Monday, July 26th, 2010...8:11 am
Video: How good was Alonzo Gee at Summer League?
Alonzo Gee of the San Antonio Spurs was one of the frequently mentioned standouts at the Las Vegas Summer League this year. With injuries to the Spurs’ DeJuan Blair, James Anderson and Garrett Temple, and the last minute scratch of Malik Hairston from the roster, Gee became “the man” on the team.
And those his numbers during the week (14.2 points per game, 5.2 rebounds, 1.8 assists, 2.4 steals and 33% from 3-point range) were solid, was it enough for him to make the Spurs roster this season?
Well, after re-signing Richard Jefferson and adding Gary Neal, the perimeter rotation is awfully crowded. And with one year of D-League eligibility left, Alonzo Gee may very well be the odd man out.
And with San Antonio’s roster moves, a stat line alone isn’t enough to get Gee a roster spot. His team defense and capacity for hitting the corner 3-pointer are way more important to Spurs head coach Gregg Popovich and Co.
So in today’s video, we look at how Alonzo Gee’s summer league was in terms of what the Spurs were probably looking for.
120 Comments
July 26th, 2010 at 8:29 am
The video made a lot of sense as far as him being a great fir for what we need specifically in the Spurs system or not even though he’s a promising young player. I just wonder if some of the defensive lapses you were talking bout was a by product of the game situations, because it looks like we had big leads during most his lapses on the video. I’m not defending the defensive lapses just sayin you know how players and teams get when they have a big leads.
July 26th, 2010 at 8:39 am
You are probably right. He will need another year in the D-league. He doesn’t have a reliable shot, a good handle, or the defensive intensity to make the Spurs roster. From what I can tell, Temple is a Spur. In fact, according to Pop, he’s Pops new man crush. Garrett is in. Hairston is also golden. The FO told him not to worry about playing in the SL and he got some court time last year with us. Here is our roster from what I can tell
PG - Parker/Hill/Temple
SG - Manu/Anderson/Neal
SF - Jefferson/Hairston **
PF - Duncan/Blair/Bonner
C - Splitter/McDyess
**I also think Anderson MIGHT be able to play SF, but the SG spot is more likely.
Random Thoughts:
*I think this lineup is very interesting. Half of our top 10 players are 25 yrs old or under. Reload mode is now in full swing.
*I really want to see Anderson in action. He was essentially the only player at OSU who could score and yet he still put up 22ppg against stiff competition. Perhaps someone knows big 12 bball better than I do, but what is his realistic playing time this season? Will he sit on the bench and not sniff court time or can he come in and start at SG and let Manu come off the bench? Someone (with knowledge) please give opinion.
*I know many have weighed in regarding a Chris Paul trade to SA. If the Spurs would have to take back Okafor at $13mil/year, then there is almost a 0% chance the Spurs would even make an offer. While he may not be wildly overpaid, a $52mil contract is a horse pill to swallow. Okafor’s contract, in the end, will scare off a number of teams. (which may be New Orleans’ point…) In the end, NO holds almost all of the cards. I think Chris Paul stays this year even if he does so bitching and moaning. Next year, however, may be a different story.
July 26th, 2010 at 8:54 am
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Andrew A. McNeill, San Antonio Spurs and RO GONZALES , Timothy Varner. Timothy Varner said: Why Alonzo Gee is on the roster bubble http://bit.ly/bPI1sq [...]
July 26th, 2010 at 9:55 am
I’m no Big 12 expert, but I know a little bit about NBA rookies. It’s a tall, tall order to expect Anderson to get to play Manu’s beard this year. Typically there are two things holding rookies back from playing in big roles or the playoffs: corporate knowledge and defense.
Defense is the real reason we can’t just start Anderson in front of Manu. If he’s playing next to Tony for long stretches, he’ll have to be able to defend the other team’s best guard.
George Hill is a bit short but an excellent defender of ones and twos. He plays off the ball, or at least plays better when there’s another Screen’n'roll guard in the game. If anybody’s going to be Manu’s beard it will probably be him.
July 26th, 2010 at 10:08 am
Good insight.
I never get tired of that song.
July 26th, 2010 at 10:56 am
Hobson13
July 26th, 2010 at 8:39 am
“PG – Parker/Hill/Temple
SG – Manu/Anderson/Neal
SF – Jefferson/Hairston **
PF – Duncan/Blair/Bonner
C – Splitter/McDyess
**I also think Anderson MIGHT be able to play SF, but the SG spot is more likely.”
I was wondering that same thought regarding Anderson playing SF. Is Anderson closer to the 6″7″ range or the 6’5″ scale of his 6’6″ listing?
With regards to the roster…another hustle type/defensive big would be nice to add. That would bring the roster up to 14. It’s possible that Gee could be #15 if the Spurs don’t add via trade or sign another rotational player at SF prior to the season.
If anything, Gee proved to be worth keeping to see how he can improve in the D-League. There is something in his game that makes me think he can make it in the nba. And after an impressive stint for the Wizards, he’s shown he can play at the nba level.
But I don’t think he is developed enough to be the Spurs primary back up at the SF position. But neither do I think Hairston is ready for that role as well.
I hope Hairston proves me wrong if the Spurs can’t get another decent wing for that role. And there again…perhaps Anderson just might fit that bill once the season starts.
Lots of promise in these young guys along with lots of unknown.
July 26th, 2010 at 11:44 am
Nice video.
Trade Gee to the Knicks?
July 26th, 2010 at 12:19 pm
@Hobson13
I agree, Malik and Temple seem like locks for the final roster.
In regards to your Anderson question, I think it’s going to be a fight between Anderson and Neal for backup minutes at the 2, and possibly the 3. I see one of them fulfilling RMJ’s role as the designated shooter off the bench. And if one shows he’s a competent defender, that might mean even more minutes.
At this point, because of Anderson’s injury, I’d have to think Neal is slightly ahead on the depth chart. But if Anderson heals and adapts to the speed of the game, he could very well come out on top.
The one thing I like, as opposed to the last few years, is that we have options. If one player doesn’t work out, we can always plug another into the system. I think the competition in this year’s camp will really benefit us.
July 26th, 2010 at 12:19 pm
“I was wondering that same thought regarding Anderson playing SF. Is Anderson closer to the 6″7″ range or the 6’5″ scale of his 6’6″ listing?”
Not sure, but Draft Express had him at 6’5.75 in shoes. He’s got long arms and was a good rebounder for his position in college. By those measurements he seems to have the potential to play reserve forward for us.
The only problem with that is a good rebounding guard in college isn’t necessarily a good rebounding SF in the pros. Defense is another concern - Manu is much more effective on two guards than on forwards and he is a skinny 6’6 guy.
Honestly Anderson is in a bit of an awkward spot. If he were a bit bigger or stronger he’d have an uncontested shot at being the backup SF. I think his game is more of the backup guard, secondary ball-handler type however; and there he’s behind George Hill who can play 40 minutes a night in that role and perhaps Garret Temple, the coach’s pet.
The Spurs are small on the perimeter and it hurts their defense. Playing Anderson out of position would certainly not improve matters.
July 26th, 2010 at 12:23 pm
Geez, I completely forgot about Neal.
Guards and Guards that are Probably Guards and not Threes:
Parker
Ginobili
Hill
Temple
Neal
Anderson
Hairston
Gee
Arranged in order of presumed readiness to play/defend the 3, from least to most ready
July 26th, 2010 at 12:31 pm
Hobson13,
I agree with your roster assessment. I also don’t think he projects as a SF except when we want to go small.
“can he come in and start at SG ”
With Hill on the roster, there’s no way he starts at SG. I bet Hill plays 36+ minutes this year and a good chunk of that has to come at SG since TP will probably play about 32 minutes a game. Even if Anderson is good for a rookie there’s just not a lot of mintues for him. He’ll get minutes in blow outs and maybe some in 3 guard lineups.
I do think he’ll be capable of playing more minutes this year. Not only was he the sole focus of OSU’s office this year and scored 22 ppg, but he was incredibly efficient despite being the focus of the defense. On offense he will fit in fine with us.
July 26th, 2010 at 12:39 pm
rob
July 26th, 2010 at 10:56 am
“I was wondering that same thought regarding Anderson playing SF. Is Anderson closer to the 6″7″ range or the 6’5″ scale of his 6’6″ listing?”
I believe Anderson is actually just a hair under 6’6″. I think he is around 6’5 1/2″. He is a strong, athletic guy with a good build. When he adds a bit more muscle, he could very easily be in the 215-220lb range which might allow him to just squeeze into the SF position. I contend that his natural position is the SG position, but I think he might be able to play SF in a pinch-hitter situation.
Greyberger
July 26th, 2010 at 9:55 am
“It’s a tall, tall order to expect Anderson to get to play Manu’s beard this year. Typically there are two things holding rookies back from playing in big roles or the playoffs: corporate knowledge and defense.”
I agree it would be difficult, but if Manu plays his career average of 28min/game (and he would be on the court during crunch time) that would leave 20 minutes to split between Anderson, Neal (however effective he will be), and Hill (who will probably be the primary backup behind Parker). I truly believe Manu will come off the bench this year like he’s done for most of his career. Let’s face it, we need a veteran to help a second unit of Blair, Hairston, Hill, and maybe even Splitter at the beginning of the season. If Manu is not the starting SG, then who is? It’s between Anderson and Neal. This is all theoretical of course, but it does make sense for Anderson to get a good shot at being our starting SG to start the season provided he can live up to his hype of being Big 12 player of the year.
July 26th, 2010 at 1:37 pm
Even if we want Gee to be a Toro and develop next year, don’t we have to give him a roster spot and Austin assignment to protect him there?
I don’t think the Spurs should cheap out on him since he is young and plays a position of need. We need depth at SF and maybe he can be that guy in a year or two.
July 26th, 2010 at 1:48 pm
@ BlaseE
If they want to keep him around, they’ll have to sign him to the 15 man roster. Chances are, he wouldn’t last long enough in the D-League Draft for the Toros to pick him again (they selected him with the sixth overall pick last year).
I’d expect the Spurs to sign Gee to a contract and see him spend most of next season in Austin, with only spot time in San Antonio (i.e. because of injuries). Similar to how Malik Hairston spent last season.
July 26th, 2010 at 1:49 pm
@ BlaseE
But I just don’t see him being a rotation player for the Spurs next season, which is the only way he’d sign with San Antonio and avoid the D-League.
July 26th, 2010 at 1:53 pm
“Let’s face it, we need a veteran to help a second unit of Blair, Hairston, Hill, and maybe even Splitter at the beginning of the season.”
Why not bring back RMJ to start? he always did better when he started alongside Tony… (crouches down into tornado safety position and winces, waiting on tomatos to be thrown)
But seriously, what other veteran options are availble right now that we could get realistically? Does anybody have any ideas? I’m still urked about Bell signing with the Deron’s.
July 26th, 2010 at 2:10 pm
Nice video. Pretty much spot on, in my view. Gee has a good deal of talent, but he has to work at being much more consistent with his defense & his shot. Also, he needs to play a little bit more under control.
Anderson & Neal are clearly SG’s. It’s unlikely that either will be used at SF at all. Gee & Hairston have the most potential at SF, though Hairston clearly has the edge at present because of his ability to defend at the three.
rob
July 26th, 2010 at 10:56 am
Hairston is clearly ahead of Anderson & Gee defensively, and that is KEY as far as earning a back-up role to RJ. But we could still use a true veteran shooter in the mix as well. Hopefully Hairston is at least improving his shot a bit. In my view, what hurts Hairston over guys like Temple & Gee is his confidence, or lack thereof in his shot. What sets the better shooters apart at any level is their confidence in their shot. For example, Mason has good mechanics, but his confidence was pretty much shot the second half of last season.
Greyberger
July 26th, 2010 at 12:23 pm
There’s no way Gee’s ahead of Hairston in readiness to guard at the SF spot.
Hobson13
July 26th, 2010 at 12:39 pm
“If Manu is not the starting SG, then who is? It’s between Anderson and Neal.”
No, I disagree. It would be Hill. Anderson’s size would be nice, but I don’t think he’s ready, particularly at the defensive end. I agree with you though, I would not be surprised to see Manu come off the bench again to start the year.
Probable starters to begin the year:
Parker
Hill
RJ
Duncan
McDyess
Second Team to begin the year:
Hill/Temple
Manu
Hairston
Blair
Splitter
Situational Role Players:
Bonner
Anderson
Neal
As the season progresses we could see some changes, such as:
- Splitter to first team in place of McDyess
- Blair to first team, moving Duncan to center, in place of McDyess
- Manu to start at SG instead of Hill
Of course, other less likely changes could happen as well.
- Anderson moves up, Hill plays more point, and Temple moves down
July 26th, 2010 at 2:23 pm
Jacob
July 26th, 2010 at 1:53 pm
“But seriously, what other veteran options are availble right now that we could get realistically? Does anybody have any ideas?”
Signing Amundson, and sending McDyess & Gee (sign & trade), or even Hairston, to Philly for Kapono would be the best moves that I can see at this point. We get defense/shot-blocking help in the interior, & a veteran sniper on the wing. The Sixers are looking to move Kapono. He doesn’t really fit into Doug Collin’s plans going forward. They could use a veteran on their front line, and an athletic, reserve wing with some upside.
July 26th, 2010 at 2:50 pm
Jim Henderson
July 26th, 2010 at 2:10 pm
“No, I disagree. It would be Hill.”
That worries me. Neither are above 6’2″ 180lbs. If I were the opposing team, I would exploit the hell out of that small ball lineup on the offensive end. Sure both have quickness, but they will have trouble with most SG’s in the league. Perhaps Temple can come in and play with Parker or Hill. He would’t give them more bulk, but he at least would give them more length.
July 26th, 2010 at 3:22 pm
Jim,
Wouldn’t you be concerned with losing MsDyess defensive skills against Nowitski/Odom types? Do you feel Amundson’s defense could work in his absence?
Also, would you want to see Kapono playing behind RJ or Manu? I suppose if we sent Hairston to the Sixers he’d most likely have to back up RJ.
July 26th, 2010 at 3:32 pm
Hobson13
July 26th, 2010 at 2:50 pm
“Perhaps Temple can come in and play with Parker or Hill. He would’t give them more bulk, but he at least would give them more length.”
Yeah, if you notice my initial 1st & 2nd team line-ups, that’s what I think is most likely to happen, at the outset at least. I think Temple might be in the 4 guard rotation at the start, mainly because of his length & versatility (can defend & play the point). Anderson and/or Neal have some work to do to break into that top four. There will be some competition though, so camp should be unusually interesting this year.
P.S. I’m just hoping Bonner does actually end up in the “situational role player” group! But at 4 million per, I could very well be wrong. All I can say is that he better not steal minutes from Blair!!
July 26th, 2010 at 3:33 pm
I think Hill can defend a lot of 2′s out there due to his wingspan. Plus, while he is skinny, he must be a strong dude judging from his physique.
July 26th, 2010 at 3:36 pm
I wouldn’t give McDyess up for that little. Against the Mavs he did a solid job against one of the toughest matchups in the league, although Dirk is going to get his points against anyone (except the Warriors haha). I noticed several times during the season last year that McDyess is an unusually spry 35 year old (or whatever age he is). Maybe all the time off from those injuries, like Grant Hill to a lesser extent.
July 26th, 2010 at 3:37 pm
Jacob
July 26th, 2010 at 3:22 pm
“Wouldn’t you be concerned with losing MsDyess defensive skills against Nowitski/Odom types? Do you feel Amundson’s defense could work in his absence?”
The combination of Splitter & Amundson would work fine. Plus, their legs are about ten years younger.
“Also, would you want to see Kapono playing behind RJ or Manu? I suppose if we sent Hairston to the Sixers he’d most likely have to back up RJ.”
Yeah, at 6’8″ he’s clearly a better fit at the SF. He’s not quick or versatile enough to play at the SG. We’re stocked at shooting guard anyway.
July 26th, 2010 at 4:27 pm
This is how I see this season for Gee. It’s quite the story, so stick this post out to the end.
I think Tony, Manu, and Hill rotate starting roles throughout the season depending on match-ups, with Hill getting a bump up to 32 mins a game (29 mpg last season). If Manu gets 28 a game (29 mpg last yr), Tony gets 30 (31 mpg last yr), and Hill gets 32, there’s only 6 mins a game left between the guard spots left for Anderson and Temple. This would lead me to believe that Anderson will pick up some minutes at the SF position.
Does he fit there ideally? I’m not sure, but where else will he get minutes? Jefferson put in 31 mpg last year, and I don’t expect that to decrease, so that leaves 17 mpg left at the SF position.
So, according to my math, between regular ball and small ball, Anderson, Temple, and Hairston have to split 23 minutes a game between the 3 backcourt spots. I expect Hairston and Anderson to claim most of those minutes, with Temple enjoying mop-up duties.
This leads to my opinion of Gee. He’ll get a small, partially guaranteed 1 yr deal to be the 15th roster guy. He’ll be relegated to Austin all year, where hopefully he’ll work his butt off and realize much of his potential, much like Hairston has. Best case scenario is a rotation player in 2011-12. Worst case scenario is he doesn’t pan out and heads to Europe next summer.
This scenario falls in line with the M.O. of the FO in years past.
July 26th, 2010 at 4:49 pm
This is how I see Gee’s upcoming season.
Hill, Manu, Parker will get 32 mpg, 28 mpg, 30 mpg this year, representing a 3 min increase, a 1 min decrease, and a 1 min decrease from last season, respectively. This leaves 6 mpg left at the two guard spots.
Jefferson got 31 mpg last year and I don’t see a decrease for him this upcoming season, so there is 17 mpg available at the SF. This leaves a grand total of 23 mpg in the back court to split between Anderson, Hairston, and Temple.
Temple could play both PG and SG, and I see Hairston and Anderson filling in at the SG and SF depending on the match-ups. I don’t see Gee stealing time anywhere.
So I think the Spurs sign him to a 1 year, partially guaranteed salary to be the 14th or 15 guy. Then they send him to Austin for the year, where he will (hopefully) work his butt off and improve, much like Hairston did.
Best case scenario is that he becomes a rotation type player for the 2011-12 season because he learned how to play D 100% of the time and develops a corner 3. Worst case scenario is that he heads to Europe next summer because he relied too much on his athleticism and not enough on hard work.
July 26th, 2010 at 4:54 pm
Jimbo,
“I think Hill can defend a lot of 2′s out there due to his wingspan.”
I agree, I like Hill because of his versatility. Of course I hope our longer 2 guards develop, but I’m happy with Hill, Manu, and TP getting most of the mintues at the 1 and 2.
“I noticed several times during the season last year that McDyess is an unusually spry 35 year old (or whatever age he is).”
I agree. Last year he produced at an average level for his position (according to WP48). This is great for a older player and fantastic to get in your fourth or fifth big. If he stays close to that level this year he’ll be a huge asset.
July 26th, 2010 at 4:54 pm
@ Jim
I like Amundson. What do you think of a 2 guard, 3 post team on the court with Amundson, Blair/Splitter, and Duncan? Would that not match up beautifully with the Lakers, at least defensively? Or would that give up too much offensively at the SF spot?
If Tony and Manu are at full health, and the Blair/Splitter combo meets offensive expectations, I could see the aforementioned line-up as a legitimate possibility. However, the weak spot would definitely be the Blair/Splitter offense, should either of those guys not live up to conservative expectations.
July 26th, 2010 at 4:59 pm
Andrew,
Great video and spot on imo.
July 26th, 2010 at 5:32 pm
Sorry about the double post detailing Gee’s impossible quest for playing time. Stupid Ubuntu….
July 26th, 2010 at 6:08 pm
ThatBigGuy
July 26th, 2010 at 4:54 pm
“I like Amundson. What do you think of a 2 guard, 3 post team on the court with Amundson, Blair/Splitter, and Duncan? Would that not match up beautifully with the Lakers, at least defensively?”
Unfortunately, neither Amundson nor Blair could play the three, from either an offensive or defensive perspective. And neither could defend Artest effectively on the perimeter. If RJ would get serious & committed on the defensive end, he could handle Artest okay. Odom is the one that presents a match-up problem for us (as with a lot of teams). Amundson could help there some, but even he would have trouble with Odom because of Odom’s offensive versatility, with his ability to go inside & outside. Amundson’s strength is really more as a “team” defender, and shot-blocker in the interior, for which he’s very good (and a decent position defender out to about 18-20 feet). Plus, he just out-hustles EVERYONE ALL the time for lose balls, rebounds, etc.
July 26th, 2010 at 6:30 pm
@ Jim
I will concede that offensively, we can’t expect anything positive offensively from him at the SF, but I’m more focused defensively. On one end of the seesaw, he’s not ideally suited to playing the SF, but on the other end, you said it best: “he just out-hustles EVERYONE ALL the time for lose balls, rebounds, etc.”
I guess the ultimate question is: Does the Amundson seesaw balance level out at the SF, at least defensively? Honestly, matching up against Odom, I’d be happy with Amundson playing off and letting Odom jack up 3′s. Same with Artest. Plus, he could possibly fill a free safety role, taking chances on cross court passes, cheating on weak-side rotations to block shots, and giving the team a monster 3rd rebounder.
Maybe I’m just bored and thinking too much.
July 26th, 2010 at 6:43 pm
Jimbo
July 26th, 2010 at 3:36 pm
“I wouldn’t give McDyess up for that little.”
A 28 year old sharp-shooter that is #1 active career from 3-point range for a 36 year old PF that is now way beyond his prime, and who’s skill-set can clearly be replaced by the younger, recently acquired Splitter, the improved Blair, and the hoped for FA acquisition of Amundson? Granted, I would like to make the Amundson acquisition before I traded McDyess for Kapono, but Kapono is too little? You do realize that we still need a proven, veteran 3-point shooter, someone off the bench that can actually hit a three in the playoffs. Right?
July 26th, 2010 at 7:04 pm
Hill would get destroyed some nights as a starting 2 guard. He’d be forced to guard post ups from Kobe Bryant, Jason Richardson, Steven Jackson, and Vince Carter. He’d be okay against Ray Allen, O.J. Mayo, and Raja Bell types that don’t post up.
I believe that the starting 2 guard will come down to Anderson and Neal. I’m leaning toward Neal getting the 1st 5 or 6 minutes of the game with Ginobili coming in as a sub.
I’m of the belief that Gee will not last the entire season with the Spurs. Gee will get the Haislip/Ratliff/Finley treatment of being released during the season.
July 26th, 2010 at 7:35 pm
ThatBigGuy
July 26th, 2010 at 6:30 pm
“I guess the ultimate question is: Does the Amundson seesaw balance level out at the SF, at least defensively?”
No. There’s no way he can adequately cover most SF’s out on the perimeter. As I said, he’s really a better “team” defender than a one on one defender on the perimeter in a half-court set. He’d be dead guarding a SF out at the 3-point line that has a good three-point shot, and a relatively quick first step off the dribble. TOAST, as would most PF’s.
“Honestly, matching up against Odom, I’d be happy with Amundson playing off and letting Odom jack up 3′s. Same with Artest.”
Honestly, even though Artest struggled from “three” at times last year, we can’t just leave him alone out there. He’s not that bad (37% over the past 4 years). Odom presents a different problem: he’s probably the best ball-handler/passer off the dribble for his size in the entire league, plus he can finish at the rim. As I said, I’m not opposed to giving Amundson some burn on Odom (we probably don’t have anyone on the current roster better able to defend him), I’m just saying, Odom is a tricky guy to guard. But I would definitely rather have Amundson on Odom than Artest (Odom usually plays the 4 for LA, with Gasol or Bynum at the five, and Artest or Walton at the three). Amundson matches up better against the other team’s PF, even center against the under-sized ones.
“he could possibly fill a free safety role, taking chances on cross court passes, cheating on weak-side rotations to block shots, and giving the team a monster 3rd rebounder.”
Well, that is what he does best, but I’d rather see him doing these types of things with the following front court partners, depending on the match-ups:
Duncan, Amundson, RJ
Splitter, Amundson, Hairston
Blair, Amundson, RJ
Gotta keep the SF in the mix most of the time, in my view.
In fact, the following line-up could provide an interesting contrast to the starting group:
Hill, Manu, RJ, Blair (or Splitter), & Amundson
That group could present a lot of havoc on both ends, & in transition. During certain stretches, as long as Blair has worked a bit on his low-post defense (including cutting down on the fouls), that group could certainly shake things up a bit for the opposition.
July 26th, 2010 at 7:52 pm
lvmainman
July 26th, 2010 at 7:04 pm
“I believe that the starting 2 guard will come down to Anderson and Neal.”
VERY unlikely. Also, what would be the point? Are both of them better players than Hill? Unlikely. In my view, Hill plays just as well with Parker (as a SG) as he does with Ginobli (as a PG). So why would we start our 3rd best SG? For me, if Manu is not starting, at this point it only makes sense to start Hill at the SG, unless of course, Neal or Anderson just blow people away in camp, which I’m certainly not expecting. And where does Temple fit into all of this? Temple is a better defender than Neal or Anderson at this point. As a result, I don’t see Neal or Anderson even pushing Temple out of the guard rotation at this point (4th guard).
“I’m leaning toward Neal getting the 1st 5 or 6 minutes of the game with Ginobili coming in as a sub.”
How many total minutes should Neal, or Anderson get as the starting SG? Will Hill only play the point? How many minutes for Hill under an Anderson or Neal starter scenario?
July 26th, 2010 at 9:06 pm
@Jim Henderson
How can you move Splitter to Mcdyess Spot, and then also move duncan to center taking mcdysess spot?You have two players playing center to take Antonio spot and then blair playing pf? More likely splitter and duncan will end up as starters with blair first big off the bench. Mcdyess will be situational big against certain teams.
July 26th, 2010 at 9:15 pm
Nice video compilation with nice analysis Andrew. I enjoyed watching that. Thanks.
July 26th, 2010 at 9:24 pm
Remember that Manu can slide to sf for short stints to accommodate a three guard rotation and this is where the spurs might be able to steal a few more minutes each game for our guard prospects. We may be more able to play better small ball this year if splitter picks up the defensive side of things quickly enough. Spurs could trot out splitter and Blair with Manu George and one of Anderson or Neal or temple whilst tim and Tony rest. I like the potential of our second unit to push the ball this year.
July 26th, 2010 at 9:48 pm
Gee is a great player I went to school with him in Palm Beach Gardens. We had a great basketball team including Leemire Goldwire, Charlotte 49ers & now in the DLeague.
Alonzo is already getting guaranteed money from San Antonio for this next season. That is a big part of why he left the Wizards. Also, he was the D League rookie of the year last year, so I’m sure San Antonio is taking a much more calculated approach to this, and I know they plan on keeping him around. Whether he sees any time I don’t know, but he’ll be around.
With that being said. Go Heat! Sign one of my boys Leemire Goldwire or Alonzo.
July 26th, 2010 at 10:07 pm
Splitter will have to prove he is capable of being on the floor at the end of games before he takes precedence over mcdyess. My guess is that they will be a committee depending on foul trouble, matchups, hot hand etc. That’s twice as many options as we had with last seasons squad. But as many posters have vigorously pointed out we are bound to the fate of our 3pt shooting which is no way near as reknowned or feared as squads from 2 or 3 years ago….and that inevitably is going to put more pressure on our low post execution. If the spurs can start the season shooting well, it may prove pivotal in how our players are guarded and refereed heading into the playoffs
July 26th, 2010 at 10:13 pm
Is there a possibility of Spurs being interested in Josh Howard? I came across somewhere about us being interested in him. More than likely we will not make any moves is what i think.
July 26th, 2010 at 10:59 pm
@ Jim Henderson, I don’t know if you’ve ever seen Kapono’s “defense,” but let’s just say he’s got problems. I’ll take an over-the-hill McDyess over a 28 year old three point shooter any day of the week. If one thing was clear last year, it’s that the Spurs are thin upfront. I have high hopes for Splitter, but not so much that I’d jettison McD before Splitter ever plays an NBA game.
July 27th, 2010 at 3:55 am
My guess in all the speculations and desires of who we would like to be added to the team is that the Spurs are going to stick with who they have now for the time being. Giving the current roster a chance to gel together in different circumstances.
If healthy…Parker, Ginobili and Duncan are still going to be the “big 3″ of this team. RJ is going to be given his chance to outperform compared to last year. And I think that will only be done if the offense is geared a little more to his abilities.
Significant role players in Splitter, Blair, Hill will be secondary options and should help solidify our defense compared to last year.
I think, depending on the development of Splitter, McDyess will gladly adjust to becoming a significant off the bench player.
With the verdict still out on Hairston to become the player the team wanted Bogans to become, Anderson, Temple and/or Neal will be given their shot early in the season. And if any of those three can play defense better than RMJ while at least equalling RMJ’s offensive output…then the teams search for RMJ’s replacement will have been solved.
If some of these players do not seem to develop/progress to a higher level….we then might see an attempt at mid-season to bring in some of the scenarios mentioned as far as hopefull acquisitions.
Again…our big three in Parker, Ginobili and Duncan will have to remain healthy in order for the Spurs to have any shot at the title. And if any one of them were to be significantly injured…it probably wouldn’t matter how well any of these players develop or who the team might bring in to bolster a back up role.
July 27th, 2010 at 4:43 am
Jimbo,
I’m right there with you. Kapono does one thing-shoot. He does it well, but he costs you dearly in every other phase of the game. Here’s John Hollinger’s scouting report on him from 2009 (after which he slightly declined!):
[snip]Scouting report: A brilliant outside shooter, Kapono shoots 45.4 percent on 3-pointers for his career and boasts one of the fastest releases in the game. Alas, less than a third of his shots came from beyond the arc. He has a maddening habit of cutting in toward the basket when a teammate drives and ending up with a midrange jumper instead of a 3. He hits these shots at a high rate too, but not nearly high enough to offset the one-point difference between the two distances.
This is extremely important for him because his jump shot provides his entire worth as a basketball player. He handles the ball OK for his size but can’t elevate at the rim or beat defenders off the dribble, and he’s useless on the glass (61st out of 63 small forwards in rebound rate).
Defensively, Kapono’s limited lateral movement leaves him vulnerable to anyone with halfway decent quickness. His size is helpful against bigger wings and he’s an OK team defender, but coaches mainly try to hide him against a non-scorer and cross their fingers.
[snip]
I’ll ad a bit more: Kapono’s PER last year was 8.44 (15 is average) and his true shooting percentage was only 52.7%. (He doesn’t get to the line at all, which makes him a remarkably inefficient scorer for such an effective shooter, although of course Bonner gets there even less frequently.) Kapono also averaged just 2.7 rebounds per 40 and 1.5 assists. That’s a lower rebounding rate than MUGGSY BOGUES, who was 5’3″! For all of that non-production, Kapono will earn $6.6 million next year. Compare that with Bonner’s 14.94 PER last year, 58.1 TS%, 7.4 REB/40, 2.3 AST/40, willingness to play defense (despite his limitations), and $4 million salary.
Additionally, some have suggested that we should trade Antonio McDyess for Kapono! We’re already short of interior defenders, so giving up a capable yet ageing one doesn’t make much sense to me. And we also need a good perimeter defender. So trading McDyess for someone who makes Adam Morrison look like Bruce Bowen seems like killing two Spurs with one stone.
When it comes to Jason Kapono, I’ll pass (which is more than I can say for him).
July 27th, 2010 at 4:52 am
[First, sorry for the angry e-mail about Jason Kapono but I've never liked the guy, dating back to his days as a supremely arrogant yet surprisingly ineffective UCLA Bruin.]
Hollinger had one more interesting post recently, his list of off-season winners which, not surprisingly, included the Spurs. He doesn’t view Jefferson’s signing the same way as everyone else. His take is that Jefferson’s move to decline his option and then re-sign was a pre-arranged deal. In that light, although it’s technically not kosher, the Jefferson contract makes a LOT of sense. Instead of a 4-year, $39-million contract it becomes a 3-year, $14-million extension, which is a pretty good deal. See Hollinger’s article for the math:
http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/insider/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&page=winners-100726
July 27th, 2010 at 6:45 am
“……..killing two Spurs with one stone.”
“…… I’ll pass (which is more than I can say for him)”
Awesome.
I don’t think there’s anything non-kosher about pre-arranging a deal with RJ, as long as nothing was signed.
July 27th, 2010 at 7:34 am
I think he already made the team because they told James Anderson he can’t get #23 because Alonza Gee already claimed it.but i disagree on your evaluation of Gee needing to be 3-point treat to make this team.First,Richard Jefferson is very average 3-point shooter and because that was bruce bowen strength,the spurs must not expect others to follow to be the same.That was problem last year,spurs treated Jefferson like he was bowen,you have to ajust your offense to the strengths of players you bring in.I think spurs down fall was alot bad coaching decision last year. First letting go your bigs and playing nellie small ball,Second letting go that 6-10 hairston who is mold of robert horry and can guard small forward or power forward positions so they had to rely on Jefferson at P.F. which was a joke!!! I wish pop come out and admit how bad coaching job he did last year.Alonzo Gee is too talented to let go,this team can not have one demonitial players any more,they need guys who can drive to basket and shoot 3pt,first they don’t go to duncan in post like he francise player,they play more to the open guy takes the shot,which you still need to win in crunch time with your stars,which the spurs went away from in phoenix series.
July 27th, 2010 at 7:44 am
I say play the your guys with veterans,you dont want old players with old vet’s/spurs had experience with experience off bench and they did not produce,play rookies that are hungry to prove themselves, when the big 3 was youg ,they had vets around them,now you got to reverse it,with big 3 as vets ,you need play young hungry players.
July 27th, 2010 at 7:49 am
Tim in Surrey,
Spot on.
July 27th, 2010 at 8:32 am
Gee scored in every conceivable way in the summer league. Someone else WILL sign him if the Spurs don’t lock him up. He’d be a good SF in a small lineup and decent SG the rest of the time. He’s athletic and can jump…2 things the Spurs lack overall.
July 27th, 2010 at 10:07 am
spursfanbayarea
July 26th, 2010 at 9:06 pm
“How can you move Splitter to Mcdyess Spot, and then also move duncan to center taking mcdysess spot?”
Those were two separate & discrete scenarios offered.
“You have two players playing center to take Antonio spot and then blair playing pf?”
Splitter (C), Duncan (PF) - (Splitter for Dice)
Duncan (C), Blair (PF) - (TD to center in place of Dice, Blair to PF)
“More likely splitter and duncan will end up as starters with blair first big off the bench. Mcdyess will be situational big against certain teams.”
That’s not how the season will likely start out, but it is not inconsistent from what I said it could very well evolve to at any point during the season.
July 27th, 2010 at 11:53 am
Jimbo
July 26th, 2010 at 10:59 pm
“I’ll take an over-the-hill McDyess over a 28 year old three point shooter any day of the week.”
Kapono’s not just ANY three-point shooter. He’s #1 active career shooter in the entire league!
“I have high hopes for Splitter, but not so much that I’d jettison McD before Splitter ever plays an NBA game.”
Number one, I said I’d like to get Amundson into the fold first. Number two, I don’t doubt a solid contribution from Splitter, as you apparently do. And number three, you apparently don’t realize how important it is to have sufficient, dependable three-point shooting off the bench. We don’t have that now, not sufficient enough to challenge for a title.
rob
July 27th, 2010 at 3:55 am
“My guess in all the speculations and desires of who we would like to be added to the team is that the Spurs are going to stick with who they have now for the time being.”
That may be the case, but a staus quo approach at this point is very likely to fail at bringing us another title. The weaknesses, while mitigated to some extent, still remain: insufficient number of dependable, clutch 3-point-shooters; inadequate defense/shot-blocking on the interior, and inadequate defense on the perimeter.
“Again…our big three in Parker, Ginobili and Duncan will have to remain healthy in order for the Spurs to have any shot at the title.”
This condition alone is VERY unlikely to be enough for us to win a title. It gets us into the playoffs, and AT BEST a WCF “appearance”. It does not give us an NBA final appearance or an NBA title.
July 27th, 2010 at 11:59 am
Tim in Surrey
July 27th, 2010 at 4:43 am
“I’ll ad a bit more: Kapono’s PER last year was 8.44 (15 is average) and his true shooting percentage was only 52.7%.”
You use stats on his worst year out of the past 5 in the NBA. In contrast, the three years between 2005-06 & 2007-08 his TS% averaged 58.6%, one of highest in the league for a wing, three-point specialist. As far as PER goes, we would NOT be acquiring Kapono because he’s a great all-around efficient player (PER), but because he’s completely capable of filing a specific niche on this team for 15 mpg.: THREE POINT SHOOTING, and someone that has actually demonstrated that he can make one IN THE PLAYOFFS.
Playoff Career 3-point shooting:
Hill - 37.8
Manu - 37.5
Bonner - 31.8!
RJ - 30.3
TP - 29.9
KAPONO - 53.6!
“Kapono also averaged just 2.7 rebounds per 40 and 1.5 assists. That’s a lower rebounding rate than MUGGSY BOGUES, who was 5’3″! For all of that non-production, Kapono will earn $6.6 million next year. Compare that with Bonner’s 14.94 PER last year, 58.1 TS%, 7.4 REB/40, 2.3 AST/40, willingness to play defense (despite his limitations), and $4 million salary.”
WHY are you comparing Kapono to Bonner? They play completely different positions. We’re probably stuck with Bonner regardless of whether we were to add Kapono. And again, for whatever reason, last year was Bonner’s career high in assists. But his career assists per 36 minutes is 1.4; Kapono’s is 1.7. Bonner also benefited from playing on a REALLY good team almost his entire career, while Kapono played on one good Heat team, and the rest sucked (e.g., Toronto, Philly). Also, WE DON’T NEED ANOTHER 15 mpg. role player that can REBOUND (the Spurs were 3rd in the NBA last year in total rebound rate): WE NEED A GUY THAT CAN COME IN AND SHOOT THE THREE (Kapono is NUMBER ONE active career 3-point shooter in the league. Also, since you want to give Bonner props for “at least trying on defense”, I’ll do the same with Kapono. From Draft Express:
“…..Will actually give some effort….” ……Uses his body relatively well against players with similar physical gifts. Won’t produce many turnovers, grab many rebounds, or commit many fouls. A liability on the defensive end who does show some effort……”
http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Jason-Kapono-3101/#ixzz0uucPkMBS
http://www.draftexpress.com
Nobody is suggesting that Kapono is a good defender. He’s clearly NOT a “perfect” choice. But he’s the only one that I can see that might be available for a decent price. Hell, if we could get a great defender & a great 3-point shooter in one guy we would have done it all ready. Bruce Bowen types are not easy to come by. That said, if we could add a guy like Amundson, along with the addition of Splitter, our rim protection would improve substantially, and this would offset some of the weaknesses that Kapono’s defense would present during his 15 mpg of floor time. And his shooting would very likely end up being a net benefit to the team. As to his contract: it’s 6.6 million for ONE year (and I agree, he’s a bit overpaid currently), and his price will undoubtedly go down the following year. Bonner’s contact is 4 million for FOUR years, and he’s a year older than Kapono.
“Additionally, some have suggested that we should trade Antonio McDyess for Kapono! We’re already short of interior defenders…”
I said IN CONJUNCTION with picking up Amundson as a FA! (which is quite conceivable for whatever we still have available with MLE, or the LLE).
“So trading McDyess for someone who makes Adam Morrison look like Bruce Bowen seems like killing two Spurs with one stone.”
On the contrary, picking up a perpetual-motion fly-swatter and a deadly sniper for a guy on his last legs seems like we’d be killing flies AND birds with two small stones. McDyess is 36 years old. He’s not the greatest defender in the world, and is not a particularly good shot-blocker. He’s an above average defender. Amundson is nine years younger, plays more consistently aggressive on the defensive end, and is one of the top shot-blockers per 48 minutes in the league (just behind Marcus Camby). We NEED shot-blocking (21st in the league last year, versus near the top during every championship year). And I’ve already extolled the critical niche Kapono would fill with his marksmanship.
July 27th, 2010 at 12:05 pm
The comment above that is “awaiting moderation” (as of noon 7/27) is mine, in response to “Tim in Surrey”.
July 27th, 2010 at 12:17 pm
Can disregard the previous post now:
Jim Henderson
July 27th, 2010 at 12:05 pm
July 27th, 2010 at 12:38 pm
Jim,
“You use stats on his worst year out of the past 5 in the NBA”
It’s also his most recent year and he had about the same the year before that. Not a good sign.
Also, I don’t think using his 53.6% 3 pt shooting in the playoffs is meaningful. He’s taken 28 3 pt shot’s in the playoffs, 24 of them in one year. I’m not sure I’d base much on what he did one year in the playoffs, especially when the playoff run was only for 5 games.
Kapono isn’t just a one trick pony, he’s terrible at everything else. He’s only had two seasons with positve Wp48. In his case, because he’s not a good man defender or “intangibles guy” I think WP48 gives a good representation of his production. I’m with Tim, I’m not interested in a great 3 pt shooter who’s an inefficient scorer and sucks at every other aspect of the game.
I know we also need depth at SF, but I’d rather go small and give guys like Anderson and Neal those minutes in order to develop. Both are good shooters and Anderson was incredibly efficient on offense despite being the focus of the defense. Also, I haven’t given up on Hairston being a decent 3 pt shooter. It’s definitely something he’s worked on and done well in the D-league and the NCAA (over 40%), so I’m hopeful he gets it together for us. I think he just needs minutes.
“Amundson is nine years younger, plays more consistently aggressive on the defensive end, and is one of the top shot-blockers per 48 minutes in the league (just behind Marcus Camby). ”
I would love to get this guy.
July 27th, 2010 at 12:38 pm
Also, for additional comments that I made concerning Kapono, see the following post from the “Richard Jefferson” thread:
Jim Henderson
July 25th, 2010 at 12:42 pm
July 27th, 2010 at 12:48 pm
to Jim Henderson & Spurs Fans;
Here’s some news. It’s been reported that the Suns are going to let Lou Amundson walk. If you are a Amundson fan & have been tracking him, & you feel that he would be a good fit for the Spurs system, well, this is good news! Uh oh! Now the bad news. It’s also been reported from Amundson himself that the Bobcats, Raptors & Warriors have intrest in him. Unfortunatly for us fans who would LOVE to have him on the team, there was no mention that the Spurs were intrested in him. The clock is ticking away, & I have this BAD feeling that he will wind up slipping through our fingers & end up on another team. I think that Amundson could be a great asset as another productive big who can bring some needed defense & perhaps 5 or so points in his 15 minutes of playing time. It will be too bad that it will be MOST unlikely that we will see him in a Spurs uni, but whatever the front office has up their sleeves, has me pesimistic, but at the same time, it will be intresting to see what’s on their minds. Oh well. GO SPURS GO!
July 27th, 2010 at 1:06 pm
bduran
July 27th, 2010 at 12:38 pm
“It’s also his most recent year and he had about the same the year before that. Not a good sign.”
Playing in a crappy situation, with a franchise that has NO idea what they’re doing. That can be demotivating for a lot of guys.
“Also, I don’t think using his 53.6% 3 pt shooting in the playoffs is meaningful. He’s taken 28 3 pt shot’s in the playoffs, 24 of them in one year. I’m not sure I’d base much on what he did one year in the playoffs, especially when the playoff run was only for 5 games.”
28 shots from three in the playoffs at 54% is a good enough sign that he’s going to at least remain at his career regular season rate of 44% with more playoff time. It’s certainly more than what Bonner’s ever done, our best regular-season 3-point shooter (career - 40%, playoffs - 32%!, on 14 of 44).
“I know we also need depth at SF, but I’d rather go small and give guys like Anderson and Neal those minutes in order to develop. Both are good shooters and Anderson was incredibly efficient on offense despite being the focus of the defense. Also, I haven’t given up on Hairston being a decent 3 pt shooter. It’s definitely something he’s worked on and done well in the D-league and the NCAA (over 40%), so I’m hopeful he gets it together for us. I think he just needs minutes.”
You really think that one of these unproven NBA players is going to give us the 3-point shooting that we’re lacking? TWO of the guys you mentioned that show “some” shooting promise haven’t played ONE game in the NBA, and neither is a good defender. Their decent 3-point shooting has been in college or Europe. The other guy has taken twelve 3-point attempts in the NBA, converting just 17% of them. You want to put your hopes on those guys to fill a glaring need on this team for this season (3-point shooting, particularly in the playoffs), go right ahead. I’ll pass.
“I would love to get this guy.”
As I said, he would be necessary to acquire in order to afford the Kapono acquisition. Two of Duncan, Splitter, & Amundson on the floor would generally be necessary during any of Kapono’s 15 minutes of floor time. His defensive liabilities would be at least partially mitigated, and his three-point accuracy would be a nice spark off the bench.
July 27th, 2010 at 1:19 pm
ChitownSpursFan
July 27th, 2010 at 12:48 pm
“Unfortunately for us fans who would LOVE to have him on the team, there was no mention that the Spurs were interested in him.”
Yes, I know. I’m just HOPING that the Spur’s might still be interested in him, and are just keeping it close to the vest at this point. But I agree, it doesn’t look good, which is really a shame. You’d think Amundson would rather come to a team voted best franchise of the decade, with a chance at a title, than to play for Golden State, Charlotte, or Toronto! I just don’t understand it. Although the Bonner signing made picking up a 6th big unlikely, unless we could package McDyess for a shooter, hence the Kapono idea.
July 27th, 2010 at 1:21 pm
Jim,
“You want to put your hopes on those guys to fill a glaring need on this team for this season (3-point shooting, particularly in the playoffs), go right ahead. I’ll pass”
Yeah, I’d rather do this than get Kapono. I like 3pt shooting, but Kapono is so bad at everything else that he has a negative WP48. Truth is, playoff rotations tighten up and it’s unlikely that Kapono or those other guys are going to get many minutes. So yeah, during the regular season i’d rather work to develop other players then waste time on Kapono.
One other thing, do we need 3 pt shooting this badly? Just looking at 3pt shooting rankings over the last ten years the Lakers (3 times), the Spurs, the Pistons, and the Heat have all managed to win outside of the top 10 in 3 pt shooting . The Heat and Lakers have done it in the bottom 10. There is definitely a correlation between playoff success and 3pt shooting, but it’s far from necessary which is why i’m not interested in a poor player who can only shoot 3s.
July 27th, 2010 at 1:54 pm
Yeah, LeBron get’s all the attention, but Bosh isn’t all that different. They’re both arrogant “quiters”:
“Colangelo went on to elaborate:
“Whether he was mentally checked out or just wasn’t quite into it down the stretch, he wasn’t the same guy. I think everybody saw that, but no one wanted to acknowledge it.”
“At the same time, I never felt we were quite in the game (in terms of signing Bosh to a new contract). There was too much out there, too much built up for him to take an easy out here, and he decided to do that.”
http://www.torontosun.com/sports/basketball/2010/07/26/14836426.html
July 27th, 2010 at 2:24 pm
@ Jim Henderson;
Jim, I respect your opinion & see your idea about this concept for the Spurs to sign Kapono as a SF & then sign Amundson as a PF/C as some added depth as both positions, actually. Kapono may not be a great defender or athletic, but he can shoot the long ball! The Spurs have thrived on these three key aspects as a winning organization. 1. Defense; 2. Three point shooting; 3. Two big 7 footers in the paint. Now, it apears that we are trying to harness that back onto this team. It would be good to have some experience at the shooting level, true-that! And true, we don’t have that Bruce Bowen-type defender at the 3 spot right now, nor do I really foresee us finding him right away either, unless Bruce decides to come out of retirement & suit up again (Not Happening!). Any who, as we fantasize, this would be nice! But Jim, I have a question. Are the 76′ers intrested in a big man such as McDyess, or do you think we may have to package him with someone else such as Gee, perhaps to draw their intrests? Sorry if I missed that in one of your previous blogs, but Thanx, & GO SPURS GO!
July 27th, 2010 at 2:51 pm
bduran
July 27th, 2010 at 1:21 pm
“Truth is, playoff rotations tighten up and it’s unlikely that Kapono or those other guys are going to get many minutes.”
If we’re not going to play Kapono during the playoffs, don’t bother getting him. But that would be stupid in my opinion.
Top nine in playoff rotation:
TP - 32 mpg.
Duncan - 32
Manu - 32
RJ - 32
Hill - 32
Splitter - 24
Blair - 24
Amundson - 16
Kapono - 16
‘One other thing, do we need 3 pt shooting this badly?”
From a previous post:
“Playoff Career 3-point shooting:
Hill – 37.8
Manu – 37.5
Bonner – 31.8!
RJ – 30.3
TP – 29.9
KAPONO – 53.6!”
That should tell you all you really need to know.
Also, the Heat the year they won, also had the SECOND highest TS% (in contrast to ours last year, which was NINTH), and tied for FIRST in total rebound rate at 52.6. The Lakers last year were 5th in both offensive & defensive efficiency, and 8th in total rebound rate, and they would have been higher in these categories if Bynum had not missed more than 20% of the season with injury. Plus, the Laker’s last year were probably the prototypical case of a team peaking just at the right time, heading into the playoffs. Nevertheless, three-point shooting is a weakness of the Lakers, hence the signing of Blake, and the heavy pursuit of Bell. Most of the other title-winning teams that you mentioned had TOP-ranked defenses, something the Spurs are destined not to match this season, Kapono or no Kapono.
The fact is, not everyone on a team is going to be a good defender, why not at least have that guy be the top 3-point shooter in the league? 15 mpg. out of 240 mpg. as a team in total (6% of all minutes) of Kapono is not going to have a meaningful impact on us defensively, particularly if we were to pick up someone like Amundson, along with our recent addition of Splitter, and more improvement & commitment on the defensive end by ALL of our players. We were 11th last year in 3 point shooting, and an even worse, 9th out of the 16 teams in the playoffs, at 33.8%! All the semi-finalists except LA (33%) shot better than us in the playoffs. And LA may have been able to win with that kind of 3-point shooting last year because their total rebound rate in the playoffs was SECOND (ours was 12th out of 16 teams), and their blocks per game was SECOND (ours was again 12th).
Kapono & Amundson together would fill two out of three critical deficiencies that the Spurs still have as a team: interior “D”/shot-blocking; 3-point shooting, including in the playoffs, when it matters the most; and perimeter “D”. Without these two pick-ups, all three weaknesses remain.
July 27th, 2010 at 2:57 pm
ChitownSpursFan
July 27th, 2010 at 2:24 pm
“But Jim, I have a question. Are the 76′ers intrested in a big man such as McDyess, or do you think we may have to package him with someone else such as Gee, perhaps to draw their intrests? Sorry if I missed that in one of your previous blogs..”
They could use a veteran big for depth on their front line, but yes, he would probably have to be packaged with something else, as I’ve stated in previous posts (e.g., Gee, maybe Hairston, a draft pick of some sort, etc.). After all, McDyess is 36 years old; his time, and thus value, is quite restricted.
July 27th, 2010 at 5:47 pm
Jim,
“Top nine in playoff rotation:
TP – 32 mpg.
Duncan – 32
Manu – 32
RJ – 32
Hill – 32
Splitter – 24
Blair – 24
Amundson – 16
Kapono – 16″
Does anyone play their ninth guy this many minutes in the playoffs? In the regular season, it makes sense to get as much out of your bench as possible, but in the playoffs you want to squeeze as much out of your best players as possible. At least, this is what makes sense from a WP48 perspective and is what coaches seem to do.
Anyway that’s a discussion for another time, here’s what we played last year at the 2 and 3 (who are still on the roster)
Manu - 35
Hill - 21 (he played 35, but 14 with TP on the floor)
RJ - 33
That only leaves 7 minutes (no way Kapono should be taking minutes from any of these guys.) I think that someone already on our roster can step up and take those 7 minutes. At this point trading for any wing who can’t take minutes from RJ just isn’t worth much, and as much as I want a better 3 pt shooter to get some minutes at the 3, I don’t want to replace him with a less efficient scorer who is a bad defender and god awful rebounder.
July 27th, 2010 at 7:01 pm
bduran
July 27th, 2010 at 5:47 pm
“In the regular season, it makes sense to get as much out of your bench as possible, but in the playoffs you want to squeeze as much out of your best players as possible.”
Our best players, unlike the Heat, aren’t 26 year old studs. Manu has always been kept at reasonable minutes in the playoffs, Duncan has a chronic knee problem at age 34 (by the way, we burnt him out in the Mav series), and TP, well let’s just hope last year’s nagging injuries aren’t a trend (I know for a fact that plantar fasciitis is subject to recurrence once you suffer from it the first time). Then of course, RJ is RJ, and I wouldn’t want to have to depend on him logging heavy minutes. Hill could get more minutes, if his performance dictates, we’ll see. It’s Splitter’s first year with the team, coming over from Europe, so I don’t see him getting heavy minutes in this years playoffs, although it is possible. And Blair’s entering just his second year at age 21, and has a little ways to go still in his development before we’re likely to give him major minutes. Personally, I like a nine-man rotation in the playoffs, if all the players are capable, and fulfill a distinct role. Sure, there certainly would be variations in my minute allocations, and you’re right, it would be the bottom two that are most likely to lose some. But I would still like to see them (Amundson, Kapono) get at least 12 minutes per game, depending on the match-ups.
“Anyway that’s a discussion for another time, here’s what we played last year at the 2 and 3 (who are still on the roster)
Manu – 35
Hill – 21 (he played 35, but 14 with TP on the floor)
RJ – 33″
Okay, so you want to zero the discussion in on Kapono. Fine. Prior to last year, Manu averaged 30.8 mpg. during the playoffs, when he was a much younger, stronger player. He’s now 33, with a number of injuries in his past. Manu is a more efficient player at 30 minutes than he is at 35 (if you disagree, what’s your cutoff for him, or should we, because he’s so good, have him play 40 mpg., like D. Wade). Manu/Bogans also apparently combined for about 15 mpg. at the SF spot, about 8/7 mpg. respectively. Manu is clearly a better defender at the SG than at the SF, and while Bogans defends the three better than average, he shot 17% from behind the arc in the playoffs. While Kapono is worse defensively than both, he’s lights out from three. Adding Amundson (and with Splitter in tow) should at least partially mitigate his defensive weaknesses. Also, if RJ doesn’t have a much better year than last year, his minutes should be cut back a few mpg. from last year as well. 20 % from three (for last years playoffs) just isn’t going to cut it. So, with Bogans out of the picture, with Manu’s minutes cut back a few, particularly at the SF spot, and perhaps even RJ’s also cut back a couple of minutes, that should leave a good 12-15 mpg. where it would make sense to have the #1 active career 3-point shooter in the game. Of course, such minutes would fluctuate depending on the match-ups, and other miscellaneous factors.
P.S. Even Kapono’s defense should be a little better playing under Pop! And I can tell you right now, Pop is going to lower the boom on the entire team this year from a defensive perspective. He know’s he’s done without EVERYONE picking it up to their maximum capabilities on the defensive end. If you don’t work at it consistently on your own, like he says Temple does, the drill sergeant will be back in spades this Fall.
July 27th, 2010 at 7:46 pm
Jim,
“Okay, so you want to zero the discussion in on Kapono”
Of course I do. You also say you want to get Amundson. I wholeheartedly agree so not much left to discuss.
“Manu is a more efficient player at 30 minutes than he is at 35″
This is an interesting question. It’s always seemed to me that Manu has done better when forced to take a larger role, usually do to injury of guys like TP. However, clearly he has never been able to sustain high minutes. Personally, I would save him as much as possible and then ramp up his minutes as needed. Unfortunately, in the West, you’re likely to get a tough first round opponent.
You still haven’t addressed his WP48. Do you think it’s a mistake that he’s been negative all but two years? The problem is it’s hard to know how valuable 3 pt shooting relative to the other stats. WP48 helps with this. If he was known as a really good defender or something that’s hard to quantify, then you can think that he really outperforms his box score stats. However, this is not the case with Kapono. He is what he is. Essentially he does nothing to help his team other than shoot 3s. You have to be really bad at everything else to have a negative WP48 when you’re that good a 3 pt shooter.
One last thing, I’m not even sure how much he’d help spread the floor. He’s an easy defensive assignment for someone. Let him hit 3s. Even with his high 3 pt % he’s not a very efficient scorer because if you chase him off the line he can’t do much. Just put your worst perimeter defender on him and let him shoot 45%. 82games.com seems to support this. The last 3 years his teams have had a higher effective FG% with him off the floor then with him on even though he gets most of his minutes with starters.
July 27th, 2010 at 7:53 pm
“Pop is going to lower the boom on the entire team this year from a defensive perspective.”
I sure hope so. In all reality, we have a team that averaged almost 102 ppg. I can see us averaging somewhere around 105-106ppg this year if RJ, Parker, and the young studs (Blair and Hill) improve. I don’t see offense being a problem. We really need this team to be much better on the defensive end than what we were last year when we gave up a very un-Spurlike 96 ppg.
Here are some of our defensive stats for the 2009-2010 regular season:
PPG: 8th in the league
FG%: Tied for 11th
3pt%: Tied for 6th
Rebound differential: 3rd
Blocks: 22th!!!
Opponents Turnovers: 30th!!
On the defensive end, I would like for us to target the opponent FG%, 3pt%, and blocks. If we can just focus on a few of these, the opponents ppg will automatically decrease. I think Splitter can help us a bit on the blocks (maybe average 1 per game) and hopefully Blair, Hill, and Jefferson can improve with another year under their belt. Amundson would help us with rebounds and a bit on blocks, but there’s no chance we can get him with the LLE.
July 27th, 2010 at 8:48 pm
bduran
July 27th, 2010 at 7:46 pm
“You still haven’t addressed his WP48. Do you think it’s a mistake that he’s been negative all but two years?”
WP48 has some built in biases, one of which is that it focuses on all-around box score production and connects that to team wins. Thus, it is generally slanted toward star players, and diminishes to some extent the contributions of role players, particularly those with circumscribed, but nevertheless important skill-sets for their particular team. And there’s no question about it, Kapono is a substandard producer in most box score categories, except for shooting. But most of the teams he played on did not win or lose much based on three-point shooting. They either had other strengths that they focused on as a team, such as driving into the lane to force easy opportunities (e.g., the title-winning Heat team), or so many weaknesses (i.e., Toronto, Philly) that Kapono’s admittedly circumscribed niche where he produces the best became less of a factor than it would be on a team with different needs. The Spurs would be a good fit because we are excellent at “kick outs” for spot-ups, playing right into Kapono’s strengths. By the way, you can find some decent, one-dimensional role players with a history of poor to negative WP48 numbers, and it doesn’t mean that in the right role, they cannot be effective (e.g., Joel Anthony has a negative WP48 for his only 3 years in the league).
“One last thing, I’m not even sure how much he’d help spread the floor. He’s an easy defensive assignment for someone. Let him hit 3s. Even with his high 3 pt % he’s not a very efficient scorer because if you chase him off the line he can’t do much. Just put your worst perimeter defender on him and let him shoot 45%.”
Sounds like Bonner. I’ll take the additional 5% shooting during the season, and 10-15% in the playoffs.
“82games.com seems to support this. The last 3 years his teams have had a higher effective FG% with him off the floor then with him on even though he gets most of his minutes with starters.”
I’m sure I could go into 82games.com and come up with stats that supports Kapono, although I’m not big on all the +/- malarkey, and I really don’t think it tells you much, so I’ll pass.
July 27th, 2010 at 9:17 pm
Excellent analysis
July 27th, 2010 at 9:34 pm
Hobson13
July 27th, 2010 at 7:53 pm
I’ve been saying all along that improving our defense is more important than improving our offense.
That said, we were actually a not very good 11th in 3-point percentage during the regular season last year….
http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/team/_/stat/offense-per-game/sort/threePointFieldGoalPct
….and 9th out of 16 teams in the playoffs (33%), when it counts the most!
http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/team/_/stat/offense-per-game/sort/threePointFieldGoalPct/seasontype/3
That’s why I’ve been upset that we couldn’t get a guy like Raja Bell, and Amundson, and why I’m now having to settle for wishing for Kapono & Amundson. With Amundson & Splitter, our interior would be considerably better, and the perimeter guys, well they’ll just have to really step it up as a group, or we’re toast. Simple as that. The Spurs teams in the Pop era win by “D”. It’s in the genes.
“On the defensive end, I would like for us to target the opponent FG%, 3pt%, and blocks.”
Yeah, those are some good targets.
“Amundson would help us with rebounds and a bit on blocks, but there’s no chance we can get him with the LLE.”
First of all, he’d help us quite a bit on the blocks, not just a bit, as long as we made room for him by doing a McDyess deal. Second, I never saw any details on the Neal contract. Did he take the MLE or what? All we’ve been able to do is make assumptions based on truncated reports, which seem to never give an unabashed picture. For example we’ve been given disjointed clues, such as, “it’s a 3 year contract”, it’s “guaranteed”. Well, I’m sorry, but that doesn’t really give me the specific answer I need, which is, HOW MANY YEARS, FOR HOW MUCH MONEY, and how much in the first, 2nd, and 3rd years, etc. Otherwise, I don’t know for a fact that the MLE is not in play anymore. As far as Amundson, I haven’t seen anything credible suggest what his true market value is at this point. For one thing, he is a pretty limited player. He just happens to fit our needs to a “T”. Not as valuable to many other teams. And the second thing is, who the hell has money left (that can/will pay him more than 3 million per year)? There’s been reports that Toronto, Charlotte, & Golden State have expressed some interest in Amundson. How much money do they have, and if you were Amundson, would you want to play for those losers for an extra million a year, or would you want to come to San Antonio and really compete in the West with the best-run franchise in the business?
Anyway, if we’re stuck with the team as is, we would need so many things to go perfect to truly compete for even a conference title that my head’s spinning right now.
I’m not big on hope, I’m big on action. If we don’t have the cash to do anything, lets start looking at trade options again, because this team is still a HUGE long-shot as currently constructed. The Duncan window is now sliding down as we speak, and our future apparently relies on unproven NBA production, and significant improvement, from a bunch of 2nd round picks and undrafted players. Anyway, don’t mean to sound like a bummer, but good luck with that.
July 28th, 2010 at 2:32 am
Jim,
I’ll have to respectfully disagree w/r to Kapono. The one thing you haven’t addressed about him, however, is the PRICE. He’s paid $6.6 million this year, which is way too much.
I do like quite a lot of the other suggested additions you’ve made, including Amundson. He’d be a nice pickup. And I agree, we could use another floor-spacer. But it HAS to be someone who can play defense, frankly, or Pop & RC won’t even look at him, much less play him. I’d rather take a flyer on a relatively inexpensive D-league prospect like, say, Derek Byars who, while not the best active 3pt shooter in the league, is someone who does lots of little things in addition to shooting. (Check him out. He’s a former SEC player of the year who played both PF and PG for Vanderbilt.)
P.S. - I compared Kapono to Bonner because so many on this list seem to hate Bonner and the two have some similar weaknesses. For my money, though, you’re right. They fill different roles because they guard different positions.
July 28th, 2010 at 5:55 am
Jim,
“WP48 has some built in biases, one of which is that it focuses on all-around box score production and connects that to team wins.”
Is this a bias? You’re suggesting that you can essentially ignore what a player does in the rest of the box score as long as he does one thing really well, but what is your evidence for this?
The truth is, I think we all believe this to some extent, but what’s the cut off? I could shoot 75% from 3 and still not help an NBA team out because I am so bad at everything else compared to even sub par NBA players. To my mind Kapono doesn’t meet the cut off. Like I said he’s not even an efficient scorer which should be key in a 3pt specialist. I think it’s fine to play below average role players who fill a niche, every team does, but there’s a limit to how bad an all around basketball player someone can be before their specialty is no longer worth it.
“Sounds like Bonner. I’ll take the additional 5% shooting during the season, and 10-15% in the playoffs.”
Bonner is a better regular season player. I think he’s also a good example of WP48 evaluating a niche player. The only thing he does well for his position is shoot the 3. Well, he’s also an efficient scorer, 59.6% TS the last two seasons. 7 boards in 36 min is not good for a PF, but not nearly as bad as Kapono for a SF. In fact, according to WP48 he’s been above average the last two years because he’s an efficient scorer and doesn’t suck badly enough at everything else to knock him below .100.
Now you’re going to say “but he’s been bad in the playoffs”. Agreed, although everyone shot poorly this year. I’ll say this though, I don’t think either Bonner or Kapono is good enough to help us win a championship if they get 15 minutes a game in the playoffs. i’d rather have Bonner help us win in the regular season and then lose minutes in a tightened up playoff rotation. Any regular season minutes Kapono would get should go to developing guys who have a chance to develop into 3 pt shooter who are also decent basketball players. That’s what we’ll need to win so we may as well gamble on it. No sense in trading for a guy who’s not good enough.
“e.g., Joel Anthony has a negative WP48 for his only 3 years in the league”
Why is he a good example? Because he’s proven that he’s helped his team win despite a sub par WP48?
“I’m sure I could go into 82games.com and come up with stats that supports Kapono, although I’m not big on all the +/- malarkey, and I really don’t think it tells you much, so I’ll pass.”
Excellent argument. There are problems with +-, but I’m guessing you haven’t looked into it much. The point is, I can find nothing to suggest Kapono would help us. Not PER, not WP48, not +-, not even just looking at +- for EFG% alone. Nothing.
July 28th, 2010 at 9:11 am
Jim Henderson
July 27th, 2010 at 9:34 pm
“Did he take the MLE or what? All we’ve been able to do is make assumptions based on truncated reports, which seem to never give an unabashed picture.”
Yeah, this is what is so frustrating about being a Spurs fan. The FO is run like the CIA. You get absolutely no information. I am assuming Neal was signed with the MLE if he indeed got a 3 year deal. Now whether I am wrong or right, at this point who the hell knows…
Jim Henderson
July 27th, 2010 at 9:34 pm
“As far as Amundson, I haven’t seen anything credible suggest what his true market value is at this point.”
It is difficult to really peg his market value at this late stage in the FA market, especially if you consider his skills. Let’s put it this way, I could see us offering him a $2mil/year deal and another team coming in with $6mil 2 year deal. No way we could match this and a low paid player probably won’t take a 33% pay cut. These are, again, assumptions, but it seems like everytime we have a good idea of getting a FA (Ronnie Brewer, James Jones, Raja Bell, etc.) the FO signs a “big name” like Gary Neal.
Jim Henderson
July 27th, 2010 at 9:34 pm
“If we don’t have the cash to do anything, lets start looking at trade options again, because this team is still a HUGE long-shot as currently constructed.”
For the most part, I agree. We would need numerous rookies or young players to have HUGE years in order for us to compete for a ring. It appears that we are banking on rookies (Anderson), Europlayers (Neal), or internal improvement (RJ, Hill, etc.) to come in and be our big time 3pt shooters. IMO, those are gambles that are destined to fail.
To me, this Spurs team has so many wildcards that it’s virtually impossible to know what we will be this next season. Here are a few of the wildcards I see:
Hill: Can he add even more to his game?
Blair: Can he be the double double machine we invision?
Splitter: We’ve heard tons about him, but really how good is he?
Big 3: Injury or health?
Jefferson/Parker: bounce back year?
Neal, Anderson: What can they give us?
I could go on, but we get the idea…
July 28th, 2010 at 11:23 am
Tim in Surrey
July 28th, 2010 at 2:32 am
“The one thing you haven’t addressed about him, however, is the PRICE. He’s paid $6.6 million this year, which is way too much.”
But Tim, I did address the price issue. Here’s what I said from a previous post:
“As to his contract: it’s 6.6 million for ONE year (and I agree, he’s a bit overpaid currently), and his price will undoubtedly go down the following year. Bonner’s contact is 4 million for FOUR years, and he’s a year older than Kapono.”
As you can see, I’ve said that his price is a bit steep in year one, but he’s also an expiring contract, and if we did have interest in re-signing him, it is highly likely that his annual salary would drop the following year, even if had an important rotation spot, and we were to win a title the first year he came aboard.
“But it HAS to be someone who can play defense, frankly, or Pop & RC won’t even look at him, much less play him.”
But for the right reasons, Pop and the FO have proven that they’re open to a niche role for a shooter that is not as defender: Matt Bonner is case in point. I know there’s the stretch 4 component with Bonner, but I think that concept is overblown.
“I’d rather take a flyer on a relatively inexpensive D-league prospect…..”
I understand your point, but it is more risky that you’re actually going to get what you think or hope you’re going to get. With Kapono, you KNOW you’re going to get shooting (a distinct need on this team), and Duncan’s window is probably going to slam shut before we get the time or luck for a d-league-type gamble to payoff.
P.S. Believe me, I understand Kapono’s weaknesses. Getting him is not a slam dunk decision by a long shot. And to reiterate, I would NOT consider picking him up without ALSO getting a guy like Amundson for additional “rim protection”.
July 28th, 2010 at 12:01 pm
bduran
July 28th, 2010 at 5:55 am
“You’re suggesting that you can essentially ignore what a player does in the rest of the box score as long as he does one thing really well…”
No, I’m not suggesting that you can ignore “box score” production, but that there is an almost complete emphasis given to “overall box score production”, and this invariably diminishes the true value of some rather one-dimensional players in some cases, for example if they’re in the right role with the right team.
“Like I said he’s not even an efficient scorer which should be key in a 3pt specialist.”
Recently he’s been less efficient, mainly due to a poor fit with poorly run & coached franchises. With a player like Kapono, “fit” on the offensive end is an extremely important consideration. And as I said before, Kapono had some pretty efficient shooting years for a three-point specialist in the years between 2005-06 to 2007-08, I believe it was.
“Bonner is a better regular season player. I think he’s also a good example of WP48 evaluating a niche player. The only thing he does well for his position is shoot the 3.”
It’s because Bonner is a good fit for the Spurs on the offensive end. Kapono would be a good fit as well, for similar reasons. I can tell you right now, Kapono would have a respectable WP48 on the Spurs because he’s a deadly spot-up shooter, and the Spurs are one of the best teams in the league at effectively executing a “kick-out” and “spot-up-type offense”.
“In fact, according to WP48 he’s been above average the last two years because he’s an efficient scorer and doesn’t suck badly enough at everything else to knock him below .100.”
Again, it’s because Bonner’s on a good, well-coached team that specifically utilizes his particular skill-set. You put Bonner on a Sixer or Raptor team the last few years and his WP48 would have dropped considerably. I will say, that since Bonner became a Spur, he has become a harder worker than Kapono is. Kapono would have to come in with the idea of being responsive to Pop’s drilling if he loses focus or intensity at either end. Because of course, that’s a given.
“I’ll say this though, I don’t think either Bonner or Kapono is good enough to help us win a championship if they get 15 minutes a game in the playoffs.”
I don’t agree. I think Kapono could, but it all depends on what they all do on the defensive end, and if we can pick up a guy like Amundson. And I’ll reiterate again, I would NOT go after Kapono without ALSO getting a guy like Amundson. Otherwise, our defense has no realistic chance of being strong enough.
“Why is he a good example? Because he’s proven that he’s helped his team win despite a sub par WP48?”
I guess you think the Heat were simply dumb in giving him a 5 year, 18 million dollar extension?
“The point is, I can find nothing to suggest Kapono would help us. Not PER, not WP48, not +-, not even just looking at +- for EFG% alone. Nothing.”
Perhaps your not looking at it from the right angle. Don’t get your head so buried in stats that you can’t see the forest through the trees. It’s pretty basic: We need a killer spot-up shooter for 6% of our total minutes. That helps our offensive system.
Sure, he doesn’t do much else very well, but he’s not a zombie out there either. With additional “rim protection” in the form of someone like Amundson, Kapono would very likely end up being a net positive for this team.
July 28th, 2010 at 12:11 pm
Hobson13
July 28th, 2010 at 9:11 am
“The FO is run like the CIA.”
Yeah, that cracked me up!
“I could see us offering him a $2mil/year deal and another team coming in with $6mil 2 year deal. No way we could match this and a low paid player probably won’t take a 33% pay cut. These are, again, assumptions, but it seems like everytime we have a good idea of getting a FA (Ronnie Brewer, James Jones, Raja Bell, etc.) the FO signs a “big name” like Gary Neal.”
Yeah, you got a fair point there!
“Hill: Can he add even more to his game?
Blair: Can he be the double double machine we invision?
Splitter: We’ve heard tons about him, but really how good is he?
Big 3: Injury or health?
Jefferson/Parker: bounce back year?
Neal, Anderson: What can they give us?
I could go on, but we get the idea…”
Exactly. The safest bet is that we’ll be as good or a little better than last year. The problem is, so will just about every other meaningful team in the West. The odds are simply not good for even a WCF appearance this year, as things stand right now.
July 28th, 2010 at 2:27 pm
“Kapono had some pretty efficient shooting years for a three-point specialist in the years between 2005-06 to 2007-08, I believe it was.”
He had two good years, ’06-’07 and ’07-’08 when he shot a ridiculous 51% and 48% from 3. The 48% was with the Raptors, whose system you say he does not fit. The following two years, one with the Raptors one with Philadelphia, he declined.
” I can tell you right now, Kapono would have a respectable WP48 on the Spurs because he’s a deadly spot-up shooter, and the Spurs are one of the best teams in the league at effectively executing a “kick-out” and “spot-up-type offense”.”
You can tell me but I wouldn’t believe you. Despite shooting 48% from 3 with the Raptors in ’07-’08 he had a WP48 of -.061. Why? He sucks so bad at everything else. Until last year he’s always hit well from 3 yet has had poor WP48. Coming to the Spurs and having a good 3pt% will not change this.
Bonner has a better WP48 because while he is below average at things like rebounding, he’s not so far below that he hurts his team as badly as Kapono does in that area.
“I guess you think the Heat were simply dumb in giving him a 5 year, 18 million dollar extension?”
You don’t think FOs make bad decisions all the time? I thought you weren’t very impressed with the Heat’s decision to go all in on the big 3, but now you want to use them as an example of a smart move? I think they did it because they didn’t have a lot of options with their cap space.
” It’s pretty basic: We need a killer spot-up shooter for 6% of our total minutes.”
I would love a spot up shooter. However, you seem blinded by that need. There is a limit to how bad a one trick pony can be at everything else. Kapono has reached this limit.
A spot up shooter spreads the floor, which should imporove our EFG%. It’s debatable that Kapono would increase our EFG% relative to a guy with a worse jumper who can also drive and pass. This may be why he hasn’t had a positive effect on EFG%.
What is not debatable is that a poor rebounder reduces the number of our possessions relative to our opponents which hurts our offense and defense.
Plus a poor perimeter defender increases the opponents EFG%. The Amundson argument doesn’t really hold water, because even with him in we’d still be better on D if we replaced Kapono with a better defender. This is why Kapono equals a net loss.
July 28th, 2010 at 4:02 pm
bduran
July 28th, 2010 at 2:27 pm
“The 48% was with the Raptors, whose system you say he does not fit.”
Those guys essentially change their system from year to year. That’s how incompetent they are. In 2007-08, his first with Toronto, they went more to his strengths, as a spot-up shooter, and not much else. In his 2nd year, in 2008-09, they were struggling so much as a team that they slipped in to wanting more from Kapono than what he can deliver (e.g., taking the ball off the dribble, looking for mid-range shooting & passing — not his strengths — and taking him out of his rhythm, asking him to be a more higher volume shooter than he’s capable of, and thus reducing his shooting efficiency). In Philly, he just wasn’t a good fit. The Sixers were constantly looking for an identity (go up-pace, or go inside out, for example), and never really being able to be in sinque (sic) as a team on a consistent basis. That type of stuff will guarantee to throw a guy like Kapono out of rhythm.
“You can tell me but I wouldn’t believe you. Despite shooting 48% from 3 with the Raptors in ’07-’08 he had a WP48 of -.061. Why? He sucks so bad at everything else.”
No, his WP48 was negative because he was on “clueless” team that had no idea how to maximize a player with an extremely circumscribed but nevertheless potent skill-set to the teams advantage: a lights-out 3 point shooter.
“Coming to the Spurs and having a good 3pt% will not change this.”
His WP48 yes; his skill-set, not much, if at all.
“Bonner has a better WP48 because…..”
He’s on a team that knows how to get the most out of him.
“I think they did it because they didn’t have a lot of options with their cap space.”
They couldn’t find a center that would play for 3.6 million or less that had a positive WP48? Also, I don’t agree with the whole “superstar buddy thing” all deciding to aggregate on the same team. However, if anybody could make it work with this top-down hierarchy of megalomaniacs, Riley has as good of a shot as anybody. He’s not dumb! I just don’t personally think it will work as well as planned. That doesn’t mean it was stupid in terms of winning & selling tickets. The Heat do have a decent shot at winning one or two titles in the next several years. I just won’t be one of those rooting for them, and the hype of “multiple” championships, or any back to back ones, is not likely to pan out in my view.
“I would love a spot up shooter. However, you seem blinded by that need. There is a limit to how bad a one trick pony can be at everything else. Kapono has reached this limit.”
Not in my view, as long as we also added another young “rim protector”, like Amundson.
“What is not debatable is that a poor rebounder reduces the number of our possessions relative to our opponents which hurts our offense and defense.”
We really don’t need any more rebounding. We were ranked 3rd in the league last year in total rebound rate. Now we add Splitter, and Blair’s rebounding is only going to get better at this stage.
“The Amundson argument doesn’t really hold water, because even with him in we’d still be better on D if we replaced Kapono with a better defender. This is why Kapono equals a net loss.”
No, because in the right system, Kapono’s TS% would be very high, probably close to 60%, which would offset his periodic perimeter lapses (during his 6% of playing time), especially with a strong weak side defender/shot-blocker like Amundson.
“…..we’d still be better on D if we replaced Kapono with a better defender.”
A little better on “D”, but we wouldn’t have the veteran, knock-down, spot-up sniper to spread the floor, and give us some timely firepower off the bench. Also, with Amundson & Kapono, (and Splitter) we would still be better defensively than last year. It “might” be enough to get us into the top five, “if” the rest of the team commits to picking it up a notch.
The bottom line is, we should avoid going into the playoffs next year with just the following career playoff 3-point shooters, because any way you look at it, our “D” won’t be as good as LA’s this season:
Hill – 37.8
Manu – 37.5
Bonner – 31.8!
RJ – 30.3
TP – 29.9
KAPONO – 53.6 career in playoffs.
We were NINTH out of 16 teams in last years playoffs at just 33%, barely ahead of Atlanta for 10th place.
Kapono, in conjunction with Amundson, could allow our offense (which should be pretty decent as it is) to be good enough to effectively compete, even though our defense will be less than top-notched, Kapono or no Kapono.
July 28th, 2010 at 4:38 pm
“No, his WP48 was negative because he was on “clueless” team that had no idea how to maximize a player with an extremely circumscribed but nevertheless potent skill-set to the teams advantage: a lights-out 3 point shooter.”
Explain how please. In ’07-’08 he had a WP48 of -.061. Now, in order for him to improve on this he would have to improve on something in the box score. That year he had his second highest 3pt % and second highest TS% of 48.3% and 56.1% respectively. He’s never been a good rebounder, stealer, assist man, shot blocker or any of the other things that improve WP48. So how do you expect it to go up? What’s going to improve in his box score to make this happen?
It’s not just Toronto either. He was even worse last year with a WP48 of -.122. Awesomeness. He could improve a bunch by joining our system and still be negative.
“No, because in the right system, Kapono’s TS% would be very high, probably close to 60%”
He’s managed this once so I wouldn’t count on it. His second best season is only 56%.
“We really don’t need any more rebounding. ”
We did not rebound well in the playoffs. We were 12th with in rebounding with a differential of -1.9. Let’s not make it worse. At least we were in the middle of the pack in 3pt %. That was with a sophmore getting his first big playoff minutes and Ginobili with a busted nose.
July 28th, 2010 at 6:52 pm
bduran
July 28th, 2010 at 4:38 pm
“Explain how please. In ’07-’08 he had a WP48 of -.061. Now, in order for him to improve on this he would have to improve on something in the box score.”
In 2007-08, Kapono had good efficiency on his 3-point & FG percentages, but his team was so inconsistent in terms what they wanted to do to win throughout the year (” lacking a real identity”), that they did not maximize what Kapono could bring to the table. For example, how does one explain that Kapono’s three-point makes & attempts dropped nearly IN HALF from 2006-07 to 2007-08? As a result, you’re taking way from the impact of a major strength (3-point shooting) that helps him contribute to team wins. Also, de-emphasizing going to Kapono too much, has a way of adversely affecting the rest of his game as well; witness a big drop in his rebounds and assists from the previous year, which were also below his career averages, despite his mpg. being on par with his career average.
A very good team (such as the Spurs) would maximize Kapono’s skill-set by drafting a game plan that consistently accentuated a spread the floor “kick-out” and spot-up game while Kapono is on the floor, and would do so in a consistent manner, with Kapono having a consistent role. Doing anything other than that is not getting top value out of Kapono, and in at least some instances, could end up with him hurting your team as a result.
“It’s not just Toronto either. He was even worse last year with a WP48 of -.122. Awesomeness.”
As I said, Philly was a mess last year, never knowing whether they wanted to go inside-out, or use their athletes to run an up-tempo team. That kind of make-shift offense hurt Kapono, as explained in the previous post. Hence the hiring of Doug Collins to bring an “identity” to this Sixer team. Brilliant coup by the Philly owner, at last! Collins is an awesome signing for that franchise. However, unfortunately for Kapono, I’m quite sure Collins has an up-tempo team on his mind, particularly with the addition of Turner, and the trade of Dalembert.
Expect a more up-tempo, young, Sixer team next year that focuses on slashers to the rim, rebounding, ball-movement, a pesky defense that forces a high number of turnovers, and an opportunistic team of athletes that gets down the floor & finishes strong in transition (e.g., Turner, Iggy, Holiday, Williams, Young, Speights, etc.). Clearly, there’s no future for Kapono in Philly, which is why I think that he, and his expiring contact, are clearly available. They probably would prefer that someone young & athletic be a part of any deal though (e.g., Gee, or similar in a “big”), but they might not insist on it, I just don’t know.
“He could improve a bunch by joining our system and still be negative.”
He could, but very unlikely.
“We did not rebound well in the playoffs. We were 12th with in rebounding with a differential of -1.9″
I’m not going to rely on just 10 playoff games for assessing the Spurs in rebounding. And the playoff rebound numbers were partly Pop’s mistake, in my view, because he cut Blair’s minutes in half from the regular season, and Blair was our best rebounder during the regular season, and during the playoffs (#1 in the playoffs per 48m for players playing at least 9 mpg. - and #4 among 30 teams per 48m during the regular season). And as I said, we’ve now added another pretty good rebounder to the mix with Splitter, and Blair should only get better. We should be solid in rebounding this year (3rd in the NBA last year), Kapono or no Kapono. Plus, I would not feel comfortable pulling the trigger on Kapono without adding a defender like Amundson in the interior, and Lou rebounds the ball very well as well.
July 28th, 2010 at 8:34 pm
“Kapono’s three-point makes & attempts dropped nearly IN HALF”
Good catch, that is why his production dropped from the previous year. It wasn’t half per minute, but it was a significant drop off.
“I’m not going to rely on just 10 playoff games for assessing the Spurs in rebounding”
But you’ll use 5 games to talk about how good Kapono is in the playoffs. Seems reasonable.
Our rebounding was hurt because Pop felt it necessary to go small. Playing Kapono at the 3 is effectively the same thing since he’s not good at defending the 3 and he’s a poor rebounder. It’s even worse because on top of that he’s not a good ball handler.
Look, Kapono’s best season was in ’06-’07 with a WP48 of .064 and he had to shoot 51.4% from 3 with a TS% of 61.3% to do it. He is unlikely to ever hit this again.
I just don’t understand why you want to trade for a guy who you constantly have to make excuses for why he sucked. Oh Toronto didn’t scheme for him right, Philly didn’t scheme for him right, the Spurs will make sure to run the right offense for him when he’s in (yeah right). He’s sucked for 3 years running and he was an okay role player at best at his peak (Miami certainly didn’t win many games that year). At some point it’s better to trust what WP48 says then a bunch of subjective excuses. Stats excel at these types of situations because people aren’t good at evaluating all the available information. The more data you try to draw in like the harder it gets as well.
You’re trying to project how a player would fit into our scheme and evaluate how he fit into Toronto’s scheme and Philly’s scheme. This is extremely hard to do for marginal players like Kapono but you act like it’s simple. Well, top flight NBA team execs screw this stuff up all the time so I know it’s not easy.
July 29th, 2010 at 12:27 am
bduran
July 28th, 2010 at 8:34 pm
“But you’ll use 5 games to talk about how good Kapono is in the playoffs. Seems reasonable.”
Yes, there was a big discrepancy in our playoff rebounding versus our rebounding during the season, a discrepancy that’s explained for the most part with Blair’s minutes being cut in half. Kapono’s playoff three-point shooting merely seems to confirm what he’s done in his career, although the rate is admittedly, & most likely, somewhat inflated, given the small sample size. I don’t suggest that he’ll shoot 54% every playoffs.
“Our rebounding was hurt because Pop felt it necessary to go small.”
I don’t know about that. Certainly not against Dallas. Even so, it was a mistake in my view. And it was just as likely to have been the result of Pop not wanting to play Blair as much because of his inexperience. Plus we have Splitter this year as well. Our rebounding should be fine.
“I just don’t understand why you want to trade for a guy who you constantly have to make excuses for why he sucked.”
Kapono is the type of player that fills a very well-defined niche. Play him in a way that deviates outside that niche, and his value begins to drop rather quickly; stay inside his sweet spot as much as possible, and he can help a team win some games. He’s limited value is difficult to optimize because of the extent of weaknesses in his game, but he does have an important specialty skill that can be quite useful to a team if it’s utilized effectively: he has tremendous accuracy with the spot-up three-ball. Our 3-point shooting is not sufficient; Kapono is the best shooter available at a reasonable trade value to address that concern. I would take him if I could simultaneously improve my interior “rim protection” with a guy like Amundson.
“At some point it’s better to trust what WP48 says then a bunch of subjective excuses.”
You can put undue faith in the WP48 if you want. I prefer to use a variety of factors when assessing whether a certain player would be a good fit on a team, and could help that team win some games. No coach or FO makes their personnel decisions based primarily on the WP48. As I said, I think Kapono, if paired with a guy like Amundson, is a good fit for this team compared to what is now realistically available. If you’d rather play Neal, Gee, Anderson, or Hairston 15 mpg. instead of Kapono in next years playoffs, that’s fine. But I disagree.
“You’re trying to project how a player would fit into our scheme and evaluate how he fit into Toronto’s scheme and Philly’s scheme. This is extremely hard to do for marginal players like Kapono but you act like it’s simple. Well, top flight NBA team execs screw this stuff up all the time so I know it’s not easy.”
I’m not saying it’s easy, and I certainly could be wrong with my analysis. It just seems to me that Kapono could help us, if acquired under the preconditions that I’ve outlined in this discussion. It is a gamble to some extent with his known weaknesses, but if we’re going to try and challenge this year, we have to make another move or two. This team as currently constructed cannot realistically challenge for a title this season. I’m sure you believe that adding both Kapono & Amundson would not really improve our chances, but I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree on that point.
July 29th, 2010 at 6:40 am
“And it was just as likely to have been the result of Pop not wanting to play Blair as much because of his inexperience. Plus we have Splitter this year as well. Our rebounding should be fine.”
Splitter will be adjusting, I’m high on him but it takes some time so i wouldn’t count on him being a stellar rebounder. McDyess averaged 10 rebounds per 36 in the playoffs so he wasn’t the problem. TD and Blair also rebounded well during their minutes. Our problem was playing Bonner and RJ at PF. It looks like RJ get about 8 minutes game at PF. Bonner played 17. So that 25 minutes of subpar rebounding. So replacing those minutes will of course help but wouldn’t bring us to the top of the playoffs.
No Kapono for his career average 3.4 board per 36. RJ averaged 5.7 so replacing his minutes with Kapono’s slides us back down.
To put his rebounding numbers in perspective Hill averaged 3.7 board per 36 last year. Ginobili averaged 4.8. In the playoffs these guys minutes are going to go up. Playing Kapono is effectively playing small ball, and I’d rather give the minutes to Hill and Ginobili. Both are good from 3, although not as good as Kapono, but both are also more efficient scorers, better rebounders, defenders, passers, ball handlers etc.
in the playoffs if we play TP, Ginobili, and Hill 36 minutes this total 108, or 12 over the 96 at the 1 and 2 spot. So that leaves 36 minutes at the 3. RJ should get 32-34 minutes here leaving only 2-4 minutes. Not enough for Kapono.
“Play him in a way that deviates outside that niche, and his value begins to drop rather quickly”
This is a guess. He’s had only had one even tolerable year.
“No coach or FO makes their personnel decisions based primarily on the WP48″
This is true. The NBA has some terrible front offices though, who would do better if they did. You are not an expert, nor do you have them time or resources at your disposal that even the worst FO’s do so you’re evaluation are likely worse. I use WP48 as a base point or quick check and go from there.
“It is a gamble to some extent with his known weaknesses, but if we’re going to try and challenge this year, we have to make another move or two. ”
It is a gamble and we know his ceiling, which isn’t very high. I’d rather gamble on a guy like Neal or Anderson whose ceiling is unknown. Kapono, Neal, and Anderson could all suck. However, the best case scenario for Kapono is a good shooter worthy of 10-15 minutes. Anderson has starter potential and playing him more this year helps us going forward
Oh well, I think he’s terrible, you think he’s not. Probably irrelevant anyway because I doubt he’s coming. At least we can agree on Amundson.
July 29th, 2010 at 11:58 am
bduran
July 29th, 2010 at 6:40 am
“Splitter will be adjusting, I’m high on him but it takes some time so i wouldn’t count on him being a stellar rebounder.”
He doesn’t need to be stellar. Just perform well while he helps save Dice & TD’s 35 year old legs so that they’re at maximum efficiency during their minutes on the floor.
“Our problem was playing Bonner and RJ at PF. It looks like RJ get about 8 minutes game at PF. Bonner played 17. So that 25 minutes of subpar rebounding. So replacing those minutes will of course help but wouldn’t bring us to the top of the playoffs.”
“Replacing those minutes” would certainly put us up there if Blair got half or more of those minutes (12.7 rpg. per 36 minutes).
“To put his rebounding numbers in perspective Hill averaged 3.7 board per 36 last year. Ginobili averaged 4.8. In the playoffs these guys minutes are going to go up. Playing Kapono is effectively playing small ball, and I’d rather give the minutes to Hill and Ginobili.”
No, it’s smarter to play with a fresh team, when players are more efficient, particularly in the case of Ginobli. What we need to do is give a lot more minutes to Blair. 9 mpg. is absurd. Bump him up to 24 mpg. and the rebounding issue is solved (takes Bonner’s & RJ’s PF minutes), and we get a crack 3-point shooter in the mix as well (Kapono would take Bogans 7 mpg. & some excess SF minutes).
“in the playoffs if we play TP, Ginobili, and Hill 36 minutes this total 108, or 12 over the 96 at the 1 and 2 spot.”
You’re going to play any of these three guys TWELVE minutes at the 3 spot? None of those players can play offense or defense nearly as effectively at the three as they can at the one or two. Plus, 36 mpg. is clearly TOO MUCH playing time for Ginobli. We’ll burn him out in the first round. We should play them on average 32 mpg., which leaves about 15 mpg. for Kapono.
“This is a guess. He’s had only had one even tolerable year.
Guess? Careful and thorough evaluation (as much as I’m able to do from my position) is not a guess. Tolerable year? Who are you comparing him to? On what basis are you making such an assessment? I already told you that I’m not buying into everything that the WP48 tells me, like it’s a bible. Tolerable year? That’s some statistical device and your opinion talking. There’s no thorough evaluation going on there from a coaching perspective.
“I use WP48 as a base point or quick check and go from there.”
You put more faith in it than that.
“It is a gamble and we know his ceiling, which isn’t very high. I’d rather gamble on a guy like Neal or Anderson whose ceiling is unknown.”
I don’t really care what their ceilings are. With Kapono you KNOW what you got: a GREAT shooter at the NBA level. With Neal, a 25 year old who’s been around, we know something of what we got: a guy that has shot well in college and over seas, but has not been deemed worthy by ANY NBA team to make their roster in the past 4 years. Anderson is a 20th pick. The likelihood of a player drafted that late to become even a good rotation player (15-20+ mpg.) is about 5% (look at the past 14-15 years of drafts). So yeah, I’ll take my gamble, especially if I want to win during Duncan’s closing window.
“Oh well, I think he’s terrible, you think he’s not. Probably irrelevant anyway because I doubt he’s coming. At least we can agree on Amundson.”
I doubt either are coming. And with out any other good moves, we’re now destined to a first or 2nd round exit again. Now isn’t that great?!
July 29th, 2010 at 7:18 pm
““Replacing those minutes” would certainly put us up there if Blair got half or more of those minutes (12.7 rpg. per 36 minutes).”
Umm, we were -1.9. 17 more minutes for Blair over Bonner gives us about +2.8 so we’d be plus .9. Not the top. Then subtract for Kapono cause the dude hates loose balls.
“it’s smarter to play with a fresh team, when players are more efficient, ”
Have you analyzed this? Do you know this is true? I ask because Dave Berri at the wages of wins has and it turns out that it’s not true. Increasing minutes doesn’t seem to reduce player efficiency. It’s not like 36 minutes is crazy minutes. Pretty standard for most teams best players. Maybe Manu should get 34. Hill and TP should get 36-38 if healthy.
“We’ll burn him out in the first round. We should play them on average 32 mpg., which leaves about 15 mpg. for Kapono.”
There’s a reason teams best players get more minutes in the playoffs, because replacing them means putting someone a lot worse in. You save them as much as possible during the season and give them more burn in the playoffs.
“There’s no thorough evaluation going on there from a coaching perspective”
Which is what you’ve done? I’m saying he’s only had one year where he played well enough for his poor D, rebounding, and everything else. WP48 is a guide line. Then you look at his stats to see why he sucks. This is what I see.
If you can only score you better be really good at it. He’s achieved one admittedly stellar year in shooting efficiency which allows to me to tolerate how much he sucks at everything else. Kinda like Bruce Bowen on D. He’s had one other solid TS% year, which isn’t good enough. The rest he’s been bad. If I though he could get up close to 60% TS, then I’d be willing to consider, but since he likely won’t, i’m not interested.
“And with out any other good moves, we’re now destined to a first or 2nd round exit again.”
You don’t think we’re better than last year? Why?
We’ve lost nothing but chaff and we’ve gained Splitter. Add more minutes from an improved Blair and some improvement from Hill (players often improve from year 2-3 although we can’t expect much.). Plus there’s always the chance that one of the young guys manages to contribute. Hill did two years ago and Blair did last year.
We had 54 WP last year (we only won 50 because we couldn’t seem to win a close one through the first half). No reason we shouldn’t be able to get that up in the 56-60 range with what we’ve got. If you say destined to lose to the Lakers, I may agree, but first or second round? Come on. No way this team has a first round exit. That is ridiculous.
I have a question for you about WP48. You’ve more than once mentioned players that you thought were good that suffered by comparison with WP48. Has it every changed your mind about a player? Have you ever seen that a player had a poor WP48, then gone and looked at his stats to figure out why and then thought, “Huh, I guess he wasn’t as good as I thought.”? I’m guessing not because you seem to think you know better than everyone else. The truth is, in general WP48 is going to do a better job evaluating the true value of a player then most people. Not all the time, but a lot of the time.
It’s extremely hard to weigh all the pros and cons of the different aspects of the game. WP48 is an objective measure developed with a solid methodology. Of course you should always question why it says what is says, but you just seem to casually dismiss it when it disagrees with you.
July 29th, 2010 at 9:37 pm
bduran
July 29th, 2010 at 7:18 pm
“Umm, we were -1.9. 17 more minutes for Blair over Bonner gives us about +2.8 so we’d be plus .9. Not the top. Then subtract for Kapono cause the dude hates loose balls.”
What are you talking about?! Blairs’s playoff rebound numbers were HUGE. He was averaging a rebound every 2.33 minutes in the playoffs. In 17 additional minutes that would translate into another 7.3 rebounds. Subtract Bonner’s 17 mpg. & 3.1 rebounds, and then subtract about .7 rpg. for Kapono for his 15 mpg. in place of RJ, Manu, or Bogans. Thus, our new differential would be about +1.6, which would put us into 4th place out of 16 playoff teams.
“I ask because Dave Berri at the wages of wins has and it turns out that it’s not true. Increasing minutes doesn’t seem to reduce player efficiency.”
Provide me a link for the specific data you’re referring to, otherwise I can’t comment.
“Maybe Manu should get 34. Hill and TP should get 36-38 if healthy.”
They’ve rarely gotten those kind of minutes in their playoff lives, and Manu’s now 33 years old. I like how Gentry did it for the Suns. He wasn’t afraid to rely on the second unit more, and the team chemistry in Phoenix was the beneficiary.
“There’s a reason teams best players get more minutes in the playoffs, because replacing them means putting someone a lot worse in.”
Talk to Phoenix about that. Do you want your role players to think that they’re “a lot worse”, or do you want to demonstrate a belief in them, and their value to the team, by playing them more, even during important parts of the game, and communicating an “expectation” in them that they must perform to the very best of their abilities for the benefit of the “team”. That’s how teams often win, particularly teams with an aging core; they require more of a contribution from their 2nd unit, which often leads to better team chemistry as a whole, and that can be critical to a team’s ultimate success. In fact, as the Lakers continue to age, I expect them to go deeper into their bench. That’s why it was critical for them to pick up guys that they felt they could trust with significant minutes: Blake & Barnes.
“Which is what you’ve done? I’m saying he’s only had one year where he played well enough for his poor D, rebounding, and everything else. WP48 is a guide line. Then you look at his stats to see why he sucks. This is what I see.”
Well, I am using both my informational & experiential knowledge of the game to bear on my analysis. I try to look at player acquisitions, and personnel decisions through the eyes of a coach. I don’t really see that from you as much. You don’t appear to readily incorporate your observations of HOW a team functions, it’s system, and how different players’ skill-sets could be effectively incorporated into that system. Or how a team or franchise succeeds or fails in optimizing the strengths of all their players in the offensive & defensive schemes that they employ. I know that this not easy to do, particularly from afar, and even though I’ve been a keen observer of the game for a much longer time than you, I don’t pretend to have all the answers. Not by a long shot. I just do the best I can. I’m just suggesting that perhaps you might consider, just for the hell of it, relying on your own observational skills just a bit more, and look at player & team evaluations more from a systems perspective. This is what scouts, player personnel managers, GM’s, and the coaching staff all do. They don’t have statisticians in their ear all that much. And of course, this is certainly not to say that stats aren’t useful, especially for us armchair GM’s! It’s just to say that we can’t possibly make proper evaluations with putting “too much” faith in stats, just as we can’t by putting “too much faith” in subjective evaluations. I know that’s a fine line, particularly for us amateurs, and I understand that some GM’s probably don’t use stats enough, to their own detriment. And I do believe that achieving a healthy balance in this regard would generally yield the best results for most teams.
“If I though he could get up close to 60% TS, then I’d be willing to consider, but since he likely won’t, i’m not interested.”
Yeah, I think in this Spurs system that he could.
“You don’t think we’re better than last year? Why?”
We are, but so are most of the other relevant teams in the playoff hunt.
“No reason we shouldn’t be able to get that up in the 56-60 range with what we’ve got.”
If everything goes well, we could get to the bottom edge of that range, perhaps. If so, we’d likely sneak into the top 4 in the West, and get home court advantage in round one. And that would be great, but round two is still apt to be a major challenge in my view. That’s where the real trouble still resides (although round one won’t be a pushover by any means).
“No way this team has a first round exit. That is ridiculous.”
It’s really not. Hell, Utah could be the eight seed. That is NOT a gimme series.
“The truth is, in general WP48 is going to do a better job evaluating the true value of a player then most people. Not all the time, but a lot of the time.”
Actually, I agree with that. I wouldn’t go against a clear signal from WP48 very often. In fact, I’m not overly confident in my approval of Kapono. And as I’ve stated numerous times, I’d be reluctant to acquire him without additional “rim protection” from a guy like Amundson. He would be too much of a defensive liability, even for his projected 6% of total team minutes of playing time. But I just think that we could make the double acquisition of Kapono & Amundson work. I think the fit would benefit the team overall. I’ve given you my reasons at length in previous posts on this issue.
“Of course you should always question why it says what is says, but you just seem to casually dismiss it when it disagrees with you.”
No, that’s a misinterpretation on your part. For example, I like Joel Anthony, but frankly, the WP48 ultimately leaves me more comfortable with an Amundson acquisition. And there’s another way to look at that. I would not feel comfortable with a double pick-up of Kapono & Anthony because both have had issues with a negative WP48, even though on the surface Anthony provides the additional “rim protection” that Kapono would certainly require. The reason is that BOTH Kapono & Anthony are too one-dimensional as players to be able to add to our team as a double pick up. It would not be a good fit. On the other hand, if we could have gotten a more all-round wing in free agency, Anthony might have worked out okay, in my view.
July 30th, 2010 at 3:50 pm
Jim,
This…
“12.7 rpg. per 36 minutes”
Does not get you this…
“He was averaging a rebound every 2.33 minutes in the playoffs. ”
It’s 2.83 which makes 7.3 just 6 rebounds which would make your 1.6 into .3. Which is around what I was saying (.9 minus Kapono).
“Provide me a link for the specific data you’re referring to, otherwise I can’t comment.”
I read it in his book.
“They’ve rarely gotten those kind of minutes in their playoff lives, and Manu’s now 33 years old”
Not that far off. Manu averages 32.7 min a playoff game not including his first two years (35 last year and he was fine), Hill 34.4 last year and I think could handle 36 easily, TP average 36.3 for his playoff career including some 37+ years and a 38+ year.
Also this is an interesting link
http://arturogalletti.wordpress.com/2010/07/26/a-half-baked-notion-about-the-difference-between-the-regular-season-and-the-playoffs/
“You don’t appear to readily incorporate your observations of HOW a team functions, it’s system, and how different players’ skill-sets could be effectively incorporated into that system.”
I would love to acquire good 3 pt shooting wing. I don’t believe great 3 pt shooting is a necessity, but it fits what we want to do. I’ve always agreed that this fits our system. The thing is, you seem blinded by it. Players to have to be basketball players and make basketball plays. I want a good 3 pt shooting basketball player. Not a 3 pt shooting robot.
“I’ve been a keen observer of the game”
Damn I didn’t realize.
” relying on your own observational skills just a bit more, and look at player & team evaluations more from a systems perspective.”
I didn’t think much of Kapono before I ever discovered WP48. I’m using WP48 to try convince you that he’s no good because it’s a pretty convincing argument. At least, I think it’s better than trying to convince someone on line of my years of “keen observation.” Honestly, I’m fine with operating under the assumption that you are a far better judge of what’s happening on a basketball court than I am. MJ is better than both of us by a mile. He’s also made some pretty poor personnel decisions.
“And I do believe that achieving a healthy balance in this regard would generally yield the best results for most teams.”
I agree with this and the closer the relative WP48 of players get the more additional evaluation needs to be done. Players multiple standard deviations below average, though, you have to work really hard to justify.
“I’d be reluctant to acquire him without additional “rim protection” from a guy like Amundson.”
I don’t think he’s even an upgrade on offense. He’s an oversized guard who can’t handle the ball, doesn’t get to the line, pass, etc. His inability to get to the rim or the line makes him a very inefficient scorer if you chase him of the line. Playing him in the regular season would hinder other players development and in the playoffs I’d rather play a guard like Hill or Manu who’s decent from 3 and can do other things as well.
Hill was a good 3 pt shooter his last year in college and shot 40% form 3 this year in college. He can certainly take any minutes Kapono would get and camp out from the corners. He shot 44.6% from the corners last year.
“On the other hand, if we could have gotten a more all-round wing in free agency, Anthony might have worked out okay, in my view.”
Here’s the thing. If a guy is way below average, but is really good at one thing that is highly valued in the WP48 calculation, that means he’s even worse at everything else than someone else with a similar WP48. I firmly believe in finding role players and niche players who fit a teams system, which clearly you trying to do mentioning Kapono and Anthony. However, we have to remember that these guys are basketball players and that there are certain things they need to be able to do.
July 30th, 2010 at 8:55 pm
bduran
July 30th, 2010 at 3:50 pm
“12.7 rpg. per 36 minutes”
That is his regular season rpg.
“He was averaging a rebound every 2.33 minutes in the playoffs.”
That is during the playoffs.
We can use Blair’s regular season numbers if we want, and I see the logic behind it, but as a 20 year old rookie, his end of season performance is more indicative of his up to the minute ability. Also, most “good” players numbers only go up some in the playoffs compared to the regular season. And actually, we would be talking about what Blair’s rebounding numbers would be in next years playoffs, after the proposed deal for Kapono, and after another regular season of experience for Blair. Rebounding would really not be a meaningful issue with the addition of Kapono, especially with Splitter, and also in conjunction with an Amundson acquisition.
“I would love to acquire good 3 pt shooting wing. I don’t believe great 3 pt shooting is a necessity, but it fits what we want to do. I’ve always agreed that this fits our system. The thing is, you seem blinded by it. Players to have to be basketball players and make basketball plays. I want a good 3 pt shooting basketball player. Not a 3 pt shooting robot.”
In my view, you’re down-playing Kapono as a player a bit too much. He would likely not have averaged 19 mpg. at the NBA level for his career if he was as “bad” as you characterize him to be.
“I didn’t think much of Kapono before I ever discovered WP48.”
It’s not as much about “Kapono”, as it is how he would fit into the Spurs system, particularly with the proposed concurrent addition of Amundson.
“I’m using WP48 to try convince you that he’s no good because it’s a pretty convincing argument.”
It really isn’t.
“At least, I think it’s better than trying to convince someone on line of my years of “keen observation.”
I’m not trying to convince you of anything. I’m simply making the argument that there’s a number of important and relevant skills to bring to bear when attempting to evaluate making a player acquisition than looking at sophisticated box score data. It also involves providing descriptive information drawn off of both data analysis AND observation to present a case for why a player would or would not be beneficial if added to a team that runs a particular type of offensive & defensive scheme. You want to put almost ALL of your eggs into the proverbial “data analysis” basket, while downplaying if not outright dismissing the validity of direct observation and systems analysis as a part of the equation necessary to most effectively arrive at player personnel decisions.
“Players multiple standard deviations below average, though, you have to work really hard to justify.”
I agree, Kapono is a tough case, as I alluded to in my previous post:
“In fact, I’m not overly confident in my approval of Kapono. And as I’ve stated numerous times, I’d be reluctant to acquire him without additional “rim protection” from a guy like Amundson. He would be too much of a defensive liability, even for his projected 6% of total team minutes of playing time.”
“I don’t think he’s even an upgrade on offense. He’s an oversized guard who can’t handle the ball, doesn’t get to the line, pass, etc.”
He’s not a guard. He’s a 6’8″ SF that can spot up and shoot the lights out. We know about his other weaknesses. Did Bowen hardly ever take it off the dribble, pass very well, rebound the ball, etc.? No. He was an excellent defender, and could shoot the three. That’s it. But Kapono has shot the ball FIVE PERCENT higher than Bowen for his career from three, and we only need Kapono to light it up for about HALF of Bowen’s minutes, limiting his defensive liability (also, what’s unique about Kapono is that during his career, he’s been pretty deadly from pretty much any place behind the arc, not just the corners). Kapono is the #1 active career 3-point shooter, and most of that was on mediocre-to-crappy teams (other than that one Heat team, which was fairly early in his career). He’s got one the quickest releases in the league (unlike Bonner), is fairly tall and lanky for a small forward, has a pretty high release point, and does a good job knocking down three’s in the face of a close-out defender. That’s a good fit for a back-up three-point sniper in the Spurs system.
“He can certainly take any minutes Kapono would get and camp out from the corners. He shot 44.6% from the corners last year.”
Hill’s 6’2″, Kapono’s 6’8″. Kapono offers us some things that Hill doesn’t have: height, and he shoots a higher percentage all around the arc (he was a little inconsistent last year, as we know). And as I said, I believe in playing more players in the rotation. I don’t believe in using the bottom half of the team as just a practice squad. I like how Gentry does it, and I think Pop should move in that direction with an aging core.
July 30th, 2010 at 9:26 pm
bduran
July 30th, 2010 at 3:50 pm
By the way, on the following link that you sent:
“Also this is an interesting link
http://arturogalletti.wordpress.com/2010/07/26/a-half-baked-notion-about-the-difference-between-the-regular-season-and-the-playoffs/”
Interesting data. He goes back 32 years. To me it would be much more relevant to look at the past 10-15 years. The league has changed considerably since the 1970′s & 80′s. The depth of competition is stronger, the depth & talent on teams is greater; the speed, strength and size of the athlete is greater, the league has become more specialized, and frankly, players were “tougher” back then, so the starters didn’t come out as much. Those are just some of the factors that came out of my head. I’m not sure how much it would effect the data, but I’m quite sure it would to some extent if he limited the data to looking at the past 10, maybe 15 years. More wins would likely be accounted for by the 7th & 8th man in the playoffs during the past 10-15 years than prior to that.
July 31st, 2010 at 6:03 am
“That is during the playoffs.”
My bad, I was using the numbers from your previous post which is the same as what I was using when I did my estimate. Since Blair had only 9 minutes a game in 10 games in the playoffs I wouldn’t use these numbers. At 15.5 per 36 we’re talking Rodman in his prime numbers. That would be awesome.
“In my view, you’re down-playing Kapono as a player a bit too much”
If he shoots lights out from 3 and still manages a negative WP48, this means everything else in the box score has to be that much farther below average to drag him down. That’s just the way it is.
“He’s not a guard. He’s a 6’8″ SF that can spot up and shoot the lights out.”
You’re right he’s a SF, he just doesn’t do anything you’d want out of a SF except shoot. I’m more tolerant of SG’s with Kapono’s skill set. In fact, if he played SG he’d have a higher WP48. Of course, he’d get burned even worse on D.
“But Kapono has shot the ball FIVE PERCENT higher than Bowen for his career from three”
Let’s not compare them. Bruce Bowen wasn’t on the floor because he helped our offense. He was only the floor because he was a great defender. He had to develop the corner 3 so he wasn’t a total liability on offense. He didn’t help our offense. If all we cared about was O we would never have played him.
“Kapono offers us some things that Hill doesn’t have: height, and he shoots a higher percentage all around the arc ”
Height is only useful if you use it. Kapono is a better 3 pt shooter than Hill, but Hill is solid and has been working for on it so I expect some modest amount of improvement. Hill does everything else better except defend the 3. I bet Manu can defend the 3 better at 6’6″ than Kapono at 6’8″. I would rather have TP, Hill, Manu on the floor.
“To me it would be much more relevant to look at the past 10-15 years”
Ask and ye shall receive.
http://arturogalletti.wordpress.com/2010/07/30/30-to-16-to-1-a-half-baked-review/
July 31st, 2010 at 10:56 am
bduran
July 31st, 2010 at 6:03 am
“Since Blair had only 9 minutes a game in 10 games in the playoffs I wouldn’t use these numbers.”
Maybe his playoff rebounds are based on insufficient data, and have resulted in an over-estimate of his rebound average in NEXT years playoffs, but last season’s average is also likely an underestimate for his rebound average in NEXT years playoffs, regardless of minutes. Also, my whole Kapono acquisition idea is predicated on also getting a guy like Amundson, and with the pick up of Splitter, our rebound differential should still be very good in next years playoffs, with or without Kapono.
“If he shoots lights out from 3 and still manages a negative WP48, this means everything else in the box score has to be that much farther below average to drag him down. That’s just the way it is.”
I guess the three teams he’s played for were pretty dumb to give him 19 mpg. over his career. They were dumb enough to not always use him properly, and did not have the right players and system around him, but they were right to try and use his 3-point shooting prowess to their advantage for 15+ mpg.
“Let’s not compare them. Bruce Bowen wasn’t on the floor because he helped our offense.”
Yes he was. He hit the corner three at 39%. He was just more valuable defensively, which is why he got nearly 30 mpg., and Kapono would get just 15 mpg.
“If all we cared about was O we would never have played him.”
That’s because he was not as good of a shooter as Kapono, could only hit in the corner (Kapono is more versatile around the arc), and was really just an opportunistic 3-point shooter. He was not a guy you really could look for to hit threes, or to give the team bonafide firepower off the bench.
I’ll get back to you later on the new data set. I have to head out for awhile.
July 31st, 2010 at 12:31 pm
“but last season’s average is also likely an underestimate for his rebound average in NEXT years playoffs, regardless of minutes.”
I would love for this to be true. However, 12.7 per 36 is already incredible, especially for a 6’6″ player. I expect Blair to improve, but not in rebounding, I just want him to maintain that rate as his minutes increase.
“I guess the three teams he’s played for were pretty dumb to give him 19 mpg. over his career”
Yes. You seem to believe their not smart enough to use him correctly. So not too much of a stretch. Remember, arguing what a franchise does is not proof. Sadly, many FOs make bad decisions. I don’t think the 76ers or the Raptors are model franchises.
“Yes he was. He hit the corner three at 39%”
Finding people who can do nothing on offense but what you said above is not difficult. The trick is find guys who can add something else as well. So what I mean is, he didn’t help our offense because he was so easily replaceable in this respect.
The link I posted showed the same trend for the last ten years. It really makes sense that teams would try hard to milk the most out of their best players once everything is on the line. The next question is, what does the minute allocations look like for the most successful playoff teams?
July 31st, 2010 at 3:01 pm
bduran
July 31st, 2010 at 12:31 pm
“However, 12.7 per 36 is already incredible, especially for a 6’6″ player.”
It is a very good rate, but he should still improve some this year, once he learns how to use his body (girth) better, and how to better compensate for his lack of height against generally taller NBA competition versus what he saw in college. Plus, he looks like he’s gotten in a bit better shape over the summer. Quickness of foot can also be a great asset for rebounding. Just ask Dennis Rodman.
“Remember, arguing what a franchise does is not proof.”
“Proof” of what?
“I don’t think the 76ers or the Raptors are model franchises.”
He also played 2 seasons for the Heat, with Riley at the controls. In one of his years there he even averaged almost TWENTY-SEVEN mpg., (a career high) even though his WP48 was a relatively weak .041.
“So what I mean is, he didn’t help our offense because he was so easily replaceable in this respect.”
Not easily, but probably replaceable, because his three-point shooting percentage was not “that high”. On the other hand, Kapono’s is, as the #1 active career 3-point shooter (44%) in the entire league (the only one at 6’8″ & above that shoots above 40.5% career). 3.5 % more is a fairly big difference.
“It really makes sense that teams would try hard to milk the most out of their best players once everything is on the line.”
I don’t think it’s as cut & dried as that. I’ll get back to you with some questions & comments about that data.
July 31st, 2010 at 10:54 pm
“Just ask Dennis Rodman.”
Thing is, if he gets any better that’s who he’ll be and I’m not prepared to say he’s that good yet.
““Proof” of what?”
Sometimes you cite what FOs do around the league. All I’m saying is I don’t consider this a valid argument.
“He also played 2 seasons for the Heat, with Riley at the controls. In one of his years there he even averaged almost TWENTY-SEVEN mpg., (a career high) even though his WP48 was a relatively weak .041.”
He didn’t many minutes their championship year and then got traded after two so I’m not sure how high Riley was on him.
“I don’t think it’s as cut & dried as that”
Well, it is and it isn’t. You want your best players on the floor as much as possible. That seems clear. The trick is, how much is possible? If you could play Manu 48 minutes and not lose per minute productivity or cause injury, you would do this. This is one reason why KD is so awesome. High WP48 and capable of playing big minutes all season long.
Looking at the championship teams since 2006 almost all WP are in the top 4 players and almost nothing occurs after the 6th man. I didn’t look at the minutes breakdown, maybe tomorrow. If the minutes aren’t also mostly in the top six then you could argue that they top players only played so well because the were allowed plenty of rest.
August 1st, 2010 at 8:42 am
All right, I using automated wins produced, which only goes back to 2006, I looked at all the championship teams. In the playoffs their top 6 produced on average 99% of wins. They produced 88% in the regular season. In the playoffs the tops 6 received 81% of minutes, 71% in the regular season. So this seems to match up with what the article said about playoff teams in general over the last 10 years.
I though I’d look at our 2007 Spurs team. In the playoffs the top 6 produced 94% (our 7th man got the rest). Our top 6 produced 84% in the regular season. Minutes wise our top 6 got 78% of minutes in the playoffs vs. 67% in the regular season. So this is not to far off from what is shown in general, with Robert Horry’s rise from the dead to have a great playoffs accounting for the slight WP discrepancy.
August 1st, 2010 at 11:57 am
bduran
July 31st, 2010 at 10:54 pm
“Thing is, if he gets any better that’s who he’ll be and I’m not prepared to say he’s that good yet.”
He’s still got a ways to go to get to Rodman. Rodman’s career rpg./36 was 14.9, Blair’s was 12.7 in his first year. I’m not saying he’ll get almost to 15 rpg./36 next year, but he should be able to push it comfortably above 13, in my view.
“Sometimes you cite what FOs do around the league. All I’m saying is I don’t consider this a valid argument.”
You think that anything that utilizes systemic observation over a significant period of time is somehow entirely invalid in a discussion of this nature. You’re wrong about that. FO’s take such factors into account all the time when considering player acquisitions. If they see a player that has the skill-set to fit well into their system, but saw that he struggled in some respects in a substantially different system, run by far from successful management teams, they’re going to evaluate such discrepancies very closely as a part of the overall evaluation process.
“He didn’t many minutes their championship year and then got traded after two so I’m not sure how high Riley was on him.”
He was still a bit green at just age 24. Plus they had Posey & Walker still in their prime years. And a lot of good players get traded. It doesn’t mean they’re no good.
August 1st, 2010 at 12:56 pm
“He was still a bit green at just age 24. Plus they had Posey & Walker still in their prime years. And a lot of good players get traded. It doesn’t mean they’re no good.”
Sure, I’m just saying there’s no evidence Riley thought much of him. He played little his first year and then played more his second year, possibly largely out of necessity due to what Riley had to work with, and then was traded away despite having played the best in his career. Not exactly a Pat Riley endorsement.
Do you know what the Heat got for him?
August 1st, 2010 at 12:59 pm
Actually, it looks like he became a FA, but I’m trying to find out for sure.
August 1st, 2010 at 2:40 pm
bduran
August 1st, 2010 at 8:42 am
I haven’t gotten as into the “wages of wins” stuff nearly as much as you have. I haven’t looked into exactly how you’re getting your data, or how you’re making your calculations in terms of coming up with “team” wins accounted for by players ranked one through six, etc.
I wanted to take a minute to manually compile some data that I though might provide just a snapshot about what’s going on here. I don’t have the data sets or appropriate software to look at too many playoff teams, or to go over many years, thus I just zoomed in on last year’s semifinalists, and I threw in last years Spurs team, a second round loser, for comparison.
I looked at a few data points as it pertained to to groups of players: (1) top-three players, *generally* defined in order of STARTER mpg; and (2) top-three bench players, also *generally* defined in the order of mpg. played.
RS = Regular Season
PS = Post Season
CELTICS:
Top Three: Rondo, Pierce, Garnett
Averages:
Age ……………MPG ………………..WP48
………………….RS/PS ………………RS/PS
30.0 …………33.5/37.6 ………. .228/.187
………………..UP 12.2% …….. DOWN - significantly
6, 7, 8 - Rotation: Wallace, Davis, Allen
Averages:
Age ……………MPG ………………..WP48
………………….RS/PS ………………RS/PS
29.3 ………….18.8/17.8 ………. .030/.043
……………… DOWN 5.3% ……… UP 43%
MAGIC:
Top Three: Howard, Lewis, Carter
Averages:
Age ……………MPG ………………..WP48
………………….RS/PS ………………RS/PS
29.0 ………….32.8/35.5 ………. .163/.132
…………………UP 8.2% ………….. DOWN
6, 7, 8 - Rotation: Pietrus, Reddick, Williams
Averages:
Age …………….MPG ………………..WP48
…………………..RS/PS ………………RS/PS
29.0 ………….21.8/17.7 ……….. .107/.087
…………….. DOWN 18.8%………. DOWN
SUNS:
Top Three: Amare, Nash, Richardson
Averages:
Age …………….MPG …………………WP48
…………………..RS/PS ……………….RS/PS
30.7 ………….32.9/34.5 ………… .205/.200
………………….UP 4.9% ………. DOWN marginally
6, 7, 8 - Rotation: Dudley, Dragic, Amundson
Averages:
Age …………….MPG ………………….WP48
…………………..RS/PS ………………..RS/PS
23.3 ………….19.1/16.8 ………….. .127/.137
……………….DOWN 12% ………….. UP 8%
LAKERS:
Top Three: Bryant, Gasol, Artest
Averages:
Age …………….MPG ………………….WP48
…………………..RS/PS ………………..RS/PS
30.0 …………36.5/38.8 …………. .179/.175
………………… UP 6.3% ………… DOWN marginally
6, 7, 8 - Rotation: Odom, Brown, Farmar
Averages:
Age …………….MPG ………………….WP48
…………………..RS/PS ………………..RS/PS
25.7 ………….23.4/18.7 ………….. .127/.049
………………. DOWN 20% …….. DOWN significantly
SPURS:
Top Three: Duncan, Ginobli, Parker
Averages:
Age …………….MPG ………………….WP48
…………………..RS/PS ………………..RS/PS
31.3 …………..30.3/35.3 ………… .222/.128
………………… UP 16.5% ……… DOWN - significantly
6, 7, 8 - Rotation: Hill, Blair, Bonner
Age …………….MPG ………………….WP48
…………………..RS/PS ………………..RS/PS
25 …………….21.8/20.3 …………. .156/.119
……………… DOWN 6.9% ………… DOWN
A few points to ponder:
- Minutes went up in all “top three” groups between the RS and the PS.
- Minutes went down in all “6, 7, 8 rotation” groups between the RS and the PS.
- WP48 went down in all “top three groups” between the RS and the PS.
- WP48 went down in two of the “6, 7, 8 rotation” groups between the RS and the PS, but went UP considerably (as a percentage improvement) in the other two groups.
- The oldest “top-three group” (the Spurs) had the 2nd biggest jump in PS mpg., and the largest drop in PS WP48.
- The second oldest “top-three group” (the Suns) had the smallest jump in PS mpg., had the smallest drop in PS WP48, and the Suns “6 to 8 rotation group” had the second highest PS gain in WP48, as well as the highest absolute WP48 (.137).
- The oldest player in the “top-three groups” usually had the biggest drop in PS WP48, except for Kobe & Nash. The same goes for the 30 yr. old+ “6-8 rotation groups”, sans Lamar Odom.
The following players of the “6-8 rotation groups” appeared to help their teams more per minute played than one or more players in the “top-three groups”:
Magic PS WP48:
Out of Top-Three …. “6-8 rotation”
Lewis: .072 ………….. Pietrus: .127
Carter: .036 …………. Redick: .085, Williams: .049
Suns PS WP48:
Out of Top-Three …. “6-8 rotation”
Amare: .032 …………. Amundson: .092
……………………………..Dudley: .223
……………………………..Dragic: .095
Lakers PS WP48:
Out of Top-Three …. “6-8 rotation”
Artest: .008 …………..Odom: .171, Farmar: .040
Spurs PS WP48:
Out of Top-Three …. “6-8 rotation”
Parker: .057 …………..Blair: .394
This is just a snap shot at last years semifinalists, and one 2nd round loser, but it seems that teams could actually be hurting themselves in the PS at times by playing top-three players too much at the expense of young, solid rotation players, particularly for teams whose top-three are on the “old” side. This appears to be true for the Spurs (e.g. Blair), Suns (e.g., Dudley, Amundson), Magic (Pietrus, Redick), and probably would be true of the Celtics, if they had a more talented & consistent bench.
Granted, the “top three” players are achieving a higher absolute PS WP48 than the “6-8″ players, but their efficiency appears to be hurt more by their increased minutes between the RS and the PS, than the “6-8″ players “could” be helped by their decrease in minutes between the RS and PS.
I’m not sure how you’re exactly coming up with “team wins” accounted for by players 1-6, etc., but I would suggest the calculations need to be more complex in order to come to any firm conclusions as to what particular team should increase the minutes of their top players in the PS, and by how much. Otherwise, I need to hear a satisfactory explanation of why the top-three players ALL had WP48 reductions in the PS (when averaging MORE mpg.) compared to the RS (when averaging LESS mpg.). Perhaps they account for more wins in the PS simply because they steal more minutes. The idea is to play your top-three as many minutes as you can without them achieving a larger drop in WP48 than the drop in the WP48 of their counterparts on the opposing team. And that is something that the Spurs were clearly losing the battle in, particularly against the Suns (and Lakers, if they played them).
August 1st, 2010 at 2:56 pm
bduran
August 1st, 2010 at 12:59 pm
Kapono was signed by the Heat as a free agent. Thus, they liked him enough to sign him. The Heat lost him as a free agent in 2007 to the Raptors, primarily because the Raptors overpaid for him (6 mil per over 4 years). He’s never been worth more than about 4 mil. per year (too many weaknesses, as we know all too well). I would only get him because it’s just for one year (if he re-signed, it would be for much less), and we simply must improve our 3-point shooting, particularly in the playoffs.
August 1st, 2010 at 3:00 pm
By the way, apparently Riley wished he could have kept him:
http://www.clublakers.com/nba-discussion/pat-riley-says-heat-should-have-kept-jason-kapono-t83438.html
August 1st, 2010 at 6:44 pm
“I haven’t gotten as into the “wages of wins” stuff nearly as much as you have. I haven’t looked into exactly how you’re getting your data, or how you’re making your calculations in terms of coming up with “team” wins accounted for by players ranked one through six, etc.”
I have posted several times the link to the automated wins site. This is where I got my data. You can find it from wages of wins.
“need to hear a satisfactory explanation of why the top-three players ALL had WP48 reductions in the PS”
It’s been noted before in Wages of Wins that in general WP48 goes down in the post season, most likely due to stiffer competition. This happens even for players who only play in the first round where increased minutes shouldn’t hurt too much. This is actually something that’s being discussed in the comments on wages of wins right now and should prompt further investigation. Some were suggesting that “experienced” players had a better carry over in WP48 although clearly this wasn’t true for us last year.
Most of the studies on wages of wins have pertained to the regular season. Now that more people have easy access WP numbers thanks to the automated wins site, more people are writing posts. So of course one of the topics is what do the regular seasons numbers mean for the post season.
“Thus, they liked him enough to sign him”
Sure, but then they didn’t play him much the first year and then let him go after two. All I’m saying is there is no real evidence of how Pat Riley valued him either way.
August 1st, 2010 at 7:41 pm
bduran
August 1st, 2010 at 6:44 pm
“It’s been noted before in Wages of Wins that in general WP48 goes down in the post season, most likely due to stiffer competition.”
“….most likely due to stiffer competition.”? That’s pure speculation, as far as I can tell. It’s simply not a sufficient explanation. Maybe it’s adequate as a hypothesis, but that’s about it. Increased minutes is just as likely, at least as a co-factor. For example, at least for 2010, how come the WP48 for the rotation players did better overall compared to the top-three guys? The rotation guys had overall stiffer competition too, didn’t they?
Any comments on this part of my post?:
“Perhaps they account for more wins in the PS simply because they steal more minutes. The idea is to play your top-three as many minutes as you can without them achieving a larger drop in WP48 than the drop in the WP48 of their counterparts on the opposing team. And that is something that the Spurs were clearly losing the battle in, particularly against the Suns (and Lakers, if they played them).”
High age/durability issues, and too much of an increase in minutes during the PS don’t appear to be a very good mix. This requires further investigation, in my view.
“Sure, but then they didn’t play him much the first year and then let him go after two. All I’m saying is there is no real evidence of how Pat Riley valued him either way.”
As I said, in year one Kapono was fairly inexperienced, just 24 years old, and they already had both Posey & Antoine Walker still in their prime years. They let him go because the financial geniuses in Toronto though he was worth 6 million per year (which is like 7 million+ in today’s market). They liked him fine, but the price was simply too steep to enter into another multi-year deal at the time.
Also, I guess the quote from Riley wasn’t good enough. Apparently Riley had some regrets, after the fact, that he didn’t re-sign Kapono, even for the high price.
“….there is no real evidence of how Pat Riley valued him either way.”
No “real evidence”? What do you need, a sworn confession from Riley? You need for him to overpay for him to prove that he valued him?
August 2nd, 2010 at 5:28 am
“That’s pure speculation”
Yep, I shouldn’t have said most likely. However, I think it’s a good guess that will hopefully lead to further analysis.
“Increased minutes is just as likely, at least as a co-factor.”
Except this has already been looked into.
“at least for 2010″
Well there you go. For 2010 guys who didn’t get a lot of minutes bucked the trend. So what.
“Perhaps they account for more wins in the PS simply because they steal more minutes.”
This is what is happening. Clearly it’s not because their WP48 is going up. It’s because their minute are going up and everyone else’s is going down.
“And that is something that the Spurs were clearly losing the battle in”
It’s not clear whether or not our big 3′s WP48 would have gone up if they’d played fewer minutes. You dismiss my suggestion as speculation and then go on to assume your own hypothesis.
I suggested in the comments section at WoW that they look at regular season WP48 using only games against other playoff teams. This may help answer the question. I don’t know if anyone will do it.
“No “real evidence”?”
Sorry, I completely missed that link. That does show that Riley at least thought he had potential. Makes me think less of him
.
August 2nd, 2010 at 11:15 am
bduran
August 2nd, 2010 at 5:28 am
“It’s not clear whether or not our big 3′s WP48 would have gone up if they’d played fewer minutes.”
But I’ve only implied that that “might” be the case. The “battle” we clearly lost last year with our aging “top-three” is that their WP48 dropped more between the RS & PS than did any of the “top-three” of the semifinalists.
“You dismiss my suggestion as speculation and then go on to assume your own hypothesis.”
You’re “suggestion” was too declarative (e.g., “most likely”). I simply pointed that out. And I did not assume my hypothesis. I asserted the following fact:
“The “battle” we clearly lost last year with our aging “top-three” is that their WP48 dropped more between the RS & PS than did any of the “top-three” for the semifinalists.”
…..Which could be used to build a hypothesis for further testing. Something like: “Top-Three” players whose average age is greater than 30, and whose minutes jump by more than 15% between the RS & PS, will on average exhibit a greater drop in their WP48 between the RS and the PS compared to other “top-three” groups that do not meet such criteria.
August 2nd, 2010 at 11:37 am
Jim,
Some posters also talked about looking into the link between age and PS WP48. However, they were thinking somewhat the opposite, that experience may allow players to keep up their WP48 better in the post season.
For example, until the last two seasons, Kobe showed a drop in WP48 in the PS. The last two seasons he actually improved, which is rare. Of course, this is likely just a somewhat random event, but it would be interesting to look into.
As for the Spurs last season, I think it’s not too hard to figure out why they may have had a larger decrease than normal. TP was coming off an injury (also I think he always has a large drop), TD started playing worse before the start of the PS due to regular season grind. Manu had a broken nose and shot poorly.
One thing the Lakers managed well was getting Kobe a lot of rest at the end of the season. I think the key for us is correct management of regular season minutes so that guys like TD and Manu can enter the PS healthy. I don’t think a few extra minutes a game would cause a large drop in WP48, at least not in the first round or two which is what we saw. It seems to me that this would more likely cause problems in a Finals or Conference Finals.
August 2nd, 2010 at 2:44 pm
bduran
August 2nd, 2010 at 11:37 am
“However, they were thinking somewhat the opposite, that experience may allow players to keep up their WP48 better in the post season.”
Age and experience up to what point? 31, 33, 35, 37?…
As I pointed out in a previous post, for last years semifinalist, & the Spurs, most of the oldest players had the biggest drop in their WP48 between the RS and the PS.
Garnett
Duncan
Ginobli
Carter
Williams
Wallace
All 32 and above. The other two, Pierce & McDyess, managed to eek out slim gains.
“TP was coming off an injury (also I think he always has a large drop), TD started playing worse before the start of the PS due to regular season grind. Manu had a broken nose and shot poorly.”
They all had drops in WP48 in the past 4 playoffs, except for TP’s, which went up last year. Manu’s last playoffs before this past year was in 2008, and he had a steep drop off on WP48 from the RS to the PS: .326 versus .107. Generally, TD has been more durable, and has aged a bit slower than Manu throughout his career. Thus, his WP48 slippage from the RS to the PS has been more gradual than Manu’s, until this year, with the knee, and at age 34.
“One thing the Lakers managed well was getting Kobe a lot of rest at the end of the season. I think the key for us is correct management of regular season minutes so that guys like TD and Manu can enter the PS healthy.”
I disagree. Kobe is just an unusually tough, durable, & resilient player. He averaged 38.8 mpg. during the RS, played through for the most part a number of relatively minor injuries, and was only bumped up to 40.1 mpg. during the PS; just a 3.3% increase. Duncan was rested quite a bit during the RS, averaging a career low of 31.3 mpg., but was then steeply bumped up to 37.3 mpg. during the PS (in line with his playoff average over the previous 5 seasons of 37.5 mpg.); which is a “top-three” increase of 19.2%, second onlt to Manu’s 22.6% increase. I would suggest that with TD’s age, and level of physical wear & tear, his playoff mpg. history could very well now be unsustainable, regardless of his rest during the regular season. In fact, his WP48 drop and playoff jump in mpg. suggests that his body may simply be unable to sustain and efficiently handle the ‘shock” to his system that the PS workload represents. And the same could be true for Manu.
August 2nd, 2010 at 4:17 pm
“he had a steep drop off on WP48 from the RS to the PS: .326 versus .107. ”
Manu injured his ankle in 2008. This year he broke his nose. In 2009 he didn’t even play. In 2007 he was awesome in the playoffs, in 2006 he suffered a drop again. I’m not really sure what this tells us. Like I said Kobe dropped in the post season every year until recently, and you can see large drops in ’06 and ’07.
We need to be in good position playoff wise earlier in the season and not fighting for a seed so we can give TD and Manu a break.
“In fact, his WP48 drop and playoff jump in mpg. suggests that his body may simply be unable to sustain and efficiently handle the ‘shock” to his system that the PS workload represents. And the same could be true for Manu.”
Maybe, the thing is we only played 10 games. Manu played 65 more minutes over those games then we would have expected during the RS, TD 60. Those minutes and 10 games were spread out over 22 days. There were also no back to backs. In some ways the PS schedule is easier even with extra minutes.
August 2nd, 2010 at 6:53 pm
Jim,
Now this is interesting.
http://arturogalletti.wordpress.com/2010/08/02/playoff-performers-in-the-nba/
Has a list of the best active playoff performers. Glancing at the top of list makes me think that rebounding is one of the things that translates the best is rebounding. Look at Ben Wallace. All the guy does is rebound and block shots, and that’s what he does in the PS. Same WP48 in both PS and RS.
I bet scoring efficiency takes the biggest hit. Certainly TPs lack of an appearance on the under 30 over .100 WP48 list fits this theory. His production is primarily from his efficient scoring.
Looking at basketball-refernce it looks like he takes a big hit in TS% and assists. It looks like he’s only been above average in the PS twice. Luckily those were 2008 and 2009 so we can hope he repeats that next year if he stays healthy.
August 2nd, 2010 at 6:58 pm
bduran
August 2nd, 2010 at 4:17 pm
“Manu injured his ankle in 2008. This year he broke his nose. In 2009 he didn’t even play.”
This is what I said:
“Manu’s last playoffs before this past year was in 2008, and he had a steep drop off on WP48 from the RS to the PS.”
In this statement, I already clearly implied that Manu missed the 2008-09 playoffs. I was referring to 2007-08, a year in which Manu played 74 games, averaged 31.1 mpg. during the RS, and played in all 17 playoff games, at 32.9 mpg. If he plays that much, we can’t use an ankle injury as an excuse. And it was indeed this year, 2007-08, at age 31, where he had the steepest drop off in WP48 between the RS & the PS.
“I’m not really sure what this tells us.”
I’m not sure either, but it’s worth looking into more carefully, including the variables of RS mpg., PS mpg., % differential, and age.
“Like I said Kobe dropped in the post season every year until recently, and you can see large drops in ’06 and ’07.”
Okay, let’s take a brief look at Kobe’s numbers:
Year….Age ….RS mpg….PS mpg ..RSWP48 ..PSWP48
2006….27…….41.0……….44.8…….. .200 …… .126
2007….28 ……40.8………43.0…….. .227 …….122
2008….29 ……38.9………41.1 ……… .257 …… .238
2009….30 ……36.1………40.9 …….. .234 …… .291
2010…..31 ……38.8………40.1 …….. .164 …… .212
It looks to me that there could be a general pattern whereby a “top-three” player, like Kobe, may be able to prevent a significant drop in WP48 in the PS as long as his minutes are held within a certain maximum threshold for that given player, and kept within a reasonable percentage increase from his RS minutes (perhaps 15%?). This should be treated as an incentive to decrease the more intense nature of playoff minutes, not to decrease regular season minutes to keep the range between RS & PS mpg. in line. It is also likely that the maximum mpg. threshold will decrease with age (perhaps beginning to slide at around age 30, depending on the player?).
For Kobe, it looks like his maximum threshold has been around 41 mpg. (witness his WP48 drops when he exceeded this limit in 2006 & 2007). He’s a pretty durable guy, but based on this small set of preliminary data, I’d be willing to hypothesize that in the next couple of years Kobe’s maximum threshold will begin to drop by about 3-4% per year, barring any more serious injury issues. Also, he looks to be most comfortable when he keeps his RS & PS mpg. range on the narrow side of the spectrum. He only had one year when he exceeded 10% (2008-09).
Remember, I’m obviously only making a preliminary assessment here. I would need to look at a lot more data before I could offer any even tentative conclusions. I’m just saying that these are the types of things that one needs to look at more carefully to be able to with more confidence make appropriate plans for a given players minutes in the post season.
“Those minutes and 10 games were spread out over 22 days.”
Actually, there’s not that much difference during the regular season. A game is played about every 2 days, which would be about 11 games in 22 days.
“There were also no back to backs. In some ways the PS schedule is easier even with extra minutes.”
The back-to-back is a valid consideration, but remember, the level of intensity is at a whole different level in the playoffs, and as our body ages and wears down, we simply have more difficulty effectively accommodating steady & increased periods of acute exertion. And the fact is, there’s only so much that resting a few days here and there prior to the playoffs will help in allowing ones body to perform more effectively during those intense bouts of exertion that the playoffs demand. I think minute management during the playoffs is a key consideration if one is to maximize a players’ effectiveness, particularly once that player exceeds a certain age threshold, and of course, also taking into account other individual intangibles for each player (e.g., injuries, general body wear & durability, etc.).
August 2nd, 2010 at 7:44 pm
bduran
August 2nd, 2010 at 6:53 pm
Interesting data-set.
“Has a list of the best active playoff performers. Glancing at the top of list makes me think that rebounding is one of the things that translates the best is rebounding. Look at Ben Wallace. All the guy does is rebound and block shots, and that’s what he does in the PS. Same WP48 in both PS and RS.”
Yeah, that makes sense to me. It seems like rebounding is one of the most best ways for a player to be consistently valuable to his team. As long as the rebounder is experienced, and somewhat limited in other aspects of his game (other than defense), as well as consistently aggressive and disciplined in his fundamentals, I see no reason why he should have a large variation in WP48 between the RS & the PS. Ben Wallace fits that model to a “T”.
I looked at the all-time list too. Magic kicked butt in the playoffs. But did you see the improvement for Jason Richardson between the RS & the PS? Wow! I think it is about a .140 jump.
August 3rd, 2010 at 5:35 am
“If he plays that much, we can’t use an ankle injury as an excuse.”
Why not, I mean, it’s the end. Even if you’re injured if you can still play you play. It’s not as simple as either operating at 100% or not. Manu’s a great playoff player, just not as good as in the RS. He on had a .107 because he was injured in the first round. That was clearly an outlier.
“Wow! I think it is about a .140 jump.”
Yeah, ridiculous. Does that mean he slacked off during the RS?
Also, how lucky are the Spurs? TD and Manu are 10 and 39 all time. Crazy.
I was thinking about the drop in PS performance. If the PS calculation is based on average PS performance, then you’d expect all players production to go down because the average production level would be so much higher. i can’t check this right now, but if you can check by going to automated wins and seeing if the position adjustment is greater for the PS than the RS. i’ll look tonight.
August 3rd, 2010 at 4:30 pm
So for 2010 I looked at the raw production for each position in the PS as compared to the RG and it’s different. So it looks like the numbers are being calculated with PS data only. This would, of course, make everyone’s numbers go down in general because the average player is so much better and that’s who players are being compared to. Go Jason Richardson.
August 4th, 2010 at 4:39 am
[...] technically listed as a shooting guard, but he has the build and athleticism to play the 3. I have my doubts, though, that Gee is ready for a role in the Spurs’ rotation this [...]
August 28th, 2010 at 9:50 pm
how can people say he aint ready in his first nba start with the wizards he scored 19 points!!!!!!!!!!!! Give me a break if a rookie who was a high pick did this he would be notched as one of the next big things… Gee happens to be tied to an organization who has depth at his position…. sucks to be him if he gets left off the roster then the spurs obviously dont know wat their doing!!!!!!!
September 23rd, 2010 at 7:31 am
[...] Alonzo Gee [...]
October 13th, 2010 at 9:12 am
[...] expected this from Alonzo Gee. He was the D-League Rookie of the Year and Spurs summer league standout. He’s a wing player, [...]
Leave a Reply