2010 Free Agent: Anthony Tolliver

[yavozerb]

Stop deflecting from the point. The point I'm making is that for what Bonner is getting paid and what Tolliver would be getting paid the difference on the floor would be minimal. It might be a little better with Bonner but not a significant amount. Are you suggesting that Bonner is suddenly going to become this amazing contributor that will help this team in the playoffs? Or that he should be a rotation big that plays 20+ minutes per game for the Spurs?

I am suggesting that Bonner well do what is asked of him by pop very well and that is to hit 3 pt shots. I would classify Bonner as an "amazing contributor" if he can shoot >45% from 3, as it stands he is a solid contributor at 40% while attempting 4 shots from beyond the arc per game. I can gurantee you Bonner wil be getting 15-20 minutes per game during the season. As for the playoffs, yes, I do agree he can improve his play and hopefully he will do so. Do you think Bonner is the reason the spurs lost in the playoffs? Bonner was only a small reason why the spurs played poorly against the suns and to lay blame on him is foolish.

[DesignatedT]

I am suggesting that Bonner well do what is asked of him by pop very well and that is to hit 3 pt shots. I would classify Bonner as an "amazing contributor" if he can shoot >45% from 3, as it stands he is a solid contributor at 40% while attempting 4 shots from beyond the arc per game. I can gurantee you Bonner wil be getting 15-20 minutes per game during the season. As for the playoffs, yes, I do agree he can improve his play and hopefully he will do so. Do you think Bonner is the reason the spurs lost in the playoffs? Bonner was only a small reason why the spurs played poorly against the suns and to lay blame on him is foolish.

pretty much this.

Tolliver is definitely not as reliable from behind the arc as bonner and that's the main thing hes in there for.

With Duncan/Splitter/Dice/Blair, Bonner's signing doesn't really matter much. He is a good fill in big when Duncan or Dice needs a night off or in certain situations. Whatever they're paying him they're paying him... who cares. If they want to go over the luxury tax for Bonner then thats holts choice, I don't understand what the money argument is. It's not going against any of the money we could spend for FA anyway.

[Stump]

With Duncan/Splitter/Dice/Blair, Bonner's signing doesn't really matter much. He is a good fill in big when Duncan or Dice needs a night off or in certain situations. Whatever they're paying him they're paying him... who cares. If they want to go over the luxury tax for Bonner then thats holts choice, I don't understand what the money argument is. It's not going against any of the money we could spend for FA anyway.

That's assuming Pop keeps him as the fifth big, which he probably won't. I think he'll continue to shuffle the rotation around in a chaotic manner like he did last year.

[benefactor]

I am suggesting that Bonner well do what is asked of him by pop very well and that is to hit 3 pt shots. I would classify Bonner as an "amazing contributor" if he can shoot >45% from 3, as it stands he is a solid contributor at 40% while attempting 4 shots from beyond the arc per game. I can gurantee you Bonner wil be getting 15-20 minutes per game during the season. As for the playoffs, yes, I do agree he can improve his play and hopefully he will do so. Do you think Bonner is the reason the spurs lost in the playoffs? Bonner was only a small reason why the spurs played poorly against the suns and to lay blame on him is foolish.

You are so ing frustrating to debate with. You keep putting words in my mouth I didn't even say and then you ONCE AGAIN completely ignore the whole substance of my argument. If you are going to continue to debate like a 12 year old then I am done here. Have fun sandwich hunting with Matty.

[Spurs Brazil]

The Hawks haven’t offered Shaq a contract yet. There’s still the open question of what kind of role he’s willing to accept on his new team. The Hawks also are said to be looking at Brad Miller, Ilgauskas, Kurt Thomas, Kwame Brown and Anthony Tolliver.

http://blogs.ajc.com/hawks/2010/07/1...id=blogs_hawks

[yavozerb]

Spurs could have signed him instead of Bonner and the impact would have been the same at worst. Guess wasting 16 million or so was just a better idea.

I'll take a mobile energy big with upside that can actually do more than shoot over the one dimensional 16 million dollar man any day.

Tolliver at vet min>>Bonner at his current price. I don't see how this is debatable.

The Spurs don't have the vet min for Tolliver but can waste millions on Bonner? lol..okay.

Unknown player that may not pan out>>proven playoff choker paid millions of dollars.

That's a pretty dumb statement. You can't debate the two player without looking at the potential financial repercussions. Tolliver at the minimum can be replaced if he doesn't work out. Bonner can't because he's a fat 4 year deal.

Stop deflecting from the point. The point I'm making is that for what Bonner is getting paid and what Tolliver would be getting paid the difference on the floor would be minimal. It might be a little better with Bonner but not a significant amount. Are you suggesting that Bonner is suddenly going to become this amazing contributor that will help this team in the playoffs? Or that he should be a rotation big that plays 20+ minutes per game for the Spurs?

You are so ing frustrating to debate with. You keep putting words in my mouth I didn't even say and then you ONCE AGAIN completely ignore the whole substance of my argument. If you are going to continue to debate like a 12 year old then I am done here. Have fun sandwich hunting with Matty.

As a 12 year old (as you like to think of some posters around who do not agree with you) I can read over and over that you feel Bonner is an over paid player. I have not disagreed with this only stating that he accepted the contract the spurs offered him, not the other way around. You mention his lack of playoff production, again I agree and say he could be better without a doubt. Comparing Tolliver and Bonner as both shooting 4's is pretty crazy. Tolliver sucks as a 3pt shooter and Bonner is one of the best spot up shooting 4's in the league. Not sure how I keep "putting words in your mouth" . Your hate for bonner has consumed your rational way of thinking and quite frankly, I'm a little concerned..

[benefactor]

I don't hate Bonner. I've actually defended him many times in the past, especially last season early on in the year when is production was quite good. But that was then and this is now.

I think where we are not finding common ground here is role and expectation. Splitter is here now, so that gives the Spurs four rotation bigs. Duncan should play 30min, Splitter 25, McDyess 20 and Blair 20. There are 96 available minutes on the front line...and that scenario would consume 95. The 5th big should only play spot duty and in situational lineups. That's why I'm saying Tolliver is a better option than Bonner. He's not as good of a shooter(he doesn't suck, as you suggest either...33% from the arc is serviceable), but he is quicker, a better rebounder, passer and at least has some upside. These are the types of thing one needs from an energy big. The fact that he could be signed at the minimum and not locked in to a long, expensive deal makes it an even easier choice.

There is no longer the same role here for Bonner...unless you are saying you want to take minutes away from Splitter/Blair/McDyess.

[DPG21920]

How people don't understand what benefactor is saying is crazy.

Also, all this contract means (unless they trade him) is that Bonner will certainly not be the 5th big. It is not a hard concept for to see that the Spurs FO values him way more than we do.

[benefactor]

Moved to the discussion to the Bonner thread for the sake of not derailing this one too much.

[mountainballer]

Splitter is here now, so that gives the Spurs four rotation bigs. Duncan should play 30min, Splitter 25, McDyess 20 and Blair 20. There are 96 available minutes on the front line...and that scenario would consume 95.

There is no longer the same role here for Bonner...unless you are saying you want to take minutes away from Splitter/Blair/McDyess.

that's why my first thought was (when Bonner was re signed) that Dice is on the trading block. if Dice is traded for a SF (he can bring back a salary from 3.8 to 6.2 million, should be possible to find a quality role player in that range. Delfino + filler anyone?)
as much as I like Dice, but a front court rotation of Tim (30)-Tiago (25)-Blair (20)-Bonner (20) makes some sense.
5th big would be a cheap player. (Ian?)

[DPG21920]

that's why my first thought was (when Bonner was re signed) that Dice is on the trading block. if Dice is traded for a SF (he can bring back a salary from 3.8 to 6.2 million, should be possible to find a quality role player in that range. Delfino + filler anyone?)
as much as I like Dice, but a front court rotation of Tim (30)-Tiago (25)-Blair (20)-Bonner (20) makes some sense.
5th big would be a cheap player. (Ian?)

If that is the case, then fine. That actually seems like the only way this team would have a legit shot to compete. They need to make a trade for a legit SF that fits whether that be by moving Hill, Blair or Dice or Bonner. Obviously I would rather Bonner be moved.

But other than that, signing Bonner for this much is a dumb move because of his role. That or the Spurs will be playing Bonner as the 4th to 3rd big.

[mountainballer]

I dislike the Bonner signing as much as most here do. but considering it's for 4 years, they plan with him, obviously. the only big who can be moved right now is Dice. (ok Blair as well, but what do you get for a player with a low salary)

[MaNu4Tres]

The Spurs spending 4 million a year on a 5th big really is mind-boggling. It means two things:

1) Spurs really plan on limiting Duncan and McDyess' minutes during the regular season.

or

2) Spurs plan on packaging McDyess or Blair in a trade.

I don't necessarily buy the Spurs trading McDyess or Blair; so that makes me believe Spurs intend to limit Duncan and McDyess' minutes as much as possible.

That being said, Bonner's the best quality stretch-4 that was available; I was skeptical Spurs bringing him back because of his assumed price tag (high for a 5th big).

The Spurs spending 4 million for him says enough on how much they valued the quality of the 5th big spot in the rotation.

[ChumpDumper]

Every thread is slowly turning into a Bonner thread.

[ceperez]

for what gsw is offering tolliver.... about 1m a season, i think should consider his services.

don't expect him to be a superstar, but a serviceable big that can hit the outside shot when needed.

[Anonymous Cowherd]

He's going to the Timberwolves.

Another one bites the dust.

[will_spurs]

Happy to hear he's got a contract. Any idea in what ballpark his contract is?

[admiralsnackbar]

Happy to hear he's got a contract. Any idea in what ballpark his contract is?

Per his agent, it's "as much as" 2 yrs, $4.8M, so 2nd year is a TO and/or there are performance incentive bonuses.

http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/385980...s-player_news/

[ceperez]

http://m.youtube.com/?ytsession=ynGc...&v=fvL5KRoXC00

[ceperez]

Per his agent, it's "as much as" 2 yrs, $4.8M, so 2nd year is a TO and/or there are performance incentive bonuses.

http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/385980...s-player_news/

A bit too pricey for the spurs.

[Chomag]

Would have been good had the Spurs not decided to have signed Bonner to a long term beefy contract. Getting him now would be a bit redundant.

Such a shame as I believe Toliver is much more talented and has way more upside then Bonner.