Why DeJuan Blair might not work for the Spurs
by Timothy Varner
48 Minutes of
Maybe a better le for this post is ‘Why DeJuan Blair is not playing many minutes.’ Either way, we’re far enough into the season to make note of DeJuan Blair’s decreasingly important role on this Spurs team.
In the last 4 games, DeJuan Blair has logged 10, 6, 13, and 7 minutes. It’s odd for a starter to play end-of-the-rotation minutes, and so it has me thinking, what gives?
Keep reading →
i would say trade him but the spurs only have 5 bigs. blair is a very good insurance policy in case any one of them goes down. unless the spurs can get a decent bench center + good SF back, then trading him won't make much sense. will just create one hole by plugging in another.
i say u keep him, his on minimum contract anyway....around 1m season...
thats just as much as teh scrubs down the pecking order are earning...
Good article.
It's just a matter of time before Dice replaces Blair in the starting line-up. Splitter will back-up Tim and Bonner will back-up Dice. Blair will become an energy big off the bench and will get extended minutes only in blowouts or when Tim or Dice sit out a game.
what happened to the beast that got those 20-20 games?
It's hard to pinpoint exactly why Blair has regressed. He couldn't shoot last year either, but he was certainly productive, in several stretches. It's almost as though the NBA has figured him out. Of course, he's still a defensive mismatch almost every night.
If I'm the Spurs, the only way I would consider trading Blair is if I could get back two commodi es that the really, really need:
1. A long, athletic SF (i.e. Paul George, Nicolas Batum)
2. A tall, athletic, shotblocking PF or C (i.e. Jordan Hill, Diondre Jordan)
Otherwise keep him around and see how he can continue to make improvements in both his shooting and his defense. It's widely known that he works hard, has a ton of desire. He just needs to become better defensively and more consistent.
This article also seems to make an argument for why a Duncan-Splitter frontcourt (which personally I would love to see) may be improbable. Pairing with Splitter would likewise make Tim a jumpshooter, and risk clogging the lanes for out perimiter guys.
Unfortunately, his minimum contract won't yield much in a trade. Blair isn't playing up to his potential this year, but he is worth holding on to. I think Pop is keeping him in the starting line-up to challenge him and give him something to play for and then fixing the center rotations for the rest of the game based on how Blair is performing. Blair is the guinea pig this year. He is getting the opportunity, he just needs to take advantage of it.
This. Blair is not built for the role he is playing. He will be far more productive in an off the bench, situational role.
The starting pfs blair faces, for the most part, are bigger and more skilled, is it surprising he regressed this year? He isnt playing against scrub 2nd stringers anymore.
Its not like he improved his game to offset the increase in compe ion. He still cant shoot. Whatever happened to the midrange jumper he worked on all summer?
Last edited by Cessation; 11-29-2010 at 03:04 PM.
I feel kind of bad for Blair, he reportedly worked on his shot over the summer, but within the flow of the offense how many opportunities to show it off this season has he really gotten? Maybe 5 or 6 jump shots, if that? How much offensive responsibility is really going to come his way when playing next to Parker, Manu, RJ, and Duncan (the 4 best offensive player on the roster)? It's like Pop is trying to see what he can do against starters, but reminiscent of the way Ratliff was "tried out" last season, it almost feels insincere. Yes, Blair has played average-at-best thus far, but damn it takes time and more than 7 to 9 minutes of playing time. Look at the way Dyess played last season, for the first half he looked like his contributions would be little to none but later he came around big time. At this point it makes sense to pull DB from the starting unit (Dyess is an excellent starter, and Splitter looks solid), but to say he "might not work for the Spurs" is a bit of an overstatement, as the writer kind of suggests too. Playing Duncan next to "natural centers" (Blair, Splitter, Mohammed, etc) isn't such a bad thing. When Bonner broke his hand last season, Blair was thrown into the starting lineup and the Spurs went a decent 11-7. And it was not long ago that Blair (as a rookie, in limited minutes) was making some pretty big plays for us in the playoffs (against our biggest rival) going after loose balls and just playing with ton of energy. No player is untouchable, but SA should take advantage of his skills (albeit raw skills).
DeJuan Blair: Making his bones in the Playoffs
http://www.48minutesof .com/dejua...against-dallas
He's a bench player. Bring him off the pine and he'll settle down and feast on second units.
I agree.
Wow, do people really think George Hill is a "mediocre" ball-handler?
He's certainly a sub-par point guard. Even as a shooting guard, his ability to create for others is relatively poor.
I don't know about mediocre ball-handler, though.
Because he is. I think it probably boils down to the fact that you don't often see Hill "break anyone's ankles" with nifty off the dribble moves. He relies moreso on his quickness to get the rim.
Like others, I was somewhat seduced by his ability to fill-in admirably for TP during his rookie year, but it's quite evident that Hill is a shooting guard -only. He's not shown an ability to adequately run the offense nor does he do anything to create offense for anyone other than himself.
You kinda answered your own question? mediocre ball-handler= sub-par point guard.
Given what he showed last year Blair at least deserved a proper audition for the starting spot. Lord knows Pop would get crucified here if it turned out the Spurs had the next Paul Milsap only get 20 minutes a night. Given the record it almost seems that there's little harm in starting him if Pop's going to have such a quick hook, but it's clear that this team could probably be even better if Blair is getting used properly.
It seems this year that Pop is trying to pigeon hole players into precise roles less and less, which is usually good, but a mistake in the case of Blair.
He always did his best off the bench, against 2nd stringers, that's his role. A trade would only be conceivable if he was first signed to a bigger contract, otherwise not much in return for him.
The problem the Spurs have, like most teams, is that their best five-man offensive and defensive lineups are not one and the same. There are three common denominators in Manu, Tim and RJ. But on defense you'd want Splitter (or Dice) and Hill, and on offense you'd want Tony and Rocket, so it's a constant battle for Pop, how to balance the strengths and weaknesses of the lineups, because there is no perfect quintet.
I don't buy the argument that having Blair and Tim on the floor together hurts the offense or congests it for the guards though. It's simple, just have one of them set a high screen for Tony or Manu, and then they'll have a lane to the basket. When the big steps up to contest, then Manu and Tony can slide it over to the other big for a layup/dunk.
It's on defense where Blair kills them.
George Hill is not mediocre, he may have been in a slump at the start of the season, but he's getting back. Just last season, we had people saying to trade Parker because Hill was doing so good, and Parker was the sub-par one. But now that Parker is shining again, Hill is coming off the bench, and he contributes very well, and provides that spark of energy. He's a great player, The Spurs pulled off another steal with GH.
I didn't read the article but if the gist of it is to get rid of Blair than I'd say it is dead wrong. Maybe even plain ing stupid. How many years does Dice intend to play?
At the beginning of the season Blair looked like he was second guessing himself. The idea of him being smaller than other bigs has put an idea into his head that he ALWAYS has to be extra crafty in order to beat others in the paint when actually it's the other way around. It's his effort that won him battles. More Barkley, less Hakeem.
Blair needs to be that "bull" in the paint. Using his power in the paint to get the offensive rebound, screening and rolling, and boxing out . He needs to keep his offense simple and efficient like he was last year. This year, I feel he's doing or thinking too much and it's causing alot of missed easy shots. Which leads to mental lapses and a quick trip to the bench.
Keep it simple DB.
blair apologists coming out in force, lol
I think he worked on the wrong thing this summer. Rather than try and develop a jumpshot, he should have taken my suggestion. Spend his time watching how Chuck Hayes plays defense...
would be a huge mistake to get rid of blair Ryan Anderson is below average player
Anderson is Bonner, but more athletic, better defender, who fits better in the the Spurs offense than Blair. I'd definitley consider trading Blair for Anderson.
Last edited by jjktkk; 11-29-2010 at 07:06 PM. Reason: Misspelling.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
