Notes from Wayne Winston, part 4

by

One of the most fascinating aspects of Wayne Winston’s work is the ability of adjusted plus/minus to, in the words of Gregg Popovich, “indicate trends.” My conversations with Wayne Winston have mostly operated at the level of 5-man units. But last night he sent me an email that’s worth posting because of its focus on a single player’s performance in relation to a particular teammate. How well does Player X perform with Player Y?

Winston:

One more tidbit: Mason is great with Manu in and Jefferson out: the Spurs play at +14. The rest of time Mason is in the Spurs play at -2. The +14 level depends little on who else is in [for the Spurs].

Remarkable.

Not only does this spotlight Manu Ginobili’s unique ability as a playmaker, but it gives the Spurs a very good idea of how and when to deploy Mason Jr., who is on the fringes of the rotation. If the Spurs want to optimize their bench, and the minutes of Mason Jr., they’ll only play him in tandem with Manu Ginobili, and without Richard Jefferson.

And not surprisingly, Aaron Barzilai’s APM numbers support the same conclusion. Have a look.

To the extent that APM reveals “secrets,” this is an important one.

  • BlaseE

    So Manu being hurt last season could be why Mason struggled so bad in the playoffs?

    and even more importantly, who doesn’t play better with Manu on the court?

  • pastrypride

    I wonder: Bogans and Mason are competing for minutes at the same position. How many of Bogans’ minutes come with Manu on the floor? Maybe Mason should be getting some of those? I don’t know what the high-tech stats say about Bogans, but he’s looked absolutely abysmal in the boxscore for a while now–several games with zeros right across despite substantial minutes. And based on what I’ve seen and read, he hasn’t exactly raised our perimeter defense to great heights.

  • Mike

    A quick glance at the numbers may answer the question to whom doesn’t play better with Manu on the court… Richard Jefferson.

  • pastrypride

    I guess the APM numbers might answer my question, but I’m too lazy to do the comparisons.

  • OneWing

    The disappointing part of Richard Jefferson not playing better with Manu on the court is that, when we picked up Jefferson in the offseason, I’m sure a lot of us Spurs fans (myself included) had dreams of the three-man break with Parker, Manu and Jefferson getting a lot of easy baskets that weren’t there without a third man on the break.

  • Acrididae

    For a while there, RJ was sliding over to the power forward spot when Manu was on the floor, and he sucked there. I’d be curious to see the APM for the last few games where RJ has been strictly at small forward while Manu has been on the floor.

  • Tim

    But are those APM’s based upon Jefferson at the 4 when playing with Manu or at the 3 when playing with Manu? I’m at work so I only had a few moments to glance through the data and wasn’t sure which position the data is for. He only recently moved to his natural 3 spot.

  • BALLHOG

    Love APM numbers…

    Our man defense is not too effective this season. We have played 2/3 of the season and it hasnt gotten much better….Would mixing in a little zone defense help the team?

    Maybe more movement in the offense and involve more players…What good does it do us to get a look at a 3, and clang it off the rim all night long?

    When shots are just not falling, wouldnt we benefit from taking the rock to the rim a little more often?

    TP is a beast on the floor, but his dimes are too low…More assists from TP would improve those good old APM numbers…

    Our 2 guard shouldnt log more dimes than our point guard, ever.

    Presence in the middle…I will just skip this..Whats the use?

    Match ups-Bad defenders on good scorers is not a recipe for success…

    Finally-Details…

    Roger Mason Jr. is solid off the bench. I am OK with his game, but a bit disappointed in the lack of improvement.

    If RMJ could attack the rim and finish, and be able to get his own shot from time to time, he would be a much better player. I think it is all that is missing form his game.

    I know I will take on heat rounds for this next one, but I love a chaalenge.

    Bonner-In 3 years, Seems Matt could have improved his game a bit as well. He could learn to post up and add a go to move in the paint. He could have improved his ball handling, and he certainly could improve his footwork and upper body strength on defense.

    However, his game looks the same now as it did when he got here. One improvement that I have seen in him is that he is no longer reluctant to shoot the ball.

    Finally, Mr. Bogans…There is really no assessing to do here. I can only continue to scratch my head in confusion.

    BIG 3-Still getting it done. I love the competitive personalities of these three players. They play to win and will get in a players chest when necessary. Real ballers for sure. They set the standard for the entire NBA over the last 10 years.

    The Key-they consistently improve.

    Ginnobli is a better shooter each year and has improved his defense and ball handling.
    he simply needs to cut down on turnovers.

    Duncan has improved his short range game. Hitting the 15-20 foot jumpers with ease. His free throw shooting is much improved, and he is using better leverage down low.

    Parker-Improved his shooting and there is no guard in the league that gets to the rack like TP…Besides, if more Spur players were cutting toward the basket when TP drives to the hole, instead of standing on the perimeter, his assists would be higher.

    Hill-Goes without saying..He is ready to be a starter in the NBA with any team in the league.

    Your thoughts?

  • Jim Henderson

    BALLHOG
    March 4th, 2010 at 10:33 am

    “When shots are just not falling, wouldnt we benefit from taking the rock to the rim a little more often?”

    AGREED! Isn’t this just common sense basketball? If a player has the ability to take the ball in the paint off the dribble and either dish or score he should be doing that as much as shooting jumpers, and yet this is rarely the case. And it’s annoying, because it hurts the team. The object is to get the highest % shot you can get on every single possession (unless, perhaps, if you have the 3-ball going). To do this requires penetrating the defense in order to get a short shot or lay-up, plus you’re more likely to get fouled, get an “and one”, foul out the other team, and get them “in the penalty”. That’s why driving the ball to the rack is so important, and should be done much more often (are you listening RJ?, and this could be one of the values of playing Hairston instead of Bogans…. Hello!).

    “TP is a beast on the floor, but his dimes are too low…More assists from TP would improve those good old APM numbers…

    Our 2 guard shouldnt log more dimes than our point guard, ever.”

    Well, in my opinion, you’re thinking in terms of a “traditional” point guard set-up a-la-Steve Nash, etc. Now, I happen to like that more traditional role at the point as well (that’s why I’d be open to “trying” to acquire Collison from the Hornets & moving TP in off-season). But TP is not a traditional point guard. He’s a scoring point guard. I agree, we could still try to get his assists up a bit, but I don’t have a problem when a 2-guard has the rock quite a bit that they on occasion exceed the pt.-guard assist total, a-la-Wade, Kobe, etc.

    “Roger Mason Jr. is solid off the bench. I am OK with his game, but a bit disappointed in the lack of improvement.”

    I like Mason, but even in his limited opportunities he’s been a big disappointment to me this year. He’s got good all-around skills, he’s just not coming with an aggressive, determined, and confident attitude every time he steps on the court. We must have that from him for him to get extra minutes (which I believe would help the team – and he’s not even a bad defender if he takes it seriously).

  • OneWing

    TP needing more assists – How many times is there a pass available to Tony that either a) does not provide a better scoring opportunity than him scoring himself or b) is part of a rotation of passes leading to easy baskets that he never gets credit for, though his penetration and passing created the shot?

    Our shooting guard (Manu) gets more assists for a few reasons – 1) He knows his shot wasn’t falling, and so recognized situations where passing the ball was a better scoring opportunity than putting up his own FGA and 2) Manu is a special, special player and, frankly, a more accurate passer than Tony. The plays that Tony creates with passing from the paint to rotate out to the shooter, Manu can make that pass without the rotation.

    Our 1 and 2 guard spots have been fairly easy to swap with each other ever since Avery left and Tony joined the team. Even Antonio Daniels was a 1/2 combo guard more than a true shooting guard. Steven Jackson handled the ball a lot when he was here, too.

    The thing to remember is to look at total assist ratio for field goal attempts. Regardless of where the assists are coming from, we are always very high in assist ratio.

  • BALLHOG

    @ Jim Henderson

    @ Onewing

    Guys, I feel that these posts are imporatant. My real hope is that some of this is actually read by folks in the organization. My guess is that more of them read it than we think.

    Some of the posts on this site are truly enligteneing and would actually help the team to improve.

    I understand that we dont own or coach or manage the San Antonio Spurs. However, we are the base of support for this franchise and our opinons are mostly based on that support. If we didnt care, we wouldnt post.

    Ive had experience with other sites and just couldnt stomach the maddness.

    Folks on this site are knowledgeable about the team and the players and the dialogue is awsome.

    We might actually get some long overdue questions answered in the process…

    48 sets the standard!

  • BlaseE

    This links to 3 man spurs units but you can play with it to get what you want to see:
    http://www.nba.com/statistics/plusminus/plusminus_sort.jsp?pcomb=3&season=22009&split=9&team=Spurs

    This isn’t APM but just PM though.

    Blair and Bonner both show really well together.

    Here are our top 11 trios by +/- per minute (minimum 75 minutes played together).

    1. (.572) RJ, Bonner, and Blair
    2. (.548) Manu, Mason, and Bonner
    3. (.496) Hill, Bonner, and Blair
    4. (.470) Manu, Bonner, and Blair
    5. (.461) Hill, Mason, and Bonner
    6. (.414) Mason, Manu, and Duncan
    7. (.385) Parker, Hill, and Dice
    8. (.339) Parker, Dice, and Duncan
    9. (.336) Hill, Manu, and Bonner
    10. (.330) Hill, RJ, and Bonner
    11. (.315) Parker, Manu, and Dice

    They didn’t qualify because of minutes but
    .636 for Parker, Blair, and Bonner was our best and
    .414 for Bogans, Blair, and Bonner would tie for 6th. On 2 man units, Blair-Bonner (.460) beats every other one by a huge margin. The only one even close was Finley-Parker (.373). Manu and Bonner is the next best at .303. That puts Bonner-Blair as scoring +7.5 points per 48 minutes to our next best tandem. Sick.

  • grego

    Mason hasn’t hit well from 3 point consistently all season though.

    Manu might make him play better from an overall perspective, but Mason is just missing a lot of open shots. RJ might be bad in the lineup with Mason, but missing open jump shots from your sweet spots is slightly different.

    RJ’s numbers will be skewed with Manu because he’s so much better off the bench playing the majority of time with Manu. Also Manu now compared to two months ago was a completely different Manu.

    It’s difficult to look at RJ’s numbers because of all those variables. From now until the end of the season would be a good indicator of how well he works with Manu, now that he knows the system and feels comfortable, and also Manu starting to look like Manu of old on a consistent basis.

  • BlaseE

    A little more on the 2 man units:

    1. (.460) Bonner and Blair
    2. (.303) Bonner and Manu
    3. (.281) Bonner and Hill
    4. (.260) Bonner and Dice
    5. (.256) Manu and Mason
    6. (.237) Parker and Dice
    7. (.215) Mason and Duncan
    8. (.211) Dice and Duncan
    9. (.204) Bonner and RJ

    Bonner shows up a lot. The best 2-man he isn’t in is the one you wrote about, Manu and Mason. If you don’t want to play Bonner, our best 5 man might be Parker, Manu, Mason, Dice, and Duncan based on this. This lineup is only moderately successful though with a +.266 points per minute.

  • Spurlady

    For all the Bonner detractors, he sure shows up a lot in the best units. I wonder if those numbers are based on the time period where his 3 point percentage was over 40. Hope he can get it back to the career high percent he was hitting before the broken hand.

  • Tyler

    Ballhog –

    TD’s assists numbers might be down just slightly, but probably not due to TD himself, but because we haven’t shot the ball as well from deep? Also, I really wish they would keep track of the “hockey assist” in basketball – I’d wager TD would have led the league most years.

    Roger had a great season last year. But for some reason (new guys having to fit into the system?), he hasn’t shot the ball with any consistency. I like him as a player, but at this point in his career, I don’t know if he’ll ever be a guy that finishes at the rim often or with any consistency. What I would like to see though, is for him to be able to pump fake, take a dribble and nail a midrange jumper. Teams know he can shoot. When guys close out too hot, he needs to make ‘em pay. No need for him to get all the way to the basket. Same with Bonner.

    Manu is the best passer on the team. Has been since he signed with us. Off the top of my head, I can’t think of a better passer at the SG spot in the league. That shouldn’t necesarily be a strike against TP, but more of a reflection of just how good a player Manu is. When healthy, I’d take him over every SG in the league not named Kobe. He just gives us so much, from the playmaking to the hustle to the swagger (also reasons why I think we’re a lock to sign him, barring his health of course).

    I gotta say, I’m pretty optimistic for the rest of the season. If RJ stays at the 3, continues to attack the rim, and TP and Manu stay healthy, I think we can beat anybody in the 1st round (except the Lakers). Throw in some timely shooting, and I can see this team waking up and suprising someone in the 2nd round. Gonna be a tough stretch, but I think we’ve yet to see the best from this team. Of course, every time I’ve said this, we go our and lay and egg, so take it for what it’s worth…..

  • BALLHOG

    Finley agrees to join Celtics…Go Fin…

    http://sports.espn.go.com/boston/nba/news/story?id=4966307

  • Bushka

    Ballhog look I appreciate your stoicism.

    Your viewing the game purely on rebounds/assists & positional fundamentalism.

    The problem is the game has changed.

    You cannot define a point guard by how many assists he logs.

    If you keep sticking to your Points/rebounds/assists boxscore mentality then theres really no point even debating with you.

    The PG in the spurs system doesn’t need to be a creator on offense.

    We try to run our offense through one of the best passing big men to play the game, and one of the best passing shooting guards in the game today.

    Thats how it’s done, it’s part of a “system”.

    If you cannot grasp this and move away from positional fanaticism your evidence is always going to be floored.

    Matt Bonner is not a dominant old school power forward. But he doesn’t need to be.

    George Hill is not a prototypical point either, but he doesn’t need to be.

    How well a team mesh’s is the important factor here.

    Refusing to see the forest for the trees is a devestating mindset.

    Do you think Derek Fisher is a pass first point guard?

    How about Mo Williams?

    Exactly which pass first PG do they use in Miami?

    Move on from the 1950′s and realise that people in this league are freaking basketball genius’s and know how to get the best from their players.

    They design an offense around the talent in front of them.

  • Colin

    ……..Uhhh, I highly doubt any coach or organization figureheads read these posts. If they do, they would probably give it about as much thought as they did their morning bowel movement……Pretty cynical, but I would put money on it.

  • BALLHOG

    @ Bushka

    You seem to enjoy lashing out at my posts..

    I could send you a POC for a good anger management counselor.

    I see many posting participants in here, yet you seem to gravitate to mine with your girlyman rants.

    I think it is hillarious…Keep it comming!

  • BALLHOG

    @ Bushka

    “Matt Bonner is not a dominant old school power forward. But he doesn’t need to be”..

    I got a chuckle out of that Bushka…

    You are right. Matt Bonner isnt a dominant power forward. He isnt a dominant anything, hes not even a Power Forward, is he?

    He seems to be a simply a good character player, with minimal talent. Maybe a 1.3 million a year role player on his best day.

    Maybe you can enlighten all of us on the value of the Red Rocket.

    Let us know how Matt makes the Spurs a better team.

    However, none of this spread the floor crap. Any player willing to take a 3 point shot can spread the floor. Its not a difficult task.

    Besides, I dont see Bonner as any better of a shooter than Mason. I also doubt that we would be hurting without the 11 million dollar Matt Bonner’s whopping 4 points per game.

    He hits a shot every now and then, but to deem him as a 3 point specialist is quite a stretch .

    But, I see that Pop loves Matt and Matt will play. Indicated by the trade/release of Scola, Gooden, Thomas, Mensah Bonsu, Haislip, and Toliver. Good for Matt, bad for our chances.

    Lets get real here my good friend Bushka…

    Do you see us beating the Lakers, Nuggets, Mavericks, or Jazz in the playoffs with Bonner and Bogans logging 20 minutes per game? With no presence in the middle?

    If so, this is why we get along so well…

    You apparently hate my opinions, while I find yours to be truly entertaining….

    Lets debate these points in a little more detail after the playoffs.

    I still say that this team would be poised to win in the playoffs if we had Mahinmi on the floor, Hairston getting Bogan’s minutes, Ratliff getting spot minutes to help on defense, and anybody at PF other than Bonner.

    The ball is in your court Bushka…

    Hit me with your infinate wisdom……

  • http://www.48minutesofhell.com Timothy Varner

    A quick note: These comment threads are becoming more lively by the week, which is a great thing. And we’re especially glad when intelligent debate breaks out between readers because it typically helps us understand things better. 48MoH is fortunate to have such an informed readership. Lots of basketball savvy, and all that.

    As the site continues to grow, we don’t want the comment threads to delve into the vitriolic. That hasn’t happened yet, and this is not a slap on the wrist to anyone. I sincerely enjoy the debates in which our readers engage. This is just a simple observation from being a part of other threads and boards that the temptation to forget the points and attack the person is always present. Argue your points, cite evidence, and avoid “if you believe that you must be stupid” arguments. With that said, please have at it.

  • BALLHOG

    @ Timothy Varner

    This is very important point.

    Once we go from lively debate to insults and attacks, the ship sinks…

    I contnue to try and make that point!

    Thanks for the assist….

  • Tyler

    Ballhog –

    BlasE posted some PM numbers above in which Bonner shows up pretty well. Also, before he broke his hand, the Spurs were 2 points better than the opposition with him on the floor (refer back to a few posts ago). Bonner is beneficial to the team when he shoots well – the stats are there.

    Here’s my only issue with what you’re saying: Obviously you believe Bonner not worthy of stepping on the fl0or, yet you haven’t backed your arguments up with any stats. Instead, all anyone gets is “He sucks”. Now, that’s fine, we all have opinions. But if we really want this keep the conversation intelligent, I think you owe it to back your arguments up with more than that….

    Cheers!

  • Bushka

    Ballhog as Tyler says.

    If you don’t have any specific evidentiary support your not going anywhere.

    Bonner sucks or Tp needs more dimes. Thats not winning hearts and minds.

    I have talked to you about the Spurs system. The fact it functions very well without needing a create first point guard. The fact we run our offence through Tim. The fact that throughout the league there is an abundance of other teams that don’t rely on positional fundamentalism to get by.

    In particular, I have consistently outlined why Bonner is worthwhile across so many threads it kills me.

    I have shown you through adjusted plus minus. I have explained to you about spacing. I have talked to you about his limited usage role and the fact he is 9th or 10th in minutes.

    I have gone and picked out 25 players with similar minutes to outline how his worth is actually excellent in comparison with his peers.

    I posted the anecdotal evidence from Wayne Winston, a statistical expert, someone who makes a living from advanced metrics, advising a playoff opponent that limiting Bonner was a key part of stopping the Spurs.

    Then you go and say things like

    “However, none of this spread the floor crap. Any player willing to take a 3 point shot can spread the floor. Its not a difficult task.”

    In all honesty to me, that is like your being willfully ignorant.

    You only become a threat and spread the floor if you are a very good three point shooter. NBA defences only respect that which can kill them.

    Added to that is the fact that you only spread the floor and take the opposing teams big out of the paint if you are a very good three point shooter who is also 6’10.

    Just another minor point regarding factual evidence. I.E B0nners Minutes per game. At no point has he been logging plus 20 minutes per game this season.

    He is playing 16 minutes per game. He is playing 10 minutes per game the last month.

    I don’t know why you fixate on him as an issue.

    I also didn’t think the tone of my initial post was overly angry. It wasn’t acerbic. It was frustrated.

    I’m more than willing to debate, but I don’t see any points or evidence.

    Mostly I am amazed at the huge percentage of NBA fans in general (not just Spurs) who demand that their product is pigeon holed in a traditional manner.

    Your point guard must be your selfless distributor.

    Your Shooting guard is your remorseless gunner.

    Your small forward slash’s to the basket with wild abandon.

    Your power forward works the low post.

    Your Centre protects the rim.

    The beauty of the game of basketball, and indeed the entire reason I came to love this Spurs team to such a degree is that fundamental skills defy positions, but ensure success.

    There is a system in San Antonio. They attempt to wring the best basketball they can out of what at times seem like disparate talents.

    Thats why I keep defending Bonner. Because it seems that when you start ignoring his worth to the team, your also ignoring the best part of the Spurs.

  • Bushka

    Let me quickly give you an example of why Bonner is so valuable when shooting the ball well (or even at his career average), while being used as a roleplayer.

    Charlotte is running Tyson Chandler on Tim, they also bring in Theo Ratliff because Tim’s having a killer day Tony is penetrating like mad, and they need to protect the rim.

    It’s a short term play, situational on the Bobcats part and they are using one of their role players to advance their cause.

    Pop puts Bonner in. Ratliff is forced to cover Matt.

    He sets up outside. Tony feeds Tim the ball then runs his man through. Single coverage for Tim. Ratliff is stuck in no mans land he wants to double on Tim but he can’t leave Bonner.

    STOP.

    Right there is why he is valuable.

    He is not shooting the ball. He is not even holding the Ball.

    He is efficient right now without the ball, I repeat, because this is so so important.

    He is efficient without needing the ball in his hands.

    Tims going to get single coverage. If he doesn’t then the spurs should be well drilled enough to find an open 3 point shooter.

    Defensively it’s not a bad move either because it’s not like Theo’s going to be the focal point of an offence.

    It’s a few minutes here and there in a game that add up to just that. A few minutes. It’s why Bonners value is that of a roleplayer, and it’s why he is effective in limited bursts. Not just because he is good at what he does, but because Pop knows how to use him.

  • BALLHOG

    Come on Bushka….

    Your quote…

    You only become a threat and spread the floor if you are a very good three point shooter. Where are you guys getting this from? A guy averaging 6 points a game at best is a brilliant 3 point shooter?

    Rocket has hit a few 3′s here and there and I too welcomed the help…But, when did he become the outside shooting assassin for the Spurs? LMAO

    He is not a good 3 point shooter. He is average. Misses more than he makes by far. As for him being a valuable decoy…Again, any player can do that, unless the player is Bogans.

    My argument in reference to the Rocket is based on his lack of basketball talent. I dont doubt your numbers, stats, graphs, and charts, but it is not what my posts are based on.

    The guys that take Bonner to the hole all night long (in every game that he plays) dont care about his stats either. My point is, when Bonner is in any game and his shot is not falling consistently, which it never is, he is a liability.

    I understand that you are a Bonner fan…Im sure that you are not the only one out there. I, on the other hand, still feel that 11 million spent on Bonner is one of the main reasons that we are being projected as a one round wonder now…if we make the playoffs at all.

    Let me say that again…If we make the playoffs at all…Thaose words are no longer uttered in Spur Nation. We are in a state of shock. Our free coffee at Valero during the playoffs is at stake here!

    Here is my point once again…

    Players play and they produce. If they arent producing and it is hendering the success of the team, they should be replaced. Of course our coach see’s it differently…

    Even you must admit that….

    Bonner is a veterans minimum player at best.

    Im hoping that Mahinmi plays soon. I know he is a different position player than Bonner, but Im willing to bet that his production will double Bonner’s easily, and so would Hairston’s.

    There is no selling Bonner or Bogans to a fan that is about winning…This coach ran for a long as he could using low priced veterans, one dimensional spot contributors, and over the hill role players…

    It was genious at the time, but that time has passed and the league has passed him by.

    It has finally caught up and has us on the verge of Lotto….

    Because of depending on players like Bonner, it will probably be difficult for any of us to recognize over half of our roster next season. We could have been developing talent for years now.

    Besides, Other than a string of lucky pick ups…There is one reason, and one reason only for the success of this coach…

    His name is Tim Duncan!

    That may be sad, but its true!

  • OneWing

    Hey, I like making fun of Bonner while I watch the game just as much as the next guy. And I moan and complain about his mistakes, too.

    But the stats back him up. Pop backs him up, when he feels confident in him, which is a lot more often than the general Spurs fan populace would like to admit.

    The failures of this team have very little to do with Bonner. He’d have to be playing a lot more minutes than he is now to put blame on him. Also, you would have to have some kind of evidence to back up that statement. The Bonner detractors aren’t even putting up shooting percentages in their arguments!

    The reasons for the lack of wins have been expounded upon over and over again on this blog and others, and none of them center around Bonner.

  • Bushka

    @Ballhog.

    “Rocket has hit a few 3’s here and there and I too welcomed the help…But, when did he become the outside shooting assassin for the Spurs? LMAO

    He is not a good 3 point shooter. He is average. Misses more than he makes by far. As for him being a valuable decoy…Again, any player can do that, unless the player is Bogans.”

    Do you watch the games?

    Do you ever look at a page filled with stats before you say things? How about a page with 3 point percentages for Matt Bonners carreer?

    Matt Bonner is a career 40.7% shooter from 3.

    That is the equivelant of hitting 60% of your shots from 2 point land.

    So yeah. He spreads the floor better than most Power forwards not named Rashard Lewis.

    Who by the way shoots it at .392% from 3.

    You have yet to back up one single thing you have said.

    You tell me Bonner gets taken to the hole all night, yet you don’t show me any evidence via adjusted plus minus, or the PER of his opposing number.

    All these things could be looked at if you were even half interested in a thorough argument.

    The best you do is give personal anecdotal opinions regarding his ability i.e He gets taken to the hole all night, or he has no talent.

    I don’t even know where to begin with that stuff, theres nothing there to support it.

    The idea that if your a spurs fan that is about winning you would not be about Matt Bonner is ludicrous.

    Just look at the writing on the page. It’s the internet, the tools to find out all this stuff are at your fingertips.

    I mean your talking about Mahinmis production doubling Bonnners. All your talking about is points and rebounds again.

    You don’t really get the concept that the team is a collection of individuals who complement each other.

    Just being able to have X amount of points and X amount of rebounds is besides worthless unless your winning or doing it efficiently.

    Anyway I’m done with the debate, if you can call it that, I’ve given you enough information to make a case and your not even looking at it or trying to comprehend it.

  • Jim Henderson

    @Ballhog

    Bushka is right about Bonner. And Pop does use him well. Nobody’s saying Bonner is a “stud” as an all-around player. He’s what I call a “situational role player”, and when healthy, he can be pretty useful.

    I’m sure you wouldn’t argue that having a PF that can shoot the three at a high percentage is an asset. It’s one of the most effective ways to create problematic mismatches for opponents, and it is “rare”.

    The central point is to compare active PF/C in terms of their value at creating both “space” and mismatches (by drawing opponent’s PF out of the paint, or drawing a shorter opponent on the cover at the perimeter). WE’RE NOT COMPARING HOW GOOD THESE GUYS ARE AS ALL-AROUND PLAYERS.

    First, I think you’d agree that shooting the three at a high percentage is necessary if the PF/C is going to be successful in creating space & mismatches, otherwise his defender could sag off of him toward the paint to help protect the rim & rebound.

    So, let’s get the argument of “what” constitutes “shooting the three at a high percentage” out of the way. After all, an argument is meaningless on this issue if one chooses to ignore the data. So let me know if you want to ignore the data, because if you do, we can immediately cut off debate.

    There is actually only SIX active PF/C’s that shoot the three at .375 or better. All of these guys are between 6′ 10″ and 7′ 0″ tall. The following is there CAREER 3-point %, and all of them have close to 1,000 attempts, or more. So we have good sample sizes, which helps establish strong “validity” with our data sets.

    1) Bonner – .407
    2) Murphy (Ind.) – .394
    3) Lewis (Orl.) – .391
    4) Nowitzki (Dal.) – .378
    5) Okur (Utah) – .376
    6) Bargnani (Tor.) – .376

    Bonner is not only the highest 3-point shooting PF/C in the game today, he’s the highest 3-point shooting PF/C of ALL-TIME.

    And, although each other PF/C on this list is in my estimation a better “all-around” player than Bonner (some a great deal better), the salaries they draw, for this season, range from TWICE as much as Bonner (Bargnani), to SIX times as much as Bonner (Lewis, Nowitzki).

    Thus, in my view, for the extremely rare quality Bonner brings to the team, he is indeed a valuable asset as a “situational role player”. And, for a pretty good price as well, considering the high cost of those in his cohort.

    By the way, Bonner’s other skills are “modest”, but they are not “poor”, and therefore do not detract meaningfully from his overall value as a PF/C three point specialist in the way that Pop uses him. If you disagree, you should try to come up with some data to make your point, otherwise your comments are merely opinion/conjecture, and this of course ultimately weakens your argument.

  • Bushka

    Well put. I had never really touched on the last aspect.

    But i agree that he is not a poor defender. He is fundamentally sound and works well like most successful spurs defenders at channeling penetration.