Reply With Quote
Well, had we kept Scola, we wouldnt need Manu to start
Voila, there you go, Scola thread
Are you happy now, look what you have done
AND, he should stay in the starting lineup.
The days when the Spurs were better off with Manu in the sixth man role are over. There is no reasonable argument to support this theory anymore. Yet, I still see people suggesting that the Spurs should go back to this tactic.
Let's start with the most ridiculous argument . . . that Tony and Manu don't play well together. There is no supportive evidence for this assertion. However, there is plenty of evidence to the contrary. Manu is already averaging more ppg than he ever did as a sixth man and this has directly attributed to Parker's recording career highs in assists. Ginobili is also up in most major statistical categories from last year (rebounds are down). While it's true that Manu makes his teammates better, there is nothing that suggests that Parker is, in any way, impeded by his presence in the starting lineup.
To the point of Manu being best suited to the sixth man role because he is the leader of the second unit, the Spurs have a deep enough bench that this should not be an issue. George Hill may be struggling right now, but he is going to have to take the reins for the bench squad. It may be the added pressure of this realization that has Hill stymied so far, but he is going to have to snap out of it and embrace this role for the Spurs to have major success this season. He got the kid glove treatment for two years. It's time for Hill to grow up.
The Spurs never could build any momentum this time last year. Pop switching around lineups every week insured that it wasn't even a possibility. The only starting position that should be adjusted is the center. Blair, like Hill, is better suited in the second unit and he will have to be a leader and a motivator in that role just like Hill. Splitter should ultimately get the job, but at this point I would rather see McDyess start over Blair.
Most importantly, the Spurs are winning. It's working. You start your best players per position and live with the results. The Spurs are looking at what is, potentially, one of the most dangerous starting lineups in the league and they need to play it out for their best shot at contending for a le.
Well, had we kept Scola, we wouldnt need Manu to start
Voila, there you go, Scola thread
Are you happy now, look what you have done
Agree with all your arguments. But you failed to address one of the main reasons he has been coming off the bench the last few years. And that's to pace his body for the entire season. The points you made are all good ones, but what about the issue of Manu's durability. The past four seasons, Ginobili has averaged 27-31 MPG and he still has had injury issues almost every season. Even when he's been relatively healthy, there's something of concern especially by the time the playoffs arrive. Right now, he's averaging 34 MPG. He's never averaged more than 31 MPG in his entire NBA career.
You should also consider that. Bringing Ginobili off the bench helped Pop and the coaching staff monitor and regulate his minutes better It forced them to play him fewer minutes. Manu starting doesn't afford them the same luxury.
All the points you made I would agree with. But be cautious in your argument, because come February and March and Manu starts getting sidelined with various injuries, that's when you might rethink this.
They can still manage his minutes as a starter and he didn't play this summer, so I don't see that as a crucial concern at this point. Manu is coming into the season healthier than he has been in years and I think his minutes will decrease as the bench solidifies and everyone gets settled into their roles.
Remember, Manu led the team down the stretch last year, put in major minutes and stayed healthy (apart from the broken schnoz). I'm not nearly as concerned with Manu's health and minute management as I am with Duncan's.
That's fine if you believe that. I'm just pointing out that you failed to mention it at all. And I think that has been a very important issue as to why he's come off the bench over the years.
When Tony and manu are together on the court, they BOTH play better!
So yes, I do agree...
I didn't mention it because it isn't pertinent to the point.
There are plenty of players that have health concerns who aren't relegated to the bench because of it. To his credit, he accepted that role and excelled at it, but it's more important for the Spurs to get out to their best start and not have to rely on Manu to bail them out off the bench. Ultimately, it's better for Manu's health, given his compe ive nature and style of play, to not have to play under that much pressure all the time. He is going to sacrifice his body more in a comeback scenario than if the Spurs are maintaining a lead.
I can't see why you don't think it's pertinent when it was a major reason why Popovich had Ginobili come off the bench and this thread is about Ginobili as a starter versus coming off the bench. It's absolutely pertinent.
Even when Ginobili came off the bench but subbed in earlier than most reserves sub in, it helped monitor his minutes. Say he comes in early each have after 4 minutes are played (very early for a sub all things considered), well that right there is automatically 8 minutes Pop can't play Ginobili. When Ginobili starts, if the game isn't going right and Ginobili is the best player on the court, Pop might disregard monitoring minutes for the sake of the game. That's absolutely a pertinent issue.
Manu's health has been an issue for several years. His durability is a huge concern. You disregarding one of the reasons he's come off the bench in the past is a pertinent issue to consider to the argument supporting him starting. It's too bad you fail to see that.
With all due respect, Jam, you've got this completely wrong.
Manu came off the bench at different times because there were two players on the team that had previously been starters and were completely worthless if they weren't in the starting lineup. It had nothing to do with his minutes. It's not any harder to limit a guy's minutes when he's starting than any other time. Anyone suggesting Popovich isn't capable of limiting a guy's minutes for the sake of a regular season game, starter or reserve, clearly doesn't know Pop very well.
You start your best players because it's much less stress on guys to maintain a lead than it is to play out of a hole.
I am not disregarding the issue anymore than you are harping on it. Is it a concern? Obviously it is. While it's true that his minutes are up right now, they will undoubtedly come down on average as the season goes on. Manu's minutes fluctuate at certain points during a season and they always have.
If Manu needs to play more or less minutes with regard to game time scenarios then it doesn't really matter if he is playing as a starter or as sixth man. The minutes will average out the same. The major reason that Manu is playing more minutes right now is that Hill is struggling with his new role. Manu probably has a good idea what his body can handle at this point and if he wasn't in great shape right now his minutes would be down somewhat.
I'm not totally disregarding your point and if he is still having to log major minutes after the first third of the season then it will be more of a concern, but right now, until the team settles into their roles, the most important thing is wins.
Remember that for the past two seasons, Manu has been injured to start. So, coming off the bench made more sense. Manu's minutes always increase with his good health.
Basically Tony said the same thing recently and pointed to assists as proof, saying playing with RJ and Manu was really helping him. Anderson's 18 minutes will surely be a test, as he has been backing up RJ mostly and Neil and Hill probably don't need to play the 3. " Best players per position" does indeed make sense. I hope our bench can step it up so we can continue to play this way and win. Also see Blair's energy being a shot of adrenaline for our bench with Dice or Tiago starting.
Lol no need for the "with all due respect" OV. If you disagree, then you disagree. If I'm wrong, then I'm wrong. I'm not above being wrong or admitting if I'm wrong. Thanks for the courtesy, but it's unnecessary.
That said, I do think Manu coming off the bench over the years did help Pop monitor minutes and I do believe that was at least one factor in doing it. Coaches can monitor player minutes whether they start or don't start but it doesn't always play out that way in close games when the game is on the line. For example, if Manu doesn't start and in the first three quarters he plays 22 minutes versus if he does start and in the first three quarters he plays 28 minutes, and Pop wants to limit Manu's minutes to around 30-32 MPG. Now in those two scenarios, in a close game in the fourth quarter, Pop has to consider that when playing Manu and it's the difference between being able to play Manu 4 minutes or 10 minutes in the fourth quarter of a close game. I really do think coaches at the NBA level micro-manage everything down to the littlest details and players minutes are one of those things.
You don't always start your best players. That's exactly why the Spurs have had their share of success with Ginobili coming off the bench over the years. That's why Lamar Odom can be arguably the third best player on the Lakers and come off the bench and the Lakers still win les. Starting your best players doesn't guarantee a lead in games. Just like not starting one of the team's best players doesn't guarantee the team will be in a hole when the second unit subs in.
Now realize I'm not disagreeing with the overall point of the thread. I think it's fine and good that Manu starts. But I think it's naive and foolish not to consider that monitoring his minutes was a very key reason as to why he did come off the bench in years past.
With all due respect, that's my opinion.
There definitely shouldn't be a change now but it is still very early in the year and my mind could change.
Duly noted, but it's arguably uninformed to not consider that the reason his minutes were monitored in the first place was because he was coming off an injury to begin the season. You have to consider that this year is different in regards to Manu's health to begin the season and the potential of the bench compared to years past.
Last edited by ohmwrecker; 11-13-2010 at 10:47 AM.
Bro your avatar is hot like fish grease
I agree with everything you said except one thing. I wouldn't move McDyess to the starting lineup at this point, because right now he's playing his best basketball as a Spur, and I don't want to mess with that. I much rather keep Blair as a starter until Splitter is ready to take over. IMO, that should happen by mid-December.
McDyess is a vet. I don't think moving him into the starting lineup is going to shake his game at all.
I disagree with JamStone's take about monitoring minutes. Pop never had a problem doing the same for Tim and he always has been a starter. He also tried many times to make Manu a starter (almost every season), but had to go back to bringing Manu off the bench because the bench basically had no spark.
The reason you see Manu (and Tony, and Tim, and Dice) playing heavy minutes early on in the season is a combination of trying to take advantage of the weaker schedule and players (at least Manu) telling Pop that they felt they lost winnable games early last season because of all the minute monitoring and it came back to bite them in the ass as far as seeding goes. As RC said, they now realize that the West is too good to pretend you can go throughout the entire playoffs without homecourt.
So I expect the minute monitoring/flat out resting to come later down the season if the record allows it. I just don't think Manu needs to stop being a starter for that to happen.
It was sort of a joke, but was still a nod to you for all the respectful debates we've had.
If Manu doesn't start and has to play 28 minutes vs when he starts and plays 22 it's exactly the same scenario in the fourth quarter. You aren't comparing apples to apples, so it's a poor example. I'd be more inclined to say that even if Manu plays the same number of minutes between starting and coming off the bench, he's playing harder if he's consistently having to play the team back into the game due to the ineffectiveness of whoever's starting in his place.
If the Spurs had a Hedo Turkoglu or a non-decrepit Michael Finley that was stinking it up off the bench I might be inclined to agree. Benching Manu is more akin to benching Kobe Bryant than Lamar Odom, especially so far this year.
jamstone with the clarity
Good post, lots of good points.
Excellent point. I wasn't aware anyone had mentioned that to him, but Spurstalk certainly noticed it at the time. It does look like Pop's learned that the best way to limit starters' minutes is to develop young guys. We should probably expect to see the minutes for Manu and Timmy start to go down as other guys get healthy and can pick up the slack.
the minute monitoring has gotten out of hand. when has it ever really worked? did it work for Mcdyess last season? or Duncan? couldn't it be argued that it is detrimental to rotations and conditioning to play 30 min then get bumped to 32? I agree manu is not a 40 mpg player, but I think he is capable of playing 35 mpg, and so does he (see his last forum Q&A). We all agree his best PO was 05, he played 33.6 then, and last year he played 35.2- sure there was some fatigue, but that also had to do with the nose injury and not having more help (see below). The broken nose was bad luck, nothing to do with the minutes he played, and still he played through it another 7-8 games (was it game 3 or 4?). It is a fact that manu's best seasons have been the ones with most minutes, even in terms of efficiency. The time that it resulted in a bad injury (08), that is more a result of manu playing through it (for 16 games on a bad ankle, because it was the playoffs) than the increased minutes themselves having triggered a serious injury.
also, playing with the 2nd unit is a double edged sword- it gave manu the advantage of having the offense run through him and playing against other 2nd units (till the 4th Q anyway), but it also meant he had to carry the likes of elson, bonner, udoka, bogans, etc. It's definitely easier for manu to play with parker and duncan than it is to play with jaque vaughn and matt bonner.
when a team is deep and spreads its responsibilities throughout the roster, the minutes manage themselves, a la LA lakers. The spurs 02/03-06/07 had a deeper roster and there wasnt the same need for manu to do more as in 07/08-present. If RJ, mcdyess, hill, blair, play a little better than last year, TP bounces back from his own injury plagued season, and splitter and neal play better than mason and bogans, then there is no need to manage manu or duncan's minutes.
I completely disagree. Like I said in another thread the bench minutes are more of a drain on Manu than a few more minutes as a starter.
When he comes off the bench he is the primary option and has to go all out every second he is on the court. When he starts he can actually rest a little more while he's on the court on offense as the ball doesn't go through him every time. IMO the bench minutes take a bigger toll on him. The main reason he went to the bench is because the bench completely sucked. I really don't think the primary reason for it was to regulate minutes.
Easy argument, of course Manu should start. It's best to have your best 5 start the game, and it's possible too when the bench is good enough. So let's do it.
And let's move Splitter into the 5 too, Bonner can sub him.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
