Monday, November 29th, 2010...7:03 am
Why DeJuan Blair might not work for the Spurs
Maybe a better title for this post is ‘Why DeJuan Blair is not playing many minutes.’ Either way, we’re far enough into the season to make note of DeJuan Blair’s decreasingly important role on this Spurs team.
In the last 4 games, DeJuan Blair has logged 10, 6, 13, and 7 minutes. It’s odd for a starter to play end-of-the-rotation minutes, and so it has me thinking, what gives?
Against the Magic, Blair was too short to effectively defend Howard and too immobile to effectively cover Rashard Lewis. Against the Timberwolves, he earned three fouls in six minutes. Blair’s 13 minutes against the Mavericks were mostly uneventful. He used his long arms to swipe at Dirk Nowitzki’s dribble out near the arc, but aside from four rebounds and two assists, Blair’s performance was forgettable. In last night’s game against the Hornets, Popovich sent Blair to the bench after six minutes of play and he remained there until the final minute of garbage time. One substitution and done.
DeJuan Blair is a good basketball player. He has the potential to become a permanent double-double player, and, at worst, is already a threat to rumble off the bench for a high-energy 10-10. But one wonders if Blair can become this player for San Antonio. Given the Spurs’ current personnel and playing style, Blair is a poor fit.
DeJuan Blair’s natural position is center, even at 6’7”. Last season he played almost entirely at center, and registered several great games. He went for 28 and 21 boards in 31 minutes against the Thunder, if you recall. He’s capable of explosive one-offs like that.
Blair, much like teammate Matt Bonner, is a wonderful case study of the helpfulness of adjusted plus minus. And I’d like to turn to those numbers to unravel the mystery of Blair’s limited effectiveness this season.
Last season Blair was featured in seven positive 5-man APM units. In six of those units, Blair played alongside a perimeter-oriented big — that is, Blair played center. Three of those units saw Blair paired with Matt Bonner, two with Antonio McDyess and one with Richard Jefferson.
Blair can’t shoot, and because of this it’s difficult for the Spurs to pair him with Tim Duncan. Not only does a Duncan-Blair lineup transform Tim Duncan into a long two shooting forward, but it congests potential driving lanes with help defenders. You have to respect Tim Duncan’s jumpshot, but he’s not so deadly that his man can’t lag back. With Bonner and McDyess, defenders have to stay home. And home is typically a long way from the hoop and very close to their man. Manu Ginobili, Tony Parker, and George Hill (a mediocre ball handler who requires ample space to perform his trademark head-down-and-go drives to the hoop) use the extra space created by Bonner/McDyess to get to the rim. When they’re able to do this, the Spurs offense hums a beautiful tune.
Tim Duncan’s natural position is center. Everyone on earth knows this, with the possible exception of Tim Duncan. The Spurs know this. This is why DeJuan Blair spent his summer trying to develop a jump shot. And from what we gathered from the Spurs coaching staff, Blair put in the time and worked hard. He’s not lazy. He gets after it. But it just hasn’t come together for Blair, which is obvious to all those who’ve watched the Spurs this season.
Because of his height and girth, Blair is a poor defensive match up against long bigs such as Pau Gasol and shooting fours such as Rashard Lewis. And without a jumpshot, he doesn’t work well alongside Duncan, who, as we noted, plays best at center. Again, the APM numbers bear this out.
Last season the Spurs used Blair in thirteen lineups which tallied enough minutes for reliable 5-man data. Five of those thirteen featured a Duncan-Blair tandem, and four of those five featured a negative APM. Minus 2.93, 4.40, 5.65, and 16.09, to be exact. And while it’s true that there is a Duncan-Blair unit that registered a positive 6.79 and two Bonner-Blair lineups that sank the Spurs’ battleship at minus 0.98 and minus 8.43, it’s generally the case that Blair plays better as a ball collecting center alongside a floor spacing forward.
This pattern is true again this year. Blair appears in two positive 5-man units. To be fair, one of those lineups is Parker-Hill-Jefferson-Blair-Duncan. Through November 26, that lineup is plus 0.97. Barely better than their opponents, but better nonetheless. Plus 0.97 is Blair’s most effective appearance as a power forward. The unit of Hill-Neal-Ginobili-Jefferson-Blair is plus 23.90 and scores a point for Blair as a center and for San Antonio small-ball configurations.
In terms of regular lineups, Blair is featured in four additional looks. In three of those lineups Blair plays power forward for APMs of minus 0.6, minus 6.82 and minus 53.73.
San Antonio’s best floor units are those that supply driving lanes for their guards and single coverage for Tim Duncan. Through November 26, San Antonio has fielded 9 successful lineups. Two of those feature Blair-the aforementioned small-ball set and the plus 0.96 Blair-Duncan offering. The other 7 positive lineups pair Tim Duncan with either Antonio McDyess or Matt Bonner. (Tiago Splitter has not played enough for reliable plus/minus data. But we’ll look at those numbers in the coming weeks.)
This sounds counter-intuitive, but DeJuan Blair is best suited to play in a transition offense that boasts a bevy of shooters. Blair would thrive in the NY Knicks offense, for example. He makes smart outlet passes, is fast enough to run the floor with smalls, and is always happy to clean the offensive glass and reset the clock for a surrounding cast of jump-shooting specialists. San Antonio can field these sort of lineups, but they’ll never do so in the closing minutes of the game.
Or, more precisely, when the Spurs play 1 in, 4 out in the final minutes of a game, Tim Duncan is their 1 in, not DeJuan Blair. Morever, when Gregg Popovich begins to play chess with opposing coaches, the only creative option that involves DB moves him from forward to center in a small-ball set.
134 Comments
November 29th, 2010 at 7:23 am
A good analysis. Know it is obvious, DB reminds me of Malik Rose. There was a great amount written about DB developing a jump shot in the off season. Maybe being taken off from the starting line up, may be a good option. Could DB be used to match up against Ron Artest? Girth, strength and agility to counter RA?
How will a pairing of Tiago Splitter and TD? Time coaching staff experimented with a TS and TD pairing before the Lakers match on Dec 28th.
November 29th, 2010 at 7:26 am
You’re in depth analysis is what I’ve been saying for some time. Not that Blair isn’t going to be a really good player some day…more so that he isn’t fitting with the Spurs as the current roster supports.
Where does that leave the Spurs? Is Blair tradeable in order to secure a better rim protecting big? What about Tiago? If Blair were ever to be traded…Tiago would most assuredly gather more time subbing for Duncan while McDyess and Bonner handle the bulk of PF duties. Will Tiago be ready by season end to handle the pressure of playoff basketball?
Or…do the Spurs stay pat with the lineup only utelizing Blair in situations that suits the team best according to getting the most productive playing time from Blair?
Tiago’s development will go a long way to answering those questions.
And the bottomline in all this (regardless of the Spurs great start) is come playoff time…the Spurs will need a definative alternate other than Duncan in the post to contend with those teams that have strong post presense.
Small ball will not defeat all the teams in that situation though it is great to see that the team has a great small ball lineup.
November 29th, 2010 at 7:33 am
@Rob,
Personally, I wonder if the Spurs and Knicks wouldn’t do themselves right to discuss a deal. Anthony Randolph is not playing for the Knicks, DB isn’t a great immediate fit for the Spurs (I’m still high on Blair, this is more about timing than anything). The Knicks need a first round pick to get in on the Melo sweeps.
I might offer something like Blair, Quinn, Udoka and a first for Anthony Randolph and Bill Walker. If the Knicks land Melo because of it, then it’s more than equitable.
November 29th, 2010 at 7:41 am
so should we trade him for another big who has better height and can defend? i know these guys are hard to come by, but our bigs can’t handle the elite frontcourts of the nba (im actually icluding the love/millicic combo in there)
November 29th, 2010 at 8:01 am
Welcome to the train I’ve been driving for weeks, Tim. It doesn’t matter who starts, it matters who finishes, and Blair is too small to finish. Simple as that.
He’s a nice guy, he can rebound with the best of them, but when nearly every aspect of his game keeps him glued to the bench, how effective can his rebounding be? Not very.
Anthony Randolf has the potential to be Marcus Camby with ball skills, according to Hollinger. I like the trade because it gives us an athletic weak-side shot blocker. Randolf has had questions about his desire and heart, but I think a team like the Spurs could really teach him the right way to play and act and be a massive positive influence.
In the meantime, however, I think we should have Blair come off the bench as an energy 10-10 guy like Tim said. Our second unit with Hill/Anderson/Neal/Blair/Bonner could be a nightmare for opposing benches. Let Blair have a chance at being the energy guy he is destined to be, a rebounding/passing devil amid a second unit of 3 point bombers. You can’t tell me that group wouldn’t scare opposing teams.
Bench Blair and start Splitter. If Blair doesn’t respond, get Randolf. Easy.
November 29th, 2010 at 8:06 am
I think Blair at 21 still has a lot of potential to improve his range. He also makes a great fill in at center if Duncan is injured or needs to take nights off.
Looking further ahead, Duncan could retire if there is a lockout; making Blair even more valuable to the roster. If Duncan keeps playing “until the wheels fall off” and say plays 3-4 more years until he is 37 or 38, Blair will only be 24-25 and entering the prime of his career. If he is hidden in Duncan’s shadow for the majority of his first contract, his second contract shouldn’t be too bad either.
Blair is spending a lot more of his time going against the opponent’s starting bigs this season than he did last year since the majority of his minutes come at the start of the first and third quarters. This could be part of the problem.
November 29th, 2010 at 8:07 am
I was really disappointed by Blair’s defensive effort against West. His focus was pretty poor and the execution matched it.
November 29th, 2010 at 8:13 am
Blair makes 918K and has a non-guaranteed ~3 million over this season the next two. He might be the carrot to get a deal to work, but using Varner’s trade as an example, it would take other pieces like Udoka and Quinn to probably get decent value back.
For his price, I think Blair is worth keeping around….as long as we’re winning.
November 29th, 2010 at 8:21 am
From my perspective, most of Blair’s struggles stem from the fact that he’s trying to do things that are beyond his skill set at this point. He’s shooting jumpers, trying to go 1 on 1 against a set defense, trying to guard perimeter 4′s (which, in his defense, he has no experience doing), etc. And in doing so, he’s taking himself out of what he does best - attacking the glass, out-hustling his man, running the floor….
I think after 16 games it’s time to move Blair into a role in which we play to his strengths. Pair him with McDyess or Bonner and let him do what he does best. Most likely this means coming off the bench. And while I’m sure he’d like to start (who doesn’t), it might allow him to play more minutes and hopefully get into a better rhythm.
November 29th, 2010 at 8:23 am
I have always liked the idea of starting Tiago and bringing Blair off the bench to play with a Hill/Manu/McDyess.
Throw Tiago into the fire like Pop did with Tony. He would be surrounded by veterans to help him tread water those first few weeks. Plus he has been a pro so his learning curve shouldn’t be too steep.
Plus Tiago can shoot so you could bring Blair as the first big off the bench to play with him. Then sub Bonner in for Tiago and run some small ball with Manu/Hill running the point.
I don’t think it’s time to give up on Blair…yet.
November 29th, 2010 at 8:42 am
I too am enamored with Anthony Randolph’s potential, but I’m always terrified when a player’s profile reads “Needs to work on: Heart, desire.”
That scares me to death. Heart, desire, work ethic, etc. aren’t exactly things you learn. Most times, you generally have it, or you don’t. It’s rare for a guy to go from lazy to suddenly showing a pulse. And furthermore, the fact he hasn’t received playing time on a NY team that’s tailor made for his style raises more red flags.
I’m not saying I can’t see it, I’m just saying the FO would have to be awfully comfortable with what they’re getting in Randolph if they were to give up Blair.
@ThatBigGuy
If one of the areas of improvement is pairing TD with a big that provides better spacing, how does Splitter accomplish that? Sure, he’s bigger and a better defender, but he’s still going to allow the defense to sag off him on offense. If you replace Blair with anyone, I think it needs to be McDyess or Bonner. And as well as McDyess has been playing (he’s been the best player outside the big 4 this year IMO), I think he’s your man.
November 29th, 2010 at 8:57 am
Although the Spurs start has been amazing, it’s still sad to see what’s become of Blair. Like Bill Simmons (Sports Guy) said, when guys have a promising rookie year, they tend to have a break out second year. If they don’t, then you should be worried. Well, with Blair, I think we should all be VERY worried. It’s seem like EVERY game is a terrible matchup for Blair…unless he plays himself.
November 29th, 2010 at 9:05 am
Gents,
I’m not saying Blair won’t become a very good NBA player. He’s already good, I suppose. My argument is much more simplistic. He just doesn’t fit with the current cast.
On my trade proposal: I don’t think Randolph would play much for San Antonio, at least not this year. Bill Walker would be the more valuable acquisition. But going forward, Randolph has the potential to become a golden defender, and so you’re basically trading away an offensive player who can’t shoot (Blair) for a defensive player who can’t shoot (Randolph). In this case, Randolph fills a need and is much closer to a passable jumpshot than Blair.
November 29th, 2010 at 9:07 am
Yes, Blair has struggled so far this year. However, in defense of Dejuan, I believe he is putting too much pressure on himself. Last year he came in young, dumb, and overweight yet still produced and played well. This year he comes to training camp in MUCH better shape, with an extra year under his belt, and a summer dedicated to working on his offensive game. Now he doesn’t seem to know how to play the game.
Also, keep in mind that Blair has NEVER been a focal point on the offensive end. Through college and his first year, his offense has usually come through put-backs and off P&R situations. Putting the ball in his hands and asking him to score is a new thing for him. IMO, the linchpin to the Blair argument is his ability to hit an open jumper. Once the J begins to fall, it will open up his game on the offensive end. What to do with him on he defensive end is still an open question. We still need to give him a bit more time, but if the last 5 games are any indication, then he is on track to play fewer minutes this year than in his rookie year.
Tim Varner
November 29th, 2010 at 7:33 am
“I might offer something like Blair, Quinn, Udoka and a first for Anthony Randolph and Bill Walker. If the Knicks land Melo because of it, then it’s more than equitable.”
I would look long and hard at a trade like this. Randolph easily has the potential to be an elite shot blocker and yet another rim defender for Tim and Tiago. I think he would be able to put the brakes on PF’s like West and Lewis with more experience and another 15lbs of muscle. I would hate giving up Blair because I could also see Randolph being a bust and Blair averaging 16/10 two years from now, but there are risks involved with every trade.
November 29th, 2010 at 9:22 am
Nice write. I’ve been going back and forth with Jim Henderson regarding this all season. Blair would get more minutes and be more effective coming off of the bench.
November 29th, 2010 at 9:59 am
Good analysis on why Blair and Tim don’t fit well together? The majority of Spurs fans want Tiago to start alongside Tim. Based on your evidence that Tim and the team need an accompanying big man who can shoot from the outside, I wonder how well Tiago will play next to Tim. I think he will play better than Blair, but his jumpshot looks to be just as worse and spacing would be just as bad I would think.
Varner, your thoughts?
November 29th, 2010 at 10:00 am
Oops, didn’t mean to put a question mark in this sentence: “Good analysis on why Blair and Tim don’t fit well together?” Should have used a !
November 29th, 2010 at 10:08 am
@Hollywood Jones,
Because he’s a much better defender than Blair, Splitter would make a better starting power forward than Blair. But, honestly, I think the best solution is to start Bonner next to Duncan. Pop could find minutes for Blair and Splitter as matchups allows.
November 29th, 2010 at 10:17 am
A few months ago, Blair was part of our nearly untouchable future core. Now we’re talking trades?! I guess this is just how fan comments work. We talked about trading Manu and Tony at different points. Give Blair some time.
November 29th, 2010 at 10:17 am
Even though Blair has more upside, isn’t this the exact same thing we saw happen with Malik Rose?
November 29th, 2010 at 10:26 am
“I think he will play better than Blair, but his jumpshot looks to be just as worse and spacing would be just as bad I would think.”
I couldn’t disagree more. First off, Tiago will space the floor much, much better than DJB. Tiago has a high “basketball IQ” and finds the open spots and has an uncanny knack for being in the right spot at the right time. Pop said this about Tiago and I tend to agree with him.
Tiago also has a better game away from the basket because he is a skilled passer. He would work well from the high post as a passer. He actually has a decent midrange shot but hasn’t used it for the Spurs, yet. He’ll get there as his conditioning and comfort level get better.
“But, honestly, I think the best solution is to start Bonner next to Duncan. Pop could find minutes for Blair and Splitter as matchups allows.”
I couldn’t disagree more (again). Bonner is a situational player, period. He doesn’t have the defensive skills to be a starter. Pop finds minutes for Bonner as the matchups/situations allow, not the other way around. Sorry boss, we’ll have to agree to disagree about this one.
November 29th, 2010 at 10:32 am
I’m not nearly as high as most responders regarding Blair. He isn’t just bad defensively, he’s horrible. And his fundamentals are poor, how many rebounds has he coughed away because he tried to one-hand it? Yes, he plays with energy and yes he can have streaks where he does great things. But right now he’s the weak link in the rotation, he should be the 5th big. I think Pop hasn’t removed him from starting because of the team’s success, but his minutes keep going down as well they should. DeJuan, move your feet on defense and stop playing one-handed!
November 29th, 2010 at 10:36 am
@DNITCH
Not really. Malik was much older when we traded him - 30 if my math is correct; there wasn’t any upside left. Also, we had just signed Malik to a ludicrous contract. But after realizing our mistake, we pulled off one of the most underrated moves by acquiring Nazr. Thanks Isiah….
November 29th, 2010 at 10:36 am
Splitter can defend at the rim, takes charges, and is relentless as a screener. The more he plays, the more comfortable he’ll get. He’s limited offensively, but Blair hasn’t exactly been Karl Malone either. I prefer a good 7 footer over a good 6′ 6″ guy for post play.
Blair would be hardly playing except for the fact the Spurs are winning and Pop doesn’t want to change anything right now.
November 29th, 2010 at 11:01 am
@jwalt
“Blair would be hardly playing except for the fact the Spurs are winning and Pop doesn’t want to change anything right now.”
I agree with you.
I think Blair’s problems are all in his head, he needs to be more focused and not try to score off of every offensive rebound he gets.
Go Spurs Go!!
November 29th, 2010 at 11:12 am
ITGuy, you bring up my biggest peeve with Blair, all his dumb fouls. The team’s collective IQ is beyond brilliant but Blair brings it down with all his silly rebounding fouls. Only he and Bonner get less than an ‘A’ grade above the shoulders — Bonner, because he doesn’t “see” the game, Blair, because he refuses to give up on some plays until the ref calls the obvious foul on him.
But, to stay positive, Manu, TP, RJ, Timmy, Hill, McDyess, are all very smart players. (And Manu is a pure genius).
November 29th, 2010 at 11:17 am
if we start losing games, then i suggest these changes maybe
a) bring blair off the bench and splitter start
b) do tim varner’s trade but a little different, spurs trade blair quinn udoka and first for chandler and randolph. would solve a LOT problems that we havent found out about yet, but a trade like this would be a steal!
November 29th, 2010 at 11:22 am
Jim Henderson is going to be pissed…
November 29th, 2010 at 11:29 am
Can 48 Minutes of Hell be held responsible if Jim Henderson’s head explodes?
November 29th, 2010 at 11:36 am
The Beat Counselor
November 29th, 2010 at 11:22 am
“Jim Henderson is going to be pissed…”
I’m going to be severely disappointed with anything less than an epic post from ole Jim.
November 29th, 2010 at 11:41 am
Somewhere in the murky depths of the Spurs Nation, Jim Henderson is quietly plotting his retort…
@Hobson13
Me too.
November 29th, 2010 at 11:46 am
When isn’t jim pissed?
November 29th, 2010 at 11:47 am
Part of the problem with Blair is that his biggest strength, getting offensive rebounds, is exactly what Pop devalues the most. Pop preaches transition defense first and foremost. It is striking that on almost every shot that we take all the guys hustle to the defensive end even before the shot nears the basket. Anyone who gets in the middle of an offensive rebound is usually because he’s stuck there, not because Pop wants our guys to crash the offensive glass. It’s frustrating to watch sometimes, but it’s Pop’s philosophy. Blair’s greatest asset and value is diminished in our system. As others have said, I think he continues to start only because we’re winning, Tiago was hurt at the beginning of the season and Pop doesn’t want to take the chance of bashing Blair’s self esteem and drive.
November 29th, 2010 at 11:47 am
By the by, I really love Tim’s trade proposal! Randolph would be a great Spur, and Walker has a lot of potential, lets pull the trigger.
November 29th, 2010 at 12:06 pm
@ Tyler
Splitter is a cross between Oberto and ’03 Robinson. He’ll set screens everywhere on the court, play good D, make the hi-low post pass, be in position for offensive put backs, and be in the right spot at the right time. If he can get 25 mins a game, I see him at 12 and 9.
Neither Robinson nor Oberto were ever in the way of Timmy, and so Splitter won’t be either. Besides, whatever slight chance that Splitter might clog the lane pales in comparison to the upgraded D he brings to the table. You can’t teach size, and that’s Blair’s biggest problem.
November 29th, 2010 at 12:12 pm
Yes TV, but we also have to look towards the future, not just the here and now. McDyess is done after this year and there will naturally be a gap at the backup 4/5 next year when that happens. It’d be nice to use that expiring salary slot for another wing defender since the Spurs are light there.
Suffice to say, D. Blair may not have a jumpshot now, but perhaps another season/off-season of work will pay the necessary dividends NEXT season where his talent/skillset, especially at the bargain rate of his contract, will be impossible to duplicate. As much as Anthony Randolph titillates, he and a guy like B. Wright have been nothing more than teases in their career. Blair, utilized correctly, hell we all know what he can do.
The best move right now would be to move him to the bench, where he could spell Duncan and/or Splitter paired with Bonner or a small-ball four like Udoka.
November 29th, 2010 at 12:31 pm
someone earlier said splitter can shoot? pfff, highly dubious. bonner is a better starter. he can be our designated spot up shooter with 3 slashers and low post offense from tim. we’ve done this for a while. bonner is indeed a role player, and starting games and 2nd halves fill a role. blair is a starter, but he’s stuck in rotation limbo. dyess would be better paired with splitter or blair. but eventually, we will need to play duncan and splitter together
November 29th, 2010 at 12:37 pm
I wouldn’t do a trade yet this season….you guys know how long it takes to acclimate someone to the Spurs system…why mess with the chemistry when we have so many new guys to integrate already (Splitter, Udoka, Anderson, Neal). All Blair needs is to play off the bench against 2nd unit bigs…he will be effective against them, like he was last season.
Right now, he plays poor because he is matched against starting bigs (West, Love, Dirk). All these guys are too good for him…
November 29th, 2010 at 12:47 pm
Bonner is fools gold! We go through this every season, wait till playoff roll around and he won’t be able to make a shot to save his life.
November 29th, 2010 at 12:48 pm
It would help if Blair could develop an outside shot, but I think if he could develop post skills he would be better served in the short term. He’s a pest around the basket and gets many offensive rebounds but then gets blocked or loses the ball because he can’t score from underneath.
He gets called for a lot of fouls but I would like to see him try creating space better with his big azz as a way to give himself a chance to score. He fouls at everything else so he might as well give this a shot.
Varner: I agree with your point that Tiago is a better defender than Blair and because of that a better fit with Tim. I see how Bonner is better in the short term as far as spacing, but I feel that Tim has to work that much harder to make up for Bonner’s deficiencies that in the long term it only wears him down.
Dice is the best partner for Tim but we’re saving him for the playoffs…hence the dilemma of whom to play next to Tim. I think Blair should still start and be given a shot…it’s only 6 minutes a game at this point. And even though he’s starting he’s still the 5th big.
November 29th, 2010 at 1:12 pm
Not a big fan of starting Bonner…he gives up too much defensively, does not rebound and is only helpful when his shot is falling. I’d rather have him be a situational player (i.e. instant offense off the bench).
Splitter is the obvious choice because he sets good screens, passes the ball well, rebounds and defends the PnR and the rim. Given proper development, I think he can have a good post game. Imagine the big to big passing between TD and Splitter.
November 29th, 2010 at 1:15 pm
As an aside, we already know how Duncan & Bonner play together…see 08/09 season….not the best defensively.
Time to give TD/TS a shot…experiment 10-15 games and see how it goes.
November 29th, 2010 at 1:21 pm
This is madness. Blair is paid peanuts. He is coming off a very good season and we are only 15 games in. You don’t trade away your underpaid players, who are good in the locker room and hard workers. Blair is 21, still improving, and will be badly underpaid for the next couple of years. Dumping him to New York along with a draft pick for a guy who already gets no playing time for a mediocre team makes no sense. You are basically giving away a good underpaid rotation player and a draft pick (just look at what the Spurs have done with similar draft picks) for an unproven bench guy. That is madness. Blair will be fine. If he struggles, bring him off the bench (just like any other struggling player). 15 games ago he was the ‘steal of the draft’ and a building block of the future. How fickle we’ve become….
November 29th, 2010 at 1:23 pm
From main post:
“Against the Magic, Blair was too short to effectively defend Howard and too immobile to effectively cover Rashard Lewis.”
Howard, the #1 draft pick, in his 7th year, is the best center in the league, and an awesome physical specimen for ANY 4/5 in the league to match up against, let alone a 21 year old 2nd year player drafted at #37, regardless of perceived “height deficiencies”. Lewis is an all-star, and one of the toughest 3/4′s in the league to match up against for ANY 4/5 because of his range on his shot, and his better than average mobility, since he played most of his career as a SF. These match-ups were tough period, and were made more difficult because of DeJuan’s lack of “experience” more so than his lack of “height and quickness”, particularly his lack of practice defending out on the perimeter. None of our other 4/5′s guarded Howard/Lewis particularly well in that game, other than TD.
“In last night’s game against the Hornets, Popovich sent Blair to the bench after six minutes of play and he remained there until the final minute of garbage time. One substitution and done.”
Blair AND Splitter AND Bonner ALL played 9 minutes or less in that game. There’s no negative point you can make about Blair in that game. In fact if one were to prorate his numbers for 36 minutes in that game they would be as follows: 19.2 points, 9.6 rebounds, 4.8 fouls, and 10 for 10 from the field. As far as his defense, it was no worse than anyone else’s on the team in the 1st quarter/half. McDyess got more minutes because with his experience he is our most dependable 4/5 defender other than TD, and “D” was ultra important against the top-rated Hornets. Other than TD, none of the 4/5′s performance was better than Blair’s in that game.
“Given the Spurs’ current personnel and playing style, Blair is a poor fit.”
Not true. What is your reasoning/justification for such a statement?
“He went for 28 and 21 boards in 31 minutes against the Thunder, if you recall. He’s capable of explosive one-offs like that.”
Yes, but they’re not destined to be “one-offs”. Only your most talented 20 year old 4/5′s can even have those kind of games as “one-offs”, and he would have had many more similar games if he was not playing behind the GOAT PF, which greatly limits his opportunities.
“DeJuan Blair’s natural position is center, even at 6’7”.”
Whether it’s his “natural” position or not is not particularly relevant. What is relevant is does he have the talent & work ethic to develop into a very consistent and productive PF, which is the position where he could ultimately make his biggest impact at the NBA level. I say clearly yes, but it will take some time. However, most on here only care about this season, and I can only say that I’m glad that you’re not the FO or the owner’s of the franchise.
“Blair can’t shoot, and because of this it’s difficult for the Spurs to pair him with Tim Duncan.”
Not true, because Duncan can shoot, and Blair won’t learn to shoot without experience against tough competition during games as part of his developmental protocol.
“Tim Duncan’s natural position is center. Everyone on earth knows this, with the possible exception of Tim Duncan. The Spurs know this. This is why DeJuan Blair spent his summer trying to develop a jump shot. And from what we gathered from the Spurs coaching staff, Blair put in the time and worked hard. He’s not lazy. He gets after it. But it just hasn’t come together for Blair, which is obvious to all those who’ve watched the Spurs this season.”
The suggestion that his jumper may never come is ludicrous. His shot mechanics have obviously improved, witness his stellar free throw percentage this season compared to last. The very difficult part for a guy with Blair’s background (ONLY asked to rebound & score at the rim in college because that was the easiest for the coaching staff, and it alone was entirely sufficient at that level of competition) is in finding a comfort zone “in space” out on the floor, developing a confidence with his shot in the flow of the game, using his body to ward off the defender, working on his shot selection (when, where, what type of shot, against who). This is not that easy for someone with Blair’s background, but it IS achievable in due time. The summer and 16 games isn’t nearly enough time.
The spacing issue, while valid, is overvalued, particularly with our shooting at the guard & SF this year: Manu, Hill, Neal, RJ, Anderson, and even TP is starting to shoot the three some more with pretty good early results. Also, what one gives up in driving lanes being a bit tighter one makes up for in rebounding, particularly on the offensive boards, as well as disruptive “D” from a 4/5 that helps launch our deadly transition game (neither of which Bonner or McDyess, or even Splitter offers.
“This pattern is true again this year. Blair appears in two positive 5-man units. To be fair, one of those lineups is Parker-Hill-Jefferson-Blair-Duncan. Through November 26, that lineup is plus 0.97. Barely better than their opponents, but better nonetheless. Plus 0.97 is Blair’s most effective appearance as a power forward. The unit of Hill-Neal-Ginobili-Jefferson-Blair is plus 23.90 and scores a point for Blair as a center and for San Antonio small-ball configurations.”
You need to provide the minutes played for these two units otherwise the +/- numbers you’ve reported could potentially be virtually meaningless.
“This sounds counter-intuitive, but DeJuan Blair is best suited to play in a transition offense that boasts a bevy of shooters……..San Antonio can field these sort of lineups, but they’ll never do so in the closing minutes of the game.”
That’s fine, at this stage in Blair’s development this may be mostly correct, and we don’t need to use him now as one of our closers. But that does not mean that he is not valuable to this team, that he’s not a good fit, or that he shouldn’t start the game (Manu, TP, and RJ can shoot quite well from 20+ ft.).
“Or, more precisely, when the Spurs play 1 in, 4 out in the final minutes of a game, Tim Duncan is their 1 in, not DeJuan Blair.”
Blair should not be embarrassed for not being selected ahead of the GOAT PF of all-time in the closing minutes of a game.
November 29th, 2010 at 1:37 pm
Jim H. — Blair’s defense was no worse than anyone else’s? Are you kidding? West was on his way to 50 until Blair was taken out. I know West had at least 10 already, and I think it was 12. And it wasn’t because of switches or poor team defense, West’s buckets were on Blair. Going for a steal (the worst play in bb) that lead to an easy score, biting on a up fake (for a layup along the baseline), not blocking out (for a tip-in).
Blair can outplay reserves on other teams, but he is out of his league against the starters he has faced, and tonight will be more of the same against David Lee.
November 29th, 2010 at 1:52 pm
Damnit Jim! I’m just a round mound rebounding machine, not a shotblocking defending big!
November 29th, 2010 at 1:55 pm
@ThatBigGuy
I agree with you - the Spurs would be better with Splitter in place of Blair. There’s no doubt in my mind Splitter is an upgrade over Dejuan.
My point was that they’d probably be even better with McDyess in place of Blair or Splitter. At this point in their careers, McDyess provides an upgrade on offense over Splitter with his ability to hit jumpers. Defensively, he’s just as good an interior defender as Tiago, but also a much better defender against the more mobile, perimeter 4′s (West, Nowitzki, Odom, etc).
In the end though, I think the debate over who starts is close to meaningless. It’s who finishes that matters.
November 29th, 2010 at 1:55 pm
I know Blair is useless playing with Tim as long as Tim is playing the C and DB is playing the PF, because by putting him in the perimeter, you’re taking away Blair’s biggest strength, which is offensive rebounding.
However, by all indications, Tim WANTS to be a shooter this year more than ever. He doesn’t really want to play in the post and it really wears him down, as does playing small. Playing with Blair (or Tiago) is really Tim’s only chance to play as a PF, so I think Pop is doing it to appease him, for the time being, and to save him some wear and tear.
Like most people I think Blair works best as a bench guy where he can provide energy, working with Dice or Rocket. Eventually he’ll either be in that role or he’ll be the fifth big and out of the rotation altogether except in a rare “sparkplug” role when we’re flat.
November 29th, 2010 at 2:00 pm
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Mike Prada, Kevin Arnovitz, James Herbert, Zach Lowe, Andrew A. McNeill and others. Andrew A. McNeill said: 48MoH / Why DeJuan Blair might not work for the Spurs http://dlvr.it/9Ny1D [...]
November 29th, 2010 at 2:09 pm
I wouldn’t trade for Randolph, unless Chandler was included not Walker.
I would try to fleece the Thunder in a straight up trade for Serge Ibaka. Maybe that 20-20 game vs the Thunder would entice them to get swindled?
I’ll get to see how Blair fares against Blake Griffin on Wednesday to further determine his importance to the Spurs with that matchup.
November 29th, 2010 at 2:13 pm
Projected 8 game win increase.
November 29th, 2010 at 2:26 pm
Tyler
“In the end though, I think the debate over who starts is close to meaningless. It’s who finishes that matters.”
Very good point. But it also matters that the team doesn’t run down it’s arguably second best (aged)big man before the playoffs begin.
McDyess playing heavy doses of minutes throughout the regular season is not what Pop had in mind for Antonio.
Blair was (maybe still is?) the hope that another big can come in and spare some of the minutes that both Duncan and McDyess are having to play at this point.
Blair isn’t proving at this point nor with the personel to be that viable option.
Maybe Tiago can become that post player to be relied upon to provide quality minutes more so than Blair?
At this point Blair is proving to be almost everything opposite than what I would guess was being expected.
And to others…this article isn’t suggesting in any way that Blair isn’t going to be good at some point. It’s merely stating the problems Blair is having playing with this team as it’s currently constructed.
Would it be adviseable for the coaching staff to completely change it’s offensive and defensive strategy just to compensate for a single player?
To me…not when it’s been able to role out a 14 and 2 record without having to depend on Blair in the game to achieve that short term goal. But winning record aside…the team is still going to need another athletic big better suited to play in a manner that Blair doesn’t provide in order to have a chance to going far in the playoffs.
And I’ve seen the arguements about what Blair might become in the future. Well the opposite could hold true regarding potential…a player may never achieve that potential in a system that doesn’t allow them to become that type of player.
Again…does a team change their entire formula to possibly winning to accomodate a single player? Or…is it best and try to get a player known for their talents that fits their philosophy?
Difficult to say the least.
November 29th, 2010 at 2:30 pm
BlaseE
November 29th, 2010 at 8:06 am
Insightful post, with vision. I’m impressed, BlaseE!
“For his price, I think Blair is worth keeping around….as long as we’re winning.”
Good point.
Len
November 29th, 2010 at 8:07 am
“I was really disappointed by Blair’s defensive effort against West. His focus was pretty poor and the execution matched it.”
Nobody guarded West well in the 1st half. He’s a tough cover for anyone when he gets it going.
Tyler
November 29th, 2010 at 8:21 am
“From my perspective, most of Blair’s struggles stem from the fact that he’s trying to do things that are beyond his skill set at this point. He’s shooting jumpers, trying to go 1 on 1 against a set defense, trying to guard perimeter 4′s (which, in his defense, he has no experience doing), etc. And in doing so, he’s taking himself out of what he does best – attacking the glass, out-hustling his man, running the floor….”
Yes, that is true.
“I think after 16 games it’s time to move Blair into a role in which we play to his strengths. Pair him with McDyess or Bonner and let him do what he does best. Most likely this means coming off the bench.”
Not necessarily. I’m in favor of continuing to start him while we’re winning at such a high rate because going against tougher competition can eventually quicken his ultimate development.
SA_Ray
November 29th, 2010 at 8:23 am
“Plus Tiago can shoot….”
Tiago cannot shoot from the perimeter. At least he hasn’t shown us that so far, 16 games in, and that’s all we really have to go on.
Tyler
November 29th, 2010 at 8:42 am
“I too am enamored with Anthony Randolph’s potential, but I’m always terrified when a player’s profile reads “Needs to work on: Heart, desire.””
I agree.
Blofeld
November 29th, 2010 at 8:57 am
“Although the Spurs start has been amazing, it’s still sad to see what’s become of Blair. Like Bill Simmons (Sports Guy) said, when guys have a promising rookie year, they tend to have a break out second year. If they don’t, then you should be worried.”
Bill Simmon’s doesn’t know what he’s talking about on this issue. I’m not worried about Blair in the least, just like Jerry Sloan wasn’t worried about Paul Millsap 16 games into season two.
Tim Varner
November 29th, 2010 at 9:05 am
“Bill Walker would be the more valuable acquisition.”
Why? We have everybody we need at his position (a 2/3), particularly when Anderson comes back in the next 4 weeks.
Len
November 29th, 2010 at 10:26 am
“I couldn’t disagree more (again). Bonner is a situational player, period. He doesn’t have the defensive skills to be a starter. Pop finds minutes for Bonner as the matchups/situations allow, not the other way around. Sorry boss, we’ll have to agree to disagree about this one.”
Totally agree with you on that one. McDyess & Splitter are reasonable possibilities to at some point to start over Blair, Bonner is not.
The Beat Counselor
November 29th, 2010 at 11:22 am
“Jim Henderson is going to be pissed…”
No, just annoyed with the constant stream of short-sightedness and impatience from the peanut gallery.
ThatBigGuy
November 29th, 2010 at 12:06 pm
“Splitter…..If he can get 25 mins a game, I see him at 12 and 9.”
I like Splitter, but he will NEVER average 9 rebounds in 25 mpg. You can take that to the bank.
Bry
November 29th, 2010 at 1:21 pm
Very solid post, Bry. Nice job.
November 29th, 2010 at 2:30 pm
@ Jim
If we’re going to wait on Blair to develop a jump shot, post moves, and defensive chops, why not trade him for a guy like Randolf, who can at least fill a roll on the team (shot blocking) while we wait on him to develop his offense and rebounding? Blair has the potential to be a 14-11 guy for us, perhaps a 16-12 game for a team like the Knicks. But Randolf has the potential to be a 14-9-3 guy for us.
In rebounds per game, we have a +2.75 differential, which is 6th in the league, and less than 1 RPG from 2nd. In blocks per game, we’re a -.56, good for 21st. You’ve championed for a defensive big all year, why not trade Blair for Randolf? Both have potential in different areas, but Randolf’s potential on D is higher than Blair’s overall potential.
With your all time favorite stat, the per 36 mins one, I submit the following numbers:
Blair: 10.3 ppg, 12.01 rpg, .75 bpg
Randolf: 8.3 ppg, 11.25 rpg, 2.25 bpg
Blair wins on points, it’s a wash on rebounds, and Randolf smokes Blair on blocks. You want to keep Blair because he rebounds, but Randolf rebounds at the same rate. You want a shot blocking big alongside Timmy, that’s clearly Randolf.
We’re destined for a really low draft pick yet again, so packaging Blair and a first rounder for Randolf would be affordable and have great potential.
November 29th, 2010 at 2:45 pm
[...] If you’re wondering why DeJuan Blair isn’t playing more, you must read this analysis from Timothy Varner at the Spurs-themed blog 48 Minutes of Hell. One thing I’d add to that [...]
November 29th, 2010 at 2:47 pm
If we get off to some more slow starts, I would expect Dice or Bonner to take over. Splitter eventually, but not until he deserves the minutes away from the rest. In terms of spacing, Bonner and Dice lead the front-court options, Splitter has some range, and Blair even less having to literally be under the basket to score.
Starting Blair against -.500 teams or small front-court squads have been his best outings and has proved to really help out with the duration of Duncan’s minutes.
The fact remains that Splitter is our best match-up against the Lakers’ bigs (besides Duncan) given his youthful speedy footwork, solid principles, and size match-ups. Having him come off the bench is a great teaching tool, however when does his time come when he’s trusted with significant minutes against legit playoff contenders so his preparedness is maximized for a rookie ring run.
November 29th, 2010 at 2:48 pm
@ Tyler
Touche.
November 29th, 2010 at 2:50 pm
ThatBigGuy
“We’re destined for a really low draft pick yet again, so packaging Blair and a first rounder for Randolf would be affordable and have great potential.”
And in the scope of things future…both Tiago and Blair null each other out regarding their respective talents. Which is playing closer to the rim.
When Duncan eventually retires…I’d much rather have a Splitter/Randolph pairing than a Blair/Splitter pairing for the reasons you set forth for the simple reason I think their talents would compliment each other more favorably.
November 29th, 2010 at 3:04 pm
I think a big problem for Blair is the weight he lost. He is obviously undersized height-wise so he made that up with his extra lbs (last year). Slimming him down and trying to make him a quicker player doesn’t feed into his game. He was better when he was throwing his meat around and abusing people…
Dice/Bonner starting is not the answer. Splitter is just as capable as spacing the floor as Dice is. Splitter knows where to be to make the offense work. He needs to start and I suspect he will by year-end. Pop is just giving him some rest for the long haul. If Splitter was playing mad minutes now his legs would be dead come playoff time. I suspect by the road trip in Feb. he will be starting. Until then enjoy all of Pop’s crazy tweaked out lineups.
BTW… Randolph/Walker I can see but no way is NY giving up Wilson Chandler along with Randolph for Blair/Quinn/Udoka. Why would they do that? I know that Melo may end up in NY next yr but there is a lack of solid SF’s in the NBA (Chandler’s #’s are solid and that is coming off the bench). NY could get a much better trade for those guys than B/Q/U.
November 29th, 2010 at 3:20 pm
Trade Parker/McDyess/Anderson to the Knicks for Felton/Randolph/Fields/Curry. A big man rotation of Blair/Randolph/Splitter would be a absolute terror for the next decade.
November 29th, 2010 at 4:23 pm
Good analysis, but why trade perhaps your best offensive rebounder from a team that desperately needs offensive rebounds. Keep in mind that Blair led the nation in offensive rebounds at Pitt. That’s why the Spurs drafted the kid. Blair is 21 and will only get better. And what if Duncan goes down with a season-ending injury (God forbid). With that said, if there was a trade that really made sense, you can reconsider. But I think Blair would be undervalued.
November 29th, 2010 at 5:45 pm
@ Rob
“I’d much rather have a Splitter/Randolph pairing than a Blair/Splitter pairing for the reasons you set forth for the simple reason I think their talents would compliment each other more favorably.”
It sure makes sense, doesn’t it?
@ Tom
“…but why trade perhaps your best offensive rebounder from a team that desperately needs offensive rebounds.”
No one denies Blair’s ability to rebound the basketball. The emerging realization is that his shortcomings in all the other areas of the game are keeping him on the bench, where he can’t grab rebounds. The coaching staff has acted accordingly. He averaged 23.9 mpg through the first 8 games, but has averaged 14.5 mpg over the last 8 games. If he can’t defend anyone, nor score on anyone, he’s the 5th big. 5th bigs are easily traded for other 5th bigs, especially one like Randolf who has the potential to be a starter after Duncan retires.
November 29th, 2010 at 6:14 pm
jwalt
November 29th, 2010 at 1:37 pm
“Jim H. — Blair’s defense was no worse than anyone else’s? Are you kidding? West was on his way to 50 until Blair was taken out. I know West had at least 10 already, and I think it was 12.”
I suggest you revisit the play-by play in the first quarter. Your memory is a bit off. First of all, Paul loves to get DWest going to start games. West will often burn any defender in the league if he’s on his game. Paul went to West early and often and he was ready to do his job to get them off to a strong start. During Blair’s time with West (6:14), West was 5-7 in FG’s, one was a lay-up, one was a tip-in, one was a pull-up jumper, and two were turn-around, fade-away jumpers. West played another 4.5 minutes before he went out for the quarter at the 1:21 mark. During that time he was still 2-3 from the field, including a lay-up, PLUS he was fouled twice in the act of shooting (once by McDyess, once by Bonner) because he was burning whoever it was that was guarding him. He was guarded mostly by MvDyess during this 4.5 minute stretch, although Bonner got in against him for TEN SECONDS, (and that’s all Pop could take because West was about to burn Bonner bad), and hacked West sending him to the line for 2 FT’s. In short, during the 4.5 minutes of Dice & Bonner on West, West was 2-3 FG’s, was sent to the line FOUR times (luckily making just two of the four), and so ended up with 6 points during this stretch (could have easily have been 8 pts.). If you prorate West’s scoring to make the minutes equal out with the time that Blair was on him, and assume that most of the time West is going to make 3-4 FT’s, not 2-4, West would have scored 10 points in that 1st quarter on McDyess and Bonner as well. Thus, as I said, Blair’s defense was no worse than anybody else’s on West in that 1st quarter of last night’s game. Plus Blair’s offensive & rebounding production per minute in that 1st quarter was better than both McDyess & Bonner’s.
Dr. Leonard McCoy
November 29th, 2010 at 1:52 pm
“Damnit Jim! I’m just a round mound rebounding machine, not a shotblocking defending big!”
Yeah, and Bonner is neither, and McDyess & Splitter are not shot-blockers - better positional defenders than Blair at this point, but do not create turnovers that fuels our transition offense, and they are not the rebounder that Blair is.
Michael Erler
November 29th, 2010 at 1:55 pm
“Like most people I think Blair works best as a bench guy where he can provide energy, working with Dice or Rocket. Eventually he’ll either be in that role or he’ll be the fifth big and out of the rotation altogether except in a rare “sparkplug” role when we’re flat.”
Don’t count on it.
rob
November 29th, 2010 at 2:26 pm
“At this point Blair is proving to be almost everything opposite than what I would guess was being expected.”
It depends on who is doing the “expecting”. LOL!
“Would it be adviseable for the coaching staff to completely change it’s offensive and defensive strategy just to compensate for a single player?”
No, and it’s not necessary with what Blair brings to the table.
“But winning record aside…the team is still going to need another athletic big better suited to play in a manner that Blair doesn’t provide in order to have a chance to going far in the playoffs.”
Oh, and what manner is that? What we don’t need is what Bonner provides. The last thing we need to make a long play-off run is an un-athletic stretch four that can’t do ANYTHING that well but shoot, and even that, not in the playoffs when the defensive intensity is cranked up. I hate to tell you, but we have enough shooters now, especially when Anderson returns and the more experience Neal gets. Lets drop the myth once and for all that an un-athletic stretch 4 has ungodly value because he “stretches the floor”, and has oddly favorable +/- numbers. Please! I’ll say it again, what we needed, minus a big trade, was to pick up someone like Amundson, and not because he has a great outside shot, but because he DOES EVERYTHING ELSE WELL, particular in his ability to DEFEND the rim.
November 29th, 2010 at 6:35 pm
ThatBigGuy
November 29th, 2010 at 2:30 pm
“If we’re going to wait on Blair to develop a jump shot, post moves, and defensive chops, why not trade him for a guy like Randolf, who can at least fill a roll on the team (shot blocking) while we wait on him to develop his offense and rebounding?”
Your “number” example does not present an accurate comparison, but if one were to do a trade, Randolph is a decent young player to consider, and does have some “potential”. The following is a recent post by Tyler, and is the primary reason why I would be very leery of pulling the trigger on a Randolph deal:
Tyler
November 29th, 2010 at 8:42 am
“I too am enamored with Anthony Randolph’s potential, but I’m always terrified when a player’s profile reads “Needs to work on: Heart, desire.””
Mac
November 29th, 2010 at 3:04 pm
I think a big problem for Blair is the weight he lost. He is obviously undersized height-wise so he made that up with his extra lbs (last year). Slimming him down and trying to make him a quicker player doesn’t feed into his game. He was better when he was throwing his meat around and abusing people…”
He’s not too light now. No way. But you are right, he’s not using his strong body enough to his advantage., yet weight is not the reason. It’s more about the time needed to adjust to playing with (and against) the starters, as well as continuing to work on applying consistent mental focus.
Tom
November 29th, 2010 at 4:23 pm
Right on, good post, Tom.
November 29th, 2010 at 6:47 pm
Blair didn’t perform that well last season either as a starter alongside TD if I recall correctly. He’s obviously more effective coming out from the bench paired with someone other than TD like everyone suggests, but are there any alternatives? Wearing Dice out in the regular season is probably not a good idea, Splitter is still a(n NBA) rookie, and Bonner is not a typical center.
Trading for Randolph sounds like a good idea, but would this kid actually put in the effort to reach his potential (if the FO indeed bring him over)? Trading a player with good work ethics for a player with poor work ethics sounds like a risky business if you ask me… then again there might be nothing to lose if Blair continues to struggle in finding his role as a Spur.
November 29th, 2010 at 7:08 pm
Jim Henderson
We’ve always agreed when it came to Amundson.
We have obviously in uncertain terms disagreed regarding Blair.
And I can understand your points regarding Blair.
According to last year…Blair would have seemed to have a break out season even in just his second year. But something has happened along the path of last season to now. I think Tim Varner made a clear and concise evaluation of the moment at hand regarding Blair and his effectiveness for this team.
Blair may well become this 18 and 10 beast that the numbers indicate he may become. But it appears his likelyhood of doing that may just be on another team and not the Spurs unless the Spurs change their philosophy which is highly unlikely.
And in looking at the trade scenario…Blair would probably be more productive in a D’Antoni system than a Popovich system. Same being the case for Randolph. Each being good at what they do but apparently in a system that doesn’t promote their talents to the best of their abilities.
But if a trade such as suggested doesn’t happen…I strongly believe Blair needs to come off the bench. And at that, only in situations as stated in the original post that allows Blair to succeed. Otherwise he’s as big of a liability to this team as Bonner when Bonner can’t make his shots.
November 29th, 2010 at 7:15 pm
I don’t think I noticed a trade that could actually be accomplished, unless it were done on February 24th. That is the NBA trade deadline, but Ime cannot be traded prior to that date as it is 90 days after he was signed as a free agent. Chris Quinn can be traded on February 6th, 90 days after he was signed. There are very few players that the Spurs could actually trade that I would think they would even consider. Even if Blair were one of them, it would be difficult to come up with anyone like Randolf due to the disparity in contracts. I think they should hang on to him for now, while perhaps watching to see if Isaiah Thomas gets a new job as a GM somewhere.
November 29th, 2010 at 7:17 pm
@Daniel T,
You’re mistaken, my friend. The rule is 90 days or December 15, whichever date comes first. The Spurs could deal, say, Quinn, on December 15, if they so choose.
And fwiw, the trade I suggested fully satisfies the CBA. I’m a dork. I’m up on these things.
November 29th, 2010 at 7:49 pm
The Randolph trade is intruiging. Check out this kid’s highlights against the Spurs during his rookie year. This is what he is capable of.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TJARASNxEo
He can’t do this every night, but he does appear to be a much better jump shooter than Blair.
November 29th, 2010 at 7:51 pm
@ Jim
I’m not sure how my number example doesn’t present an accurate comparison, but I’m glad we can find some common ground on Randolf and his potential upside.
I also recognize that Randolf seems to have a work ethic/effort problem as Tyler pointed out. I would counter that he’s been in 2 organizations not exactly known for their internal structure. I think his attitude would improve significantly on a winning team surrounded by quality guys who are extremely professional. Remember, Captain Jack was a head case, but he behaved quite nicely while surrounded by the same influences.
I just think Randolf’s potential trumps his attitude, especially when surrounded by Tim/Pop/Manu ect. It could be the perfect environment to unlock the Camby in Randolf.
November 29th, 2010 at 8:04 pm
why fix somthing that is not broken
The spurs have the best record and blair is 20% of the offensive rebounds of the team
November 29th, 2010 at 8:15 pm
blairs value as a cheap 2nd rnd impact player with high b ball iq is a good reason to keep him. blair used to get bench mintues with bonner. blair was rolling to the basket off pick and rolls, but splitter is getting those looks because his development is key to macthing up with the larger teams in the west. blair will no doubt have some big games this year, but we may not be as dependent on his rebounding and energy as we were last year considering the splitter acquisition. this is certainly a point of concern, but hes still a keeper.
November 29th, 2010 at 8:23 pm
First off, Blair is a legit NBA player on many levels.
However, I do not think that he will make any all-star teams (he could prove me wrong) without at least one signature post move and without a jumper. He makes his offensive living cleaning up and being in the right places.
I believe Blair looked so good last year because it was an abnormally poor regular season by Spurs (Tim Duncan era) standards. There were so many glaring holes that Blair filled to make himself stand out. IE: Parker/Ginobili unhealthy and inconsistent for 1/2 the season and Jefferson playing with the coordination of a pregnant pole vaulter. Someone had to step up in those games and it was Blair in many cases.
This year with the ball dominated by a healthy Parker, Ginobili, a rejuvenated RJ, and not to mention the evolution of George Hill…….and of course TD who will impose his will on this season and the playoffs when the time is right. There just isn’t room for Blair to put his stamp on games the way he did last year. I think the Spurs should quickly assess just how they can use Blair.
If he continues to be used like he is now, I believe they can put him on the market for someone who can fit this roster better.
by the way, where are all of the stupid haters who only post here when the Spurs lose?
November 29th, 2010 at 8:53 pm
rob
November 29th, 2010 at 7:08 pm
“According to last year…Blair would have seemed to have a break out season even in just his second year.”
It was never realistic for anyone to “expect” a “break-out” season for Blair in year two. Hope yes, expect no. I know Pop did not “expect” it. Also, it’s way too early still to know how the season will end for Blair.
“I think Tim Varner made a clear and concise evaluation of the moment at hand regarding Blair and his effectiveness for this team.”
Yes, and I disagree with it, and for good reason. No disrespect to Tim, but I have WAY more experience at following this game than the great majority of poster’s/commentator’s on this blog. You can use Tim’s assessment in an effort to validate your own preconceived notions all you want, but it does not make it correct.
“But it appears his likelyhood of doing that may just be on another team and not the Spurs unless the Spurs change their philosophy which is highly unlikely.”
Not true. The Spurs do not need to change their philosophy just for DeJuan Blair. Blair has a very strong possibility of ultimately thriving in this system, and in fact already makes strong contributions within it.
“And in looking at the trade scenario…Blair would probably be more productive in a D’Antoni system than a Popovich system. Same being the case for Randolph. Each being good at what they do but apparently in a system that doesn’t promote their talents to the best of their abilities.”
That’s not necessarily true, and you could say that about a lot of players, but it’s not particularly relevant. There’s no reason that Randolph could not flourish in D’antoni’s system. He’s just not playing well. And if he was such a good defender D’antoni would put him in at center instead of feeling forced to run Amare there. It’s not like he’s getting much out of Turiaf & Mozgov. Also Randolph is very good in an up tempo offense. That’s where he showed his flashes at Golden State.
“Otherwise he’s as big of a liability to this team as Bonner when Bonner can’t make his shots.”
No offense, but that’s an absurd comment.
ThatBigGuy
November 29th, 2010 at 7:51 pm
On your conclusion, we’ll just have to agree to disagree.
November 29th, 2010 at 8:54 pm
As usual, great read Tim.
I’ve said for some time that I don’t fully understand what Blair is going to develop into with in the NBA. He’s a hard read given his non-prototypical game/body for position. Personally he is frustrating to watch at times, but he is very young, quite raw, but oh so promising.
This discussion has a bit of some Scola stink attached to it and that’s a rock that has hit Spurs fans to many times in the head to forget.
I say hang on to the young man and lets enjoy watching him figure it out.
November 29th, 2010 at 9:21 pm
Jim Henderson
November 29th, 2010 at 6:14 pm
“First of all, Paul loves to get DWest going to start games. West will often burn any defender in the league if he’s on his game. Paul went to West early and often and he was ready to do his job to get them off to a strong start. During Blair’s time with West (6:14), West was 5-7 in FG’s, one was a lay-up, one was a tip-in, one was a pull-up jumper, and two were turn-around, fade-away jumpers. West played another 4.5 minutes before he went out for the quarter at the 1:21 mark. During that time he was still 2-3 from the field, including a lay-up, PLUS he was fouled twice in the act of shooting (once by McDyess, once by Bonner) because he was burning whoever it was that was guarding him. He was guarded mostly by MvDyess during this 4.5 minute stretch, although Bonner got in against him for TEN SECONDS, (and that’s all Pop could take because West was about to burn Bonner bad), and hacked West sending him to the line for 2 FT’s. In short, during the 4.5 minutes of Dice & Bonner on West, West was 2-3 FG’s, was sent to the line FOUR times (luckily making just two of the four), and so ended up with 6 points during this stretch (could have easily have been 8 pts.). If you prorate West’s scoring to make the minutes equal out with the time that Blair was on him, and assume that most of the time West is going to make 3-4 FT’s, not 2-4, West would have scored 10 points in that 1st quarter on McDyess and Bonner as well. Thus, as I said, Blair’s defense was no worse than anybody else’s on West in that 1st quarter of last night’s game.”
Possibly the single fullest piece of shit excuse and rebuttal I’ve ever read in my life. Using words like “if” and “assume” and “would have” and “luckily” and “could have”. Does it not make sense to foul if you get burned? If DeJuan would have hacked him MAYBE he would have had less success against him genius. The other defenders saved 2 points by committing fouls yet you say Blair’s defense was equivalent to theirs. Incredible Jim. Incredible. The lengths you go to TRY to prove your point is border line foolish at times.
November 29th, 2010 at 9:37 pm
Bankshot21
November 29th, 2010 at 9:21 pm
“Possibly the single fullest piece of shit excuse and rebuttal I’ve ever read in my life. Using words like “if” and “assume” and “would have” and “luckily” and “could have”. Does it not make sense to foul if you get burned? If DeJuan would have hacked him MAYBE he would have had less success against him genius. The other defenders saved 2 points by committing fouls yet you say Blair’s defense was equivalent to theirs. Incredible Jim. Incredible. The lengths you go to TRY to prove your point is border line foolish at times.”
I have four words for your response:
UTTERLY PATHETIC AND CLUELESS.
November 29th, 2010 at 9:43 pm
With Duncan, Splitter, McDyess, and Bonner on the roster, the Spurs can afford to give Blair time to see how he develops. I’d start Duncan and Splitter and use McDyess, Bonner, and Blair as substitutes situationally.
J2
November 29th, 2010 at 10:01 pm
Like many who have posted here, I am on the fence about Blair’s ability to convert his clear, specific strengths into into something resembling a starter who is more contributor than liability. But a crucial point seems to be largely missed in this discussion and it is one that that cannot be ignored.
Despite his incredible strength, unfailing work ethic and surprising athleticism, Blair has knees that are almost certain to fail him in the next 2-5 years. Here’s just one story I’ve read that addresses the issue:
(http://www.poundingtherock.com/2010/11/4/1787341/relishing-the-now)
Pieces like this reinforce the fears I already had for Blair based on my own unpleasant, personal basketball knee nightmares.
As much as I enjoy watching him play, especially for how little he adds to the payroll, I think that depending on him in any long term is wishful thinking. I’m not saying we need to dump him before this year’s trade deadline or anything that dramatic. But I don’t think any long range roster planning should be made with him in mind.
We’ve already gotten more out of him than is expected of most 37th picks in the draft. He has built up his value over a stellar rookie season, although his value is obviously not at its peak right now based on the season so far.
I think it would be wise for the Spurs to quietly explore trade options over the course of the season and the summer to see how to use this vaulable but fragile asset to secure another post player more likely to survive the rigors of NBA play.
Any analysis of his value that pretends this is not a relevant factor is not reality-based analysis. He dropped to 37th in the draft for a legitimate reason. The Spurs decided he was worth the risk at that slot and he’s already proven them right. But that doesn’t mean all is well in the ACL-free world.
Let’s not kid ourselves here.
November 29th, 2010 at 10:04 pm
@ syd
Keen and fresh insight. +10
November 29th, 2010 at 10:11 pm
@Daniel T
You were correct in your assessment of Udoka’s trade availability.
@Tim Varner
Sorry my friend, you are not the expert on the CBA as you claim to be. The exact words of the CBA are “(d) Except as set forth in Section 8(e) below: (1) no player who signs a Contract as a Free Agent may be traded before the later of (i) three (3) months following the date on which
such Contract was signed or (ii) the December 15 of the Salary Cap Year in which such Contract
was signed”.
Since Udoka was not signed 90 days before december 15 he must wait 90 days after the date he signed. It clearly states in the CBA that he must wait for the later of the two. Udoka holds the distinction of being the last free agent signing to be eligible to be traded due to the fact that his ninety days ends up on the NBA trade deadline.
Before you go slamming fellow bloggers, please have your facts in order.
November 29th, 2010 at 10:51 pm
Greetz all. My first post of the season! I am a superstitious being and didn’t want to post in the middle of “the streak” and have it end because I decided to post. With that out of the way… what a season so far. Great to see so many positive posts and none of the “ball” posters calling for Pop to be fired, and the “It’s only November” posts as well. Great piece here on Blair.I think there are things here and many have already touched on it. Blair doesn’t seem to be the Barkely that some thought he’d be but more of the Malik Rose. I’d love to have another Malik Rose, he played a pivitol role on several championship teams. I don’t think it is surprising to see his regression this year since he is playing against starting quality bigs. He’s not playing against the No 2’s off the bench. At this point it seem like he’s more well suited to do so and terrorize the No 2’s instead of the No. 1’s. We’re asking him to do too much by going up against the other team’s staring C/PF most of which are either taller than him or if they are undersized, they usually have an amazing skill set (i.e. West – he’s not a 7 footer but is an offensive nightmare for the Spurs). Blair’s contract is tiny; which is all the more reason to hold onto Blair who is certainly not a bad player. He’s a good young player of which too much is simply being asked. His body is not built to handle starting 7 footers. His contract is small and he’s certainly an energy guy off the bench that can play very well against the second unit. He still may develop into starting material but isn’t there yet. Let him get his burn against the 2nd unit guys. Gotta love his attitude though. If we talk about his lack of production on this board on a daily basis what do you think this guy (a competitor) feels like? He still brings it every day. Yet another reason to hold on to him and get him to develop. Tiago becomes an interesting case study as well. At the beginning of the season he was the second coming to some. He’s still our big signing in more ways than one. He plays the pick and roll well, moves his feet for charges well; but what I really don’t like about his game is positioning. More times than not, he will not battle for position and when a ball is coming off the rim he is behind his man in poor rebounding position. As much as a scrappy guy like Blair tends to be in the right place at the right time for a rebound, the opposite can be said of Tiago. There is lots of work to be done with Tiago and against the bigger teams we need a big who has a more developed skill set. Look at what happened to us from Kevin Love and Darko. Love is the real deal and can do that to plenty of people in the league but Darko? Honestly I haven’t been watching his game this year, but dammit it’s Darko! The Spurs lack of quality length is something I’m sure the coaching staff are aware of. Plenty of time to get things better in that dept. Hopefully with the development of Tiago. I feel it’s more important to develop a 7 footer than an energy guy in Blair (Jimmmy Flame Suit On!). Unless Tiago is what he is and there’s not much room for growth and development. It seems like there is with Blair but with Tiago I’m not sure if he’s close to his ceiling or not. Only time will tell. Of the teams with high winning percentages, the Mavs I believe have played the toughest schedule. Thus what our neighbors to the north are doing is worth noting. Also I (and plenty others on this board) mentioned before the season began, that dumping Dampier was a great move since Dampier is abused more by Duncan than the word “Booyah” by Stewart Scott. Chandler (when healthy) gave Duncan and the Spurs fits. They also have Haywood which is even more scary. But… it’s November and normally this is too early to talk about basketball, but this is the start of a pretty incredible season.
Random thoughts and observations on the season thufar:
-Miami is sucking and that makes me smile really really big!
-It’s great to see George Hill returning to form. Perhaps his injury at the beinging of the season was affecting his game
-Blair’s game has regressed… what to do, Spurs will figure it out
-Miami is sucking and that makes me smile really really big!
-Timmy is taking a backseat thusfar to the other stars in SA; and so begins the twilight years of Duncan’s career (no vampire jokes please)
-As of now I will have to bake an apology fruitcake and give it to RJ for Christmas. I (and many others) were all over this guy last year. Kudos for the work put in over the summer. This is the guy we thought we were trading for last year.
-Gary Neal… there were those that were on his bandwagon in pre-season and said he’d be a difference maker. I was not among those supporters. To me he was an unproven rook in the NBA. To pin your championship hopes on an unproven rook is pretty ridiculous. Well… I’ll take my crow blackened with a side of dirty rice please. Chalk it up to another great find by the Spurs brass. Very promising young player; not the season savior, but a welcome addition and contributor to the Spurs. Now can we keep him and develop him pretty please.
-Tiago is as tall as advertised, but his game is not as polished as I thought it would be. Hopefully this comes in time; he truly hasn’t had much burn. So far it’s evident he does fit in the pick and roll which is nice, and is decent at picking up charges. He needs more to his game to contribute, let’s hope that comes with more reps.
-McDyess is playing less like November and more like the player we saw at the end of last season. Another welcome surprise; let’s keep it up.
-Tony’s speed is back and that makes him dangerous. It keeps the trade “Tony Parker” posters at bay for a while at least
-The Spurs are an uptempo offense this year! And with that comes better assist numbers from Tony Parker (see above)
-Miami is sucking and that makes me smile really really big!
-Tony is a manwhore and cheating on Eva
Not really a surprise that an athlete and TV/movie star marriage didn’t last. Kinda surprised it lasted as long as it did. Luckily it hasn’t blown up into anything too large in the media and Tony has kept his game up on the court. That is the biggest surprise. This is the smallest scandal in the NBA. Whoever put out the media fire… Good on ya.
-Manu is healthy and when he’s healthy he’s half man, half amazing. He’s what makes the Spurs truly special.
-The Spurs are off to their best start in franchise history and if you can’t get excited about that… you have no pulse
-It’s Novemebr and this is my first obscenely long post
-Jim Henderson loves him som DeJuan Blair
November 29th, 2010 at 11:54 pm
Dr. Who
November 29th, 2010 at 10:51 pm
Welcome back, Dr. Who. In retrospect the thought of going undefeated and never hearing from you again could have been really traumatic around here — I never thought I would be that happy with a loss!
“I don’t think it is surprising to see his regression this year since he is playing against starting quality bigs. He’s not playing against the No 2’s off the bench. At this point it seem like he’s more well suited to do so and terrorize the No 2’s instead of the No. 1’s. We’re asking him to do too much by going up against the other team’s staring C/PF….”
Have you ever noticed that one of the most important and fundamental ways anyone can ramp up their improvement the quickest when trying to improve at any sport is to play against competition that is better than yourself? I’m sure you have. The purpose of this tactic of course is defeated if one plays too much against players that are too much better than oneself. In other words, growing pains are good, but torture is counter-productive. And this is the fine line that Pop is straddling with Blair. It requires constant adjustments and reevaluations. So far Pop looks to be handling Blair’s development in the way one would expect from a coach with such long-term success in this league. In my view Blair is very much worth this kind of special attention & investment, and I think Pop’s actions suggests that he agrees. And it’s pretty hard to argue with 14-2.
November 30th, 2010 at 3:04 am
Wow so many interesting comments and a very interesting debate.
Heres my take.
Trading for Randolph essentially for Blair is dumb. When Randolph’s profile reads that he needs work on heart and desire, thats already a no. I know that some people believe that when hes around the Spurs organization that he’ll have the best out of him. Thats probable. Stephen Jackson, Dennis Rodman in Chicago, Ron Artest (so far in LA) are some cases.
Id add that for Randolph to develop and learn the Spurs system, and to break up the preexisting chemistry that Blair already has with the current team will be dumb. I also think that Blair has alot of potential, and someone brought up a comparison to the Scola situation. I know some people believe that Blair’s potential would be similar to Randolph’s except Randolph adds shotblocking - well my view to that is that Blair has heart and desire which Randolph doesn’t. That’s what I saw in RJ last year in his postgame interviews despite his inconsistent season. Blair has heart, desire, and character. Thats why hes a spur and he puts in work/and will put in more work.
Blair really is a 4, and as many has highlighted, hes playing against starting 4/5s which is a level higher than what he’s normally accustomed to. He’s a very useful 4 in many situations - e.g. to spell Duncan at times and presents a very unique skillset/energy that is a very powerful x factor. He can influence games.
Right now, Blair starting is the right decision as Splitter is still developing.
Another issue i noticed from the comments is our concern for our lack of height/athletic ability and size. I think that if Splitter develops and Duncan in playoff form, which i think both of which will happen - and having Dyess in playoff form, Bonner in spot situations, and Blair for energy/rebounding/pick and rolls/putbacks - we should have enough to go pass LA and Boston provided we have the same kind of play we’re seeing from our guards and wings.
The Drive for Five!!
November 30th, 2010 at 3:07 am
I agree with one earlier comment made about Bonner that he’s thus far hasn’t produced much in the playoffs when the intensity is higher.
I still think that hes a valuable player for us for the reason that he stretches the floor by usually demanding someone with length/athletic ability to contest his shot. Against a team like the Lakers or Celtics, having one of their bigs come out to defend him stretches the floor for our guards and RJ’s penetration different from having another shooter in Bonner’s place.
November 30th, 2010 at 4:36 am
Jim Henderson
“Randolph is very good in an up tempo offense. That’s where he showed his flashes at Golden State.”
And a very good shot blocker/rim protector. Something yourself have been begging the Spurs to get.
My quote:
“Otherwise he’s as big of a liability to this team as Bonner when Bonner can’t make his shots.”
Your response:
“No offense, but that’s an absurd comment.”
No offense taken and none meant to give in my rebutal.
But lets look if it really is absurd.
So far Blair has a problem guarding (without fouling) bigger/taller bigs around the rim…check
Blair has a problem defending quicker PF out on the perimeter…check
Blair hasn’t developed a consistent jump shot…check
So if Blair hasn’t developed these qualities to be dependent upon to do reasonably well and garnish more time and the only thing he does well so far is rebound and make occasional steals….is that not the same as if Bonner isn’t hitting his 3 point shots to be a liability for the team because of the lack of ability to do other things well?
Regarding the Knicks proposed trade…In D’Antoni’s system Blair’s assests would be beneficial to the Knicks more so than to the Spurs because he wouldn’t be relied upon or expected to do no other than what he’s already good at doing.
And the lack of heart and desire tag being given to Randolph is based on who’s opinion? I’ve seen Randolph play with a lot of heart and desire. Matter of factly…some of his issues are quite the opposite of lack of…but more of trying to do too much. I’ve seen this kid try and take it upon his shoulders to carry a team. Frustration may be a better example…but I’ve never seen a lack of heart from Randolph.
@syd
Great point about Blair’s knees. Given his physical situation…is Blair truly going to last long enough to develop all that potential before his knees start breaking down. IMO…Blair’s window of opportunity has always been a small one in that regard.
@spursfanbayarea
“Before you go slamming fellow bloggers, please have your facts in order.”
I don’t think Tim was “slamming” his fellow blogger.
But with regards to the trade scenario…I’ve looked into the original proposal made by Timothy Varner and found the trade would be succesful without having to give up Udoka.
Blair and Quinn + a first rounder for Randolph works just as well. And could be done now without waiting until the 15th.
November 30th, 2010 at 4:52 am
Sigh. This is all so silly. I’m particularly surprised at this coming from Tim…
First of all, everyone, Jim Henderson isn’t alone in thinking it’s a good idea to continue to invest a lot of minutes in Blair. I’ve been an advocate of Blair’s all season long. So if you’re looking for whipping boys, don’t gang up on him. Count me in, too.
But I find this line of discussion very frustrating because you all seem to be desperately looking for downsides to the best start in team history! I guess I understand Tim doing that, because he’s got a blog to run. But more than anything else because so many of you just don’t seem to have a good understanding of what the Spurs are doing. This isn’t about who’s going to guard Rashard Lewis the best tonight. It’s about doing a good job on him while still developing the team.
The Spurs had a long run as championship contenders, but it wasn’t actually a single run. They won their first title at the end of Robinson’s career with the addition of Duncan. But they didn’t win another one for four more years. Why? Because Robinson’s game was built around athleticism and as he aged he could no longer perform at All-Star levels. So they rebuilt the team around Duncan while maintaining a high level of success, but without seriously challenging the Lakers from 2000-02. It’s extraordinarily difficult to rebuild while winning, but they did it. Nobody gave Pop and RC much credit for this remarkable achievement, though, because they assumed it was due to Duncan’s dominance. But it took a lot more than just Tim to win a championship and they worked hard to add the necessary pieces while still playing at a high level.
In 2003, having added Ginobili and Parker to Duncan, the Spurs went on a run of three titles in five years. So they did manage the near-impossible, rebuilding the team to a champion without going on an extended losing streak. But the thing is, until they actually beat the Nets, the fans didn’t really appreciate Ginobili, Parker, and Bowen.
After the 2007 title, it quickly became clear that Duncan and Ginobili were starting to decline and the Spurs weren’t at that same level anymore. Since then, they have again tried to rebuild the team while maintaining a high level of success. Let’s remember that rebuilding while winning is the single greatest challenge in sports, much less basketball. And Popovich and Buford are among the few in any sport ever to have done it even once. So you’d think at least their fans would have a little faith that they know what the hell they’re doing. But no. Just like from 2000-03, there are always the doubters, making little tempests in little teapots. But if Pop had listened to those doubters, the Spurs would’ve had ONE championship and not four. I remember when the fans doubted Parker was the kind of point guard who could lead a team to a title (they came back with a vengeance when he was injured last year, even though he has an NBA Finals MVP trophy on his mantle!). And I remember when the fans doubted St. Manu, too. I remember when they howled about losing Derek Anderson, Steven Jackson, Malik Rose, Nazr Mohammed (after questioning why Pop was playing him in the first place!), Rasho Nesterovic (ditto), Beno Udrih (and again), on and on and on.
So here’s the simple version: 1) Pop and RC know what they’re doing. 2) Other than Robinson and Duncan, every player who has been a key part of their championships has been doubted by the fans. 3) A lot of the players they’ve developed have blossomed after initial criticism. And finally 4) Against all expectations, the Spurs have added five talented young rotation players (Splitter, Hill, Blair, Anderson, and Neal) and two solid veterans (McDyess and Jefferson) over the last two years without giving away all their draft picks or breaking up their three big stars. This season they’re playing like contenders and have the best record and power ranking in the league. How then do you justify disagreeing with Pop on Blair’s playing time? Based on a couple of +/- analyses, when the worth of those statistical measurements as a tool for predicting the future has never really been demonstrated? I’ll stick with results, particularly the only +/- that really matters: The Spurs are +12 in the win/loss columns after only 16 games-even though they’ve invested time in a developing, 21-year old player. Can we just enjoy that for a while before changing the lineup?
November 30th, 2010 at 5:18 am
@rob - No checks for you. I challenged every reader on this blog, after numerous complaints about Blair’s defense against the Clippers, to give me specific examples. I broke down the entire game and his defense graded out quite well and essentially equivalent to Splitter’s. The team played better on offense with Splitter in the game, but that’s not surprising given his advanced game when compared to Blair. But that’s why, as long as they’re winning, it actually makes more sense to play Blair. He needs more development. You’re right, of course, Blair did have some trouble with West and Lewis. But who doesn’t? That’s why those guys have been All-Stars, are paid 8-figure salaries, and start for playoff teams. They cause problems. But last time I checked, the Spurs have gone 2-1 against Orlando and New Orleans with Blair in the starting lineup. I’ll take it.
Regarding Randolph: I’ve been watching him since he was at LSU. In my opinion, based on quite a few games, he’s vastly overrated. He reminds me in some ways of a predecessor at LSU, Stromile Swift. They show flashes of talent but don’t have the ability to consistently play at a high level mentally nor the determination to develop their games. Randolph is essentially the same player now that he was as a 19-year old at LSU, despite working with Mike D’Antoni and Don Nelson for several years now. Another similar guy from LSU, Tyrus Thomas, has finally made some big strides this year under Larry Brown, so maybe Pop could reach Randolph in the same way. He does still have a world of potential. But if I was RC I wouldn’t make this trade.
The most amazing thing of all, though, is that you guys are actually suggesting that the Spurs should trade Blair because of his knees! Well, that puts you on the side of the argument with the John Paxsons, Rod Thorns, and Billy Kings of the league and I have no intention of following that group. The fact is that Blair played in 72 of 72 possible games in two years at Pittsburgh and has played in 98 of 98 possible games for the Spurs. Randolph, meanwhile, missed 19 games as a rookie, and 49 games last year. Again, you’re looking at potential. I’m looking at results.
November 30th, 2010 at 6:12 am
What about calling New Jersey and seeing what they want for Derrick Favors? We’ll need another big at some point, and I wonder if the Nets would be willing to part with him.
November 30th, 2010 at 6:50 am
In the meantime, the Spurs have the best record in the league and most is well in Spurs land.
As Tim in Surrey said; “Can we just enjoy that for a while before changing the lineup?”
And please, no more “trade Tony” comments!
Go Spurs Go!!
November 30th, 2010 at 7:13 am
Tim in Surrey has said it best, don’t jack with a good thing. Pop and RC know what they are doing, they have never given away the farm to improve the team.
Even when they traded for R-Jeff, although they suffered last year with that albatross of a contract, they were fortunate when R-Jeff opted out. They got him back for a steal of a price @ $9.5m and he is making them look as brilliant as ever.
Swiping Dejuan @ #37 away from all of the other NBA teams, who had ample opportunity to acquire him before our beloved Spurs has got to be the biggest acquisition in the 2nd round since, well, identifying Manu Ginobili and Luis Scola in the 2nd round of their drafts.
This team is light years ahead of everyone else in the league and we are so lucky that Pop and RC run the Spurs and not some of the knuckleheads that post on this blog.
Keep this team as is, make some added adjustments as the season progresses and let the chips fall where they may…which should be in the Spurs floating down the river in June followed by hanging up banner #5 @ the AT&T Center!
November 30th, 2010 at 7:33 am
@rob
“Blair and Quinn + a first rounder for Randolph works just as well. And could be done now without waiting until the 15th.”
Sorry but you are incorrect. This trade would not be allowed until 90 days after quinn signed. Quinn signed Nov 5,2010 so would not be eligible until 90 days after that. So Quinn would not be allowed to be put into a trade until Feb. Please refer to exact excerpt of the CBA.
The exact words of the CBA are “(d) Except as set forth in Section 8(e) below: (1) no player who signs a Contract as a Free Agent may be traded before the later of (i) three (3) months following the date on which
such Contract was signed or (ii) the December 15 of the Salary Cap Year in which such Contract
was signed”.
November 30th, 2010 at 7:39 am
@Spursfanbayarea,
the OR between clause i and ii allow for a Quinn trade on or after December 15.
@Rob,
The Spurs have to wait until the 15th to move Quinn.
Moving Quinn, by the way, is purely hypothetical. There is no indication from the Spurs that they are entertaining moving anyone.
November 30th, 2010 at 8:38 am
“There is no indication from the Spurs that they are entertaining moving anyone.”
“This team is light years ahead of everyone else in the league and we are so lucky that Pop and RC run the Spurs and not some of the knuckleheads that post on this blog.”
No more trade comments, you’re wasting everyone’s time.
Go Spurs Go!!
November 30th, 2010 at 8:58 am
@Jim Henderson — you gave impressive numbers to defend your statement that everyone was equally bad covering West in the first quarter, but I still argue that Blair was the worst. By the time he left the game West was on a roll, and it would have taken a young Kevin Garnett to slow him down by that point.
Blair provided West with the feeling that he was “in the zone” by the time Pop took him out.
But I certainly enjoy reading your posts.
November 30th, 2010 at 9:00 am
And I agree with ITguy, the Spurs should stand pat, this is their best roster since Bowen and Horry were able to make a positive contribution.
November 30th, 2010 at 9:09 am
@ Tim in Surrey
“The most amazing thing of all, though, is that you guys are actually suggesting that the Spurs should trade Blair because of his knees! Well, that puts you on the side of the argument with the John Paxsons, Rod Thorns, and Billy Kings of the league and I have no intention of following that group. The fact is that Blair played in 72 of 72 possible games in two years at Pittsburgh and has played in 98 of 98 possible games for the Spurs. Randolph, meanwhile, missed 19 games as a rookie, and 49 games last year. Again, you’re looking at potential. I’m looking at results.”
While I agree with much of your post prior to this point, I think you’re off base here. Those of us who are concerned about Blair’s knees and his long-term viability aren’t “on the side of the argument with the John Paxsons, Rod Thorns, and Billy Kings of the league” so much as we are acknowledging the medical facts surrounding Blair’s condition.
Billy King, Rod Thorn and John Paxson (or Sam Presti or Danny Ainge, for that matter) having a particular opinion about a player is not automatically a reason to kneejerk react in agreement or opposition.
If you’ll recall, the Spurs front office also passed on the opportunity to draft DeJuan in the first round. They clearly had the same concerns as everyone else but decided it was worth rolling the dice at 37.
No one is disputing Blair’s tougness or work ethic and I think it’s fantastic that he’s been so durable so far. But that’s not really relevant to the point I’m making, which is that looming joint health issues are an inevitability for Blair, not a possibility.
Now admittedly, almost all professional basketball players can expect knee-related issues over the course of a career, especially bigger players. Tim is dealing with them now. But the medical consensus for a thick post-oriented basketball player with no ACLs is that he’s operating on borrowed time and the clock is likely to tick out much sooner rather than later.
I’m simply suggesting that in light of that, we keep our options open. We should of course continue to develop Blair to make him as complete a player as possible, both to help the Spurs and to make him more valuable to other teams. Whether he starts or comes off the bench, I think finding him 15 minutes a night will benefit us more than it hurts us against most teams.
But any talk of a post-Duncan era frontcourt that prominently includes Blair in the discussion is not operating based on the evidence offered through due dilligence. It is based on rosy hopes. And that’s no way to run a team.
For now, his strengths and his ridiculously favorable contract allow the team to be patient. Even if he averages 10 minutes a game all season, we’re ahaead of the game in terms of what one typically expects from a 2nd round, undersized post player with iffy knees.
But my hope is that over the course of the next year or so, the Spurs (as I’m certain they will) seriously consider any trade scenario that allows us to bring in a young-ish quality rotation big. Blair is a useful piece for the right team. But I’m skeptical that he’s a long-term piece for any team.
The team being 14-2 is awesome. But it is not primarily a function of what DeJuan Blair is doing on the court. And our current record should not be an impediment to making moves, either now or later, that improve our competitiveness.
November 30th, 2010 at 9:31 am
@Tim
Sorry but it states the LATER of the two. I see you are going to go the Jim Henderson route of never admitting to be wrong. Sad to see one of the heads of this blog being non-objective and interpreting things in his own biased manner.
“Udoka, you see, is the last free agent signed for 2010-11 who can be included in a trade this season. The NBA’s annual trading deadline falls on Feb. 24. Since free agents can’t be traded until 90 days after signing, any player signed after Nov. 24 can’t be dealt. And Udoka, for the record, can only be moved on deadline day.”-Mark Stein ESPN
November 30th, 2010 at 9:37 am
@Spursfanbayarea,
I wasn’t trying to be snarky, and I’m certainly not afraid to admit when I’m wrong. Here watch: you’re right. I was wrong. I misunderstood the rule. Udoka can’t be traded until February 24.
I’m still a dork; I’m just not very good at it. And you read way too much into my “own biased manner.” It was more a case of sloppy reading and plain ignorance.
November 30th, 2010 at 9:48 am
Alix Babaie
November 30th, 2010 at 7:13 am
“This team is light years ahead of everyone else in the league and we are so lucky that Pop and RC run the Spurs and not some of the knuckleheads that post on this blog.”
I wish I felt the same way about the Spurs, but let’s be realistic about our expectations. We are off to an unreal start, but we are not “light years ahead” of the Lakers and Celtics. We still very much need another shot blocking 7-footer hence Tim’s trade suggestion.
syd
November 30th, 2010 at 9:09 am
“The team being 14-2 is awesome. But it is not primarily a function of what DeJuan Blair is doing on the court. And our current record should not be an impediment to making moves, either now or later, that improve our competitiveness.”
Well said. Our fast start has virtually nothing to do with Blair’s production on the court. The Blair apologist’s conveniently dismiss the facts that he is playing slightly more minutes than last year and yet his scoring and rebounding have fallen. As you said, a team can’t sit on their ass just because they have the best record at the moment.
Look, I love Blair and think he has great potential several years down the road, but he is not untouchable and if you can pick up two young pieces (Randolph and Walker) for the price of Blair and a late 1st round pick, then the FO would take a serious look at that opportunity.
November 30th, 2010 at 9:55 am
@Jim
Good to be back… Yep I agree that the best way for rapid improvement is against good competition. But at some point it becomes counter productive (as you stated). I get visions of rookie QB’s being sacked 10 times a game here… Hard to tell if that is the case with Blair, too much too soon? It’s out of our hands and up to the coaches. They have a decent track record when they decide to actually develop talent (we won’t mention Beno here just everyone else) so we’ll wait and see.
The wonderful thing about the 100 comments here is that we currently have the best record in the league and we’re debating about a starting 4/5. Last year at this time we were calling for Pop’s head because he continued to trot out a starting line-up with Bonner and his mancrush Finely. What a difference a year makes! On that note, as far as suitable replaements for Blair in the starting line-up, Bonner should be left off the list. He’s definitely had his moments this short season but when he has been thrust in the the starting line-up it is very clear that he is not suited to take on starting 4/5′s. A solid bench stretch 4 is what he is; great for certain situations when you wnat to stretch the floor and improve spacing. Dyess and Tiago are the obvious choices. If Tiago can learn to play alongside Duncan that would be fantastic, I’m not sold on this idea or his game yet (but I really want to be). I’d prefer to keep Dyess on the bench and not have him play heavy minutes. We’ll need him come playoff time and don’t need to burn him out during the regular season. Good thing is, the team can still greatly improve, oh yeah and Miami is big ball of drama mess… life is good
November 30th, 2010 at 12:02 pm
Obviously his side doesn’t fit our needs, but I still love him as a Spurs
November 30th, 2010 at 12:02 pm
If this were 2004, then we wouldn’t be having this conversation. The fact of the matter is though, because Timmeh will not have many productive seasons ahead of him, we can’t really afford to take time to develop a player as crucial to the rotation as Blair. Unfortunately, that means Blair becomes a very valuable trade piece, since what Blair brings to the table now isn’t fitting the holes that the Spurs have. I think Varner’s trade proposal makes a lot of sense because it kills two birds with one stone. While I’m not a huge fan of Bill Walker (not as big of one as Tim) he does fill the wing need we have (able to play behind both Manu and RJ, making Gary Neal that 3pt specialist) as well as replacing the minutes that needed to go to Blair, without trading anything more than Blair, Quinn, and Udoka. Frankly, Randolph and Walker are a better pair than anything we can likely scrounge from free agency and I don’t see Timmeh’s minutes increasing, which means we need someone else in the frontcourt because too many things need to go right for McDyess, Bonner, and Splitter to cover the difference in Timmeh’s decreased floor time. Tiago is not a shot-blocking presence, but Randolph is. That is the precise reason I wanted us to trade for Darko a couple years back when he was vegetating on the end of the Knicks’ bench. Randolph and Walker make the most sense and Blair would thrive in D’Antoni’s offense.
November 30th, 2010 at 12:19 pm
Frankly, I don’t see any reason to NOT do a Randolph for Blair swap considering the upside Randolph has. I’m a big per 36 guy and Randolph’s rookie per 36 rivaled David Robinson’s. Now there may be underlying (read: attitude) issues that I’m unaware of, but even if Blair suddenly becomes the second coming of Charles Barkley, we know that his NBA career is limited in terms of duration. I’m not calling for an abandon ship, but I think this is something to seriously consider, especially as it does solve two of our problems in one go.
November 30th, 2010 at 12:23 pm
I think I should have elaborated…the Spurs Front Office is light years ahead of the rest of the teams in the league. The Spurs have perfected finding diamonds stashed overseas and the rest of the teams in the NBA literally have to account for the Spurs every NBA Draft. I think that Pop and RC have learned from giving up talented young players and are committed to drafting and developing their young guys so that they can always have players coming up. Since RC has taken over, they have hit more than they have missed.
November 30th, 2010 at 1:33 pm
rob
November 30th, 2010 at 4:36 am
“And a very good shot blocker/rim protector. Something yourself have been begging the Spurs to get.”
I do like Randolph’s skill set, and his shot-blocking ability is one reason why I would not reject as out of hand a Blair/Randolph trade. However, in the final analysis I would not pull the trigger on that deal for the reason that I’ve already reiterated twice on this thread.
“So if Blair hasn’t developed these qualities to be dependent upon to do reasonably well and garnish more time and the only thing he does well so far is rebound and make occasional steals….is that not the same as if Bonner isn’t hitting his 3 point shots to be a liability for the team because of the lack of ability to do other things well?”
No, because rebounding is inherently a more stable skill than 3-point shooting, and Blair doesn’t make just an occasional steal, he’s one of the best on the entire team. Bonner does one thing well, shooting the three, which can be fickle, and he hasn’t even demonstrated success with it in the playoffs, when it matters.
“Regarding the Knicks proposed trade…In D’Antoni’s system Blair’s assests would be beneficial to the Knicks more so than to the Spurs because he wouldn’t be relied upon or expected to do no other than what he’s already good at doing.”
So you think it’s smart for a player to be in a system where he’s encouraged not to develop, but to simply maximize what he has at the age of 21. Okay, I get it!
“And the lack of heart and desire tag being given to Randolph is based on who’s opinion?”
A consensus from all the players, coaches, organizations that have worked with him.
“Blair and Quinn + a first rounder for Randolph works just as well. And could be done now without waiting until the 15th.”
Anyone that does that deal is a nut.
Tim in Surrey
November 30th, 2010 at 4:52 am
“This isn’t about who’s going to guard Rashard Lewis the best tonight. It’s about doing a good job on him while still developing the team.”
Nice, insightful point, Tim. It amazes me that so many don’t get that simple, but hugely important point if one wants to sustain a healthy franchise.
“It’s extraordinarily difficult to rebuild while winning, but they did it. Nobody gave Pop and RC much credit for this remarkable achievement, though, because they assumed it was due to Duncan’s dominance. But it took a lot more than just Tim to win a championship and they worked hard to add the necessary pieces while still playing at a high level.”
Very well put!
jwalt
November 30th, 2010 at 8:58 am
“By the time he left the game West was on a roll, and it would have taken a young Kevin Garnett to slow him down by that point.”
If Bonner and/or McDyess were guarding West from the outset he very well would have lit them up as well. West has always been know as a flame-thrower to begin games. He has a virtually unstoppable game if he’s on. He was “on” Sunday night, and it would not have mattered which of our 4/5′s was guarding from the opening tip.
spursfanbayarea
November 30th, 2010 at 9:31 am
“Sorry but it states the LATER of the two. I see you are going to go the Jim Henderson route of never admitting to be wrong.”
I admit I’m wrong when I am “wrong”. But of course I’m not going to admit I’m “wrong” just because my view differs from someone else’s. Surely you can’t expect that.
Regarding the Quinn trade example, you appear to be correct, unless the source at the link provided is incorrect:
“Generally, a player cannot be traded until three months after signing a contract or December 15th of that season, whichever is later.”
http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#Q83
That said, I don’t think that Tim is refusing to admit that he was in error. You appear to be jumping to conclusions there. He may have simply misread the source material. And in fact, the quote you provided seems to be missing one key passage to back up your point on this issue. At the end of what you quoted should have read something like, “which ever comes later”. This language is made necessary because of the, “or” (ii) the December 15 of the Salary Cap Year in which such Contract
was signed”.
Hobson13
November 30th, 2010 at 9:48 am
“We still very much need another shot blocking 7-footer hence Tim’s trade suggestion.
We could have gotten a shot-blocker, if that’s what we wanted, without giving up Blair! His name is Lou Amundson.
“Well said. Our fast start has virtually nothing to do with Blair’s production on the court.”
That is absurd! You have NO evidence to support such a conclusion. This team would not be 14-2 without DeJuan Blair’s contribution this season. In fact, the team was 11-1 BEFORE his minutes dropped significantly after game #12, and is just 3-1 since.
“The Blair apologist’s conveniently dismiss the facts that he is playing slightly more minutes than last year and yet his scoring and rebounding have fallen.”
I’m not an “apologist”, for anyone. The 21 year old Blair is trying to broaden his game. He’s playing with four of our starters, who are all all-star players and very good scorers, and against the 1st unit players of the opposing team. Of course we’re likely to see a modest drop-off in his numbers to start the season. BIG DEAL! It’s not relevant for the big picture, which is winning games now (14-2!), and sustaining the health of the franchise beyond this year. And by the way, Blair still has the best rebounding rate on a team that has Tim Duncan & Antonio McDyess. Not too shabby. Plus his steal % is 3rd on the entire team, just a fraction behind Manu Ginobli & Tony Parker, and this represents a 33% increase from his steal % from last year.
“…..but he is not untouchable and if you can pick up two young pieces (Randolph and Walker) for the price of Blair and a late 1st round pick, then the FO would take a serious look at that opportunity.”
Dr. Who
November 30th, 2010 at 9:55 am
Number one, nobody said he’s “untouchable”. Number two, why would you want Walker now with the emergence of Anderson? They’re the same player!
“On that note, as far as suitable replacements for Blair in the starting line-up, Bonner should be left off the list.”
No question about it. Bonner IS NOT a starter on a 14-2 team. No way.
“A solid bench stretch 4 is what he is; great for certain situations when you wnat to stretch the floor and improve spacing.”
Yes, and even then, he has not produced in this role in the playoffs. Therefore, we should not be playing him too many minutes at the expense of developing two promising young “bigs”, Blair & Splitter. Bonner should average 15 mpg., tops, especially when Anderson returns.
“I’d prefer to keep Dyess on the bench and not have him play heavy minutes.”
Agreed.
“Good thing is, the team can still greatly improve, oh yeah and Miami is big ball of drama mess… life is good
”
Yeah you probably know that I’m celebrating along with you!
November 30th, 2010 at 1:36 pm
At the end of the day Dejuan is 6’6.
He has to be able to play Power Forward. So we give him time to build a PF skillset.
Until that happens it’s not such a bad thing to have a rebound mad kid available. I doubt you trade him unless it’s for a known quantity.
November 30th, 2010 at 1:43 pm
Jaceman
November 30th, 2010 at 12:19 pm
“The fact of the matter is though, because Timmeh will not have many productive seasons ahead of him, we can’t really afford to take time to develop a player as crucial to the rotation as Blair.”
WRONG!
“While I’m not a huge fan of Bill Walker (not as big of one as Tim) he does fill the wing need we have (able to play behind both Manu and RJ, making Gary Neal that 3pt specialist) as well as replacing the minutes that needed to go to Blair, without trading anything more than Blair, Quinn, and Udoka.”
Yeah, what about James Anderson, he’ll be back in a month you know. They’re the SAME player!
“Tiago is not a shot-blocking presence, but Randolph is.”
The need for a shot-blocking presence has been known for several months now. If the FO believed it was a necessary hole to fill then they would have signed Amundson, and not even have to give up Blair for an unproven Randolph, with work ethic issues, that can’t even earn minutes on the weak front line of the .500 team Knick’s (other than Amare).
November 30th, 2010 at 1:50 pm
Hobson13
November 30th, 2010 at 9:48 am
“…..but he is not untouchable and if you can pick up two young pieces (Randolph and Walker) for the price of Blair and a late 1st round pick, then the FO would take a serious look at that opportunity.”
Number one, nobody said he’s “untouchable”. Number two, why would you want Walker now with the emergence of Anderson? They’re the same player!
Dr. Who
November 30th, 2010 at 9:55 am
The following excerpt from a previous comment was not supposed to be in my post to you. It was meant to be directed to Hobson:
“Number one, nobody said he’s “untouchable”. Number two, why would you want Walker now with the emergence of Anderson? They’re the same player!”
Sorry.
November 30th, 2010 at 2:12 pm
Jaceman:
You’ve apparently skipped by the references to the fact that neither Quinn nor Udoka can be traded until 90 days after they were signed, so that would be in late February. I don’t believe you could get as much talent in return in a straight up trade at his salary level, and if he’s packaged it would have to be something more complex involving players considered more critical than the 12th & 13th players.
Regan wrote: “Blair really is a 4″
It seems like his skills are those of a 5, while his height is that of a 3. Did you come up with a 4 by averaging those out?
He could become more of a 4 if he could develop an outside shot. Most players don’t begin to do that after college, even though he has had some improvement in his free throw shooting. But if he did move out more, his most valuable contribution of offensive rebounding would decline as he’d less often have the position.
One of the reasons not often mentioned is that Pop didn’t have as many choices early in the season as to who would be his starter in Blair’s spot. Tiago was injured, and Bonner became injured during the first game. If Pop didn’t like what he was seeing from Blair, he didn’t have much choice at the beginning of the season. Blair has still been in there recently, but averaging only about 9 minutes in the last 4 games.
November 30th, 2010 at 2:27 pm
“We could have gotten a shot-blocker, if that’s what we wanted, without giving up Blair! His name is Lou Amundson.”
Yes, we both agreed months ago that Amundson would have been great. At this point, our missing out on Lou is water under the bridge and does nothing to fix our current needs.
“That is absurd! You have NO evidence to support such a conclusion. This team would not be 14-2 without DeJuan Blair’s contribution this season. In fact, the team was 11-1 BEFORE his minutes dropped significantly after game #12, and is just 3-1 since.”
Blair averages fewer points, rebounds, and blocks in more minutes this year. Last year Blair was 8th on the team in the area of +- per minute. This year, he is still 8th on the team in the +- category. This year he is either the same or worse in the areas of points, rebounds, blocks, and assists and only slightly better in steals. So how again does he play a big part in our 14-2 start? Our quick start is a function of several things, but Blair has little to do with any of them.
“Number one, nobody said he’s “untouchable”.
With that said, Jim, under what trade scenarios would you be willing to trade Blair this year in an attempt to shore up our deficiencies?
“Number two, why would you want Walker now with the emergence of Anderson? They’re the same player!”
He’s another decent young player. Yes, he may be redundant with Anderson, but can you really stock up with too much young potential? You may disagree, but I don’t think so. If Anderson works out, then trade Walker. If Walker is the better player, then let Anderson go. Secondly, he wouldn’t be the primary piece we would obtain in the trade. That distinction would belong to Randolph.
November 30th, 2010 at 2:45 pm
If we didn’t talk about Blair, what would we talk about?
I took some time to compare his stats from last year to this year. Nearly every big stat is down across the board. The only thing that hasn’t fallen are his offensive rebounding numbers, which have stayed the exact same (2.4 vs 2.4).
’09-’10 First 16 (’09-’10) First 16 (’10-’11)
MPG 18.2 15.5 19.3
PPG 7.8 6.9 5.5
RPG 6.4 5.9 6.4
FG% .556 (275-495) .620 (49-79) .400 (38-95)
FT% .547 (88-161) .450 (9-20) .800 (12-15)
His minutes are up, but his rebounding has not increased. He’s shot more shots through the first 16 games than he did through the first 16 games last season, but his FG% is brutal and therefore his scoring average is way down. His FT% is way up, but he’s shot 25% less through 16 games, and his FTA per game so far this season is less than half of what it was last season (0.9 vs 2.0).
Last year he played a much more important role because he rebounded (like he’s doing this year), shot 56% from the field, and drew fouls. Plus, Dice wasn’t having a good regular season and Bonner was hurt a lot, leaving Blair as the default 2nd big. This season he starts off as the 2nd big, only his rebounds don’t increase relative to his MPG, his shots per game increase but his FG% takes a hideous nosedive, and he’s not drawing fouls, which is a double whammy because his FT% is light years better. Add those woes to the fact that Dice is playing great, Bonner is shooting amazing, and Splitter joined the team, and now Blair’s the number 5 big.
I end with a quote from Hollinger:
“He’s a fantastic value as a second-round pick, but one wonders if this roster is the best complement for his skill set.”
November 30th, 2010 at 2:51 pm
The numbers I posted didn’t line up right. The first number is from the entire ’09-’10 season, the second number is the first 16 games of ’01-’10, and the third number is from the first 16 games this season.
Sorry if it’s confusing.
November 30th, 2010 at 2:57 pm
@Jim Henderson
How many more “productive” seasons do you think we’ll see out of Timmeh before he retires? Realistically? His minutes and production have all been dropping, and frankly Blair is further off from what we need him to be. As currently constructed, I see winning a championship a long-shot.
I’m not denying the necessity of maintaining a strong franchise, I don’t think anyone is. However good DeJuan Blair becomes, we know that his ceiling is very limited by the simple fact of his knees. If he goes off and proves me wrong, then kudos to him. I’d pull the trigger not for Walker, but for Randolph, and again, I’m not claiming to know exactly why Randolph hasn’t flourished, and maybe it won’t work out for us, but don’t go randomly accusing people of not thinking about the future of the franchise. At this point, what I think I’m in agreement with Tim about is that Blair is a square peg that we are trying to fit into the round hole of the Spurs’ roster. No matter how awesome that peg is it’s still a square. We can round it off to a circle, but that takes time, and my question is, do we have it? I frankly don’t see this being resolved this season, and I frankly don’t think we can afford to wait another season for Blair to develop into the player we need. I’m not saying he can’t, but we frankly don’t have the luxury of Tim Duncan’s younger years with Blair that we had with Malik Rose.
Anderson has shown flashes of being solid, but I can’t say we’ve seen enough of him, again I’ll be the first to say that I’m not a huge fan of Bill Walker, no one here is saying you HAVE to pull the trigger, but the options are one to consider. I’d like to have options as to who can guard Kevin Durants of the league. I love what I’ve seen from Anderson, but I’m not sold on him as a defensive stopper at both wing positions.
@ Daniel T
This is mostly a hypothetical, and I cede that we won’t be able to do anything with Quinn or Udoka until February, but it’s something to think about, unless you’re thinking we need to package Hill/McDyess/Neal/Bonner with Blair. I don’t think we’ll get straight up value at his salary level, but never say never. Every single player that I want that is even semi-realistic for the Spurs to land is way more than Blair’s tradeable salary level, but we’re just speculating right now anyways right? In terms of the salary and reasoning, Tim’s speculation works for now, perhaps not in the timing that we want it to, but it works. I don’t think it’s a perfect trade, but it’s the most realistic one I can think of at the moment.
November 30th, 2010 at 3:03 pm
On a completely separate note: Tim, I don’t see this happening until Kelenna Azubuike returns fully healthy and shows he can still be better than Walker.
November 30th, 2010 at 3:03 pm
Hobson13:
I take it you are proposing trading Blair and a first round pick for both Randolph and Walker. I don’t know if you have figured out a way that you could make such a trade work. For one thing, since Randolph was recently acquired in a trade he cannot be packaged with another player (Walker); you’d have to be able to work out two trades that would both work.
Next thing would be to figure out how you would make this work while remaining under the salary cap. The Spurs would pick up $2.8m in salaries while trading away only $.9m. Somehow I guess the New Orleans/Toronto trade was worked out without matching salaries by getting an agreement from Peja to take less, were you going to get Randolph to agree to a salary reduction?
November 30th, 2010 at 3:03 pm
Daniel T
November 30th, 2010 at 2:12 pm
“Blair has still been in there recently, but averaging only about 9 minutes in the last 4 games.”
The point is, the Spurs were 11-1 when Blair was averaging 23 mpg.
Hobson13
November 30th, 2010 at 2:27 pm
“At this point, our missing out on Lou is water under the bridge and does nothing to fix our current needs.”
The point is, THE FO OBVIOUSLY DOESN’T THINK IT IS A NEED OF OURS otherwise they would have looked to sign someone like Amundson in the off-season.
“….slightly better in steals..”
He’s NOT “slightly better in steals” this year. As I said, if you’d listen, his steal % has increased 33% this year compared to last year. There’s NO way to describe that as a “slight increase”. As for the other stat declines, you’ve chosen to ignore the entirely valid explanation that I provided in my previous comment:
“The 21 year old Blair is trying to broaden his game. He’s playing with four of our starters, who are all all-star players and very good scorers, and against the 1st unit players of the opposing team. Of course we’re likely to see a modest drop-off in his numbers to start the season.”
“So how again does he play a big part in our 14-2 start? Our quick start is a function of several things, but Blair has little to do with any of them.”
Oh yeah, prove it. Start anybody you like in place of him and I doubt we have ANY other 11-1 stretch over the whole rest of the season (since his minutes have dropped, so has our winning %). During that 11-1 stretch Blair was averaging 23 mpg. He was a significant PART of that 11-1 TEAM! He led the team in REBOUND %!! The most steals of ANY BIG on the team! He has unequivocally helped to fuel or transition offense! Why are you making it sound as though he was just some meaningless, ancillary, interchangeable piece. Ridiculous!
“With that said, Jim, under what trade scenarios would you be willing to trade Blair this year in an attempt to shore up our deficiencies?”
Unless the FO was truly open to trading “Bonner” to help close these “deficiencies”, deficiencies that they apparently don’t see (or have a suitable solution to), I wouldn’t be interested in trading Blair for anything less than a legitimate starter/rotation player that still has upside (in a package for Ibaka, for example).
“He’s another decent young player. Yes, he may be redundant with Anderson, but can you really stock up with too much young potential?”
Yes, particularly when you’re talking about giving up Blair to do it!
“You may disagree, but I don’t think so. If Anderson works out, then trade Walker.”
Running a revolving door of even rotation players is not the best way to build a franchise.
“Secondly, he wouldn’t be the primary piece we would obtain in the trade. That distinction would belong to Randolph.”
Yes, which I’ve already stated I have some problems with.
November 30th, 2010 at 3:13 pm
ThatBigGuy
“If we didn’t talk about Blair, what would we talk about? ”
You hit it on the head! This means October/November has been veeeery good to us! Let’s hope we keep squawking about issues like this. It means everythign else looks pretty good.
November 30th, 2010 at 3:25 pm
ThatBigGuy
November 30th, 2010 at 2:45 pm
“His minutes are up, but his rebounding has not increased.”
He’s played much more this season WITH one of the best rebounders in the modern era, Tim Duncan!!!!!!!
“He’s shot more shots through the first 16 games than he did through the first 16 games last season, but his FG% is brutal and therefore his scoring average is way down.”
He’s attempting to broaden his game, and he’s going up against a number of very experienced 1st units on the opposing team. It’s the best way for him to improve over time.
“His FT% is way up, but he’s shot 25% less through 16 games…”
Again, his reduction in attempts is a function of him adjusting to playing against 1st units, and our starters!! What is so hard to get about that!
“I end with a quote from Hollinger:
“He’s a fantastic value as a second-round pick, but one wonders if this roster is the best complement for his skill set.””
You know what, I don’t give a shit about some out of context quote from Hollinger.
Jaceman
November 30th, 2010 at 2:57 pm
“How many more “productive” seasons do you think we’ll see out of Timmeh before he retires? Realistically?”
I don’t care, however long he can play is great.
It’s ALWAYS been a long-shot. I’m glad you’ve caught up, but Blair’s not the scapegoat.
“However good DeJuan Blair becomes, we know that his ceiling is very limited by the simple fact of his knees.”
No we don’t know that at all.
“….but don’t go randomly accusing people of not thinking about the future of the franchise.”
I don’t go “randomly” accusing anyone of anything. I very logically & methodically call a spade a spade, and I just happen to have a penchant for pushing some buttons along the way in an effort to rattle the cages of denial.
“I’m in agreement with Tim about is that Blair is a square peg that we are trying to fit into the round hole of the Spurs’ roster.”
Wrong, and nobody has yet presented a compelling case for this assertion.
” I’d like to have options as to who can guard Kevin Durants of the league.”
Yeah, I’d like to have Michael Jordan in his prime, too.
“I love what I’ve seen from Anderson, but I’m not sold on him as a defensive stopper at both wing positions.”
And you’re sold on Walker in that role?!
November 30th, 2010 at 3:33 pm
I’ve heard Ibaka’s name mentioned a few times over the past few posts…
Let me say this: He is going nowhere. He is the third of three untouchables on OKC’s roster.
If he were traded for Blair, there would be a riot in OKC.
November 30th, 2010 at 3:47 pm
@ Jim Henderson
No one is blaming Blair for whatever potential pitfalls may come, but honestly, you can’t think that as long as Duncan plays we have a chance. I’m a huge Duncan homer, but the fact of the matter is that, Tim Duncan circa 2011 isn’t going to be Tim Duncan circa 2003, no where close, and Blair isn’t making up for the difference. If we both agree that it’s always a long shot, and I can agree with you that this trade isn’t ideal, then compel me as to what in regards to Blair’s game currently is working with the Spurs’ roster. There has to be a good reason Pop is benching him right? From what I’ve seen, Blair isn’t a good fit, and frankly I’m not inclined to waste Duncan’s waning years trying to make him one. Even if it is always a long shot to win a title that’s no reason to bail on trying to improve our chances. There’s no reason we can’t become a better team and maintain franchise stability with or without DeJuan Blair. He’s not going to become the second coming of Charles Barkley, so I’m sorry if you think he’ll become a future cornerstone of the franchise, because frankly, if he does, the Spurs really won’t be all that good.
November 30th, 2010 at 3:48 pm
Tyler
November 30th, 2010 at 3:33 pm
“If he were traded for Blair, there would be a riot in OKC.”
I wasn’t suggesting a one for one deal, and I know it would be hard to pry Ibaka. It should not be very easy to trade Blair either.
Splitter/Blair for Ibaka/Sefolosha is a more meaningful starting point, with probably a late bench big for OKC thrown in, and a late bench player on our team (wing/guard) thrown in as well.
November 30th, 2010 at 3:49 pm
@ Jim
“He’s played much more this season WITH one of the best rebounders in the modern era, Tim Duncan!!!!!!”
Oh, you mean the Tim whose RPG have decreased due to his decreased MGP, leaving more rebounds available? That Timmy?
“He’s attempting to broaden his game, and he’s going up against a number of very experienced 1st units on the opposing team. It’s the best way for him to improve over time.”
You broaden your game in the offseason and spring training. If the new game doesn’t work during the season (which it hasn’t), then you go back to what you do best and try again next offseason.
“Again, his reduction in attempts is a function of him adjusting to playing against 1st units, and our starters!! What is so hard to get about that!”
By your flawed logic, he should have less FGA. However, he’s had more FGA, yet his FTA have been slashed by half. That means he’s getting blocked more and fouled less. Either he’s not drawing contact like last year or he’s not getting calls. Either way, he needs to adjust his game, if he even can.
“You know what, I don’t give a shit about some out of context quote from Hollinger.”
Tim writes this in the original post: “Given the Spurs’ current personnel and playing style, Blair is a poor fit.” How is the Hollinger quote, which is exactly the same thing, out of context?
November 30th, 2010 at 3:54 pm
Jim
Give it a break man
November 30th, 2010 at 3:58 pm
Jaceman
November 30th, 2010 at 3:47 pm
“There has to be a good reason Pop is benching him right?
It’s called a process of player development for a player like Blair, but of course you and others on here obviously don’t understand player development.
” From what I’ve seen, Blair isn’t a good fit, and frankly I’m not inclined to waste Duncan’s waning years trying to make him one.”
Tim Duncan is not the most important variable for the future of this franchise. That time has passed.
“Even if it is always a long shot to win a title that’s no reason to bail on trying to improve our chances.”
Yes, but acquiring Randolph for Blair does not meaningfully help our chances.
“There’s no reason we can’t become a better team and maintain franchise stability with or without DeJuan Blair.
It depends on who you get back, doesn’t it?! Randolph is not the answer.
“He’s not going to become the second coming of Charles Barkley, so I’m sorry if you think he’ll become a future cornerstone of the franchise, because frankly, if he does, the Spurs really won’t be all that good.”
Don’t be ridiculous. I never suggested any such thing! I don’t mind engaging in reasonable conversations, but I don’t enjoy nonsense.
November 30th, 2010 at 4:00 pm
Daniel T
November 30th, 2010 at 3:03 pm
“I take it you are proposing trading Blair and a first round pick for both Randolph and Walker.”
This isn’t my trade proposal. It was Tim’s and yes I think it makes sense on several levels. Of course if this were to happen it would take place sometime in the future. Perhaps Blair will simply play better so we can avoid this hot button topic.
Jim Henderson
November 30th, 2010 at 3:03 pm
“Oh yeah, prove it.”
At this point, I think you’re just arguing for the sake of arguing. I just explained that his stats virtually across the board (except for steals that I will touch on in a moment) have dropped. How could anyone in their right mind visually see a player struggling and then have the statistics to back it up this assertion and yet still believe he has been an integral part of a team that is playing superior ball compared to last year? This is why I referred to you as a Blair apologist. In the two years I’ve participated in this blog, I’ve never seen you stick to such an indefensible point.
“He’s NOT “slightly better in steals” this year.”
Here’s the bottom line. He went from averaging .67 steal/game last year to 1 steal/game this year. Percentage wise it’s a HUGE improvement. In reality, he averages 1 more steal per 3 games. Your 33% improvement is a misleading stat, Jim.
“Running a revolving door of even rotation players is not the best way to build a franchise.”
You call it having a revolving door. I call it having options.
“I wouldn’t be interested in trading Blair for anything less than a legitimate starter/rotation player that still has upside (in a package for Ibaka, for example).”
Ibaka in year 2
10.8ppg 6.9 rebs 2.1 blks .2 assts in 27min/game
Randolph in year 2
11.6ppg 6.5 rebs 1.5 blks 1.3 assts in 23min/game
You know where I’m going with this. When healthy, Randolph is a better offensive player and a comparable defensive player. Besides, OKC would never give up Ibaka. They are short of inside muscle as it is.
I say this over and over again, but I’ll say it one more time. I’m not against Blair. I’m a huge Blair fan. In fact, I’d be the first to congratulate him if he had a 20/20 game against the W’s tonight. I want him to break out of this slump. However, at some point, he will need to settle down and produce. We are 16 games into the season and he’s shown little ability to be a factor in the starting lineup and has in fact looked worse this year than in his rookie campaign.
November 30th, 2010 at 4:00 pm
Colin
November 30th, 2010 at 3:54 pm
If anything needs a break it’s the “bail on Blair” folk that need to give it a rest.
November 30th, 2010 at 4:12 pm
Hobson13
November 30th, 2010 at 4:00 pm
“At this point, I think you’re just arguing for the sake of arguing.”
I’m afraid that’s the other way around. I’ve given entirely valid, detailed descriptions for my positions on Blair. Many of you just ignore the facts and wander about with a “bail on Blair” rant because he hasn’t met YOUR inflated expectations.
“Your 33% improvement is a misleading stat, Jim.”
That is ridiculous!
“I call it having options.”
Yeah, options with no real plan or identity. I’ll pass.
“Ibaka in year 2
10.8ppg 6.9 rebs 2.1 blks .2 assts in 27min/game”
Ibaka has had a shot due to injuries to get more minutes. I never said that we could get him for Blair one for one.
“Randolph in year 2
11.6ppg 6.5 rebs 1.5 blks 1.3 assts in 23min/game”
Yeah, with a crappy, run & gun, undisciplined Warrior team.
“However, at some point, he will need to settle down and produce. We are 16 games into the season and he’s shown little ability to be a factor in the starting lineup and has in fact looked worse this year than in his rookie campaign.”
I’m not bailing on a 21 year old player with great promise over 16 games. If you are, I’m glad you’re not running the franchise.
November 30th, 2010 at 4:31 pm
I’ve reached my wicks end with this nonsense that Jim Henderson continues to offer as expert analysis. 1st you praise Blair for being apart of our 14-2 team, then you scoff Bonner for playoff struggles even though he is currently apart of this same 14-2 start. Who gives a damn about how the man played in spot minutes in the playoffs. Blair wasn’t exactly Dennis Rodman in the playoffs himself so for the love of whoever you pray to please stop bringing up this playoff crap. Please stop bringing up Blair’s age. Please stop with the Millsap talk. Please understand that you have single handedly made many of us knock Blair whom under normal circumstances we would cheer. Tim In Surrey, I respect your opinion more, as it isn’t as smug but do you seriously think less production in increased minutes which is decreasing is helping this kids development? Apart of being a pro is if you don’t perform you ride the pine. Blair can give us sooooo much it’s crazy. But the notion that he can only be developed in a starting role is laughable. Back to you Jim…to mention that the team was 11-1 with Blair logging big minutes and “just 3-1″ when he logged less minutes is pure stupidity. You compared a 13 game sample size against a 4 game sample size. The more appropriate comparison would be the 1st 4 game with big minutes (3-1) versus the last 4 games with very few minutes (3-1) and its a complete wash. The frustration has clearly slipped out a little and for that I do apologize. I do not mean to bring the quality or integrity of this fine blog down but enough is enough. We all watched Blair get smoked last game and this man made a load of crap excuse as to how West “could have” had the same amount of points against the other defenders. Should have, could have, and would have means nada in the grand scheme of things. And as 1 of the bloggers mention he did get in the zone after tearing through Blair’s swiss cheese defense. I mean West is good…but he’s not THAT good. He looked Malonish out there against Blair. I hope Blair gets it together and does what starters are expected to do at age 21 or age 31. These are professionals and if you can’t do what’s asked of you then find a nice comfty seat next to Jacques Vaughn.
November 30th, 2010 at 4:35 pm
i think maybe hes off to a bad start . but he did manage to get over 500 pts and rbs last year whi. ch maybe only a little more than 50 other players did , Im not sure whats wrong .maybe he will be a great rebounder who just cant get the points,but when he decided to come out to the nba he should have been more ready i would like the spurs to keep him and see if things dont get better. I think he can and i would hate to see him do so well elsewhere like scola is doing for the rockets now
November 30th, 2010 at 4:48 pm
*12 game sample size
November 30th, 2010 at 5:05 pm
[...] 48 Minutes of Hell, has a great post on the effectiveness of San Antonio’s starting center: Why Dejuan Blair might not work for the Spurs. Fascinating read, and I don’t want to disagree with any of the conclusions. I do, however, [...]
November 30th, 2010 at 5:46 pm
Gents and ladies,
Maybe we should shut this one down. It’s never a good thing when fans of the same team begin to cannibalize one another. When discussions turn into diatribes, it sort of kills the fun of enjoying the team, which is, after all, really playing well this season.
If you feel yourself drifting into comment thread jerk windbag territory, let the other person have the last word and move on.
On a brighter note, at least we’re all passionate about the team. Imagine what a force Spurs fans would be if we didn’t spend so much time beating on each another.
December 1st, 2010 at 1:06 pm
[...] Sometimes, when you’re writing about the NBA, someone completely beats you to the punch. I’m not going to write a better summary of the DeJuan Blair quagmire in San Antonio than this one by Timothy Varner. [...]