Reply With Quote
Agree with above post. Kawhi is phenomenal at rebounding. Can we figure how much time kawhi and bonner played together?
But wait a minute Kawhi is stealing Bonner's rebounds
Agree with above post. Kawhi is phenomenal at rebounding. Can we figure how much time kawhi and bonner played together?
Comparing Kawhi's rebounding to Bonner is outrageously misleading.
You have to adjust the numbers on a per-36 basis.
When doing that, Kawhi is at about 11 rebounds per 36. Bonner at 0.5.
So in the three games he's only, what, 22 times the rebounder Bonner is? That's not so bad for Bonner guys.
In Matt's defense, rebounding is a misleading stat. We think of every rebound as being hard-fought with some opposing big man. But most rebounds just fall uncontested into the hands of a defensive player standing right under the basket. They fluctuate wildly from game to game usually based upon who just happens to be there to collect them.
IMO, Bonner's detriment is not his lack of rebounding but the intangible negatives that his presence on the floor brings. Basketball is a human endeavor which is played and officated by humans not much more sophisticated in their opinions than we are -- in other words, Bonner often strikes them in the same way he does us. He looks and runs like a non-athlete or in the common parlance, a geek. Just listen to Barkley's derisive comments about him. Opposing players surely feel the same way and Bonner's mere presence on the court infuses them with confidence. "We can't lose to a team with that guy in the rotation." Confidence is huge in a rhythmic sport like basketball.
Same with the refs, they're human too. They see an ungainly guy like Bonner out there and their first instinct is to call a foul on him, i.e., not give him the benefit of the doubt. Style points matter and Bonner has none of them.
I confess to falling victim to the same kind of thinking. It's a visceral reaction to Bonner in my case -- I associate his presence on the floor with the end of the Spurs' championship era. They happened precisely at the same time in my mind. Is it unfair? Yes. Was Bonner's arrival in the rotation and the simultaneous end of the Spurs' great run coincidental? Almost certainly. But I can't help myself when I watch him choppily attempting to get back in transisition. Yes, it's unfair but it's real to me, to you (probably), to the refs, to sneering NBA commentators and to the opposition players. Life's unfair but it is what it is. I don't think the Spurs can succeed at the highest level with Matt getting consitent minutes in the rotation.
Agree with much of what you posted.
Exception is this:Mathmatically i would say one third of all rebounds are "just happen to be there". Not the majority no way. Varies from game to game but overall about one third given the basics, that being correct Defensive positioning including boxing out, fighting for loose ball rebounds, team D positioning etc. Over a season and esp over a career (see Bonbon) the "bounces" should come to even a guy like Bonner (6'10") more often.They fluctuate wildly from game to game usually based upon who just happens to be there to collect them.
I'd have to disagree. While this may explain the occasional anomaly (such as games where a good rebounder grabs only 3-5 boards when things just don't bounce his way, or one where they grab 20 boards when EVERYTHING bounces their way), there is a reason some guys are known as good rebounders and some aren't.
The two main reasons are usually height and position. This is why centers and power forwards are usually apt to gather 7-15 boards a game. They are taller than the other players, thus they should be able to get to the ball first, and since they are guarding opposing 4s and 5s, they are right in the vicinity of where most rebounds are going to end up. I'm sure this isn't exactly rocket science to anybody.
Then you've got guys like Leonard or Rodman, who don't even have the height advantage, but are able to use a combination of athleticism, energy, determination, and instinct to be decent rebounders for their size and position. We've already seen how adept Leonard is at crashing the boards in three games, because he has a good nose for the ball, and is willing to get into the fray and scrap for it.
At 6'10, Bonner has the height. , he's the third tallest guy on the team (which doesn't say much about our roster). And while I could understand him not being a great offensive rebounder since he spends most of his time at that end of the floor floating around the perimeter, he is still coming down and defending the opponent's power forward or center, and SHOULD be right in the rebounding wheelhouse.
The problem is, even these natural advantages are totally negated by his lack of effort and/or intelligence. He's not athletic and can't jump over a Hot Wheels car. He's got short arms, and is terrible at boxing out or fighting for position. He's always in the wrong place at the wrong time, and he either lacks the desire to fight for rebounds, or he is just absolutely inept at doing so.
Matt Bonner was never a good rebounder to begin with, but we've now seen this decline steadily each year to the point of ridiculousness. For a guy who spends all of his minutes as a post player, that's not just by chance. When you are a regular rotation big, and you are being outrebounded by a point guard who only gets spot garbage minutes, something is very wrong.
Leonard should get virtually all of Bonner's minutes. I don't even know why/how Bonner gets classified as a big when he plays like a 5'4 middle schooler. If Bonner isn't hitting 3's (which he usually doesn't after December) than there is not a single thing he can do to contribute on the floor. Kawhi, while not able to spread the floor, can impact the game so much more than Bonner in probably a quarter of the minutes. We should keep the 4 bigs as TD, Splitter, Blair, Kawhi (as a PF).
When Bonner is in, it's us essentially playing small ball anyway. I just can't see Pop putting him in the doghouse. He's far to obsessed with stretch "bigs".
I would much much rather get rid of Bonner than RJ. In a heartbeat. RJ can at least drive to the rim, has some athleticism, and looks much more confident shooting the 3 ball than Bonner who takes half an hour just to set his feet for a catapult shot.
RJ has a brutal contract, but it's getting to the point where Bonner's is just as bad. Books should be written about how the least likely NBA player ever managed to be a top 3 point shooter (in theory anyway). Like Seabiscuit or that movie "Rudy".
Oh, and Matt Bonner.
In the past, Matt would hamper the opposing fast break with what amounts to a fake hustle at a rebound. That's nothing new. These days he doesn't even do that. He's slow to recover, got his ankles broken by a pass (of all things) and ended up on his back like a turtle. He lacks speed, quickness and agility. He lacks reach, awareness and savvy. Now he lacks a decent outside shot.
He's probably not even D league material, they would run all over him.
They should call him Rainman. He's no doubt book smart, probably a math whiz, awkward as and doesn't operate on the same wavelength as the team, yet he's forced into NBA society by his pop.
excellent idea. Maybe we can get started on a group script.
Hey here is a start already!:
DMC
They should call him Rainman. He's no doubt book smart, probably a math whiz, awkward as and doesn't operate on the same wavelength as the team, yet he's forced into NBA society by his pop.
Bonner looks like someone who won a radio contest to play for an NBA team.
Instead of the Church of Bonner can we make like a Gas Chamber of Bonner or something? This guy straight up sucks. FFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUU
Bonner had the best three point percentage last year because he only takes wide open uncontested 3's. If other NBA players did that they would have higher percentages. It some times make sense to take a slightly contested 3 if it's in the flow of the offense. Teams have figured out he's pretty much useless if you make an attempt to run him of the line.
Bonner on the early returns:
Total Rebound % = 1.0
This is incredibly bad. The only other frontcourt player on the year who's played at least 20 minutes and is worse is Steve Novak (and he's at 12.5 mpg). Bill Walker is at 2.2, Battier at 3.0.
He ranks dead last (72) on ESPN among qualified power forwards rebounding per 48, at 0.8. 71st place is Nick Collison at 4.2.
He is at a team worst PER (3.3). A team worst Defensive Rating of 109. A middle of the pack Offensive Rating of 93 (Kawhi is 92). A TS% of .40.
I'm sure he'll pick up those numbers as the year goes on, and Spurs bloggers will keep up their yearly tradition of appearing on ESPN's NBA Today podcast and promoting Bonner as the secret weapon for beating teams like the Lakers in the playoffs, because they can't match up with Matt Bonner.
Bonner is significantly worse thus far in the short number of games we've played. Bonner's always been terrible, but at least last year you could tell he was really trying. This year he doesn't have the body language of someone who gives a .
He's no Bonner, but Ian with 19 and 5 tonight in 29 minutes.
He'd be useful right now as a 4th or 5th big - no?
The dude looks terrible and looks like he doesn't even care about the game anymore. He is a lot slower and his defensive rotations are just terrible he can't guard anyone without holding/fouling them.
I know we talked about Amnesty Clause for RJ but can't we do it for Bonner?
Instead of creating a separate thread about this, I thought it better to post this here.
Even though we're only a few games into a new regular season, I firmly believe one fact that is becoming obvious to most Spurs fans. In no way, is this team any better off with Bonner on it. In fact, it's worse. Bonner is much-maligned around here because he's long represented only a single-skill set, albeit an inconsistent one, along with an overwhelmeing lack of both athleticism and mental toughness. Yet, he's been bequethed a spot in the rotation and given way too many chances to fail. Yet he remains on the team. Bonner also represents a wasted roster spot.
Two summers ago, the Spurs brass made the ill-fated, and short-sighted, decision to not only retain Bonner, but they chose him over another young player. A player, who most certainly could've exceeded Bonner''s pitiful on-court contributions. The decision to re-up Bonner was only exceeded in stupidity by the decision to allow Ian Mahinmi to walk. That's right - I said it then and I'm saying it again now.
This situation with Bonner is even more infuriating because it could've and should've been avoided. For all the Ian-haters, ask yourself, how does Bonner's contributions, or lack thereof, help offsite the dramatic decline in production from the center spot? How are the Spurs any better off with Bonner over Mahinmi? If you factor in the continued decline of Duncan, the suckiness of Bonner and the fact that this roster is still missing a young big man, I don't see how anyone could agree that keeping Bonner, and letting Ian walk, was the right decision to make.
Ian was unmercilessly criticized when he was here. Even though he was, and probably still, a career backup big - at least he is an active, developing player, with a skill set the Spurs are currently lacking. He is also a player who is still young enough to provide contributions like his most recent one. For those who aren't familiar with Ian's Friday night stat line, versus the Raptors, here goes:
19 Pts, 5 Reb, 1 Stl, 2 Blks
Has Bonner even gotten 5 rebounds in the first 3 games? A final fact about Ian, he would have been a much better fit with the Spurs emerging young core of players.
That said, I don't want to make this post exclusively about Mahinmi. This is more about the front office's decision to re-invest in a player, who brings very little to the table skill-wise, is a huge liability on the defensive end, during the regular season, and provides diminishing returns, on both ends of the court, in the playoffs. Bonner has no business on this team.
Why are you people barely figuring this out? I was saying this back in 07' when Spurs were winning and he was on the bench.
*closes eyes*
Duncan/Splitter
Scola/Blair/Mahinmi
@SenorSpur
Part of the problem is Pop no longer knows how to develop big men. The only way a bigman will make the roster is if they can shoot 3's or they have an already developed skill set.
Why didn't you want to start a new thread?
I really just wanted to mention Ian's stats - I'm glad he's getting some minutes.
this season's going to give guys like him a chance to prove themselves and maybe even get better. Good time for the Spurs to put a project type guy in the mix too.
we need richards. he might be raw, but at least he'd be better than bonner.
Last time they won it all, he got hardly any minutes and this got was on the bench! Where he should have stayed until he got cut later! Why did Pop make him a key rotational player and use him more? Good lord that is the end of the Spurs IMO! GOOD LORD he is utter shyt.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
