Aron Baynes, Nando De Colo Both Assigned To Austin Toros

[DapDaGenius]

Baynes doesn't have to be "good" right now. We could give him Blair's limited minutes because Blair simply isn't able to rebound or defend at an NBA level.
Maybe Baynes can't either, but it's worth a shot. What's there to lose?

I think Baynes will be able to rebound and defend at an NBA level. Just like with Kawhi, it's a matter of him getting the minutes he needs to adjust.

Also, does anyone know when we are able to get rid of Bonner?

[exstatic]

Baynes cannot be used in every game, but he clearly has value in an area that SA are chronically weak...offensive boards.

How long have you even been a fan? Ignoring the offensive boards to get back on defense and prevent easy baskets is part and parcel of their entire system. They usually send one guy, sometimes two if Tim and Tiago are both in the game. Two on five doesn't come out well for us often.

[Strategic]

Turning this thread into a Baynes vs. Blair argument may only leave one of the following two scenerios after this season:


1. If the Spurs win it all with Dejuan getting some PT then he and the club might come to an agreement for him to stay for the cheap.
(never underestimate the power of the trophy)

2. If the Spurs do not win it all this year then the natives will forever sling this 'Baynes should have played' .
(think Splitter two years ago and the Scola river of tears...................... forever)


I'm trying to think which scenerio will be less painful.

[Russ]

Baynes seems somewhat similar to two players -- Tyson Chandler and Ian Mahinmi. That's a huge range.

[Supreme_Being]

Blair is actually a pretty good pnr defender. He falls asleep on his rotations though.

Baynes doesn't know the angles to take, the spacing to zone it up, nor is he used to the speed on the NBA players on pnr. You can see it when he is playing 3rd string guys. NBA teams run a TON of pnr and you can tell he doesn't know how to defend it. You think Blair is bad on rotations? Baynes doesn't even know where the help is supposed to come from much less if or how he is supposed to cover for that if it's his rotation.

He is completely lost on offense and if he is not posting up or screening he just wanders around. He is not going to know the cuts or the plays even when he is on the ball.

He's a new toy; I get that and I always hope that we blow teams out so I can watch him some more but he is not remotely ready.

You do realise baynes played under Brett brown who uses the same system as the the spurs, right?

[Budkin]

Watched the Toros game last night. ing refs were indeed awful.

[ChumpDumper]

Different positions being the key words of your hilarious non-sequitur.

Baynes even remarked about his urgent send down being nothing more than a conditioning run. Obviously it paid dividends; the increased stamina has allowed him to sit for longer periods of time while still maintaining correct posture.

It was pretty stupid of him to get ejected, I agree.

Nowhere in his post did he pimp anything; simply asking for proof of what is being flouted as facts. As far as pimping goes

perhaps you're having flashbacks to the time you were concieved in a back alley of that dank strip mall your momma lived next to?

The first step in trying to get back at me for recalling your idiotic take on Splitter is to remember i before e except after c.

[LarryDavid]

Turning this thread into a Baynes vs. Blair argument may only leave one of the following two scenerios after this season:


1. If the Spurs win it all with Dejuan getting some PT then he and the club might come to an agreement for him to stay for the cheap.
(never underestimate the power of the trophy)

2. If the Spurs do not win it all this year then the natives will forever sling this 'Baynes should have played' .
(think Splitter two years ago and the Scola river of tears...................... forever)


I'm trying to think which scenerio will be less painful.

I'll take scenario one. Any scenario involving winning the is better than the alternative.

[TJastal]

The first step in trying to get back at me for recalling your idiotic take on Splitter is to remember i before e except after c.

Ahhh right... when all else fails and lame arguments are failing to hit the mark its time for the grammar cop routine. Shame though you weren't there to impart all that wisdom to mum back in the day so she could fill out a job application correctly. Course then you might not have existed. Moot point, really.

[exstatic]

You do realise baynes played under Brett brown who uses the same system as the the spurs, right?

Actually, the plays are the same, but they are only a subset of the complete Spurs offense. Anyone remember when we had to "dumb down" the offense for Jefferson? That didn't work out so well.

[Seventyniner]

How long have you even been a fan? Ignoring the offensive boards to get back on defense and prevent easy baskets is part and parcel of their entire system. They usually send one guy, sometimes two if Tim and Tiago are both in the game. Two on five doesn't come out well for us often.

Another false premise to be debunked. Here we go...

The Spurs are 21st in the league in both opponents' fast break points per game and opponents' fast break efficiency. The Pacers are first in both.
http://www.teamrankings.com/nba/stat...oints-per-game
http://www.teamrankings.com/nba/stat...eak-efficiency
The catch? The Spurs are last in offensive rebounding at 20.3%, while the Pacers are 5th at 30.1%. Obviously it is possible to both crash the offensive glass and have a good fastbreak defense like Indiana. Or you could be horrendous at offensive rebounding and still below average on fastbreak defense like the Spurs.

In fact, let's take this a step further. I ran a linear regression of opponents' fastbreak efficiency vs. own offensive rebounding percentage. I got:
Opponents' fastbreak efficiency = 0.3215*own ORB% + 1.6087 with an R^2 value of 0.003. There is basically no correlation between opponents' fastbreak efficiency and own ORB%.

I did the same for opponents' fastbreak points per game vs. own ORB%.
Opponents' fastbreak PPG = -0.8392*own ORB% + 13.436 with an R^2 value of 0.0004. The negative correlation is what many assume, but again since the value is so close to zero, there is no correlation between opponents' fastbreak PPG and own ORB%.

Face it: the Spurs are just not a good offensive rebounding team, and unless I hear it from someone trustworthy, I would have to assume that it isn't all by design and is just plain a weakness of the team. Could the Spurs' opponent fastbreak numbers get worse if the Spurs started going harder after offensive rebounds? Sure, but the league-wide numbers don't suggest it.

[ChumpDumper]

Ahhh right... when all else fails and lame arguments are failing to hit the mark its time for the grammar cop routine. Shame though you weren't there to impart all that wisdom to mum back in the day so she could fill out a job application correctly. Course then you might not have existed. Moot point, really.

So saying my mom was a pros ute is a basketball argument?

lol hypocrite

Sorry your takes are so historically bad that they bite you in the ass three years on.

[ChumpDumper]

unless I hear it from someone trustworthy, I would have to assume that it isn't all by design

Seriously?

Have you never watched a Spurs game with a former Spurs player commentating?

[TJastal]

Another false premise to be debunked. Here we go...

The Spurs are 21st in the league in both opponents' fast break points per game and opponents' fast break efficiency. The Pacers are first in both.
http://www.teamrankings.com/nba/stat...oints-per-game
http://www.teamrankings.com/nba/stat...eak-efficiency
The catch? The Spurs are last in offensive rebounding at 20.3%, while the Pacers are 5th at 30.1%. Obviously it is possible to both crash the offensive glass and have a good fastbreak defense like Indiana. Or you could be horrendous at offensive rebounding and still below average on fastbreak defense like the Spurs.

In fact, let's take this a step further. I ran a linear regression of opponents' fastbreak efficiency vs. own offensive rebounding percentage. I got:
Opponents' fastbreak efficiency = 0.3215*own ORB% + 1.6087 with an R^2 value of 0.003. There is basically no correlation between opponents' fastbreak efficiency and own ORB%.

I did the same for opponents' fastbreak points per game vs. own ORB%.
Opponents' fastbreak PPG = -0.8392*own ORB% + 13.436 with an R^2 value of 0.0004. The negative correlation is what many assume, but again since the value is so close to zero, there is no correlation between opponents' fastbreak PPG and own ORB%.

Face it: the Spurs are just not a good offensive rebounding team, and unless I hear it from someone trustworthy, I would have to assume that it isn't all by design and is just plain a weakness of the team. Could the Spurs' opponent fastbreak numbers get worse if the Spurs started going harder after offensive rebounds? Sure, but the league-wide numbers don't suggest it.

Yet another misused crackpot theory debunked. Popsuckers are running out of holy grails to cling to.

[TJastal]

Actually, the plays are the same, but they are only a subset of the complete Spurs offense. Anyone remember when we had to "dumb down" the offense for Jefferson? That didn't work out so well.

Funny how you whine about 's shortcomings yet were perfectly content in acquiring his equal in namesake as well as mental for ude (at the expense of a highly cerebral player to boot).

[ace3g]

Nando recalled:

http://www.nba.com/spurs/news/130316...l_nando_decolo

[Seventyniner]

Seriously?

Have you never watched a Spurs game with a former Spurs player commentating?

Sorry, I tend to tune out Sean Elliott, as much as I liked him as a player.

Past Spurs teams haven't been nearly this bad at ORB% (they've been in the 24-27 range leaguewide for a while, but in absolute numbers never nearly as bad as this year's 20.3%), so the dropoff (yes, it is a big one) can't be explained only by Pop's orders unless Pop has started telling his players to weight their efforts towards transition defense and away from offensive rebounds even more than in the past.

[ChumpDumper]

Sorry, I tend to tune out Sean Elliott, as much as I liked him as a player.

Can't help you then.

I can certainly go with the theory that the players just suck at offensive rebounding now, but a few minutes of Baynes isn't really going to change that.

[Bruno]

Nando recalled:

http://www.nba.com/spurs/news/130316...l_nando_decolo

Baynes not recalled is half a surprise. With only Parker injured, another player has to be inactive. Baynes could have been called back but he would have been in a suit. On a more long term basis, I wouldn't be surprised to see Pop switching Baynes and De Colo for the 13th active roster spot.

[ChumpDumper]

Baynes not recalled is half a surprise. With only Parker injured, another player has to be inactive. Baynes could have been called back but he would have been in a suit.

There's another game in Austin tonight against a couple of good bigs. If Baynes can stay in the game, it shouldn't be a complete waste of time. If he travels with the team next week, we'll know it's probably a longer term assignment.

[Pasta Batman]

Boris Diaw played in the NBA for eight seasons.

Also familiar with Spurs system from Parker + National Team

[TheGoldStandard]

Baynes won't be active for the playoffs, don't you know that Pop is resting Bonner to get him geared up for the playoffs. Come playoff time Pop is going to release the Red Rocket.

[Das Texan]

Baynes not recalled is half a surprise. With only Parker injured, another player has to be inactive. Baynes could have been called back but he would have been in a suit. On a more long term basis, I wouldn't be surprised to see Pop switching Baynes and De Colo for the 13th active roster spot.

Pop is punishing him for getting thrown out.

[Seventyniner]

Can't help you then.

I can certainly go with the theory that the players just suck at offensive rebounding now, but a few minutes of Baynes isn't really going to change that.

Completely agreed about Baynes.

Though I'm struggling to explain the dropoff even from last season to this one, where the personnel changes have been minimal. 25.1% to 20.3% is a huge decrease. Were Blair and HWSNBN that good at offensive rebounding?

[jimbo]

The first step in pimping a player is spelling his name correctly.

Worthwhile basketball analysis bro A++

If you can't do what I asked, why are you even posting about this?