I know Spurs fans only care about the forthcoming trade deadline right now, but that new starting lineup Pop employed last night was, well, shocking. During the recent TNT broadcasts, Doug Collins constantly repeated that Pop told him that he was planning big changes coming out of the All-Star break. But, wow, this wasn't what I was expecting.
For those who didn't watch the game, Pop trotted out this starting lineup: Tony Parker, George Hill, Keith Bogans, Matt Bonner and Tim Duncan. Parker, Hill and Duncan weren't surprises but Bogans over Jefferson and Bonner over McDyess and Blair? Wow ... that's all I can say.
The cons of this starting lineup are obvious:
1. Matt Bonner as a starter was a failure last season. In the playoffs, he was horrible. This season, protecting the rim has been a major issue for the team. Bonner makes that an even more prominent deficiency. And I haven't even mentioned how he's shooting just 31.5% since his return from injury.
2. Bogans hasn't played well in weeks (or is it months now?). His shooting has been very iffy and, most damning, his defense has been average. It looked like Bogans had played his way out of the regular rotation. Now he's suddenly a starter again. Wow.
3. DeJuan Blair and Antonio McDyess will be fighting for a relatively small amount of minutes. After you factor in Bonner's minutes and small ball minutes, we could be talking peanuts. Blair, specifically, could find his playing time drop sharply.
4. The ceiling for this starting group is extremely limited. Even if Bonner and Bogans are playing well, basically every other Western Conference playoff hopeful boasts a better starting unit. Starting each half in a hole doesn't sound like a winning recipe.
5. The Spurs are paying Richard Jefferson a lot of money. Bringing him off he bench can basically be construed as giving up on him. At the very least, it makes it much more difficult for him to ever reach a level that justifies the trade.
Now I'll try to summon my inner Pop in an attempt to explain why he made this decision:
1. The Spurs need to start playing better defense to have any hope of winning a championship. Though it may be more reflective of the sad state of affairs, Bonner is currently the team's best defensive bigman outside of Duncan. While Bogans has been average defensively as of late, he's the team's best defender at small forward. Putting the best defenders on the court to start the game should set a dependable tone to each contest.
2. Duncan and Parker need to be surrounded by shooters to be most effective. Both Bonner and Bogans (in addition to Hill) can hit from beyond the arc and should provide sufficient spacing. This lineup makes it easy to figure out who should be the go-to scorers, which could allow the Spurs to burst aggressively out of the gates.
3. For the Spurs to become a true contender, Hill must blossom into the team's fourth most reliable player. By gutting the starting lineup, it puts him into a sink or swim situation. Hill may respond by raising his level of play even higher.
4. Jefferson as a starter wasn't working. There's a chance that he plays better with the second unit due to not feeling as much pressure. Pairing him with Manu Ginobili allows him to play the team's best current playmaker. Also, going up against inferior bench players could allow for his physical tools to better shine.
5. Prior to this move, the Spurs arguably had the best bench in the league. After this move, there's no doubt the Spurs have the best and most talented bench in the league. As long as the starting lineup can stay close, the bench should be able to come in and provide a momentous spark on a consistent basis.
What do you think of the new starting lineup? Select an option in the poll and post your thoughts.
Thanks.
i think it was the Chemistry issues that forced Pop to go with this line up.
I think RJ played relatively well, and I don't really mind Bonner over Blair and Dice. Prior to the injury he was having a career year, and like TS said he plays the best D next to TD.
Couldn't find the "sucks azz" option.
Bogans got burned on the first play of the game and didn't do much better the rest. His defense hasn't been anything special all season. He's a body to throw out there and nothing more.
Bonner the best defender after Tim? Seriously? I know Dice misses some rotations but he also plays much better overall D than Bonner. Add to that boxing out on the defensive end, which Bonner sucks at, and I'd much rather see McDyess play those minutes. Bonner is nothing but a three point specialist. He's almost non exisitant on the defensive end other than the occasional block from behind under the basket. And Mcdyess with limited minutes will give you the same production you saw for most of the early part of the season.
Jefferson coming off the bench works for me in that he can become your first or second option. When he gets motre touches he's more productive on both ends of the floor.
Hill plays well no matter where you put him in the line-up. He's still a streaky shooter but his overall play makes up for that.
Now am I re ed or did the previous lineup not just beat the out of Denver right before the break? Why was there a need to mess with the lineup? The only positive I saw was more production out of Jefferson. And you got less production out of Blair and Dice. Was it worth it?
also: we beat the Pacers by 3. By 3.
Best bench + Worst Starting Lineup = No Championship
Best Bench + Good Starting Lineup = A Chance to Contend/ Possibly Win
Best bench + Worst Starting Lineup = No Championship
Best Bench + Good Starting Lineup = A Chance to Contend/ Possibly Win
This is one of my problem with the lineup: TP is 6'1, Hill is 6'2 (granted long arms...but still 6'2) and Bogans is 6'5.
Bonner as a starter is step back. (To view it optimistically, maybe Pop was trying to feature Bonner for a trade.)
But RJ coming off the bench looks like a good thing.
Since the problem has been fast starts followed by late collapses, shifting assets to the bench could also help.
I've believed for awhile that Ginobili should start. Whatever spark he provides off the bench would be the same spark in the starting lineup. But I do understand the spark-off-the-bench approach.
I like Bonner in the starting lineup so we can see right away of he's got it. If he's hot, keep him in, or he's shooting bricks, then ride the pine.
Bogans' role might be to offset Bonner's defensive deficiencies. This way, we'll have our theoretically best and worst perimeter defenders on the court at the same time. I don't know. Just grasping at straws because in spite of a couple of impressive early-season performances, I haven't seen enough from Bogans to want him getting starter's minutes.
My preferred starting lineup as of right now:
Parker
Ginobili
Hill
Duncan
Bonner
Parker, Hill and Ginobili ... at least one of them would be on the court to handle pt guard duties while the others rest.
Subs:
RJ as the main offensive weapon for the 2nd unit
Blair/McDyess/Ratliff based on opponent size
3-pt shooter ... Mason or Finley
There's your 8-man rotation. Honestly, like others here think, that roster might = playoffs, but it likely doesn't = ring #5.
Bonner getting more than 10 minutes a game = no chance in
at least matt only got 12 minutes
not enough time to do too much damage. thank god
Pop could write a book on how to screw up a season when your team is full of allstars.
Against the Pacers I don't really care too much (then again they have been close games).
Its worth noting that last night's starting lineup really only played together for limited minutes: Bonner had 12:32 minutes, Bogans 22:25 mins.
I don't understand. Bonner ahead of Dice and Blair in the rotation? Really? And We have four bigs in the rotation in Duncan, Bonner, Blair, and Dice (Ratliff really should be getting minutes too). Why are we limiting their minutes in favor of small ball. WTF is Pop doing?
I like trying RJ off the bench, but wish we had someone taller than Bogans to replace him in the starting lineup. I think Bonner is in there for the Corporate knowledge, but you wouldn't have known that from his missed rotations in the 1st quarter....
Anytime you prefer Bonner as a starter you just patching up a hole that will get torn out again as the heavy trucks of contenders pound you when you play and more so in the playoffs. Bonner should have been shopped years ago for something. I like the guy but when he is the most reliable big next to Tim your season is a repeat or worse of last year.
I'm completely indifferent. My mind can no longer handle trying to understand anything Pop does.
In a league that is built, more and more, on athleticism, this decision is curious because if anything could have diminished the already-questionable athleticism of the Spurs starting lineup, this is it.
If, however, it helps Jefferson to reclaim his confidence and if it allows the Spurs to exchange strong starts for strong finishes, it could work. But I doubt it will do either of those things.
Look man, why bother making a post longer than it needs to be about this . Its ing stupid and Pop must have lost his ing mind.
I voted that I doubt it would be successful, but I can't say I have any better ideas.
It's tempting to put McDyess in for Bonner as a starter, but I think Pop felt McDyess was needed on the bench to play with Blair.
Ginobili over Bogans would be nice, but again I think Pop was considering the bench and wanted a playmaker there. Really I think Finley might do better than Bogans unless his injury has finally done him in. Mason is still here too.
At any rate the result is we have a decent starting lineup and a decent bench. This may give us more regular season wins but I can't fathom how it will translate into a championship.
Hot Garbage.
Not sure how I feel on the whole package yet, but I am a BIG fan of RJ to the bench. Dude needs to work on his confidence, and I think this well help.
To the extent this becomes a fixture (and assuming Manu can regain his defensive form), I would also like Pop to consider starting Manu and benching Hill.
5. Prior to this move, the Spurs arguably had the best bench in the league. After this move, there's no doubt the Spurs have the best and most talented bench in the league. As long as the starting lineup can stay close, the bench should be able to come in and provide a momentous spark on a consistent basis.
I agree with five. The bench of Gino, Jefferson, Blair, and Mason sounds fun to watch. I say give lineup a chance, because things have worked out really well till now (sarcasm).
I am okay with it. Its not like the Spurs were doing great with the previous starting lineup. I think the biggest plus is Jefferson moving to the bench. I don't think he knows how to play with Parker and Duncan. He defers to them too much. I think he plays better with Ginobili. Ginobili isn't score first like Parker is. I also like Blair coming off the bench because him and Ginobili are great off the pick and roll.
I don't like Bonner starting because opposing big men who have decent post moves usually take advantage of Bonner and some abuse him. His rebounding is pathetic for a guy his size. However, he does give the Spurs another outside shooter with Duncan draws two or three defenders.
I doubt it will work, but I'm taking a wait and see at ude. A few main reasons for this:
1. I kind of doubt it will stay this way for long. I almost feel like Pop is back in tinkering mode for a bit, which is not necessarily a good thing.
2. I wouldn't be surprised to see some sort of trade today, even a minor one, that could tweak the lineups a bit.
3. As for the lineup itself, I like the idea of RJ coming off the bench, at least on a trial basis. Problem is, the Spurs don't really have a great option at the 3 in that lineup other than RJ. I'm not a big fan of Bogans there, and I think Mason is too small to pair with Parker and Hill. Honestly, Finley might be the best option on the current roster (other than Hairston, perhaps), and that scares me a bit.
4. I'm not a big fan of Bonner starting at this point. If you want to put McDyess on the bench and/or set up more solid defensive pairings, then I'd rather put Blair back in the starting lineup. I guess I can understand why you'd pair Bonner with Duncan and McDyess with Blair, given Bonner's and McDyess's different abilities to spread the floor, but I'm still not sure it's the best idea.
Worst lineup! Bonner shouldn't even be playing! Lineup with Bonner starting killed us last year and once again Pop doesn't learn! I don't know what he is thinking!
I don't like it, but we'll see...
I'm not sold that Bonner is the best defensive big man outside of Duncan. I'm not sure if you talked yourself into it LJ, or what. I guess we disagree on the definition of defense. As PJ correctly pointed out last night, defense doesn't end with making a stop, but also boxing out and grabbing a defensive rebound.
Honestly, Dice has been picking up his game considerably as of late, and as far as Blair goes, sure, he's going to have a bad game here and there, like last night. But the kid is already averaging twice the amount of boards of Bonner in the same amount of minutes.
Bogans was a great gamble when he was shooting over 50%... you ride that gravy train until it doesn't give you that anymore. That time is now. If he's not going to be a defensive stopper, then I rather have RJ out there. At least he's a better shooter.
I have no problem with the other 3 starters...
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
