Again, not trying to argue for Green-is-better-than-Manu. But your saying that Manu can be better Green simply by taking Green's role is not convincing.
Let's use an analogy, say Manu is like a general, Green is like a soldier. When Manu is on, he means much much more to the Spurs than Green. Everybody agrees with that. But when a general is too senile, that does not mean he can easily go back to being a good soldier, a much inferior position.
agree. Nobody is disputing Green vs Manu roles on the team. We know they are different. Green cannot take over manu's job and Manu cannot take over Green's job.
It's just that Green is playing his role pretty well. Manu is actually hurting the team. Of course the playmaker is more valuable, but when the playmaker is not playing well, he actually hurts the team even more.
Last edited by hater; 03-28-2013 at 03:07 PM.
I agree with all that, and I don't think Manu at the moment can step in and replicate Green's success, since Ginobili's confidence seems low..
My point was that they aren't comparable and that if they had been in the same role since Green joined the Spurs, Manu could easily fill his role, tbh..
Ginobili, even during his struggles, receives defensive attention and game-planning from opposing defenses and coaches..Green doesn't, obviously..
Ginobili is just not the shooter Green is, period. Manu's best season was 40.1 percent. His career average is 37.2 percent. Green's shooting at 44.6 percent right now, and at 43.2 percent for his career. That's a tremendous difference. There's no reason to assume Ginobili could have ever gotten near that number, and especially not "easily".
Also, defenses sure do key in to stop Green, which is why he has games where he doesn't take many shots. His man hardly leaves him out on the three-point line. In fact, it's because players have to commit to defending Green that the Spurs' offense works as well as it does. That's pretty much the definition of spacing the floor. It's clear that Ginobili is much more of a triple-threat for sure, but Green is not a forgotten man like Diaw is.
Saying Ginobili can/could fill Green's role is like saying Duncan could fill Bonner's role (and that's not even talking about the defensive factor). Just because Player A is better than Player B doesn't mean A can do everything better than B, even if A is focusing on it.
I will say this Green is doing a better job in his role than Manu is in his role.
Danny Green gets way better three point looks with Parker. When Parker was out, he really seemed to struggle. With Parker in the lane finding the open man, Green has become a sniper once again.
I'm frustrated by Ginoboli's lack of productivity. Still, it seems like his biggest problem is hitting the outside jumper. That's not something you lose with age. And if he could get it, it would help the rest of his game as it would open up more dribble penetration for scoring in the lane or finding the open shooters.
Green has certainly been more productive than Ginobili in the past several weeks (if not the entire season). Everyone here is just hoping and assuming that Manu will return to his old self in the playoffs, but...what if he doesn't?
Right now, Green contributes more to the team.
Oh, man, this is just crazy.
As so many of you have pointed out, Green's role on this team is as a spot-up shooter, which he does pretty well. He wouldn't be anywhere NEAR as good as he is if he didn't have Tony drawing all the defenders into the paint and then getting the ball to Green in order to do what he does. Very often his defensive stance reminds me more of a head waiter displaying the path he would like the diner take to get to the designated table than of a hard-nosed perimeter defender.
Green plays with Tony who is the playmaker for the first squad, and if Tony is double teamed (as happened last night with Denver), then Duncan can make plays. Green takes what Tony or Duncan and the opposing team gives him, which tends to be corner threes. His job is to hit them. He did it very very well in the first half last night. He is not asked to create plays for himself or others, and if you have ever watched him try to complete a fast break, you fully understand why he is not asked to do more.
Manu is the playmaker for the second quad. His role requires far more than Green's role requires. Manu has not been performing his role particularly well of late, but he is not designed to be a spot-up corner shooter. He is the play maker. He has to be able to see the court, figure out what the defense is allowing, get the ball in position for a three point shooter or the big guy (because Manu rarely gets to play with more than one big guy at a time) on a pick and roll or create a shot for himself, or whatever play Pop has sent in the from the bench. When Manu is on the court, someone else is in the Green role. Perhaps Jackson, whoever.
The point is that they can't be compared head-to-head because the role requirements are so different, and Manu's role is so much more complex.
yes, TP passing when is driving and kicking out is spot on, ball arrives in perfect conditions, much better than lateral passes after a screen
no. Manu haters can kick rocks.
You can't simply compare 3pt percentage. Manu takes much tougher 3's than Danny Green. DG gets open 3pt looks. Back in '02 I think Steve Smith shot close to 50% from 3. He had never even come close to that in his career. Did he suddenly become a much better 3pt shooter? No. He got wide open looks due to TD. That's what happens when most of your shots are open. Give Ginobili mostly open 3's and he would probably be close to 50% as well.
Ginobili has several seasons of 39+ % 3-point shooting AS A SHOT CREATOR..do you understand the difference between spot-up shooting and shooting off the dribble?..comparing Ginobili-Green's shooting disparity to Duncan-Bonner is one of the worst arguments in SpursTalk history, tbh
85% of Danny Green's shots are assisted..
Danny Green helps the Spurs offense because he makes his 3s at a high rate..if opposing defenses actually focused their defenses against him, he wouldn't have nearly as many 3-point attempts as he does..
Where are these games with Danny Green's shots attempts being limited by opposing defenses?..in the 67 games where he plays more than 15 minutes, he has 57 games with 4 or more 3-attempts, an unreal number
Green is a 1-dimensional offensive player that plays decent defense..he excels at a high level with that only dimension, I'm not selling him short, he's an elite regular season shooter..he's the Spurs version of Mike Dunleavy, which is a good asset, tbh..
He did, but if you're going to qualify his success, then it's only right that you qualify his failure, too. The reality is, he was so obscenely hot from three down the stretch and in the first two rounds that he was due for a slump. Unfortunately, it just so happened to come at the most inopportune time.
This post was full of terrible arguments. We'll go step by step:
That's just not factually correct. Try looking up some stats. Ginobili shot over 39 percent TWICE, from 2006-2008. That was a pretty easy thing to check. The fact that you didn't really explains how you could make such a bad argument.
Yes. I mentioned that when combating people who thought Green was the next Ray Allen. Ginobili isn't taking all pull-up threes like you're pretending he is. And even if he were, that only goes to suggest that Green has a better feeling of when to shoot. Green shoots pull-ups, too. But he only does it when he's open. I don't give Manu points for chucking.Do you understand the difference between spot-up shooting and shooting off the dribble?
We're talking about roles. Green is a floor spacer. He's not as good of a player as Ginobili in general (Lord, have we all agreed on that), but that doesn't mean that Ginobili can just be a better spot-up shooter by trying at it. The same way that Duncan wouldn't do Bonner's job better just because Duncan is a better player. Is the argument an exaggeration? Of course it is. The gap between Duncan and Bonner is worlds greater than that between Green and Ginobili. If your argument had any weight at all, one would think you'd be jumping all over yourself to agree with that...comparing Ginobili-Green's shooting disparity to Duncan-Bonner is one of the worst arguments in SpursTalk history, tbh
That's the whole point of spacing the floor. Green being as good of a shooter as he is forces the defender to either guard him or help out on Parker's penetration. We should all be hoping that teams commit to taking him away. A day where Green is too well guarded to get a shot is a day where Parker got to live in the lane.Danny Green helps the Spurs offense because he makes his 3s at a high rate..if opposing defenses actually focused their defenses against him, he wouldn't have nearly as many 3-point attempts as he does..
So it looks like there were 10 games to me. If you don't believe me, go back and look at timvp's game grades from those games. He mentioned a couple of times specifically how open the paint was because Green's man just wouldn't leave him. (The first Brooklyn game comes to mind specifically.)Where are these games with Danny Green's shots attempts being limited by opposing defenses?..in the 67 games where he plays more than 15 minutes, he has 57 games with 4 or more 3-attempts, an unreal number
He also shot an at elite clip for the first two playoff series. You may act like that may as well be the regular season. But prior to last year, the Spurs hadn't made it out of the second round since 2008. Even if Green choked in the OKC series (he didn't), I don't think Spurs fans would have really been that upset if Bonner's shooting always continued out through the WCF.Green is a 1-dimensional offensive player that plays decent defense..he excels at a high level with that only dimension, I'm not selling him short, he's an elite regular season shooter..he's the Spurs version of Mike Dunleavy, which is a good asset, tbh..
- Ginobili has 3 seasons at 40% or better(rounded) and 2 more seasons at 38%(rounded)..semantics, tbh..I have no idea how somebody can claim that Manu isn't a great open shooter..
- You didn't acknowledge my point that 85% of Green's shots are assisted
- You didn't counter-argue that Green took 4 or more 3s in 57 out of 67 games..10 games isn't an argument in your favor at all
- I agree that Green is less of a choker than Bonner, tbh..good comparison though, very similar..
There's no reason to believe that. Ginobili doesn't really seem to hit a high percentage or open threes versus contested ones (though I am sure there's some difference). While I think he'd make a decent spot-up shooter (along the lines of Leonard), 44 percent is hard to do.
Manu's been working on his three game for a couple of years to preserve his body. It's not like he just rolls out of bed and shoots his percentage while Green doesn't nothing but practice outside shots and gets his percentage. I think if they both put their full effort into making threes, Green would still be higher. Ginobili would have to raise his base percentage tremendously; Green would just have to stop being so damned streaky.
You're right that I forgot one of Ginobili's seasons. I didn't even look at 2011-2012 for some reason -- my mistake. But you can't go around touting he shot over 39 percent several times and then say that I should have acknowledge when he shot 38 percent when I refute you.- Ginobili has 3 seasons at 40% or better(rounded) and 2 more seasons at 38%(rounded)..semantics, tbh..I have no idea how somebody can claim that Manu isn't a great open shooter..
- You didn't acknowledge my point that 85% of Green's shots are assisted
- You didn't counter-argue that Green took 4 or more 3s in 57 out of 67 games..10 games isn't an argument in your favor at all
- I agree that Green is less of a choker than Bonner, tbh..good comparison though, very similar..
I didn't disagree on Green's shots being assisted. If Ginobili played the same role, he'd get those 85 percent, too. If Green were taking his own shots, that means Parker doesn't have the ball as much, and that's not good for the Spurs' offense.
I didn't need to counter-argue about Green's games where he takes a lot of shots. I pointed out that when he doesn't it leaves the lane open. He gets so many shots now because teams are desperate to stop Parker (or when Green forces the issue like he did when Parker was out, but that's another topic). In 10 games where Green doesn't get shots, the lane is a vacant lot. In the games where teams leave him along to contain Parker (the first half of the Denver game as a prime example), Green destroys them. That's why floor-spacing works the way it does. Green takes those shots because he has to; he'd hurt the offense if he doesn't. The whole system wouldn't work if you didn't have something around this balance.
There's nothing even remotely similar between Green and Bonner, and you know it. Green has much better playoff stats, and even led the team in defensive rating in the OKC series. Once again, if Bonner had had those numbers, the Spurs would have gone deeper in the playoffs than they had for the past few years before last year.
F__________ way!
Manu is our best corner shooter(55%)
That would be a good reason. Where'd you find that stat? I've been looking for a place that breaks down shots like that. Not that that automatically shows Ginobili's a better shooter. To me, it shows one of two things: either Green is getting run off the corner more than he used to or that Green's finding success at many other spots.
Stats from early march, just press members have acess to those stats(nba.com)...
The blue charts represent shot distribution.
The yellow, red and green shot chart represent shot performance.
Manu
Green
Kawhi
Thanks for the pics.
I'm trying to make sense of them. It's hard to read them on my screen.
After downloading the pics and zooming in, I got a better chance to see what they're saying.
I wanted to test the hypothesis that Ginobili was the Spurs' best corner three shooter, so I did a couple of quick chi-square tests. The results I got suggests that Ginobili hasn't taken enough attempts to say he's for sure a better corner three shooter than either Leonard or Green. Ginobili had only taken 36 corner threes as of that picture. Green had taken 128 (and Leonard 92).
But I get that should want to show that Green is a significantly better three-point shooter than Ginobili is. Doing a chi-square test on that, I found that Green has had significantly more success shooting from three this year (total attempts) than Ginobill. Incidentally enough, there was no significant difference between either Leonard and Green or Leonard and Ginobili.
To me, this data reinforces the idea that Green is more than the run-of-the-mill, D-and-corner-three player that the Spurs have employed as their starting two-guard for much of the Ginobili era. He shot the best out of the three players from non-corner three spots. That already makes him a more dynamic weapon than people typically give him credit for. It's one thing to be able to run Green off corner shots; it's another to have to run him off shots at the wing, where the recovery distance is longer.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
