Reply With Quote
I guess, despite the fact many on here argue the very opposite ( at least in Bonner's case), no one wants to take any chances.
Bonner's line last night
Last night was not the brightest moment for Bonner. He missed open looks, seemed scared and his defense got hesitant. I admit I expected more out of him, albeit the Celtics were playing pretty strong defensively.
but
Bonner did have 9 rebounds (3 off), all three were successful tapouts. He had a couple defensive strong boards as well and played the Celtics bigmen without fouling (1) or giving up easy looks. Perkins had a couple successful postups, true, but Bonner played him pretty tough throughout.
Pop played Bonner 21:41, slightly above this year's average of 20.8 MPG.
He only scored 2 points.
Can Bonner contribute without scoring?
Let's look to Bogans and ask a slightly different question.
Last night, Bogans ran 5.5 less minutes than he averages on the year. He spent the majority of his time on Gray Allen. His biggest mistake was fouling him for an and 1. While his man defense was good, he missed an easy reverse and immediately got pulled about 4 minutes into the 3rd for Manu.
Can Bogans earn time without scoring?
First, why use this game as any sort of measuring stick? I'm not using it as a measuring stick for the team, surely. Just what these players bring to the table. So why should this game matter more than any other?
My answer to that question is simple: it's a healthy contending Boston Celtics team, with plenty of intriguing matchups (Bogans on Allen, Bonner on KG/Perkins) and it's the latest data we have. I don't think this game is some sort of prediction about the future, that now we have no chance; nor do I believe it was meaningless, for it surely was not.
I know one may quickly answer the thread's main two questions with "no" and "yes" without actually entertaining the thought, from either pure hatred or bias in one case, to a sense of near indifference in another or the ever popular just trade them for somebody better. You mustn't. There are reasons to ask these questions.
These players could be vital in our campaign for another le.
In order to make my point, especially concerning Bogans, I bring up a now retired spur.
Bruce Bowen: why is he not a Spur? Is it because he retired? Or is it because the Spurs didn't want him anymore while all he wanted was them? The Spurs who stopped playing him last season and playoffs. The Spurs that didn't obviously want him back. The Spurs that thought he just didn't have enough offense to supplement his defense in this changing NBA world, or even that Father Time's claw had finally grippened tight.
If Bowen had no chance with just solid D, how could Bogans? The most obvious counter-point is that Bogans is young while Bowen is old - I ask, does anyone really think he could not have played the 18 minutes Bogans is averaging? To my knowledge, little such evidence exists.
Yet now, we have little choice except entrusting Bogans to pester the Allens of the League.
So I ask: can Bonner contribute without scoring?
Can Bogans earn time without scoring?
I guess, despite the fact many on here argue the very opposite ( at least in Bonner's case), no one wants to take any chances.
Yes, Bonner can contribute without scoring, but he has to be rebounding at a good clip to do so. Teams are still going to close out on him because his percentage is too high, so Bonner not scoring doesn't hurt as much on the offensive end. Because of his average defense though, he must rebound or he serves no purpose on D.
Bogans can earn time, but that is a bit more tricky, especially if he is being dared to shoot. If he doesn't get his FG% up, teams are just going to double whoever is hot and get off Bogans. Bowen was at least a deadly 3-pt shooter. Whether or not he can earn time also heavily depends on how the other wings perform in their scoring roles.
In theory this team should be stacked enough that we don't need these guys to score to be useful or get time. They both must remain a threat though so we don't play 4 on 5 ball. Currently Bonner has no problem with being a 3-pt threat. Bogans though does. Also, Jefferson needs to pull his weight if those two can be useful without scoring. You can only have so many players with poor offense before it hurts the team.
If Bonner isn't crashing the boards and bricking shots, take him out. If Bogans isn't hitting the side of a barn and not slowing his guy down, take him out. It's all very situational IMO. They definitely have the potential to get time or use. Check back in a month and we will have a clearer picture I think.
Hey z0sa... I just saw this thread...
My take on this is relatively simple. Guys like Bowen (and I think Pop is trying to do the same with Bogans) brought in a 'zero-sum' game. I'm not going to score, but neither is the guy I'm guarding. In that context, the Spurs lost Bowen's scoring, but the other team lost one of their best player's scoring (or at least their effectivity was greatly diminished).
Plus Bowen was good enough hitting the three that he wasn't entirely such a offensive liability that other teams felt compelled to simply leave him alone all the time.
I think Pop wants Bogans to have the same role, but obviously he's not at the same level as Bowen (at least not yet). So I think Pop has been using him more sporadically depending on how he's doing out there. If he's being effective at slowing down the other's team best player, then he'll have more time. Otherwise, he won't.
Bonner is a different type of player. Matt is an offensive weapon. If he's hitting his shots, then he's awesome, but if he's not, then it's a problem, and I'll break it down for you:
1) Rebounding is not his strength. It looks like he tries here and there, and especially this season he has improved, but he still gets beat on the defensive board a lot, and his offensive tip-outs are what I call the 'Oberto' rebounds. Sometimes they might give you a second chance, sometimes they might not. I rather have a solid, good rebounder that has the size to box out and actually grab a board.
2) He is not a good defender. He's, at best, average... and, at worst, a matchup gift that keeps on giving for the opposition. He will be used as a matchup liability against good teams. He also still makes very silly mental mistakes. Have you EVER seen him take a charge, even though he lives pretty much under the basket defensively? No. But you do see him often backing up, arms raised, fouling the offensive player and giving up an and1? Sure.
The ONLY way he can offset for this is by scoring at the other end. Sometimes he does. And when he does, a lot of people forget about these problems. When he doesn't, he's not really giving you anything else. He's actually most likely giving up points at the other end.
Matt is who he is. Against average teams that don't really have a way to exploit a weak defender in the paint, Matt can probably be serviceable and can probably play extended minutes, provided they're not killing you on the boards. It's a long season, so he'll be definitely useful in those games. Against the real good teams though, I don't think he can really help you at all unless you play him in 5 minutes stretches just to see if he happens to be shooting 50% from three point land that particular night.
Oh, and I rather have Bogans than Bonners simply because I rather have a top defensive team than an offensive juggernaut. That's all.
Talking about this... I just saw Bonner's plus/minus from last game... see why that's a trash stat for individual performance? He basically got his from Blair's play...
, I thought Bonner gave the team a big lift too, not as big as Blair obviously but still decent. And that was all accomplished whilst missing his only 3 shots he took from the arc. So at least in last night's game, Bonner contributed plenty even while not scoring.
Bogans on the other hand can't claim as much. He looked slow and lethargic trying to guard 35 year old Ray Allen. He had trouble keeping up and even when he was in good position to contest a shot Allen simply rose up and shot easily over him. If this is the best he can do against Allen he'll have no chance whatsoever against Kobe Bryant.
Well, the whole starting unit looked confused and out of sync. But both these guys have to find ways to contribute within thier roles. I think that the Boston game just showed how the Spurs still don't know their exact roles especially the starters, whereas the second unit came in and did what they've been doing the last few games, make thngs happen and especially Blair and Hill. I feel that Bonner off the bench will be big, and even though Manu was pulled late in the first half he set up Blair with some excellent opportunites, and this I think will pay divedends for Blair and the Spurs down the line.
But I do have concerns about Bogans on guys like KObe, LeBron, and Wade. And I feel like Bogans is a much better defender than Jefferson although in the Boston game jefferson did a decent job on Pierce, although he did stink up the place everywhere else.
They can, but in order to keep defenses honest they MUST take open shots, and more importantly HIT THOSE OPEN SHOTS.
I think the Spurs should look into not only getting a player that can spot up for 3s to space the floor for Tim, but can actually take a few dribbles and attack the basket if their shot isn't falling. I'd like for a team with championship aspirations to not have to live and die by the 3 when they should really be able to cover all the bases and be a complete team.
I agree. However I honestly doubt that would ever happen as long as Pop has anything to say about it.
That's a very tall order. A player who can knock down 3s at a rate high enough to space the floor and can also handle the ball well and attack the rim is a multidimensional player.
Setting aside details like contract size and availability, how many players in the NBA actually meet that description? Guys like Kobe and Durant immediately come to mind. There will be very few, if any, that meet your description and are not on either a huge contract or a rookie deal.
The Spurs have 4 very highly paid players. They were only able to add the 4th big contract by going way over the tax limit. Everyone else on the roster is paid less than the MLE. Outside of players on rookie deals, vets making less than the MLE will tend to be one dimensional players or more versatile players (like Dice) at the end of their careers.
The RJ trade was an attempt to add a player such as you describe. To be generous, let's say the results have been inconclusive.
In the question posed by z0sa, Bonner obviously provided an example of how he can contribute very effectively without scoring, but he absolutely HAS to have games like this when he isn't hitting his shot from the perimeter.
I thought Bogans worked really hard 1 on 1 and in fighting over the screens, to the point of being physically spent. Where he hurts the Spurs is when he doesn't rotate over in time on kick-outs...resulting in an easy shot. An example was when he was too focused on man but not on ball and came late to rotate on Rasheed Wallace's 3 at the end of the 3rd quarter.
The question asked brings up a similar question about Richard Jefferson. Can RJ focus on D (good job on Pierce) and contribute well without scoring? Same question for McDyess. My feeling is that at least one of Bogans, Jefferson or McDyess had better provide scoring as starters, regardless of their defensive abilities. Otherwise, Parker and Duncan will be exploited by sagging defenses.
bogans is not here for offense he's here for the D but when he does score its money because nobody expects to much offense from bogans.
bonner like Elnono said is not good at many different things such as D and rebounding but his offense (when he's hitting) out shines everything else.
but to answer your question.......
bogans yes
bonner kinda lol
I don't see why Bonner can't duplicate these types of games, where he is contributing with hustle and effort. I saw a different Bonner out there against the celtics, a more confident Bonner.
I think its the combination of being more comfortable in the 2nd unit where he is matched up against non-starters or starters who are gassed and ready to come out of the game. He and Blair both showed they can be very high energy players from the bench and I liked what I saw from both of em. They made a very good tandem.
On the other hand, Bogans' lack of length and inferior conditioning was exposed big-time by Ray Allen. I don't think he's going to be the answer for the spurs as the starting 2. His situation is almost exactly like Bonner's was when he was starting.. against top flight players they cannot cut it.
I wish the spurs would have never signed Bogans, and instead given his salary to Hairston.
bump
good strategy, but unluckily pop is not smart enough and play booner too much, i agree we should try and see by occasions but not dwell too much if he is not buying bucketsHey z0sa... I just saw this thread...
My take on this is relatively simple. Guys like Bowen (and I think Pop is trying to do the same with Bogans) brought in a 'zero-sum' game. I'm not going to score, but neither is the guy I'm guarding. In that context, the Spurs lost Bowen's scoring, but the other team lost one of their best player's scoring (or at least their effectivity was greatly diminished).
Plus Bowen was good enough hitting the three that he wasn't entirely such a offensive liability that other teams felt compelled to simply leave him alone all the time.
I think Pop wants Bogans to have the same role, but obviously he's not at the same level as Bowen (at least not yet). So I think Pop has been using him more sporadically depending on how he's doing out there. If he's being effective at slowing down the other's team best player, then he'll have more time. Otherwise, he won't.
Bonner is a different type of player. Matt is an offensive weapon. If he's hitting his shots, then he's awesome, but if he's not, then it's a problem, and I'll break it down for you:
1) Rebounding is not his strength. It looks like he tries here and there, and especially this season he has improved, but he still gets beat on the defensive board a lot, and his offensive tip-outs are what I call the 'Oberto' rebounds. Sometimes they might give you a second chance, sometimes they might not. I rather have a solid, good rebounder that has the size to box out and actually grab a board.
2) He is not a good defender. He's, at best, average... and, at worst, a matchup gift that keeps on giving for the opposition. He will be used as a matchup liability against good teams. He also still makes very silly mental mistakes. Have you EVER seen him take a charge, even though he lives pretty much under the basket defensively? No. But you do see him often backing up, arms raised, fouling the offensive player and giving up an and1? Sure.
The ONLY way he can offset for this is by scoring at the other end. Sometimes he does. And when he does, a lot of people forget about these problems. When he doesn't, he's not really giving you anything else. He's actually most likely giving up points at the other end.
Matt is who he is. Against average teams that don't really have a way to exploit a weak defender in the paint, Matt can probably be serviceable and can probably play extended minutes, provided they're not killing you on the boards. It's a long season, so he'll be definitely useful in those games. Against the real good teams though, I don't think he can really help you at all unless you play him in 5 minutes stretches just to see if he happens to be shooting 50% from three point land that particular night.
Oh, and I rather have Bogans than Bonners simply because I rather have a top defensive team than an offensive juggernaut. That's all.
Negative Ghost Rider
Bonner's sole purpose is to spread the floor and make 3s. So no.
Bogans we all spotted a looong time ago. He's just not good enough defensively to warrant being a complete non-factor on O. Especially if he's going to get wide open looks.
The difference between Bogans and Bonner is that Bogans was taking valuable time from Hairston and dare I say, Mason before his confidence was completely shot. The only time Bonner stole was whichever smallball-4 Pop was deliberating upon.
But I am disappointed in Bonner and deserve some crow if he doesn't get it together these next 2 games. I fully expected a big game in the PO from him by this point, especially these first two games against the Suns. I am certainly disappointed in him and his effort, but there's still time to turn it around. Bogans, not so much. He's even less talented than Bonner.
As timvp said, Bonner's epitaph is etched in stone: playoff choker. There's nothing there to "turn around". Bonner's a playoff loser.
The huge positive last night was Mason DNPCD.
But when Pop still plays D-leaguers like Bogans and Bonner, the Spurs simply are not compe ive.
There's actually still at least 2 games for him to somewhat redeem himself. Even if he does well though, it's been etched in stone for years that spurfan shall always upon him.
he deserves all criticism and more. He is a weak minded pussy ass choker.
You will get your wish i am sure Pop will play him game 3 at least and hope the home crowd will get him going.
I predict he will contribute with 3s game 3 and 4.
but back to phoenix and he will turn into the same old pussy
Bonner can't contribute in any aspect of the game:
- can't hit open shots anymore
- can't jump
- can't rebound
- can't play D
On top of that, Suns had a 9-0 run at the end of the 3rd and he was on the court
We lost by 8 pts
Coincidence? I think not
But hey, he can contribute in practice and play the role of Amare Stoudemaire, to make sure Duncan is ready for games 3 and 4
This is perhaps the tiest part of the equation. Everyone agrees that the Spurs are struggling from 3, yet the best pure shooter on the team gets applauded for having sat the entire game. And people ride the other primary 3 point threat out of town because he develops a case of blueball when the playoffs arrive.
What the does that say about this team? Not much.
Think about it......Right now the difference in this series? Dudley+Frye >>>>>>> Mason+Bonner
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
