Tuesday, March 16th, 2010...1:15 am
Matt Bonner, beyond the +/-
Statistical geeks love him, casual fans and traditionalists abhor him. Given that the team manages to stay out of the headlines and no longer employs Bruce Bowen, perhaps no Spurs player is more polarizing than Matt Bonner.
How polarizing? Just take a look at the opening paragraph of one of Timothy Varner’s more recent posts.
Whenever I talk with Matt Moore the conversation invariably leads to Matt Bonner, someone I do my best to defend. Moore thinks Bonner stinks. Shouldn’t be on an NBA court, or something to that effect. He’s the cause of much beard-tugging consternation for our favorite hoophead. My response, the easy response, is to tell Moore that Bonner eats APM for breakfast, and then smugly kick my feet up and call it a day. No rants against redheads here thank you.
Unless you have an obsession with Daryl Morey and Shane Battier (and most fans advocating Bonner probably do), the thought of changing a game without being directly involved in many plays is a hard concept to grasp.
Any discussion on players who make their teammates better inevitably turns to playmakers like Chris Paul, Steve Nash, Lebron James or Manu Ginobili. Or to a defensive presence like Dwight Howard or Tim Duncan, who cover for their teammates.
Such narrow views are why people rail on and on about “pure” point guards without realizing that a player who can completely break down a defense makes it easier for his teammates to find open shots by operating against scrambling defenses even if they aren’t racking up a great deal of assists.
Or, how a big man with three-point range can devastate a defense even if he only makes three or four shots on any given night.
But in discerning the value of Bonner and his +/- the question remains—is Bonner’s advanced statistical value the result of the teammates he shares the floor with, or his own unique skill set?
The simple answer is that it’s a symbiotic relationship. Bonner would not be nearly as effective on a bad team, and the Spurs are a much more dangerous team when he plays well.
The Spacing
There is a valid argument in stating Bonner’s viable NBA skill set is limited to being merely a floor spacer, but to view this skill set as being quantifiable by a term such as “merely” is in itself a limited view of the game.
In Duncan, Ginobili and Parker, the Spurs have a trio of stars that excel at both scoring and generating shots for teammates. The flipside is, for all Duncan’s length, Ginobili’s craftiness or Parker’s speed, none are particularly explosive leapers, thus each requires sufficient space to work at peak levels (Ginobili less so).
And not all spacing is equal. It is important to consider what part of the defense is stretched thin and what section of the floor the three-point shooting is coming from. Pulling a big man out of the lane is much more valuable than keeping wings and guards at home. It changes the dynamics of defensive sets and rotations.
Furthermore, most of the Spurs shooters comfort zones are from the corner to the wings. Outside of Ginobili, Bonner might be the only other player with comfortable range out to the top of the key right now, creating another stress point for defensive rotations to get to. This is vital.
By receiving the ball as a threat at the top of the key, Bonner has the option of reversing the ball with an extra pass and opening up the entire court. In the NBA, wide open three-pointers are those taken with unbelievable athletes closing out within fractions of seconds. The attention Bonner receives opens up the three-point shooters even more, providing another shooter to chase and, after a few passes, nets more time for shooters to gather and get a shot off.
Which leads me back to a final point of his offensive game, which is very underrated. While not a slasher-his forays into the paint look awkward at best-when chased off the three-point line Bonner is able to put the ball on the floor and make a sound decision without turning it over.
These drives may not seem like much, but those two or three dribbles into the paint keep the defense rotating and create more driving lanes, as opposed to simply stopping to reset the entire offense and allowing a defense to get set again. So in addition to spacing, Bonner also keeps the ball moving.
The Defense
Individually, Matt Bonner is a below average defender, even if he has improved. I think one of the best assessments of Bonner’s defense can be found in John Hollinger’s scouting report:
Defensively, he doesn’t move well but has enough bulk to battle big forwards in the posts, and he proved serviceable on the defensive boards. Additionally, his defense improved a lot this past season in situations like pick-and-rolls and isolations that tax his mobility to the limit. He’ll never be a good defender, but last year he was passable. The way he shoots, passable is all he needs.
The simple truth is, there are many offensive role players whose defense is found wanting (Channing Frye comes to mind) that do not receive nearly the amount of criticism that Bonner does.
Bonner at least hits his rotations, and generally does a decent job of making players try to shoot over the top of him. Lately he has even put in some gems, going back to the New Orleans-Memphis back-to-backs in which he played some good defense on David West and Zach Randolph, two of the tougher covers in the league (seriously, go back and watch the tape).
Because his IQ and size, when placed with teammates who are familiar with the defensive scheme, Bonner is an adequate team defender. Plus, as Wayne Winston pointed out, Bonner’s offense helps boost the defense too.
With Bonner in Spurs have Eff. FG % age of 55% with him out only 51%. I think this means when Bonner is in Spurs spread floor and get good shots. So less transition baskets for opponents. Our defensive rating is based on team points given up; it’s not based on 1 on 1 defense. So if you cut your team’s turnovers and cut transition baskets you can have good rating even if your one on one defense is so so.
The Role
Do not confuse the amount of words dedicated to this piece as an attempt to paint Bonner as some sort of star. He is admittedly a limited player, which will always prevent him from being a full-time starter or getting huge minutes, but all role players are.
Rotation players on good teams generally have at least two NBA quality skills, whether it’s defense and corner threes or setting picks and rebounding. Bonner combines the obvious (a great shot) with a good IQ and NBA size-unlike a tweener such as Steve Novak, Bonner is a legitimate power forward-making him a valuable 20-25 minute a night player.
59 Comments
March 16th, 2010 at 1:57 am
Yes. I agree. It makes sense. Only sometimes it feels like with Duncan, Bonner and three other wing/guards that we are playing small ball, but Bonner plays hard and is improving in his drives and rebounding/defense. When he shoots well, he makes us very dangerous. Agree with your conclusion - hes a valuable role player.
March 16th, 2010 at 1:58 am
Small ball isn’t bad. There’s a time and place for it. And it has certainly given us success at various points this year. Its flipside is that at times, we give up the necessary height and size that we had in our “traditional 2 bigs” defensive days.
March 16th, 2010 at 2:11 am
Good piece, bud. I’m not a Bonner fan, but I’ve come to respect his game. I don’t think he’d be playing in the All-Stars, but I think that he’d be an important part of the Spurs, should he stays with the team. He’s an important role player who, while he couldn’t carry the team on his shoulders, would serve as a crucial piece of the team come the playoffs.
March 16th, 2010 at 2:40 am
I will defend you Sandwich Monster.
Bring forth your generic rants
“I’m tired of watching score season highs”
“He is allergic to rebounds”
“He can’t defend”
“He only scores 7 points and 3 rebounds a game”
“I could do better than him, and so could my grandmother.”
Let the ridicule flow, let the anecdotal whines begin.
March 16th, 2010 at 3:53 am
Go Spurs Go!!
March 16th, 2010 at 5:22 am
Good floor spreading stats or not, Bonner has been a liability. He has played better in the last three games than Ive ever seen him play as a Spur. Credit given for that.
However, When Spurs are playing winning teams in the West, Bonner will certainly get lost and Spurs will be back to playing 4 on 5 when he is in the line up.
Now, if he were playing at the 3 instead, maybe he could be an asset. Just dont believe in Power Forwards who cant play the position.
Bonner is big enough and seems strong enough to be a far better player. However, someone told him that he could shoot the ball and he became strictly a perimeter guy.
What is he going to do with Carmello, Gasol, Odom, Okur, Boozer, Dirk, or Aldridge?
Bonner seems to work hard and have a good attitude, but if we are truly keeping it real, limited players like Bonner are the reason for our struggles.
Some of Bonner’s shortcommings are due to coaching. A coach could simply demand that Bonner not only spread the floor and shoot the ball, but actually relocate the paint and play a little Power Forward. Same can be said of Mcdyess.
Two big bodies that could be helping inside every night. Could post up inside, get a few rtebounds, and even play some defense. We are constantly pounded in the paint because there is nobody there. When Bonner and Mcdyess are in the game, they are on the perimeter 90% of the time.
Actually, this leads to Spurs not really having a PF on the floor. Teams pull Duncan out of the paint and just enjoy a lay up drill on the Spurs. Hence, my constant pleas for Mahinmi to log minutes.
The next 7 games will gauge exactly how glaring that weakness is.
If this team is depending on Bonner to take it to the promise land, were done.
Bonner is a decent shooter, but only if the shot is uncontested. Seems like a team that wanted to take him out of the game would simply blanket him a little.
He really wont attempt a contested shot, and when he is run off the 3 point line, his dribble drive attempts only further expose his lack of athleticism.
Seems he could have spent the last three offseasons learning to put the ball on the floor and drive it to the basket, and actually be able to finish at 6′10.
Could have worked on becomming a better rebounder and defender as well as a three point shooter.
He and mason could have both improved from work in those areas.
March 16th, 2010 at 5:25 am
Don’t forget that he’s on a very reasonably priced contract. I think management will re-sign him.
March 16th, 2010 at 5:27 am
I love Matty’s hustle. Along with height and dominance, this is something you cant teach. Some people hustle, some dont. It is nice to know that someone appreciates the millions of dollars they get paid. When Matt Bonner suits up, he is always ready to give it 100%.
Last year i believe he had the 8th best 3-point % in the league. This year his volume has increased, and with his injury, his percentages are down, but you cant argue with a 40% 3-point shot.
Say what you will, at a bare minimum he busts his tail out there every night!
March 16th, 2010 at 5:45 am
@Jesse,
Great article here. I think it nicely sums up everything that Bonner brings to this team.
@Ballhog
Do you remember a “PG” that played for the Spurs a few years ago named Steve Kerr? He had one discernable basketball skill - shooting. Most of the time he was in the game, he was handling the ball (I use that term loosely). It seemed that teams pressed the Spurs when Kerr was running the point because he couldn’t handle the ball terribly well. He also couldn’t defend anybody to save his life. But man, that guy could shoot. He single handedly defeated the Mavs in the 2003 Conference Finals with four 3-pointers in the 4th. The moral is, role players with a distinct basketball skill can have a spot in the rotation for a championship contender.
March 16th, 2010 at 5:47 am
I was looking into our season splits yesterday. In our wins, Bonner shoots 22.1% better from 3 and takes 1.5 more attempts per 48 minutes. He scores 6.7 more points per 48 minutes in game we win as well which is second on the team to Bogans’ 7.0.
March 16th, 2010 at 6:02 am
@Ballhog - “Now, if he were playing at the 3 instead, maybe he could be an asset.”
Did you even read the article? Quote: “Pulling a big man out of the lane is much more valuable than keeping wings and guards at home.” Matt Bonner wears a uniform for one reason: to pull the opposing 4 out of the lane and open it up for Tony, Manu, Tim, etc. to operate. Your plan to put Matt at the 3 is beyond absurd. It eliminates his only contribution to the team. At the 3 he would be 100% pure liability.
March 16th, 2010 at 6:05 am
@BlaseE
I like Bonner enough, but it is scary to think that we will need him to win in the playoffs. I just hope he comes through this year in a way that he didn’t last year.
March 16th, 2010 at 6:10 am
Bonner fits in well against inferior, non-playoff teams. However, playoff matchups for Bonner will be unkind. Gasol, Odom, Martin, Nene, Nowitski, Marion, Okur, Boozer, or Millsap will be a serious test of his mettle. We’ll see in upcoming games how he fares.
Is there a breakdown of his overall +- vs current west playoff teams and how does it compare to his overall +-?
March 16th, 2010 at 6:45 am
Although I promised not add any more comments this season Ballhog’s comment on Bonner are accurate. His limitations will be severely exposed against the elite teams. Evidence of the man’s shortcomings will become painfully obvious in the upcoming games against the Lakers and Cavaliers. Mahinmi alongside Duncan gives them a better shot at victories against those teams. It seems both Bonner and Mason could have worked more on their inabilities to get to the basket and score during the offseason.
March 16th, 2010 at 6:52 am
Ballhog -
“Bonner is a decent shooter, but only if the shot is uncontested. Seems like a team that wanted to take him out of the game would simply blanket him a little.”
You just made the case for Bonner.
March 16th, 2010 at 6:54 am
Bonner is what he is-a role player. Just like any other role player, there will nights he plays great and we love him and there will be nights he plays terrible and we hate him. I think when he has nights like Saturday vs the Clippers we should tap the brakes on the warm fuzzy feelings because a 1-7 from 3pt land is just around the corner.
March 16th, 2010 at 6:57 am
People exaggerate the abilities of guys who don’t play way too much. Mainly because they don’t see what would happen to them in real game time.
If you think Bonner would be exposed against elite teams, how about Mahinmi? He would foul out in 10 minutes against them.
And why would they work on driving to the basket when that’s not their game? Would you tell Tim Duncan to work on his 3 pt shot? If they’re not gonna develop a dependable skill, then might as well not develop it at all and focus on your strengths instead. The system doesn’t ask them to do anything else but shoot, so why not focus on that?
March 16th, 2010 at 7:03 am
I can say with certainty that Ian would play better than Bonner. This is based on…
March 16th, 2010 at 7:33 am
@BALLHOG
“We are constantly pounded in the paint because there is nobody there. When Bonner and Mcdyess are in the game, they are on the perimeter 90% of the time.”
How do Bonner or McDyess dictate where they are playing defense 90% of the time? They guard their men, and if their men are on the perimeter, that is where they go. This is the point of the article: the NBA today is about using bigger players to spread the floor. The fact that Bonner and McDyess get stranded out on the perimeter on defense is attributable to fact that most good teams now have a big who can shoot (like Bonner) in order to get the bigs out of the lane to clear room for scorers.
When Bonner is matched up against a big that plays post, he actually does an adequate job most nights (see, e.g., Randolph, West).
If you are talking about offense (in which case, your “pounding” comment makes no sense), you can’t expect Bonner to just “develop” post game and go score in the paint. That’s not his game. Dirk has similar limitations (albeit with massive alternative skills to compensate, clearly), and when Avery tried to get him to play the post, it was a disaster. The good coaching you point to would actually have players play to their strengths, not force all skill sets into some paradigmatic numerical position based on a player’s height.
March 16th, 2010 at 7:36 am
Why does it feel like we’ve had this debate before?
March 16th, 2010 at 7:48 am
People plz stop your never ending love for Mahinmi. He is foul prone and repeatedly misses rotations. Just so we get 2 blocks a night from him, we wouldnt wanna give up 10 uncontested shots because of his mistakes.
He is great at pick and roll defense because of his quickness. Outside of that, he is a mediocre defender at best. Pop would have inserted him more if he liked wht he saw in practice and during the brief stints he has had during the games. For example, Hairston has found a way in his rotation because of what he brings to the table. Obviously, Ian doesnt bring enough.
PS: Bonner Rocks!
March 16th, 2010 at 7:49 am
Also, have u ever seen Ian hunt for a sandwich? He loses to the red rocket even on that front!
March 16th, 2010 at 8:02 am
You keep referencing APM as a metric that describes NBA basketball so well and is a great tool for evaluation. The problem is that it has no statistical correlation with future wins. No predictive ability = useless.
Dave Berri (though many disagree strongly including Bill “I feel it in my bones” Simmons) has a metric with great statistical correlation to wins and great predictive ability. He predicted a .500+ Rockets team, a 38+ win Bucks team (before knowing what Jennings would bring), and a Pistons team that would win fewer than 30 games because of their horrible offseason moves.
His metric shows Matt Bonner as nearly twice as productive as an average PF/C, primarily because of his terrific shooting ability and his very low turnover rate. Note the correlation between his injury and the Spurs’ midseason struggles.
http://www.wagesofwins.com/AllTeamMid0910.html
March 16th, 2010 at 8:17 am
bonner deserves another contract. he was a huge reason why we won 50+ games last year and that we are on an upswing this year. i’ll admit i was a bonner hater, but you can’t argue with his production. he is a rare gem that fits perfectly on our team. and since his athleticism isn’t as important, he will have good shelf life for the coming years.
i think we should resign mahinmi this summer. we aren’t getting tiago splitter as so many times the 48 crew has suggested. and we can’t afford any free agents this summer. i’m saying, we can sign him to an inexpensive, possibly conditional, contract, and i honeslty think he is a summer away from being a productive player. this is his 1st time to log nba minutes for multiple games in a season and he really has lookded pretty studly at times. slowly ease ian in for mcdyess.
March 16th, 2010 at 8:29 am
Why is Bonner getting an article written about him when he has two good games against two terrible teams. Bonner may be a nice guy and all but come on does he really help the Spurs? Is Bonner a true difference maker? All the talk about spreading the floor is ridiculous. Yes he brings a big man out of the paint but the elite teams have guys who can recover and contest his shot. If Bonners role is to shoot when open then he should have the highest shooting % in the league. But that is not happening. I nearly fell out of my seat when I read a post comparing his game to Steve Kerrs. Steve Kerr could shoot the circles around Bonner. His skill set was good enough to run the offense through TD and make threes when he was open. Bonner can not run the offense and not hit as many threes as Kerr did. I aplaude his hustle and his commitment while he is on the court. I know a few other Spurs who could take a note or two from Bonner. If the Spurs could get a better player for Bonner I am all for that, until then we will just have to live with Bonner playing for the Spurs.
March 16th, 2010 at 8:51 am
@BayAreaSpursFan
Exactly!
March 16th, 2010 at 8:56 am
Enlightening article. Thanks
March 16th, 2010 at 9:21 am
“Does he help the Spurs?”
Please read the last two months of blog posts and comments. You’ll find a strong case backed up by numerous stats and not just opinion.
“Why does it feel like I’m taking crazy pills!”
March 16th, 2010 at 9:29 am
I’m with you Tyler. Any time there is evidence that shows that Bonner is a solid role player, the argument is, “he sucks because he does!”
March 16th, 2010 at 9:43 am
You guys are missing the point.
He is brought in to spread the floor and knock down the 3-ball.
He obviously spreads the floor well explaing +/-
He obviously shoots the 3-ball well at 41% despite his woes he has had this year.
He will never be your closer, he will never single handedly win games, he will not be exciting, but he will hustle and do his job.
March 16th, 2010 at 9:51 am
I don’t think anybody here is looking for Bonner to be a closer or savior. All we are looking for is another valuable addition to an improving team, and I think there is evidence to suggest that he does bring something to the team. This team has plenty of closers, with Ginobili obviously regaining form as one of the best in the game. The team doesn’t need Bonner to close out games - just keep the team in games.
March 16th, 2010 at 9:54 am
A well considered article that leads to the non-controversial conclusion that Bonner is a serviceable player. This would be consoling if the Spurs had a well-balanced roster of players. But, this year, the Spurs do not, and consequently, Bonner has been thrown into roles he cannot fulfill. His shortcomings in this context must be seen, in the final analysis, as a collective shortcoming. This does not mean “Pop or RC should be fired.” It just means: they are fallible (yet another non-controversial conclusion).
March 16th, 2010 at 10:06 am
I like the way you put that, Mark. The shortcomings this season are really a collective and not a few individuals.
March 16th, 2010 at 10:36 am
It seems as if we have a good partnership as jefferson has requested to play with ginobili was much as possible due to ginobili’s jason kidd like playing style
http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/spurs/Spurs_Notebook_Jefferson_says_hes_best_alongside_Ginobili.html
Also Michael Finley, who we just released, scored 15 points in 14 min in 6-7 shooting against the pistons recently. He suddenly finds his groove right after we release him. fml
http://www.boston.com/sports/basketball/celtics/articles/2010/03/16/finley_has_jumper_cables_to_give_celtics_a_spark/?rss_id=Boston.com+-+Boston+Celtics+news
March 16th, 2010 at 10:40 am
would people like him more if he tore KG’s throat out during the middle of one of his infamous trash talking rants?
I would, but that doesnt take away anything from him now.
March 16th, 2010 at 12:09 pm
Bonner is an amazing role player. You could argue that he had too many minutes last season and shouldn’t have been starting games, but hmm, I think Pop has addressed that situation. I think people should be more critical of McDyess, actually.
March 16th, 2010 at 12:24 pm
@ Jacob, : I guess u missed the game where bonner (when he played for toronto) throws garnett down … was awesome to see, i suggest u google for that video
March 16th, 2010 at 12:25 pm
@ Jacob: Do you mean like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FASClJTnJ4I
(I didn’t create it, but it’s somewhere around the 3:00 minute mark…Matt vs. KG)
March 16th, 2010 at 12:38 pm
So far arguments against Bonner have been mostly just statements with nothing to back them up. Elite defenders can close him out and recover? So there is no value to pulling a guy out of the lane because he can just recover? Damn, that really sucks. I really don’t understand the Bonner hate. Especially when you consider no one advocating he get more than 20 or so bench minutes. Sure he’s less effective against elite defenses, who isn’t? That’s why their elite defenses.
Bottom line is Bonner is a cheap role player. His main value may be in taking minutes in the regular season, and that’s fine. Our team needs guys to help us win games and get a decent seed while keeping our stars rested. Losing his minutes this year hurt. If the better teams in the playoffs have no problem dealing with Bonner, then fine. Rotations tighten up in the playoffs. Now, he’s having his best season this year so I’m hoping he can be productive in the post season, but he’s already proved his worth.
March 16th, 2010 at 12:40 pm
I like Matt Bonner. He gives everything he’s got every time he gets on the floor. Some nights shots are going to fall for him and some nights they are not. I think everyone should just lay off and trust Pop and the team to get things done. I BELIEVE!!!!! 2010 THE YEAR OF THE SPURS!!!!! GO SPURS GO!!!!!
March 16th, 2010 at 1:12 pm
@Bonner Haters
“Bonner is big enough and seems strong enough to be a far better player. However, someone told him that he could shoot the ball and he became strictly a perimeter guy.”
On offense, yes. That’s his job.
“What is he going to do with Carmello, Gasol, Odom, Okur, Boozer, Dirk, or Aldridge?”
He’s going to stand at the three-point line on offense and remove them from the paint so our slashers will have an easier time driving, and on defense he’s going to cover them as best as he can. What more do you want him to do? Clog the paint even more on offense? I know! We’ll have Hill throw an entry pass into Bonner so he can post Gasol up! That’ll really boost our offensive production. It’s genius!
“When Bonner and Mcdyess are in the game, they are on the perimeter 90% of the time.”
Bonner is standing on the perimeter on defense 90% of the time? I think not. How is he playing defense? Just leaving his man wide open in the paint? This is a ridiculous statement.
“If this team is depending on Bonner to take it to the promise land, were done.”
They’re just depending on him to play his role, not carry the team.
“Bonner is a decent shooter, but only if the shot is uncontested. Seems like a team that wanted to take him out of the game would simply blanket him a little.”
Another ridiculous statement. If teams left their PF on Bonner all game with him standing at the 3-point line, Manu, Hill, Jefferson or Parker would take their defender off the dribble and create the same “lay-up line” you’re constantly complaining the Spurs allow. If teams put a smaller player on him, it’d create a mismatch elsewhere on the court. This is basketball 101. Bonner gets wide-open shots because dribble-drive penetration by our slashers creates, say it with me, wide-open shots.
“He really won’t attempt a contested shot, and when he is run off the 3 point line, his dribble drive attempts only further expose his lack of athleticism.”
He attempts the higher percentage shot. Which is more likely to fall, my friend… the wide-open 3 or the contested one? Yeesh. He can’t jump out of the building, we get it, but get over it.
“Seems he could have spent the last three offseasons learning to put the ball on the floor and drive it to the basket, and actually be able to finish at 6′10.”
He’s finished his drive plenty of times this year. Just because he doesn’t do it every time doesn’t mean he can’t do it. It’s almost like you’re saying he should be the go-to guy or something.
“If Bonners role is to shoot when open then he should have the highest shooting % in the league. But that is not happening.”
Does this even make sense? All three-point shooters are asked to space the floor and shoot when open, but because it is more difficult shot to make it would be impossible to lead the league in shooting % if all you do is fire away from 3-point land. Did Kerr do it one year or something?
March 16th, 2010 at 1:15 pm
I feel like we’re simply rehashing the same “is Bonner a valuable player” argument.
As such, I will re-post my comment from a previous post on this subject. Apparently, some STILL don’t seem to understand the relevant points about the “value” of Bonner on this team.
So here it is, in case you missed it, and want to give it a read:
Jim Henderson
March 7th, 2010 at 12:08 am
@Ballhog
Bushka is right about Bonner. And Pop does use him well. Nobody’s saying Bonner is a “stud” as an all-around player. He’s what I call a “situational role player”, and when healthy, he can be pretty useful.
I’m sure you wouldn’t argue that having a PF that can shoot the three at a high percentage is an asset. It’s one of the most effective ways to create problematic mismatches for opponents, and it is “rare”.
The central point is to compare active PF/C in terms of their value at creating both “space” and mismatches (by drawing opponent’s PF out of the paint, or drawing a shorter opponent on the cover at the perimeter). REMEMBER, IT’S NOT ABOUT COMPARING HOW GOOD THE GUYS MENTIONED BELOW ARE AS ALL-AROUND PLAYERS.
First, I think you’d agree that shooting the three at a high percentage is necessary if the PF/C is going to be successful in creating space & mismatches, otherwise his defender could sag off of him toward the paint to help protect the rim & rebound.
So, let’s get the argument of “what” constitutes “shooting the three at a high percentage” out of the way. After all, an argument is meaningless on this issue if one chooses to ignore the data. So let me know if you want to ignore the data, because if you do, we can immediately cut off debate.
There is actually only SIX active PF/C’s that shoot the three at .375 or better. All of these guys are between 6′ 10″ and 7′ 0″ tall. The following is there CAREER 3-point %, and all of them have close to 1,000 attempts, or more. So we have good sample sizes, which helps establish strong “validity” with our data sets.
1) Bonner – .407
2) Murphy (Ind.) – .394
3) Lewis (Orl.) – .391
4) Nowitzki (Dal.) – .378
5) Okur (Utah) – .376
6) Bargnani (Tor.) – .376
Bonner is not only the highest 3-point shooting PF/C in the game today, he’s the highest 3-point shooting PF/C of ALL-TIME.
And, although each other PF/C on this list is in my estimation a better “all-around” player than Bonner (some a great deal better), the salaries they draw, for this season, range from TWICE as much as Bonner (Bargnani), to SIX TIMES as much as Bonner (Lewis, Nowitzki).
Thus, in my view, for the extremely rare quality Bonner brings to the team, he is indeed a valuable asset as a “situational role player”. And, for a pretty good price as well, considering the high cost of those in his cohort.
By the way, Bonner’s other skills are “modest”, but they are not “poor”, and therefore do not detract meaningfully from his overall value as a PF/C three point specialist in the way that Pop uses him. If you disagree, you should try to come up with some data to make your point, otherwise your comments are merely opinion/conjecture, and this of course ultimately weakens your argument.
March 16th, 2010 at 1:15 pm
I like this article about Matty B. It’s always fun learning about my team, no matter who the particular player is.
Every top tier team has a stretch 4. If you don’t believe in this position’s importance, just check out all the hoopla the Cavs made trying to get Jamison. They had the best record in the league and they still made it a huge priority to get Jamison.
Bonner is no Jamison/Dirk/Rashard Lewis, but he is a stretch 4, which makes him a valuable part of the team.
March 16th, 2010 at 1:36 pm
@ Jim
“REMEMBER, IT’S NOT ABOUT COMPARING HOW GOOD THE GUYS MENTIONED BELOW ARE AS ALL-AROUND PLAYERS.”
I will not argue numbers and agree that the numbers show that he has the highest 3pt % of all PF/C. But you have to look at the body of work. Your 3,4, and 5 guy on the list can play defense against guys like Odom, KG, Jamison, etc. Just because he scored some points against the Clippers and the Timberwolves does not constitute an article on how much of a great player he is for the team. What are his number when he starts against the top 4 teams in the west? How many of those games have we won when he was out there streatching the defense? Come on you know defense wins championships and not offense.
@ Mike -
Im sick of all the high praise for Bonner. Yes he is just a roll player who has some good offense for a big guy. But would rather have my big guy shut down his man and grab rebounds. Also it is about what the team does against elite defenses.
Like I said before, Im ok if the Spurs only have Bonner in that role position unless we can get a role player who can play great defense and have an ok offense because ” DEFENSE WINS CHAMPIONSHIPS!!!!!!!!!”
March 16th, 2010 at 2:00 pm
Like it or not, Bonner is an X factor this season. When he is hitting and spreading the floor it makes us a better team and helps the Manu’s and Duncan’s that lead our attack. Go Spurs!
March 16th, 2010 at 2:24 pm
Why are all the arguments against Big Red simply anecdotal rubbish?
If you agree that he spreads the floor.
If you agree that he is effective without needing the ball to be effective.
If you agree that he does all this as a spot role player.
Then you must agree that he is an asset.
If you don’t see the value in having a stretch 4 spreading defences.
If you don’t see the value in a PF who can be effective without the ball in his hands.
If you honestly think that your 8th or 9th option who averages 14.28 minutes a game the last month is meant to do more than provide a distinct NBA skill.
Then you don’t understand todays NBA.
March 16th, 2010 at 5:16 pm
BayAreaSpursFan
March 16th, 2010 at 1:36 pm
I’ll quote you a couple times, and then make a few brief comments.
You say:
“Your 3,4, and 5 guy on the list can play defense against guys like Odom, KG, Jamison, etc.”
Do you have the cash to PAY these other guys on the list? All of them except Bargnani make between 10-20 million a year! And by the way, none on the list are the greatest defenders in the world (better than Bonner’s “D” but look at their salary!). That’s NOT why they’re pulling down big bucks. So, get back to me when you have a way to pay for those guys on the list (most of them ARE EMPHATICALLY NOT available), AND also be able to keep paying Duncan, Ginobli, Parker …… and enough for the rest of the role players so that they’re good enough to make important contributions to the team. Just let me know. In the meantime, be happy you have Bonner.
“What are his number when he starts against the top 4 teams in the west?”
Number one, Bonner doesn’t start. Remember? He’s a “ROLE” player, good for just 15 minutes per game on average. Number two, you seem to be wanting Rashard Lewis for Bonner’s salary of 3 mil. per year. Good luck with that!
Bushka
March 16th, 2010 at 2:24 pm
Well put. Nothing else worth saying on the subject.
March 16th, 2010 at 5:16 pm
I have no respect for a big man who can do nothing more than sit on the outside and jack 3’s all day… Even the great coach Ghandi would suggest he needs to get his big butt down low and start banging!
Create Spacing? Get outta here… how about creating enough space to grab an offensive rebound from time to time!?
March 16th, 2010 at 8:16 pm
”DEFENSE WINS CHAMPIONSHIPS!!!!!!!!!”
while not the most eloquent words written about basketball, it helps prove why casual fans who mindlessly regurgitate mantras will never run the spurs front office.
read the article again, this time more slowly and deliberately. let it soak in. bonner not only improves offensive spacing, but reduces transition buckets and overall points given up. why does pop have people crash the defensive boards and essentially give up offensive ones? it all comes down to transition defense and limiting second chances on offense, which is undeniably part of championship defense. while bonner is not much of a one on one defender against mobile bigs, he’s held his own in the post and more than makes up for it with the effect of his shooting.
advanced stats may be voodoo to most fans, but it does help quantify the contributions of role players much more easily than pure observation. i think of it as also helping break down the conformist, traditionalist ideas of how basketball “should be played” with 1-5 positions and promote creative, flexible solutions for the what basketball essentially is: put the ball in the hole, keep the other guy from doing the same.
March 16th, 2010 at 10:18 pm
Great point Andy… Us traditionalists truly have missed the boat on the point of basketball -thanks for breaking it down! I look forward to seeing Tony parker get more post-up opportunities when he comes back from injury! Heck… I hear Timmy’s been practicing his half court hook shot, too -since none of the bigs will get their big butts down court, there’ll be PLENTY of awesome transition defensive stands for this revolutionary team!! What was I thinking!?
March 17th, 2010 at 12:23 am
el galactico: i’m glad you’re familiar with reductio ad absurdum.
obviously, i’m not saying you experiment wildly for experiment’s sake, but when you have an idea or strength that doesn’t conform to traditionalist ideas of position or strategy, explore and use it. there are point guards who can post up (e.g. baron davis) and bigs who can shoot a high percentage from long. heck, kobe has added the post game to his arsenal this year. it doesn’t mean he should do it every time, but if it gives the defense that much more to deal with, both individually and from a team perspective, bravo and see if you can exploit it further. if it ends up changing the game to a style the opponent is uncomfortable with, all the better. some strategies are game changing, like the valuing the corner 3, and some are for changeup, i.e. the wildcat in football. i’m saying that judging from our imitators, our brand of spurs basketball is more the former than latter.
likewise, i’m not advocating the wholesale abandonment of rebounding. however, transition buckets are some of the most high percentage, easiest points you can earn. preventing them should be a priority, regardless of philosophy. the value of that offensive board compared to the number of transition baskets you give up can quickly make it less appealing. with an aging, less athletic than average team, i’ll take transition d hands down.
March 17th, 2010 at 8:08 am
okay “Andy” -if that IS your real name… I’ll concede that the old legged Spurs have long sought to capitalize on unique offensive roll players such as the 3-jackin’-big, however, even when they had Robert Horry -acting as a mere poor man’s Robert Horry -he’d do an above average job of timely offensive board crashes and occasional tip-outs/caroms…
This shortsighted writer seems more impressed with Bonner’s unique ability to rack up trivial statistics and looks to suggest that the Spurs can continue to put square pegs into round holes. The bigger plus/minus to consider here is that the ol’ Red Rocket will is at best a boxcart Robert Horry who will continue to subtract from the team on the offensive glass -and that’s not even considering his defensive shortcomings. I’d take the combination of Blair and a boxcart version of Kerr (protypical, “traditional” 3 point shooter) over this long-range lummox any day.
March 17th, 2010 at 1:30 pm
Bonner is fine coming off the bench- he’s only taking up $2.5M of cap space, and his production as a role player is acceptable. McDyess taking up 4.5M of cap space is a bigger liability for the Spurs.
March 17th, 2010 at 4:53 pm
Bonner is the Bill Wennington of this decade. Wennington played his reserve role very well during the Bulls championship years. Bonner would do the same if the Spurs had a quality-big.
March 17th, 2010 at 9:05 pm
I am not one of the people who feels that Bonner isn’t an NBA caliber player and doesn’t have a place in the league. I am one of the people who look at him as a 10 to 15 minutes per night player, or a player who is used for larger minutes against teams that have slow bigs that can’t cover the floor. The spurs trying to have an athletically diminishing Duncan (his speed is not what it was a couple of years ago, and his stamina aren’t either) with McDyess and Bonner on the constantly isn’t a good thing. This doesn’t make Bonner bad, he’s not, he’s a serviceable floor spreading bench big though it did take him a couple of years with the spurs to reach that level.
The spurs problem is a lack of a fast athletic bigman who can make rotations on defense and catch offensive rebounds and give me feeds inside. I’m not asking for all star I’m just asking for average starter ability.
March 20th, 2010 at 8:29 pm
Bonner has great court vision! Don’t know why haters cannot see this. Other teams do; it’s why they do so many bogus fouls on him. He has to work that problem out. He like all the spurs need to get use to the new guys and a slower Dice and Duncan. Bonner, like Mano, makes the spurs a better team. Give the spurs 2 years and they will ALL (including RJ) have it together on defense and offense. You cannot build champions in 1 year when you have a new team. Patience Everyone!
March 20th, 2010 at 8:37 pm
I have seen Bonner get rebounds in the right place, at the right time sooooo many times when RJ, Tim, and Dice were standing motionless, waiting for the ball to hit the rim. Bonner is a student of ball trajectory. Not as great as Rodman, but better than anyone else on the spurs team (except Manu). And, he’s finally showing some aggression out there against some pretty aggressive players in the NBA.
March 22nd, 2010 at 3:20 am
Bonner is only an asset at one end of the floor when he hits threes.
Either way when he shoots a three there have been countless times this year when he gets blown away on a fast break.
So what, he spreads the floor. We dont have any inside game. He cant rebound or finish second chances, which is where we lack ability. Having him stand around the perimeter doesnt really legitimize him as a solid player, go ahead with the BS +/- argument, it only takes away from something we desperately need. REBOUNDING, INTERIOR D.
Writing articles about Bonner is insane unless it has something to do with trading.
April 18th, 2010 at 8:10 am
[...] no. 55: Matt Bonner, Beyond the +/- In Duncan, Ginobili and Parker, the Spurs have a trio of stars that excel at both scoring and [...]
Leave a Reply