Loyalty

[Extra Stout]

Thanks for supporting SA210, my and other knowledgeable Spurs point.
The years Bruce got big minutes on Kobme, Kobmes percentages were held in check.
Specifically game 1 of 2008. Bruce on Kobme, Spurs up freakin 20 mid 3rd qtr.
DumbassOvich takes Bowen out, Lakers and Kobme go on immediate run and win!

Bruce Bowen Minutes Per Game in Spurs-Lakers Playoff Series
2002: 37
2003: 36
2004: 28
2008: 34

[CubanMustGo]

13 minutes off the bench from SuperStevie Kerr in the 2003 Championship run in Gm 6 vs the Mavs.

Move forward.

[Agloco]

Because Finley hadn't opted in for 2009-10, he couldn't have been traded on the date of the trade; had the Spurs waited, they might not have acquired Jefferson. And even if he had opted in, Bowen was a necessary piece for a trade that the Spurs HAD to make to have any chance to remain relevant.

This thread is pointless.

[Extra Stout]

Commentary:

Following Kobe Bryant's (and Shaquille O'Neal's) dominance against the Spurs in the 2001 Western Conference Finals, the Spurs added Bruce Bowen to shore up their perimeter defense. The improvement was immediately apparent in the 2002 and 2003 series, where Bryant was held below his season shooting percentages. In 2004, Bowen's minutes were cut because of the presence of Hedo Turkoglu, and the Spurs' defense against Bryant suffered accordingly.

By 2008, it was clear Bowen had lost a step in guarding Bryant. The Spurs were no longer able to contain the Lakers' superstar as they once had, though the aging Bowen was still a better defensive option than the hapless Ime Udoka or anybody else on the Spurs roster. Bowen therefore played comparable minutes to what he had in the past. (Bowen's decline had become apparent in the previous series when he was completely unable to contain Chris Paul, though he was able to shut down Peja Stojakovic when switched over to guard him.)

There is no reason to expect that Bruce Bowen would be able to perform at his 2002-07 level were he to be re-acquired by the Spurs for spot duty in 2009-10. The scenario presented wherein the Spurs lose to the Lakers because Bowen is not available to provide 10 minutes of spot duty on Bryant is specious. He is not the defender he was in 2008, much less 2003.

Bruce Bowen had tremendous value to the Spurs in his prime because despite his offensive limitations, he was the best perimeter defender in the world. Now that at the age of 38 he is just an above-average perimeter defender, he is no different from a mul ude of players on the fringe of the league who struggle to stick with teams.

SA210 has a well-do ented affinity for Bowen. That said affinity is impervious to reason has much to do with SA210's just being a passionate person who believes in people. Fabbs' agenda is a longstanding antipathy for Gregg Popovich. That said hatred is impervious to reason has much to do with Fabbs' just being an asshole.

[spursfaninla]

Nor did we ever claim if the Spurs lose to the Lakers this upcoming 2010 playoffs that the sole reason will be because we are Bruceless. That notion originates with you, even if you do not agree with it.
I agree Bruce looked a half step slower last year. Which is 5 steps faster then Finley. On O, Bruce matched or exceeded Finley. Thus our points.
If the Spurs win a championship, it will be because DumbassOvich does not play Bonner and Finley 30 minutes a game in most games and certainly not in critical series changing games.
I will gladly take a championship this year with or without Bruce. If its without Bruce and with Finley, that is disloyalty to the max.

This loyalty theme still makes no sense, as has been expounded alrady, but thanks for trying to revive it without actual substance. Your real argument, which I think has been pretty badly shredded by all accounts already, is that Bowen would greatly contribute on D, and finley sucks, so we should dump fin and bring back bowen, not for loyalty, but for pragmatics.

Unbelievable that you claim Bowen is better on O!? I don't think rational spurs fans will even contemplate that before agreeing your credibility is SHOT like a corner 3...which was bowens only (but excellent) offensive contribution...compared to finely, who could shoot from...well, all over. And shoot jumpers...and dribble.

Of course Bowen is much better than Finley on D. Finley is hopefully not even playing this year either. Finely played OVER bowen during the regular season as well, if you noticed. Why was that? Either because finely's advantage in OFFENSE was greater than the need for a DEFENSIVE stopper in bowen, because Bowen had SLOWED DOWN; or, Pop is senile and should be taken out back and shot.

RJ will be given a chance to be a defensive stopper...as will Hill. Also have Hariston, who has shown flashes of being a very good defender. Our team D should be very good next year...dont' send up the white flag on our team needing the pentultimate on-on-one defender in order to win.

I hope we trade Fin and Bonner for something at the trade deadline, so then half of your about this topic will disappear.

[Fabbs]

Commentary: Fabbs' agenda is a longstanding..

..love of winning NBA Championships, esp when Lakers are one of the victories along the way.

fify

[SA210]

Thanks ES I think. I do believe in Bruce. It really pains me that he's gone. I just think he was used wrongly recently. I really do believe we have a better chance with him for situational purposes. I feel without him for those little moments could make the difference on whether we advance or not.

[Fabbs]

Unbelievable that you claim Bowen is better on O!? I don't think rational spurs fans will even contemplate that before agreeing your credibility is SHOT like a corner 3...which was bowens only (but excellent) offensive contribution...compared to finely, who could shoot from...well, all over. And shoot jumpers...and dribble.

Of course Bowen is much better than Finley on D. Finley is hopefully not even playing this year either. Finely played OVER bowen during the regular season as well, if you noticed. Why was that? Either because finely's advantage in OFFENSE was greater than the need for a DEFENSIVE stopper in bowen, because Bowen had SLOWED DOWN; or, Pop is senile and should be taken out back and shot.

Bruces 2009 playoff fga like .727
Real credibility.
In fact feel free to compare last reg season also.

Finley can shoot all over? He's driven the ball to the rack like once in his entire Spurs tenure. He's a catch and shoot per Pops Stand n Veg offense has ordered.

[spursfaninla]

um, I didnt' say fin was a slasher (anymore), I said a shooter.

SHOOTER not equal SLASHER.

Bruce shot like 3 fg the whole playoffs, not impressed with that.

similarly with the reg season; fin actually contributed offensively in comparison, i would think his percentages would go down.

[spursfaninla]

Bruces 2009 playoff fga like .727
Real credibility.
In fact feel free to compare last reg season also.

Finley can shoot all over? He's driven the ball to the rack like once in his entire Spurs tenure. He's a catch and shoot per Pops Stand n Veg offense has ordered.

I think the stats mean you are self owned; bruce had .53% shooting in the playoffs, but almost all his shots were 3pt from, you guessed it, the corner, and 42% during the regular season, with a 41% average lifetime. So, 70% is obviously not accurate.

Points: 4ppg, efficiency 6.60

Finley: 41% 2pt, 46% 3pt in playoffs, 8 ppg in the playoffs, 43%fg and 41% fg reg season, 9.7ppg reg. season... efficiency 7.6

Fin. was just more productive than bowen on offense, despite some hot shooting during one round of the playoffs for Bowen. Even given that, Bowen was 1-3 in 2pt shots his last 3 games of the playoffs.

[Fabbs]

I think the stats mean you are self owned; bruce had .53% shooting in the playoffs, but almost all his shots were 3pt from, you guessed it, the corner, and 42% during the regular season, with a 41% average lifetime. So, 70% is obviously not accurate.

A 2 pter is worth 2 pts.
A 3 pter is worth 3 pts.

Bruces' field goal adjusted was 72%

Player A takes 10 shots, all two pointers. He makes 6. That's 12 points.
Player B takes 10 shots, all three pointers. He makes 6. That's 18 points.

[spursfaninla]

wow, that was very instructive.

So what if his effective fg% was what you claim? He scored 4 pts a game. He can't create, so he can't get those corner 3's every play...

next.

[SA210]

Great work Fabbs!

[Agloco]

Commentary:

Following Kobe Bryant's (and Shaquille O'Neal's) dominance against the Spurs in the 2001 Western Conference Finals, the Spurs added Bruce Bowen to shore up their perimeter defense. The improvement was immediately apparent in the 2002 and 2003 series, where Bryant was held below his season shooting percentages. In 2004, Bowen's minutes were cut because of the presence of Hedo Turkoglu, and the Spurs' defense against Bryant suffered accordingly.

By 2008, it was clear Bowen had lost a step in guarding Bryant. The Spurs were no longer able to contain the Lakers' superstar as they once had, though the aging Bowen was still a better defensive option than the hapless Ime Udoka or anybody else on the Spurs roster. Bowen therefore played comparable minutes to what he had in the past. (Bowen's decline had become apparent in the previous series when he was completely unable to contain Chris Paul, though he was able to shut down Peja Stojakovic when switched over to guard him.)

There is no reason to expect that Bruce Bowen would be able to perform at his 2002-07 level were he to be re-acquired by the Spurs for spot duty in 2009-10. The scenario presented wherein the Spurs lose to the Lakers because Bowen is not available to provide 10 minutes of spot duty on Bryant is specious. He is not the defender he was in 2008, much less 2003.

Bruce Bowen had tremendous value to the Spurs in his prime because despite his offensive limitations, he was the best perimeter defender in the world. Now that at the age of 38 he is just an above-average perimeter defender, he is no different from a mul ude of players on the fringe of the league who struggle to stick with teams.

SA210 has a well-do ented affinity for Bowen. That said affinity is impervious to reason has much to do with SA210's just being a passionate person who believes in people. Fabbs' agenda is a longstanding antipathy for Gregg Popovich. That said hatred is impervious to reason has much to do with Fabbs' just being an asshole.

This sums things up nicely.

/thread

[lennyalderette]

if u watch nba tv right now the lakers and spurs are next im sure you will be seeing some moments we are going to miss from bruce, i have been watching the top spurs games on nba tv and he makes some crucial plays that turn the game around, and i kinda forgot how awesome he is since pop didnt play him. i would second him being a back up at least. the guy annoys the outta people he takes them out of their game even at 38

[SA210]

if u watch nba tv right now the lakers and spurs are next im sure you will be seeing some moments we are going to miss from bruce, i have been watching the top spurs games on nba tv and he makes some crucial plays that turn the game around, and i kinda forgot how awesome he is since pop didnt play him. i would second him being a back up at least. the guy annoys the outta people he takes them out of their game even at 38

[FromWayDowntown]

if u watch nba tv right now the lakers and spurs are next im sure you will be seeing some moments we are going to miss from bruce, i have been watching the top spurs games on nba tv and he makes some crucial plays that turn the game around, and i kinda forgot how awesome he is since pop didnt play him. i would second him being a back up at least. the guy annoys the outta people he takes them out of their game even at 38

If I watch the Lakers/Spurs from 2003, there are sure to be some moments the Spurs have missed from David Robinson, too. And if I watch Lakers/Spurs from 1983, there are sure to be some moments the Spurs have missed George Gervin, Johnny Moore, Mike Mitc , and Artis Gilmore.

Bowen was bought out by the Bucks. Move forward. The lame excuse that the Spurs had to trade Bowen therefore Finley now has to stay on the roster is lame. Old. True they had to include Bruce to get Jefferson. That is done. Bruce is now a free agent, Finley is on the roster as well as Pops organ.

Financially extended Spurs cannot sign Bruce. Please.

Well, the fact that Michael Finley has a deal that guarantees him $2.5 million for the 2009-10 season and the fact that the Spurs are over the tax threshold already is certainly true. That means that a team that already is going to owe $11 million or so in tax payments would make itself obligated for another several million on that bill. If you think that's not an impediment to the transaction you're carping for, you should gather up all of that money you have to waste and buy the Spurs.

[sabar]

1. If you are arguing against FWD, you are probably on the wrong side.
2. Bruce is ancient
3. No near-40 player is going to come off the bench and lock someone down half their age in 8-10 minutes of playtime.
4. Fabbs is just pushing his very well-known agenda, he doesn't care about Bruce

[MajorMike]

You know, this is a big ole long thread about whining and contracts and Finley and all that crap. Probably the same people who were lighting themselves on fire when Malik was traded.

One fact remains, however; if Bruce would have been good enough to play, he would have. He wasn't. No conspiracy theory can change that. If Bruce was such a defensive stopper still every team and their dog would be lining up to get him. They aren't. If basketball was about loyalty then Elliott would have never been a Piston; he was (but came back, but you get the point).

Waah; Bruce got traded. We all love him and he did great things for us. I loved the first Huffy dirt bike I got when I was a kid and defied death on that thing on a daily basis. However one day it got tired of all the abuse and it was time to trade up and get a new one because the old one, no matter how much I loved it, just didn't perform the way it used to, it squeaked, had rust and the frame was even bent. Doesn't mean I didn't pull it out of the garage now and then before I decided it was really time to get over it, but it was a good ride and I had to learn to move on.

It was a good ride; learn to move on.

[Fabbs]

You know, this is a big ole long thread about whining and contracts and Finley and all that crap. Probably the same people who were lighting themselves on fire when Malik was traded.

One fact remains, however; if Bruce would have been good enough to play, he would have. He wasn't. No conspiracy theory can change that. If Bruce was such a defensive stopper still every team and their dog would be lining up to get him. They aren't. If basketball was about loyalty then Elliott would have never been a Piston; he was (but came back, but you get the point).

Waah; Bruce got traded. We all love him and he did great things for us. I loved the first Huffy dirt bike I got when I was a kid and defied death on that thing on a daily basis. However one day it got tired of all the abuse and it was time to trade up and get a new one because the old one, no matter how much I loved it, just didn't perform the way it used to, it squeaked, had rust and the frame was even bent. Doesn't mean I didn't pull it out of the garage now and then before I decided it was really time to get over it, but it was a good ride and I had to learn to move on.

It was a good ride; learn to move on.

But do you (and others) still have your Finley bike? And do you ride it to the at&t center to watch Phil and Kome work over Poop and Finley. Again. And again. And again?

[Fabbs]

Well, the fact that Michael Finley has a deal that guarantees him $2.5 million for the 2009-10 season and the fact that the Spurs are over the tax threshold already is certainly true. That means that a team that already is going to owe $11 million or so in tax payments would make itself obligated for another several million on that bill. If you think that's not an impediment to the transaction you're carping for, you should gather up all of that money you have to waste and buy the Spurs.

What did Holt pay to buy the team?
NBA Team Valuations
http://www.forbes.com/lists/2008/32/...ions_Rank.html
10th ranked San Antonio Spurs 415 million up 3% from the previous year revenues for the year 138 million

yeah lets hold a pity party for Holt. Finley has to be kept, just like he had to be extended.

[loveforthegame]

I'm fine with the Spurs moving on. It's a shame that Bowen was the first casualty but I'm more excited about them upgrading to Jefferson in the process.

The time for depending on Bowen to be our lock down defender has passed.

[anakha]

What did Holt pay to buy the team?
NBA Team Valuations
http://www.forbes.com/lists/2008/32/...ions_Rank.html
10th ranked San Antonio Spurs 415 million up 3% from the previous year revenues for the year 138 million

yeah lets hold a pity party for Holt. Finley has to be kept, just like he had to be extended.

So are you advocating for the team to waive Finley now, and sign Bowen?

Say it outright.

[SA210]

1. If you are arguing against FWD, you are probably on the wrong side.
2. Bruce is ancient
3. No near-40 player is going to come off the bench and lock someone down half their age in 8-10 minutes of playtime.
4. Fabbs is just pushing his very well-known agenda, he doesn't care about Bruce

I don't get that one.

And then Bruce is ancient? So was Kevin Willis.

And how can't he come in for 10 minutes and do well? You just saw him do it when he was used in the playoffs just months ago.

Everything you said is wrong. It's ok to not ride bandwagons, it's done me pretty good in my life.

[Bullshit Detector]

It's ok to not ride bandwagons, it's done me pretty good in my life.

Seems like you're riding Fabbs' nuts pretty good.