with.

But I cannot overlook the way he makes the Spurs collectively worse off the second he checks in.

I couldn't either, if only it was true.

How's that for debate? Can we all just save our collective breaths and agree that Bonner is easily one of the worst Spurs to ever wear the uniform and should be ceremoniously discharged from the team?

I can easily think of Spurs (past and current!) who are worse than Bonner, but like the rest of my arguments, it makes no difference when an agenda is more important than facts. I guess I'll just leave it at that. If you're expecting a superstar as your backup power forward, you're never going to recognize him as the solid role player that he is.

[EIC]

Bronx,

You don't make any sense. On one hand you keep suggesting that Bonner's numbers weren't that bad, but then complain---as we do---that he got way too many minutes. Which is it?

What possible reason would Spurs fans have to bash Bonner if there was not some legitimacy to his utter inability to contribute as an effective player? What "agenda" do we have? What do we have to gain by criticizing him?

Or maybe, just maybe, his play wasn't that great, as reflected in Hollinger's play-efficiency rating?

Also, how do you explain that the opinion that Bonner blew ass in these playoffs is not unique to Spurs fans. Take for example:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...#ixzz0nAt002mT

And if you did not notice the tendency for the Spurs to fold up when got on the court, then you are completely and utterly blind. Lakers fans were coming on here starting threads about his ability to kill momentum for crying out loud:

http://spurstalk.com/forums/showthre...onner+momentum

So either Matt Bonner sucks and you can't see it because you refuse to believe your brother is that bad, or this whole thing is part of some worldwide conspiracy to bring him down.

[BronxCowboy]

I don't think he's a great player. I don't think he's good enough to be a starter or the first guy off the bench. But he does contribute and is a solid role player, as long as you don't expect him to play more of a role than he should. He's not complete garbage. The SI article was referring to two games. You have to take a more comprehensive look to get a good idea of someone as a player. It's interesting that you referenced Hollinger's PER. It puts him right between Jeff Green and Juwan Howard, both generally considered contributors on their respective teams. Yes, they are role players, but so is Bonner. It's really hard to find a case in any of this that Matt Bonner is single-handedly bringing the Spurs down. But hey, apparently the trolls are buying it.

[BackHome]

Right? I mean, he was so useful in the playoffs.

I guess we get rid of Hill cause he got ing abused by Nash?

1. Sign Tiago
2. Get rid of Mason, Bogans, trade Ian for early second round pick.
3. Make a decision on which player we keep...Temple, Gee, Hairston and then play them.
4. Trade Bonner to Memphis for their 25th first round pick use our and there pick for Luke Babbit SF and Williams SG or Ganai PF.
5. If Ian can get us a second then get Quincy and draft Art P. late.
6. Bring in Nando and Victor for summer league and see if they can make the team.

[ducks]

if frye gets to expensive
booner would fit in with the suns

[duncan228]

3 Next steps
Ian Thomsen
SI.com

I reached out to an NBA pro personnel scout to examine the next moves for these three evicted playoff teams.

• For the Spurs. I asked the scout why San Antonio would consider trading Tony Parker when he -- a peaking 27-year-old - isn't the problem. "The only reason they'd move Parker is because of George Hill's development," he said. "Parker has one of their most expensive contracts, and moving him would give them some flexibility. But I agree with you, I don't think they're going to blow it up as long as Tim [Duncan] is there."

Duncan is signed for two more years. The Spurs could use their No. 20 draft pick and sign 25-year-old Brazilian big man Tiago Splitter from the Spanish ACB to add vitality to their front line (provided he is able to come to terms, which is no sure thing). "Remember how good [Fabricio] Oberto was for the Spurs because he had a great IQ, he knew his role, he was a complementary player?" said the scout. "That's what Splitter could be for them - he'd play a different style but he would have a very similar effect on the team as a complementary guy who would bring some toughness, and he's a pretty good guy who would understand the team concepts. He will do lot of the dirty work and give them the physical style. He's not going to be flash, he's going to be substance."

Could Hill be ready to flourish in his third NBA season should coach Gregg Popovich decide to move Parker? "It's a of a risk, but I know George Hill is one of Pop's absolute favorites. Everybody looks for the curve of their players -- have we ridden out the curve of this guy, have we gotten the most out of him? When Devin Harris was traded [from Dallas], everybody lauded the Nets for making a great trade; but as time has gone on, now you hear people saying that maybe Dallas knew what they were doing by trading Harris. It's hard to know what the Spurs should do or will do, because nobody knows your own players like you do."

My own feeling is that the Spurs won't deal Parker because it is so difficult to make a fair trade in basketball terms anymore. The Spurs would need to receive talent in return, but in this market most teams will be seeking to steal him for expiring contracts. I'm guessing they'll look forward to acquiring Splitter and a promising rookie while counting on further improvement from Richard Jefferson, Antonio McDyess and DeJuan Blair after their boot-camp year in the Spurs' system.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201....lebron/1.html