If he hadn't hit those two threes then of course this game isn't nearly as good.
But he did.
I don't want him to be Tim Duncan-defensively good. I want him simply not to be abused by whoever he's guarding or such a liability that we need to send double teams. That has not happened yet.
I disagree. As bad as Blair was, he played a much more complete game than Bonner overall, especially in the 1st half. Now, if you're blinded by the golden minute, then I have nothing to tell you.
He was a turnstile on defense. Failed to box out, gave up offensive boards, missed rotations. Dice was worse today though.
There's no way Blair was better. No ing way.
Bonner was better today than McDyess.
And Bonner had the best playoff game of his entire career, based on when the shots fell.
But on the whole this was a modest game for Bonner. If you hit 2 threes in the final minutes and are still a -10, maybe that's bad? Plus/Minus isn't a great indicator, but Bonner-lovers have used it for years as proof of how he's the greatest Spur of all time.
And by the way . . .
Remember Bonner-lovers defense of his nightmarish failure in 2009? It involved making excuses for him because Manu wasn't playing, therefore being impossible for him to make his shots.
Yet without Manu today he somehow managed to not fail with 3s in the 4th?
How could the be even possible?
It's good to hear thought that Bonner-lovers admit that Pop's plan for a championship include a player whose role is not to play defense... as failed as that sounds...
lol tanking to play against the Blair/Bonner frontcourt and being right about it...
You sound like DarrinS. If this is the way you want to be, then go right ahead.
I have watch the game a second time but in the moment right now, I would rank them about equal. Blair had some major fails trying to score around bigs and turning the ball over, but did get offensive rebounds and managed to have a +8 without any points from his froncourt mate Bonner.
You said it. The 'that's not his role' has been as overused as his plus/minus...
Somebody please tell me what is his defensive role?
Bonner is useful in pick and rolls because he recovers well while whirring his T-Rex arms in dog-paddle fashion.
that's about it.
He does actually move like that tbh
I've rewatched the game with a Bonner centric focus.
He did play servicable enough that he didn't hurt the Spurs with his defense, and overall played better than my immediate impressions following his play in the 4th quarter, which was probably his worst before the shots went down.
Defensively he spent most of his time against Arthur. Memphis tried to post him up on Bonner but it never happened. Bonner battled Arthur to the point that passes never came, but I feel that was largely Arthur playing soft. Bizarrely, most of the possessions where he was guarding Gasol or Randolph, Memphis never went at him, ignoring the Rasheed Wallace edict of giving the ball to whoever Bonner was guarding. Bonner battled hard though, I've never doubted his effort or activity level.
If that continues for the rest of the series, then Bonner won't hurt the Spurs too much.
It was the 4th quarter where Bonner's defense came into play, such as Gasol going at him and forcing Bonner to foul.
Bonner's rebounding wasn't great. The one play where he he was thrown to the ground by Randolph while Gasol scored off the offensive rebound . . . I couldn't tell if it was his responsibility to rotate and block out Gasol or RJ's, but RJ rotated to block out Randolph instead with Bonner. Bonner still got wrecked though. I'm leaning towards blaming Bonner.
Bonner was bailed out of two turnovers by dumb fouls. The first one he passed on the shot and got lucky. The second one I feel would have been a 24 second violation without the contact. And of course he lucked into free throws with his loose ball rebounding mega-flop. IF Memphis continues to bail out Bonner like that and refs fall for flying flops, then Bonner doesn't hurt the Spurs there either.
Where Bonner didn't help the Spurs however was the whole reason for him to be on the court: spreading the floor. The only Memphis player who paid any respect to Bonner's range was Gasol, and he didn't cover him nearly as much as Arthur. Anyone not named Gasol simply left Bonner largely uncovered and came down to pack the paint. They didn't respect Bonner, and they weren't spread about the floor.
So it was the best game of Bonner's postseason career to my memory.
But they should still play Splitter over any big not named Duncan.
They have their best chances to win when playing their best players. That means Splitter over Bonner (or McDyess or even Blair). Just like it meant Hill over Mason and Vaughn in 09.
The scorer was right, that ball was deflected by Parker away from Randolph and into Bonner, though Memphis was claiming that Parker hit the passer's arm. Bonner was just standing there.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
