Fundamentally Sound

Our new backup PG

2011-12-12T08:06:00.000-08:00

Everyone was a little iffy about whether or not rookie Cory Joseph could fill the role of backup admirably in the Spurs organization. While playing limited minutes, this was still always an important role, and during our championship years filled by players like Antonio Daniels and Speedy Claxton. Now, this is something we don't have to worry about, as I find that the Spurs have just signed T.J. Ford. Ford, while being known for attempting too many one-man fastbreaks, does provide veteran saavy, and is reported to have been focusing more on defense and play-making over the past years, two things Pop loves to hear. Well, I'm done talking. Good job RC, good job.

Searching for Bowen 2.0

2011-12-07T17:30:00.000-08:00

Well, as if they knew that I was looking for something write about, the Spurs decide to up and waive Richard Jefferson. I don't dislike RJ, don't get me wrong, but I also recognize he wasn't the best fit on our team. Utilizing the amnesty clause, well, I think Woj from Yahoo kind of explains it so read the article. Essentially what this means is that we have an opening in the 3 spot the Spurs are looking to fill. Once again, while James Anderson and Gary Neal are both on the roster, neither are exceptionally suited for playing the small forward position, and while I'm hopeful about the potential of Kawhi Leonard, we don't exactly have a lot of time to wait for him to develop. So where does that leave us? Looking for a 3.

Woj mentioned talks about Josh Howard and Caron Butler, given that we only really have the mid-level exception to spend, those are some decent names. Butler and Howard are both coming off of injuries, both looking to finish off their careers with a championship and I can't say that the Spurs are a BAD place to go for that, they have as good a shot as anyone else. Granted whoever the Spurs sign will have to likely split time between Leonard and Manu given how much Pop likes playing small ball now, but hey, I think you've got a good shot at it. Woj also mentioned Butler being more interested in playing in Chicago, where he would likely start at the SG spot where Chicago is greatly lacking.

Now Butler and Howard are all well and good, but the question we have to ask isn't necessarily who the best available free agent is, but rather, what exactly are we looking for. With RJ gone, and Timmy, Manu, and TP all a year older, it seems to me that Pop is looking for a more versatile wing defender. I'm still of the mind that most of the offense will continue to run through Manu, Timmy, and TP, so ultimately I think we're looking to improve defensively without losing a huge amount offensively. Sort of a stopgap while Engelland does his thing with Kawhi Leonard. So given that consideration, we basically go back to something of a Bruce Bowen blueprint, maybe with a little more offense. Realistically, I suppose it would be something between Bowen and RJ talent wise. Additionally, MLE is important, because that's all we have to pay, I don't think there are many big hot-shot superstars right now so I think we're okay on that front, but it's something to be noted. Some of these choices are obvious, but let's see who's out there.

1.) Tayshaun Prince
Prince, I think, has felt somewhat under-appreciated as of late in Detroit, especially with the changing of the guard to a younger team. Granted, I don't know if he will settle for just the MLE, but he sort of ideally fits everything that we're looking for. Generally quiet and hard-working, Prince averaged 14.1 points, 4.2 rebounds, and 2.8 assists last year on 47.3% shooting and 34.7% from beyond the arc. They're not gaudy numbers, but they're not bad. Some of the older Spurs fans may have a very clear recollection of Prince from the finals in 2004 and 2005. He's kind a solid blue-collar working type, he doesn't get much hype, but at 6-9 he's a long and able defender. He looks super skinny and has that awkward looking lefty shot, but he seems a good fit. The question for Prince (at age 31) is less of will he fit, because I believe that he would fit almost anywhere, given his skillset, but rather, will he settle for the MLE?

2.) Shane Battier
Naturally, when you talk about defensive specialists in this generation, you cannot fail to mention Shane Battier. Battier averaged 7.6 points, 4.5 rebounds, and 2.3 assists per game last season, but we also have to remember that he was traded to Memphis after 59 games with Houston for Hasheem Thabeet. Being 33, we know that Battier knows his window is closing, and I'm certain Battier wants to win as much as anyone. Since the playing field is pretty level with the MLE, unless some team decides to over pay Battier, the question is a matter of where Battier thinks his chances are better. Memphis wants him to re-sign and play with Rudy Gay and Zach Randolph while Miami wants him to play behind LeBron James. Where does starting next to Tim Duncan and Manu Ginobili rate on that scale?

3.) Josh Howard
The primary difference between Josh Howard and Richard Jefferson is mindset. If Josh Howard is serious about coming back to the NBA, and he's able to regain a good amount of his game from when he was playing in Dallas, then I'm all for it. He's a solid defender, and able to score off of the primary pieces of the offense. San Antonio may not be a bad place for him to try to make his career comeback.

4.) Jared Jeffries
As much of an offensive disaster Jeffries is, he is a 6-11 stopper on the wing. I'm sure Knicks are interested in trying to keep him, but I don't know how hard they'll try. Certainly he's not the most ideal candidate, but he is a solid and very long defender. If Jeffries is our option, then let's hope that Tiago Splitter has improved a bit.

5.) Grant Hill
Hill has sort of made his comeback in Phoenix after being declared the second coming of Jordan in Detroit and then Mr. Glass in Orlando. Hill is hardworking and has proven that he still has a lot of game even with his age. Hill is actually a pretty ideal candidate and I think would fit into the Spurs system well. While I don't think he'll command more than the MLE I also think he has sort of found his niche in Phoenix. Of course Phoenix does also have a glut of perimeter players in Josh Childress, Mickael Pietrus, and Jared Dudley. So you never know.

6.) Al Thornton
Al Thornton would be higher on my list if it weren't for the stated fact that he wants to be in the spotlight (or would rather have more playing time on a bad team than less playing time on a contender). Obviously he doesn't really have the talent to be the go-to guy and he'll probably be platooning a bit of time, but the amount of playing time here in San Antonio is a good chunk, particularly given how Pop treats his rookies (with the exception of Duncan). We know he can score, and he's a very physical, tough defender. Does he have the mindset of a Spur? Well, maybe not, but maybe the lockerroom in San Antonio could be a good influence for him.

7.) Caron Butler
Why is Butler so low? Because frankly, I was very disillusioned with Butler after he was traded from the Washington Wizards. Not that I'm looking for Butler to drop 24 a game anymore, he's not the go-to guy anymore. Nonetheless, I don't think Butler's that great of a defender (I could be wrong) and he's a fairly inefficient scorer as we saw on the Mavericks. If that's the case, I don't know that he'd be a significant improvement over Richard Jefferson other than the contract, and frankly, I think we can do better.

8.) Dominic McGuire
Why is San Antonio so great? It's because it's where are these random no-namers (i.e. Matt Bonner) can make a name for themselves. Dominic McGuire is a tough, long, athletic SF, the question, like it was for Jared Jeffries is whether or not he can hit a shot. I like McGuire a lot, but I see him more as a developmental project than an immediate fill to our need, and frankly, with the development of Kawhi Leonard, is not something we need. Additionally, with the shortened season, it's not really something we can afford either. However, that being said, I wouldn't be opposed to a player like McGuire on the roster.

9.) Jamario Moon
What ever happened to the feel-good story of 2008? Well Moon, if anything is a solid defender and a decent shooter. After a short stint of his Cinderella year at Toronto and a disappointing showing at the 2008 Slam Dunk Contest, Moon just kind of fell of the map. Given his history, I think Moon is of the hard working ilk, and that always rings true with Spurs fans as well as the front office. Can he contribute at a starter level? Dunno, looking at his history, it seems that he's taken progressive steps backwards, but given that, he's seen his playing time nearly cut in half as well. Starting for the Raptors he did average 8.5 points, 6.2 rebounds, 1.2 assists, 1 steal, and 1.4 blocks per game in about 27 minutes of play. 27 minutes sounds about right for the amount we're looking to play him. Of course it's been like 3-4 years since then, so we wonder if he can still pull it off. Still, maybe we can get him as the Ime Udoka replacement.

10.) James Jones
If the Heat land Shane Battier, James Jones becomes somewhat expendable in Miami. He's probably not the most stalwart defender that we'd hope for in our SF but he's a 6-8 three point specialist and we all know how Pop loves his three point specialists.

Of all the remaining free agents I personally don't think we can get any of them. I intentionally disregarded RFAs because I'm pretty sure that the teams would just match, particularly for players like Luc Mbah-a-Moute and Jonas Jerebko. This is my take on who we should take long hard looks at, but I'm not in the front office. Of course, I trust RC, so I'm sure he has a good reason for getting whoever he ends up getting. Hopefully, whoever it is, he'll be the difference maker this year.

Should the Spurs run in free agency?

2011-12-02T20:16:00.000-08:00

Well, I'm sure it's more of a question of can they rather than should they, and frankly, I don't know that they can. Currently, the roster remains pretty much the same, with the addition of rookies Kawhi Leonard and Cory Joseph, acquired at the cost of George Hill, which, while sad, when all is said and done, was pretty worthwhile. NBA.com currently ranks the Spurs as 8th overall in their power rankings, behind the likes of Miami, Dallas, OKC, Chicago, LA Lakers, Boston, and Memphis (of all teams), which I can see being relatively fair given the shape of the team. While indignant about being overlooked, as we have been so many times about so many things, I can understand why these 7 teams are ahead of us, because frankly, I think any of these 7 teams can handily beat us in any given playoff series. So the question again comes down to what do we need? and where do go from here?

Obviously, Duncan at age 35 and Manu at age 34 cannot sustain the team long term, like the Boston Celtics, with their aging trio of Kevin Garnett (35), Ray Allen (36), and Paul Pierce (34), this is probably their last run if they make one. Now, I believe that a classy organization like the Spurs will keep Duncan and Manu until they decide to retire, and I believe that classy players like Duncan and Manu know when to call it quits. It's also realistic to believe, that as good of a point guard as Tony Parker is (now 29), he's not a franchise cornerstone. With the changing of the guard for the Spurs, beginning with the drafting of Tim Duncan in 1997, David Robinson was fortunate to have, well, Tim Duncan. From 1997 through 2003, Gregg Popovich only needed to play 3 bigs for his rotation, Duncan, Robinson, and the ever serviceable Malik Rose. They got 2 championships from that front court rotation. In 2005 and 2007 Duncan was able to get away with less well known frontcourt partners of Nazr Mohammed, Rasho Nesterovich, Fabricio Oberto, and Francisco Elson thanks to two things; the ever saavy veteran play of Robert Horry and the fact that Duncan was in his prime. Today's front court lineup unfortunately contains an older Duncan, who is probably closer to the then older Robinson now than his more youthful days, and a plethora of role players. Some mixture of Antonio McDyess, Matt Bonner, DeJuan Blair, and Tiago Splitter just isn't going to cut it.

The season is shortened, and unfortunately, unlike in 1999 we don't have a well-established team already, Kawhi Leonard is a rookie for crying out loud. Sure Manu won one his rookie year (2003), but remember they also had an established wing rotation with Stephen Jackson and Bruce Bowen. So given our current roster generally established:

PG - Tony Parker, Cory Joseph
SG - Manu Ginobili, James Anderson, Gary Neal
SF - Richard Jefferson, Kawhi Leonard
PF - Tim Duncan, Matt Bonner, Antonio McDyess, DeJuan Blair
C - Tiago Splitter

The question remains do we try to leverage any one in free agency or should we try to make a trade? Unfortunately, neither situation provides us with many options, but they are things to be considered. As much as we need a big, the big names of the free agency are mostly bigs which we can't afford, as much as I want Nene, Marc Gasol, Tyson Chandler, or even Samuel Dalembert, there's likely going to be a team with much more cap flexibility that can snatch up these players quickly. So who's left? Well, should we even be looking at bigs? Should we trade for one? These are all questions that I don't know that I can address. Who can we pick up cheap? With 12 spots filled we have 3 left on the roster, and given how much Pop likes using Bonner, McDyess, and Blair can anyone find playing time that's left or does Tiago eat it all up?

It's a tough question, and personally (as much as people will disagree with me about this) I don't believe DeJuan Blair is a good fit for this team. I think he's a great player who will work well in a system that suits him, and this is not it. We also have to remember though, that Blair is on his rookie contract, which might I remind you was from the second round, so maybe we get a solid backup PG? It's hard to say. All this being said, I can perfectly understand RC Buford and Gregg Popovich deciding to stand pat and see where things go, and given the upside of Kawhi Leonard, and now a full season of James Anderson, I feel I may be pleasantly surprised. It's easy to point at the needs we have right now, but hey, I trust they know what they're doing. If this is Timmy's last run, let's make it a good one.

A Fresh Look at Kawhi Leonard

2011-09-27T00:01:00.000-07:00

I'm probably super late in posting this but a friend of mine pointed me towards a good look at what a number of rookies may look like in the NBA, or at least, what the rookie/sophomore game would look like if we are fortunate enough to get an All-Star Game this year.

This is a link to the Jimmer's All-Star game which was hosted in BYU. The two teams were comprised of various draftees, including several first and second round picks. One team was captained of course by BYU star Jimmer Freddette, the other by the Spurs' own first round pick, Kawhi Leonard. It was a good chance to see the skills that Leonard would bring to the table and I liked a lot of what I saw. Leonard finished with 24 points, 10 rebounds, 3 assists, a steal, and no turnovers on 8-17 shooting for the night. Leonard's team also did come out with a very convincing victory.

Leonard definitely was a factor defensively, but what was very impressive was his offensive game. He showed a couple of pretty good dribble-drive moves, not afraid of drawing contact, having a smooth finish at the rim. Under pressure, Leonard does show a bit of a tendency to revert to his old, ugly jump-shooting form, and rush his shot, but I'm sure that's something Engelland can deal with.What I was particularly impressed with, was his ball-handling skills, which the commentators continually pointed out being something he worked on significantly in the last couple of seasons. The team often ran him as a point-forward, even with guards like Kemba Walker and Isaiah Thomas on the team. In particular, the commentators pointed out Leonard's ability to feed the post and see the different passing angles. While I don't expect him to take over much of that job from Manu Ginobili or Tony Parker, it certainly eases my concerns regarding a backup point guard.

The future looks bright to me. Seeing Leonard in action makes me hope that this lockout ends all the more.

Unfettered Optimism: The next big thing

2011-06-26T12:29:00.000-07:00

Fact: Spurs haven't had a top 15 pick since Tim Duncan.

That is, until now, until Kawhi Leonard.

While it's sad to see George Hill go, you can't help but be excited about a guy who is athletically as gifted as the San Deigo State product. Tack on the hard work ethic and the Spurs excellent coaching staff, you can't help but get excited. I have to say I'm excited. Then again, I'm always excited at the prospect of fresh young talent. With James Anderson fully healthy and Tiago Splitter a whole season acclimated to the NBA, you can't help but smile at that glimmer that will be the 2012 season, provided there is one with this whole lockout that's looming. However, with an infusion of young blood and the level-headedness of our savvy vets, you have to think that we have something good going on here. I'm intrigued to see what R.C. Buford will do with the impending free agency, but this isn't about that, this is about the draft. While I'm somewhat intrigued by the talents of Davis Bertans and Erazem Lorbek, the immediate here and now force us to look closely at the games of Kawhi Leonard and Cory Joseph.

Let's start with the big name: Kawhi Leonard.

If you took the 3 minutes to watch the Sports Science video above, you'll have learned that Kawhi's arms are longer than Andrew Bynum's and his hands are as big as Shaquille O'Neal's. Wow. Despite standing only 6-7, that's impressive, majorly impressive. Tack onto that the fact that he is laterally quick enough to defend SFs and may eventually develop the strength and bulk to defend PFs, we have an amazing defensive tool in our hands. If his DraftExpress profile is to be believed, Leonard's upside is that of Shawn Marion, and I'm pretty sure they are referring to the 2007 Phoenix Suns Shawn Marion (though the 2011 Dallas Mavericks one does now have a ring), with a worst case scenario of Luc Mbah-a-Moute, who is still one of the more able perimeter defenders on a defensive-minded Milwaukee Bucks squad. Besides, Leonard does have one thing on Marion, his shooting form actually looks decent, and he's working on it. You can't help but think that Spurs are excited to have a young athletic player, willing to work on his jump shot, who has been actively working on his jump shot working extensively with shooting coach Chip Engelland is going to turn out something special. Adding Leonard also does another thing, it forces Richard Jefferson to fight for his playing time. Added motivation, good stuff. While Leonard doesn't entirely solve the problem of a shot blocking big man next to Duncan, he does provide a viable option to play small, being long and versatile enough to probably play some PF for stretches. We'll see how much of an offensive repertoire he develops, but if he can even just develop a decent jump shot (letting Chip do his work), then Leonard will become an immediate boon to the rotation, adding size and defensive tenacity to the squad.

Now let's look at the less heralded name: Cory Joseph.

There's actually some pretty good reasons to be excited about Joseph as well.

Now Joseph, being the 29th pick of the 1st round wasn't a huge household name coming into a weak draft year. Now here's a familiar story, a not-really-PG type that the Spurs reached for. Does that sound familiar? No, I don't think Cory Joseph will become the next George Hill, but I do think he has the potential to become a solid rotation player that can make an impact as a backup PG. While not a stellar ball-handler, Joseph has the tools to shoot from almost anywhere on the court, I don't see him playing huge minutes, but enough to give Tony and Manu a breather. Unlike Hill, Joseph will only be asked to run the offense, which he does reasonably well, reading through various scouting reports, it's hard to gauge Joseph's skills as a PG, but there is hope as he is known to play low-mistake basketball running the point. I could hope that he would become something of a poor man's Kirk Hinrich, but that might be asking for much, but it does give you an idea of the mold that I think he could fit in. He's not extraordinarily large at 6-3, nor extremely athletic, but he does have a reputation for being a pesky defender, and that, combined with his vast offensive arsenal, in a controlled setting may be something that the Spurs can use in a backup PG. While there are questions about Joseph's ability to play PG, I think things might work out alright, especially as Pop will likely still run the offense through Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili.

Looking at the Spurs roster currently, there are still a number of questions, but certainly things are looking up:

PG - Tony Parker, Cory Joseph
SG - Manu Ginobili, Gary Neal, James Anderson
SF - Richard Jefferson, Kawhi Leonard
PF - Antonio McDyess, DeJuan Blair, Matt Bonner
C - Tim Duncan, Tiago Splitter

While we are lacking solid playmaking ability in Joseph, Neal, Andeson, or Leonard, I believe that if Joseph just plays smart, low-mistake basketball, then the little time that he gets when both Parker and Manu are on the bench won't be as big of a liability as we might suspect. Additionally, it's hard not to get excited when Leonard's strengths are precisely what works in the Spurs' system: grabbing the rebound and making smart outlet passes. While I'm still not enamored with our frontcourt rotation, I think all-in-all, things are looking up. We're in a good spot, and we'll see (after the lockout) what we can get out of these kids.

What Made the Twin Towers so Special?

2011-06-06T12:37:00.000-07:00

I was reading this post about how Mike Brown may attempt to bring back the Two Towers in LA and while you do have two talented 7-footers on the Lakers in Pau Gasol and Andrew Bynum (and possibly third 6-10 versatile forward in Lamar Odom), I'm pretty convinced, it won't be even close to the original iteration of Tim Duncan and David Robinson that won the 1999 championship. Maybe I'm wrong about Andrew Bynum, but let's consider the skill sets that were in place to make Robinson and Duncan so successful, so far as winning two rings running a 3-man frontcourt rotation with Malik Rose.

1.) Dominant low-post threat that draws double teams

We can't deny that David Robinson was an explosively athletic player, and he had a solid low-post game to go with it. For years, he single handedly carried the Spurs deep into the post season. I've also heard tell that (in his prime) Tim Duncan in the low post is probably the closest thing you can get to an automatic two points (I want to say Chris Webber said that but I don't know). So far though, this doesn't limit our options, because if we look at it, a lot of players had this skill, Shaquille O'Neal first and foremost, but I would posit that Shaq would not have brought a revival of the twin-towers. So far though, for our comparison, let's say that both Pau and Bynum meet this requirement.

2.) Solid mid-range shot that demands respect

Essentially, this is the role of every single big man that played next to Tim Duncan after David Robinson retired. Antonio McDyess does this admirably, but players like McDyess and Bonner and even Robert Horry don't give Duncan rest in the low post. This basically is a way to show that the big man is still in it even if he's not in the low post. Robinson had his 10 foot straightaway jumpers from the free-throw line and Duncan had his 12 foot wing bank shots. You have to respect those shots. Defenses are forced to choose between some pretty potent poisons when determining defensive matchups, I imagine it was quite a nightmare to figure out who to matchup against Duncan and Robinson, the Knicks in 1999 showed us that. They got away without it with the savvy play by Fabricio Oberto, but you could hardly call him a second tower next to Duncan. Pau for all intensive purposes meets this criteria, he's got a solid mid-range game (better, arguably than Duncan's). Bynum's limited range limits the effectiveness of any matchups that can be exploited. If the defense isn't worried about Bynum's mid-range game, then Pau Gasol's effectiveness in the low post becomes mitigated, because Bynum's man can roam and help.

3.) Ability to pass out of double-teams and find the open man

A lot of big men have fairly underrated ball-handling skills and passing games: Shaq, KG, Yao, C-Web, and I would posit that Duncan and Robinson are among those. Robinson, I don't know if he had elite passing for a big man, but at the very least, it was good enough to get the job done. Simply put, you can't punish double teams if the ball can't get to the open man.

4.) Defense - Shot blocking

This is pretty obvious, so it would seem, but essentially it's like two lines of defense, so many shot angles at the rim are taken away, it's hard not to get swatted. I mean, we're talking a combined 5 blocks PER GAME average between Duncan and Robinson in the playoffs of their '99 championship run. That doesn't count all the altered shots (but consider they averaged 21.4 rebounds per game in the playoffs, 15.8 of those defensive).

I don't know if I covered everything, but these are the basics for a Twin-Tower type offense to work. Does Mike Brown have that to work with in LA? Hard to say. It helps that like Duncan, Gasol can guard both PFs and Cs so they can always keep one of the two big men on the floor, but can Bynum step it up and be the second piece of that? Only time can tell. My gut says no, but I could be wrong.

Regular season success: Is that all we were made for?

2011-04-26T14:11:00.001-07:00

Being a cynic, there's always something bitter-sweet about having to say "I told you so." Because, while I do relish being right, I don't like being right about bad things. While I may be completely off base in saying that the reason the Spurs are down 3-1 in the first round of the playoffs has anything to do with any analysis I may have put out previously, it still bothers me that we are down 3-1 to the Memphis Grizzlies without Rudy Gay. It makes me sad. Of course, I could just be continually underestimating the likes of Zach Randolph, Marc Gasol, Sam Young, Tony Allen, Shane Battier, and Mike Conley. Adrian Wojnarowski has already declared this the death of a dynasty, and frankly, I don't know that I entirely disagree with him. While he pays lip service to never writing the Spurs off because of the classiness of the organization, he already has. As Graydon Gordion has surmised, Gregg Popovich was out-coached, which I also may or may not agree with. Why am I so ambiguous? Well simply put, it's because I haven't really watched the series too much, but Graydon brings up an excellent point: we should be winning at least 4 out of 5 of these matchups, but we're still losing the game. Why? I don't know beyond the fact that the Spurs are playing like crap, which I can't say for sure, but if they weren't, we wouldn't be down 3-1 against the Grizzlies after an embarrassing 18 point rout in Memphis last night.

Given we're in this position it's hard not to draw comparisons to the 67-15 Dallas Mavericks of 2007 and their first round defeat at the hands of the 8th seeded We Believe era Golden State Warriors headed by Baron Davis and the maniacal coaching of Don Nelson. Already, writers are throwing out the possibility of only the second 8th seed upset (since the Warriors in 2007) since the first round series moved to seven games. The only question that we as Spurs fans have to ask is, how did it all come to this? Shouldn't we, the top seeded playoff powerhouse, be standing tall over the team that has been among the laughingstock franchises of the league since trading Pau Gasol for Kwame Brown, Javaris Crittenton, and the rights to Marc Gasol? I could go on spouting how I thought Popovich should have played Tiago Splitter earlier in the series to mitigate any damage Marc Gasol would do to us, I could say any number of things, how we needed another defensive big man to be a shot blocking presence in the paint, but what's done is done, and frankly, the regular season had me convinced I was wrong anyways.

I've always touted a couple of things that the Spurs needed this season to be successful, a shot blocking presence and a defensive minded wing player, neither of which we really addressed (no I don't consider Richard Jefferson or James Anderson really an answer to the latter issue). But then I thought, hey, what do I know about basketball? From the box scores, my immediate reaction is that the offense is stalling. While Duncan is rested, we can no longer expect him to take over a series, while both he and Antonio McDyess have shown that you can extend your career through smart playing and veteran savvy, it's not 2003 anymore. While Tony Allen claims Manu "faked" his elbow injury, I think if that were the case the series would be 3-1 in the Spurs favor. From all appearances, we're not playing Spurs basketball which we need, but that's not why I'm here.

Let's look at our roster really quickly:

PG - Tony Parker, George Hill
SG - Manu Ginobili, Gary Neal
SF - Richard Jefferson, James Anderson, Danny Green
PF - Antonio McDyess, Matt Bonner, DeJuan Blair
C - Tim Duncan, Tiago Splitter

That is our roster. Sure you might throw Chris Quinn in there, but I wouldn't consider him a major part of the rotation. We played a wheeling and dealing offense that honestly stunned a lot of teams. However, a lot of it predicated on so many things going right. Now, people have argued with me that every team needs a lot of things to go right in order to win a championship, but my reservation with the Spurs was simply that we didn't have much wriggle or buffer room. This is no longer 1999 where would expect Duncan and Robinson to combine for almost 60 points, 30 rebounds, 10 assists, 12 blocks per game in a low possession 90 point game. This isn't 2003 where Tim Duncan could single handedly score at will and dominate a whole series on both the offensive end and the defensive end. Sure Duncan can still put up numbers, but the onus of the offense now falls to the backcourt tandem of Parker and Ginobili. Now, I still believe that there is no one in the league that can stop Ginobili other than himself, but as we've seen time and time again, as great as Ginobili's competitive spirit is, his body has betrayed him enough to give him the consensus label of "injury prone". While few guards can stay in front of Tony Parker, he's not one you would expect to take over a game for you. Despite being arguably the best transition guard in the game, you cannot win a series purely on the transition game alone.

Where does that leave us? Expectations have certainly been high, but have we really just been deluding ourselves into nostalgic dreams of grandeur? A lot of pundits and fans would say yes. I think we can squeeze one more good run out of this team though, and while there have been pleasant surprises, there have been drastic disappointments. Richard Jefferson was never the game changer we needed him to be. Certainly, he's filled into his Sean Elliott/Bruce Bowen/Michael Finley type role quite nicely, but unlike either Elliott or Finley before him, Jefferson certainly has not taken over any game. Gary Neal has been a stellar find but let's be realistic, isn't he just a marginal upgrade over Roger Mason? Am I asking for the impossible? Maybe. I know we probably won't get another star in the near future. Few players these days want to play for an old-school small-market franchise, even if it is one of the best franchises in the league for the past decade.

We had the best record in the regular season, and as the Cleveland and Dallas have shown us, that means little in the post season. It's easy to lament things past at this point in time, but in the face of another humbling playoff exit, we really have to ask ourselves: do we have what it takes to win a 7 game series? Maybe it's a mental thing, but my call is just that we're seeing really how precariously built this Spurs team was in the first place. I hate to say it, but: I told you so.

Best Record Beware: Does Barkley know what he's talking about?

2011-03-03T14:45:00.000-08:00

There are a couple of things I'd like to go through on this specific post, and I'm kind of juggling ideas of how exactly I go about doing that while I'm actually writing this. Somewhat unprofessional, I know, but not being a journalist, I'm okay with ditching professionalism for colloquialism. So there are a number of things that spurred this post. One of the major ones was a statement made by Charles Barkley:

"I got Dallas and the Lakers ahead of the Spurs to be honest with you. To be honest with you, if the season ended today I think Oklahoma City can beat the Spurs because I think the Spurs are a little overrated to be honest with you because I think they play very hard, they play very smart but I think they are missing a big guy to be honest with you. Tim Duncan is struggling on the downside of his career but I just don’t think they don’t get enough easy baskets because their two best players are Parker and Ginobili, and I love Ginobili, but I believe in jump shooters being your go-to guy to be honest, that was my only knock on Oklahoma City. I always tell people you don’t win with jump shots. They have gotten better around the basket defensively but I think Dallas and the Lakers are the two best teams in the West."

Now, when I actually sit down and read that, it's really confusing to me, but I think I get the gist of it. I think. Essentially, Barkley is saying that despite the league best record, the Spurs aren't his favorites to win a championship, which can be a legitimate statement. It was only in 2007 that we saw the league-best 67-15 Dallas Mavericks embarrassingly ousted from the first round of the playoffs by the Cinderella We Believe Golden State Warriors, lead by Baron Davis, Stephen Jackson, and Jason Richardson. We saw in 2009 66-16 Cleveland Cavaliers get destroyed by a Hedo Turkoglu and Dwight Howard pick-and-roll in the Eastern Conference Finals and then in 2010 the 61-21 Cavaliers saw LeBron James check out during the second round against the Boston Celtics. So if we've learned anything from history, we do know that regular season record isn't necessarily indicative of anything. In 2006 the 64-18 Detroit Pistons were upset by the Miami Heat, led by Dwayne Wade and Shaquille O'Neal in the Eastern Conference Finals. So that means in the last 5 years, only the 66-16 Boston Celtics of 2008 both held the NBA league-best record AND won a championship. That's not to say that there is a negative correlation, but rather, that they are probably less related than one might initially imagine. Fair enough.

That brings me to the second point though, which is where Barkley thinks that all these other teams are ahead of the Spurs, which I'm not entirely sure about. While it's fair to say that on paper, Lakers have an edge, I don't know that you can definitively declare the Spurs patently "worse" than the Mavericks and Lakers considering that the Spurs at worse can split the season with either team, having already beaten both teams twice out of their annual four meetings. I mean, on paper, sure, the Lakers and Mavericks "look" better, but that isn't always telling. I mean, seriously, when was the last time the Spurs "looked good" on paper? 2003? Yet with all these no-name players and journeymen and such, the Spurs have managed to cobble together consecutive playoff appearances and 4 championships since Duncan's rookie year in 1998. However, I can still see that just based on intuition how Barkley would pick the Lakers over the Spurs (though maybe it's bias that causes me to dislike the Mavericks and wonder how anyone could think that team is good). Let's look at all these teams that Barkley likes over the Spurs:

	SPURS	LAKERS	MAVERICKS	THUNDER
PG	Tony Parker	Derek Fisher	Jason Kidd	Russell Westbrook
SG	Manu Ginobili	Kobe Bryant	Rodrigue Beaubois	Thabo Sefolosha
SF	Richard Jefferson	Ron Artest	Peja Stojakovic	Kevin Durant
PF	DeJuan Blair	Pau Gasol	Dirk Nowitzki	Serge Ibaka
C	Tim Duncan	Andrew Bynum	Tyson Chandler	Kendrick Perkins

G-3	George Hill	Steve Blake	J.J. Barea	Eric Maynor
G-4	Gary Neal	Shannon Brown	Jason Terry	James Harden
F-3	James Anderson	Matt Barnes	DeShawn Stevenson	Daequan Cook
F-4	Antonio McDyess	Lamar Odom	Shawn Marion	Nick Collison
C-2	Tiago Splitter	Joe Smith	Brendan Haywood	Nazr Mohammed

Res	Matt Bonner	Luke Walton	Ian Mahinmi	Cole Aldrich
Res	Chris Quinn	Devin Ebanks	Brian Cardinal	Nate Robinson

On paper, I can kind of see where he's going. I mean, the Lakers do have the formidable frontcourt rotation of Gasol/Bynum/Odom to continually deal with, and of course the machine that is Kobe Bryant. Additionally, Blake and Barnes aren't significant steps down from Fisher (which I know isn't saying much) and Artest. Now, I am somewhat predisposed to disliking Dirk, so maybe I underrate him a little, but with an aging Kidd and Marion and a shooter as streaky as Jason Terry, it's hard to say that an equal number of things has to right for the Mavericks as it does for the Spurs to win a 7 game series against any one of these teams. Granted Tyson Chandler is the 7 foot interior defensive anchor that Erick Dampier never was and Dirk never will be, but can we really say that Beaubois and Barea are significantly better than Hill and Neal? As for OKC, while adding Perkins and Mohammed give them one of the better defensive frontcourt rotations of Ibaka/Perkins/Collison/Mohammed, paired with the ultra-effective pairing of Westbrook and Durant, I can see this being a very good team. I can understand who they might be considered a contender now, but first, Perkins needs to get back healthy, until then we have to reserve our judgment. I wouldn't want to play any of these teams in the playoffs, but do I think we have a legitimate chance of beating each one? Yes. Certainly, "anything can happen" does apply in the playoffs, especially with teams as good as these four, but blanket statements like "I have the Lakers and Mavericks ahead of the Spurs because I think they can beat the Spurs in a 7 game series." are just kind of ignorant, because on the flip side, it's so close that the Spurs could just as easily win said 7 game series.

Which kind of leads my rambling to my last point, which is simply, I don't think Charles Barkley has watched a Spurs game. Essentially, he labelled Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili "jump shooters" and went on to say, "you don't win with jump shots". Okay, fair enough. 76% of Ginobili's shot attempts are categorized as jump shots on 82games.com, but so are 81% of Kobe Bryant's, 86% of Kevin Durant's, and 88% of Dirk Nowitzki's shot attempts, furthermore, Tony Parker only has about 52% of his shots categorized as jump shots, so essentially, the go-to guys on the Spurs are less jump shooters than all the other teams. That was a lot of numbers, let's see if a chart can help:

	Tony Parker	Manu Ginobili	Kobe Bryant	Pau Gasol	Dirk Nowitzki	Jason Terry	Kevin Durant	Russell Westbrook
% jump shot	58%	76%	81%	55%	88%	88%	86%	63%
% close	42%	22%	17%	34%	11%	11%	8%	33%
% dunk	0%	1%	1%	5%	1%	1%	6%	4%
% tip	0%	1%	0%	0%	0%	0%	1%	1%
% inside	42%	24%	19%	45%	12%	12%	14%	37%

Okay, so the premise is that the more shots you take inside, the easier the two points are. Well, if that's the case, the Spurs get the most easy shots for its two stars. I mean, the Mavericks are pretty much just jump shooters other than Tyson Chandler. If jump shooting doesn't win, then the Mavericks shouldn't really be that good right? Maybe I'm just confusing myself now. Anyways. My point is this, the Spurs may not be the clear favorites, but they have to be in the talk. My take is that given all the ups and downs of this year, you can't really count them out, and there is no definitive favorite. My other point is that Charles Barkley has either a) never watched a Spurs game, b) very ignorant about the Spurs' players, or c) all of the above. That being said, I've never really taken Chuck too seriously when it comes to legitimate basketball talk, so I'm not going to start now.

Free Agency! Woo!

2011-03-01T16:17:00.000-08:00

For some reason I love wandering in the realm of possibilities. Specifically, the possibilities of something that would make the Spurs better. In the wake of the flurry of trades that drastically altered the landscape of the NBA, sending Carmelo Anthony and Chauncey Billups to New York to join Amar'e Stoudemire, the one that sent Deron Williams to New Jersey, and Kendrick Perkins to Oklahoma City, now comes a slew of buyouts, through which, contending teams hope to shore up their rosters and improve their chances in both the playoffs but also in pursuit of the ever elusive Larry O'Brien trophy. Among the names of players already bought out include names like Mike Bibby and Troy Murphy, of those expected to be bought out but weren't we have the likes of Samuel Dalembert and Joel Przybilla.

Nonetheless, also in the wake of the trade deadline is a major injury to Tony Parker, sidelining him for 2-4 weeks. Even had Parker stayed healthy, I expected the Spurs to be a major player in the free agent market, as their seemingly perennial hunt for a championship makes them one of the few small market teams that veteran players look at. Currently as stands, the Spurs roster looks like this:

PG - Tony Parker, George Hill, Chris Quinn

SG - Manu Ginobili, Gary Neal, James Anderson

SF- Richard Jefferson

PF - DeJuan Blair, Antonio McDyess, Matt Bonner

C - Tim Duncan, Tiago Splitter

I know, Anderson should technically be classified an SF and Blair a C, but let's not split hairs over these things okay? For all extensive purposes, this is our roster. With Parker out, I anticipate Hill to start with Manu essentially being the de facto point guard. Quinn might see some (more) minutes, but all-in-all I see much of the ball handling duties going to Manu and Hill with Anderson and Neal taking the other minutes available. So what exactly is it we need then? Well, in my opinion, and those of several others in Spurs fandom, two things; a legitimate wing defender and size. Arguably the former is easier to find than the latter, but should that be our priority? I would argue no. Why is that? Wasn't I the one constantly pushing for the Spurs front office to sign a shot-blocking presence of some sort? Well, yes. However, as the season has unfolded, it's really hard to see where another big would fit into the rotation given how well Blair, McDyess, and Bonner have been playing. This is amply demonstrated by the fact that Tiago Splitter (granted he's had his rookie woes), the biggest player on the team, cannot find a consistent spot in the rotation. As much of a defensive revelation as Anderson has been, we still don't necessarily have someone that can hassle the opposition out on the perimeter. Now, granted, we have to temper our expectations, we're not going to find another Bruce Bowen, but that doesn't mean there aren't players out there to look at. Additionally, we have to consider who's available from buyouts and from a free agency perspective. Logically, we would only really consider the buyout candidates since the players that are still free agents are still free agents for a reason. We know that Mike Bibby is going to sign with the Miami Heat (probably), and one of the few bigs to be bought out, Troy Murphy, will sign with the Boston Celtics.

Here are my top picks:

Corey Brewer (SG/SF, 6-9, 188 lbs, 24 yrs old)

Brewer, taken at 7th overall in the 2007 NBA draft, was part of the Florida championship team that featured the likes of Al Horford and Joakim Noah. While his NBA career hasn't been quite as stellar, Brewer at the very least has three things going for him. First, he's young. Second, he's long. Thirdly, he's used that length to establish himself as something of a defensive player. While his three-point shooting is suspect, unlike most young players, he knows his three-point shooting is suspect, and thus doesn't take many of them. It's not the perfect fit, but certainly I believe that if any team can work with him to improve that it would be the Spurs. In the interim he'd definitely be a solid backup to Richard Jefferson, in the long haul, he'd definitely be a potential steal if the Spurs are able to lure him to San Antonio and keep him there and he picks up that Spurs winning mentality.

Al Thornton (SF/PF, 6-8, 235 lbs, 27 yrs old)

Old for his draft class of 2007, I recall Al Thornton being a surprise scoring sensation on the Clippers. However, I also recall him being something of a black hole. Since then, he's been on the Wizards, who, with the additions of Rashard Lewis and Mo Evans has found it difficult to crack the rotation, especially since Josh Howard has recovered and returned to the roster. That being said, I like Thornton also because he's known to be aggressive and physical on defense, which is something Pop appreciates. Granted Twitter is reporting that Thornton would prefer to get solid amounts of playing time rather than sit more for a contending team, also indicating he'll likely end up on the Warriors, he's still someone to at the very least consider.

Kelenna Azubuike (SG/SF, 6-5, 215 lbs, 28 yrs old)

I've always been high on Azubuike, and granted, he's something of an older, more battle-tested James Anderson in more ways than one, he's a solid player overall. Of course, the fact that he was waived from New York during his rehab from major knee surgery is something we should be cautious about, he is a player that can make an immediate positive impact. While not a stellar lockdown defender, he is a 40.9% career 3 point shooter, which definitely helps, not to mention he's a plus on the athletic end of things.

Aside from that, I also expect the Spurs to take good hard looks at players that they've already seen before, reports include Garrett Temple. Personally, I'd also like to see the possibility of some D-League call-ups, including Marcus Cousin and/or Joe Alexander.

Go Vote

2011-02-24T15:16:00.001-08:00

http://www.poundingtherock.com/2011/2/24/2013543/standing-pat-or-shoring-up-the-reserves

Perspectives on Player Development

2011-01-12T10:20:00.000-08:00

I'll be the first to admit that I don't really know a whole lot when it comes to the realities of player development. The extent of organized basketball that I've been exposed to was limited to a couple weeks of basketball camp at various local colleges, and this was like middle school. Therefore, my player development schema is limited to intuition and NBA 2K8, which doesn't work super well, because there, you can develop almost anybody into an All-Star. So I guess most realistically, I'm going on intuition, and general player development in the realm of sports.

There's a lot that goes into player development, certainly therein lies opportunity, environment/culture, and also the individual player's work ethic. A player cannot improve if none of the above are given, or, in other words, if there is no chance given to the player to improve some aspect of his game or if either of the player or coaches don't think he can improve or needs to improve, then we have obviously limited the growth and subsequent development of said player. Certainly today on the Spurs' roster we have a significantly increased amount of development that is necessary, we have a lot more new faces and younger players. To me there are three aspects of player development; skills, conditioning, and knowledge.

Development of skill is improvement on the basic movements and techniques necessary for the game. Most obviously, DeJuan Blair's work in the off-season on free throw shooting has significantly improved his stroke from the line, therefore, he is making them more easily and regularly. Likewise with Richard Jefferson's off-season work with Pop on his shooting. Yet with perfecting skill, there is always first a downturn. You always get worse before you get better. Why? Simply because you need unlearn all the things you've been consistently doing wrong beforehand, and then relearn the right way of doing it. Not to say there aren't those who won't be successful with an altered shooting stroke (say Kevin Martin) or unorthodox footwork, or whatever, but they are the exceptions. Part of what makes Tim Duncan great is simply that he sticks with the basics, he has such a highly developed back-to-the-basket skillset that he's touted as "the closest thing to a guaranteed two points" when in the paint.

Conditioning is comprised, in my mind, of two things: strength and stamina. The two sound pretty straight forward. Ultimately, it's the strength to play a game as physical as basketball, and the ability to do it over an extended period of time on the floor. Naturally, this is something that does deteriorate with age, as age is something that slows players down, as well as repeated wear-and-tear over time, especially with repeated usage of the same muscles and such. While a lot of players get by fairly admirably on athleticism alone, their lack of development in other areas of their game become very glaringly obvious as players get older. Once past their prime, there are a lot of things that players just physically aren't able to do anymore. If we look at Tim Duncan, it's obvious that the continual wear of the past 14 years of professional basketball has taken its toll on his legs. All that jumping for rebounds and contesting/blocking shots has drained a lot of the athleticism that was once there. Likewise in regards to stamina. If you are not conditioned to be able to withstand long periods of physical exertion, then you cannot really expect to stay on the floor and be effective. It really doesn't matter how "good" or "talented a player is, if he gets gassed after two trips up the floor, then he can't really contribute much in the grand scheme of the game. 48 minutes is a long time to be running up and down a basketball court.

The last, but certainly not least, aspect of player development is knowledge. Knowledge entails knowing the game itself; how it's played, how it's called, etc... However, it's not limited to simply understanding the intricacies of the rules of basketball, it also includes knowing what your role is and how your teammates fit around you. Additionally, it's being able to read and understand what the opposition is doing and react accordingly, being in the right place at the right time, both offensively and defensively. Setting the appropriate screens, flashing to the basket at the right time, taking a charge, boxing out for the rebound, these all take an intricate knowledge of the game, yourself, your team, and your opposition. A lot of times pundits like to boil this down into what we simply call basketball IQ.

Now, why this whole spiel on player development? Well, the Spurs are generally considered a great place for player development, and overall, just a great organization to play with. A lot has been made of the playing time, or lack thereof of rookie Tiago Splitter. While Splitter is considered to be eventually the bigger impact on the Spurs, he has yet to see a fraction of the time that Gary Neal has seen, and probably less time than rookie James Anderson, when he returns from injury, why is that? While I would posit that Splitter may have the skills to be successful, and I think his knowledge is on par with at the very least, James Anderson, in regards to the game, there are a couple aspects of Splitter's development that are keeping him off the court. One is conditioning, while he's used to extended stints on the floor from his play in Europe, he's also lighter than a lot of the big men in the league. While the play is arguably less physical than Euroleague, he is competing against bigger, more athletic players, this requires a greater amount of strength and stamina to compete. A second, may be simply fatigue. He's coming off of a rugged off-season playing FIBA, in which he was injured. I haven't seen enough of Splitter play to gauge his potential upside, but, I do know that Splitter will need to take some time to adjust to not only the style of play, but also the intricacies of Popovich's offensive and defensive schemes, which, is hard to develop a comfort for outside of game situations. Doesn't that mean Pop should play Splitter more? Well, that's a difficult question to answer for me, and I'm going to kind of cop out by saying, yes and no. Yes, Splitter does need more floor time to work up his in-game conditioning as well as comfort for the feel of where he fits in the offense and on defense. However, the Spurs are also playing so well, and winning games, which is their goal. I'm not knocking Splitter, but Pop's rotations are so intricate and the Spurs' success contingent on so many things going right (as it is with all teams) that in some sense, we can't really afford to have Splitter learning as we go, making mistakes in close games.

What I'm ultimately trying to say, is that we need to be patient with Splitter. Certainly there is a sense of urgency as the "championship window" continues to draw closed. Buford and Pop have certainly done an excellent job of revamping the Spurs and extending that window, maybe some would even consider it opening a new one, regardless, the window is certainly not quite that long, so the concept of giving Splitter a couple seasons to mature into the player that we want/need him to be certainly becomes less and less of an option, but as we well know, some things take time, and player development is one of them. I have no doubts that Splitter is an intelligent and skilled player who can make an impact on the court, but we need to be patient with him and with Pop in molding Splitter into the most effective player he can be when taking the court. While I have high hopes for a championship this season, my excitement is tempered with the understanding, that some things can't be rushed, which makes me anticipate our next shot at a ring all the more.

Is the roster good enough as is?

2010-12-30T16:42:00.000-08:00

The Spurs currently hold the league best 27-4 record. With four losses coming from New Orleans, Dallas, Los Angeles Clippers, and Orlando, and having beaten each of the previously mentioned teams previously save Dallas, who they will play tonight. Obviously, we're doing something right. Gregg Popovich obviously has come up with something that is effective and gets the job done, changing the identity of the Spurs from the traditional grind-it-out defensive squad to a run-and-gun offensive nightmare. Tim Duncan, like his predecessor, David Robinson, before him, has ceded the keys of the franchise to his long-time partners Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili, letting the game flow through them rather than himself. R.C. Buford has surrounded his Big 3 with a more than solid supporting cast, snagging young talent like George Hill, DeJuan Blair, Tiago Splitter, and Gary Neal, as well as adding the veteran savvy of the likes of Antonio McDyess, and retaining the ever serviceable shooting of Matt Bonner. Richard Jefferson took the time to work in the off-season with the coaching staff, and looks completely rejuvenated and a stellar fit in the Spurs' new look with the same feel, another championship contender.

Is this enough though? Currently the Spurs have 13 players on their roster, and Pop is making fair use of all 13 of them due to injury troubles to George Hill, James Anderson, and earlier, Tiago Splitter. Typically, Pop has preferred, especially in playoffs, the truncated 9-10 man rosters. Essentially running a 3-4 man front-court and a 3-4 man wing rotation with a 2 point guard system. With the high performance of the young guns (Hill, Blair, Neal) it can't be said that the Spurs are lacking in depth. I, along with several other fans certainly cannot wait to see the emergence of James Anderson's full potential. It's true that we currently can't really add anything without taking away from whatever mojo is working for us now, but I can't quite get this nagging feeling out from the back of my head that we could be better. Granted, anyone we add now may simply be insurance, and perhaps Buford is holding off on tapping the ever generous pockets of the Holts until some kind of injury comes way, or perhaps quite simply there hasn't been anyone that fits well enough. Since pre-season we've already gone through the likes of Bobby Simmons, Garrett Temple, Alonzo Gee, and Marcus Cousin. Here's how the breakdown of the depth chart currently looks (presuming everyone is healthy):

PG - Tony Parker, George Hill, Chris Quinn
SG - Manu Ginobili, Gary Neal
SF - Richard Jefferson, James Anderson, Ime Udoka
PF - DeJuan Blair, Antonio McDyess, Matt Bonner
C - Tim Duncan, Tiago Splitter

Immediately, the first and second unit kind of take shape, and frankly, they look pretty good. The return of James Anderson will instantly put Ime Udoka out of anything except situational play, and it's hard to figure there will be any more playing time to the already highly regulated frontcourt, at least in terms of minutes. While I'm still not a huge fan of James Anderson at SF (though I admit, from the few times I've seen him play, he certainly has the strength and athleticism to make it work), Gary Neal has been playing too well to not have him play. Neal has easily taken the role of instant offense off the bench, in the molds of Jarren Jackson, Steve Kerr, Brent Barry, and/or Roger Mason, with his nice shooting touch, as well as his continually impressive overall play. In any given game 12 suit up, and on that list, currently, only James Anderson is not active, due to injury. However, when he recovers, as I previously stated, Ime Udoka no longer needs to dress for games. I know Pop always likes to have a backup-backup point guard option; Antonio Daniels behind Steve Kerr, Steve Kerr behind Speedy Claxton, Jacque Vaughn behind Beno Udrih, etc... and here, that's Chris Quinn.

So it appears to me, that we have a pretty nice roster, while the names themselves aren't as flashy as say the depth in Boston, you certainly can't knock the front office for any of these moves/additions. Given that, I think trading anybody is pretty much out of the picture if we were to make any moves. So, as much as I would like to see the likes of Andray Blatche, JeVale McGee, or Kevin Love in silver and black, it doesn't look like it's happening. Therefore, if we are to do anything, we are relegated to minimum contracts through free agency. Certainly, we don't want to jump the gun, but I like options, so even he doesn't even play, I think it's a good opportunity to add some quality pieces. Worst case scenario, we find a project and assign him to the Toros. Here's who I think we can take a look at in the free agency pool:

Joe Alexander (6-8, 230 lbs, 24 years old)
Alexander (not to be mistaken with Seinfield star Jason Alexander) is one of those potential projects I was talking about. An excellent physical specimen, there's no question about Alexander's athleticism. Boasting a max vertical of 38.5 inches, this guy can get off the ground. Unfortunately, teams have passed over him due to the lack of polish he has in his game. However, he has stellar work ethic, and is simply raw, only having played 5 years of organized basketball prior to his stint in the NBA. Unfortunately, no one has really taken the time or had the patience to work with Alexander on all the little things. Given his attitude and work ethic, I think he would fit well with the Spurs, adding a great amount of athleticism. Given how well one off-season sessions worked for the 30 year old Richard Jefferson, what if the Spurs staff took a little bit of time to develop a younger, equally athletic (albeit more raw) version of RJ? Sure, Alexander doesn't have the 3 point shooting touch that the Spurs desire in their wings, but that can be developed. It's there, and I think the Spurs would be a great place to tap this burgeoning talent. We've seen flashes, in 10 games in the D-League he averaged 18.5 points, 10.5 rebounds, 0.9 steals, 1.1 blocks on 48.3% shooting.

Larry Hughes (6-5, 184 lbs, 31 years old)
Hughes kind of got a bad rep for playing so well in Washington then fizzling when the Cleveland Cavaliers signed him to such a lucrative deal. That being said, Hughes adds one thing in addition to his hot/cold shooting and occasionally brilliant offensive play; ball-handling. A lot has been said about Hughes's attitude, but how much of it was due to lockerroom leaders like Gilbert Arenas and LeBron James? How much is just how he is? Hard to say, perhaps it's enough to keep us away, definitely enough to keep us leery. Nonetheless, he has the tools to be a solid defender, and offensive initiator. He'd ultimately have a similar role to Ime Udoka, just a little more versatile though. Think Roger Mason plus, or a poor man's (real poor man's) Stephen Jackson. I'm not so keen as to whether Hughes can play the SF spot, primarily, can he guard the bigger stronger 3s in the league, but he would make a suitable George Hill-type 1-2 spot defensive stopper type backup.

Jonathan Bender (7-0, 219 lbs, 29 years old)
Boy, he retired early, but then, he had that mini-comeback with the Knicks last season. While he certainly hasn't been as great as people have wanted him to be, he's a shooting 7-footer that can guard 3 positions, shooting guard, small forward, power forward, There aren't a lot of 7-footers that can do that, Jared Jeffries maybe? but Jeffries has no offensive game. How effective Bender's defense is, I'm not sure, but I'm sure his length can cause difficulties for a lot of players.

While I don't relish the idea of pulling old legs, and would rather see us get some young talent, what's there is there. There is a high bar set for any role player on the Spurs, from the 3rd quarter heroics of Steve Kerr, to the amicable lockerroom presence of Malik Rose, to the clutchness of Robert Horry, to the intangible presence of Fabricio Oberto. The Spurs are known to do their homework and are good at seemingly pulling talent out of no where. It's an effective system, and it works. Maybe the 14th and 15th roster spots aren't important, maybe I'm overly concerned with the last player on the bench to suit up, to me, better safe than sorry.

Because I can't leave well enough alone...

2010-12-01T17:01:00.000-08:00

The internet is a hostile environment, I sometimes forget that. I'm certainly glad on some levels that Fundamentally Sound doesn't really have enough of a reader base to create this level of controversy, especially among fellow fans of the same team no less. Now everyone (or maybe just a few very loudly outspoken people) are getting up in arms about one blogger stating his opinion regarding how DeJuan Blair's skill-set as a central low-post offensive machine isn't a great fit with the current optimal lineup that the Spurs want to go with. Does this mean I think DeJuan Blair is a bad player? No. Does this mean I dislike DeJuan Blair as a player? No. A lot of people are probably going to point at yesterday's game against Golden State where Blair netted 16 points, 11 rebounds, and 2 steals on 7-15 shooting in over 28 minutes of burn, and tell me that Blair can fit. First, I think Blair can have good games, even in an ill-fitting system, second, it's against the Warriors, seriously.

I'd like to believe that as a player DeJuan Blair has gotten better over the summer. His free throws look super smooth, and he looks lean and in very good shape, but if we look at his numbers:

Per game:

Season	Age	Tm	Lg	G	GS	MP	FG	FGA	FG%	3P	3PA	3P%	FT	FTA	FT%	ORB	DRB	TRB	AST	STL	BLK	TOV	PF	PTS
2009-10	20	SAS	NBA	82	23	18.2	3.4	6	0.556	0	0	0	1.1	2	0.547	2.4	4	6.4	0.8	0.6	0.5	1.4	2.7	7.8
2010-11	21	SAS	NBA	17	17	19.8	2.6	6.5	0.409	0	0.1	0	0.8	1	0.824	2.6	4	6.6	0.8	1.1	0.4	1.4	2.5	6.1
Career			NBA	99	40	18.5	3.2	6.1	0.529	0	0	0	1	1.8	0.573	2.5	4	6.4	0.8	0.7	0.5	1.4	2.7	7.5

Per 36:

Season	Age	Tm	Lg	G	GS	MP	FG	FGA	FG%	3P	3PA	3P%	FT	FTA	FT%	ORB	DRB	TRB	AST	STL	BLK	TOV	PF	PTS
2009-10	20	SAS	NBA	82	23	1494	6.6	12	0.556	0	0	0	2.1	3.9	0.547	4.8	7.9	12.7	1.6	1.2	0.9	2.7	5.4	15.4
2010-11	21	SAS	NBA	17	17	336	4.8	12	0.409	0	0.1	0	1.5	1.8	0.824	4.7	7.3	12.0	1.4	1.9	0.7	2.5	4.5	11.1
Career			NBA	99	40	1830	6.3	12	0.529	0	0.1	0	2	3.5	0.573	4.8	7.8	12.6	1.5	1.3	0.9	2.7	5.2	14.6

He's getting more minutes, more shots, and missing more. Sure, he gets a whole steal every game now, but his rebounding numbers remain the same while his scoring numbers have dropped drastically. Sure he's shooting 30% better on his FTs but he's getting to the line less than half as much as he used to. From what I've seen, Blair is a better basketball player than he was last year, but still, he's performing worse? You can argue that he has been moved to the starting lineup where he's playing next to Duncan more... so... Tim Duncan is causing him to miss almost 15% more of his shots? Is this a case of Blair performing better off the bench than as a starter? If we look at last season...

As a starter:

MP	FG	FGA	FG%	3P	3PA	3P%	FT	FTA	FT%	ORB	DRB	TRB	AST	STL	BLK	TOV	PF	PTS
23:36:08	4	7.3	0.508	0	0		1	2.4	0.495	3.04	5.3	8.4	1	0.8	0.7	1.65	3	8.8

Off the bench:

MP	FG	FGA	FG%	3P	3PA	3P%	FT	FTA	FT%	ORB	DRB	TRB	AST	STL	BLK	TOV	PF	PTS
16:07	3	5.5	0.55	0	0	0	1	1.8	0.545	2.2	3.4	5.6	0.7	0.5	0.4	1.25	3	7.4

Sure, it's only Blair's second year so we have a very limited sample size, but across the board his numbers are pretty much down with the exception being steals, even from being a starter last season and I'm pretty sure most of those were next to Duncan too, in fact only 4 of his 23 starts were not next to Duncan, and that was because Duncan didn't play those 4 games. Did Blair's off-season training fail? Is he just hitting his sophomore slump early? No and maybe. As it has already been pointed out, Blair has been working on developing an outside jumper, one that he doesn't have, so despite his improved free throw form, whatever he's developed off-season isn't translating in game. As people have mentioned, the fact that he's shooting a worse percentage and not getting to the line means either he's not getting calls, he's getting blocked, or he's just not making shots.

I'm always speculating on random trades, and my point is simply this; can we afford to wait until DeJuan Blair fits in? Maybe. It's a risk either way, and I'm not adverse to exploring the risk of trading Blair for someone else. Am I bailing on Blair? If that's what that's called, the fine, yes, I'm bailing on Blair. He's not going to magically develop a jumpshot halfway through the season, especially if all offseason hasn't worked. To me, variable minutes isn't player development, it's Pop figuring out what will work to win the game (and the next), because that's what he's paid to do. If that means I have no idea what I'm talking about in regards to player development, then paint me ignorant, but from what I've seen of Pop, you get pulled because something's not working (unless it's a blowout).

While I think DeJuan Blair can be a good, even great basketball player without ACLs, you also have to consider the risk that is involved without a balancing mechanism in an up-and-down sport as intense as basketball. Does it decrease his shelf-life? Maybe. Granted it's a risk you take with every player, but I'd rather "plan for the worst, hope for the best". What can we get for Blair? I don't know, but that doesn't mean I'm going to not consider the options. Anthony Randolph and Bill Walker? It's an intriguing notion. We're all biased when we come to this, if you don't like Randolph, you're going to think that if he hasn't been able to develop into Lamar Odom in 3 seasons then it's never going to happen, or rather, DeJuan Blair just has more upside, and brings more positive impact. I've never met any of these people so I can't say whether or not the Spurs environment might be exactly what Randolph needs to tap that potential we saw. Which can beg the same question: can we afford to wait for Randolph to develop? Also legitimate, and maybe that will be the nix on this trade. I personally find that Randolph mitigates a lot of the defensive liabilities that Blair brings to the table off the bat, so in some sense yes. Is Randolph better than Blair? Will he become better? Hard to say, they're both brimming with potential, but what they bring to the table here and now is important too, and regardless of the ceiling that each player has, Randolph's defense is a better fit than Blair's offense. Here's a per 36 comparison of their rookie years for you stat junkies:

Player	Season	Age	G	GS	MP	FG	FGA	FG%	3P	3PA	3P%	FT	FTA	FT%	ORB	DRB	TRB	AST	STL	BLK	TOV	PF	PTS
DeJuan Blair	2009-10	20	82	23	1494	6.6	12	0.556	0	0	0	2.1	3.9	0.547	4.8	7.9	13	1.6	1.2	0.9	2.7	5.4	15
Anthony Randolph	2008-09	19	63	22	1129	6.3	14	0.462	0	0.1	0	3.2	4.5	0.716	4.1	7.5	12	1.6	1.3	2.4	2.6	4.5	16

Even with these trade speculations we are somewhat shackled by the bounds of reality. I think Blair can become a stud, given time, even on the Spurs, unfortunately, time isn't exactly a luxury we have a lot of. With Duncan seeing fewer and fewer minutes and adding more and more mileage onto those knees of his, too much has to go right with frontcourt pairings any two of Blair, McDyess, Splitter, and Bonner to compensate. Let's find a way to mitigate that. If Blair's play pans itself out, and he ends up being the answer, awesome. If it's Splitter adjusting to the game and putting Blair on the bench, awesome. If it's trading Blair for someone else (doesn't have to be Randolph), it is what it is, and hopefully, it pans out and we get better (and win another championship).

The DeJuan Blair Project

2010-11-30T11:27:00.000-08:00

According to Tim Varner, the window to this may be closing fast, and since Tim and all the commenters already blew this topic out of the water, I can kind just sit here and say, yes, I agree. It's not that DeJuan Blair cannot fit with the Spurs (think Malik Rose circa 2003) but the simple fact that he's not. I don't have a great frame of reference, but as currently stands, DeJuan Blair hasn't stood out to me to be much more than perhaps Jason Maxiell (circa 2005) with better passing and less hops. Does that mean we trade him? or do we keep working on him? Well, I can't honestly say that I have a good answer to that. For one thing, even if he doesn't have the skills necessary for a Spur he certainly does have the attitude, which sometimes is harder to come by. However, this issue isn't one that the Spurs possibly haven't encountered before, but rather, one that comes at a fairly inopportune moment, that of Tim Duncan's closing championship window.

With Antonio McDyess playing well, Matt Bonner shooting the lights out, and Tiago Splitter finally in a Spurs uniform, it's easy to think that Blair is now expendable, but as currently stands, the Spurs need so much going right to ensure success that it's hard figure out what a finalized lineup will look like. In our previous championship teams Pop has generally used a relatively thin roster, but in today's lineup, we're seeing Pop throwing basically every available body on the floor. I figure we won't see the 3 big rotation of old, and I'm sure that Pop is still tinkering around with what will work, and how to optimize it for not only the regular season but also moving into playoffs. So what does that mean for the Spurs? Can we develop Blair? I'm almost certain that Spurs could groom Blair into the caliber of player that they need, but the problem isn't that, the problem is whether they can afford the time.

Should we trade him then? Blair is slated to make $918,000 this year, this means that the max we can trade Blair straight up for would be $1,247,500 of salary in return. That's not a whole lot. We could wait until December and try packaging him with Chris Quinn or Ime Udoka... I'm not saying there aren't players out there we can't get with him, but realistically, what are we looking for? I really don't have any straight up answer myself, but let's hash out some of the possibilities here:

The first and most obvious possibility is to just hang on to Blair and try to ride it out and hope that something clicks mid-season. Personally, if this is the move to be made, at this point in time I would move Antonio McDyess into the starting lineup in place of Blair until Tiago Splitter has shown that he has adapted to the game, at which time, I would insert Splitter in as the starter next to Duncan. Blair would essentially become something of a sparkplug off the bench, producing with energy, think possibly Carl Landry on the Houston Rockets.

The second possibility is to trade Blair. Now Blair as a player is fairly marketable, but as Tim states in his article he needs a bevy of shooters around him to be effective. We're talking about an undersized center who makes smart outlet passes and can be a premier rebounder when it comes to positioning and hustle. Here is a list of players that you could feasibly trade Blair for straight up:

Atlanta Hawks:
Jason Collins - C
Jordan Crawford - SG
Josh Powell - C
Etan Thomas - PF/C

I'm not keen on packaging anyone with Blair, simply because other than Quinn and Udoka, I don't know who exactly I'd really want to package. Bonner thrives in our system and McDyess are both playing well, that leaves James Anderson, who I still have high hopes for, Gary Neal who is playing well, and George Hill, who would be the most value to other teams, but frankly, also would be one of the players I'd want to trade the least. From the Hawks there really isn't anyone except Jordan Crawford who intrigues me, and with the impending departure of Jamal Crawford due to contract issues, I don't see them parting with Jordan quite that easily.

Boston Celtics:
Von Wafer -SG
Delonte West - G

Frankly, those two players to me we already have copies of in Gary Neal and George Hill, so I don't really see a reason to even think about this.

Charlotte Bobcats:
Derrick Brown - F
Kwame Brown - C
Dominic McGuire - SF

McGuire is probably the most intriguing of the trio that we could get for Blair. While he's a long, athletic defensive wing, he doesn't really have much of an offensive game to speak of, and I personally don't have enough confidence in the playmakers off the bench to involve him enough to not have defenses take a vacation and hide horrendous defenders (read: Steve Nash) on him.

Chicago Bulls:
Taj Gibson - PF
John Lucas - PG
Brian Scalabrine - PF

Gibson is the primary person of interest, and I can't say I know enough about him to declare him immediately a better fit for the Spurs or enough about the Bulls to determine whether or not DeJuan Blair will be a better fit behind Carlos Boozer or if this would be at best a big step sideways. My gut tells me that maybe, but probably not since they don't have a bevy of shooters that we think Blair needs.

Cleveland Cavaliers:
Christian Eyenga - G
Joey Graham - SG/SF
Leon Powe - PF
Jawad Williams - SF

Leon Powe is the most intriguing of the list and frankly, I don't see him as a significant upgrade over Blair, significant enough to make the move.

Detroit Pistons:
Jonas Jerebko - F
Tracy McGrady - SG/SF
DeJuan Summers - F

I like Jerebko, I'm sure the Pistons do too, he could be like the second coming of Walter Hermann only Swedish. T-Mac of 3+ years ago is exactly what we need, T-Mac of now... ew.

Indiana Pacers:
Josh McRoberts - PF
A.J. Price - PG
Lance Stephenson - SG

McRoberts is one of those that at first glance I kind of looked at and was thought, no way, but the more I think about it, the swap might be better fits for both teams. It's purely a speculation move, and ultimately, might just be a lateral move, but I actually think Blair fits pretty well on the Pacers' current roster and McRoberts wouldn't be a bad fit as a Spur.

Miami Heat:
Carlos Arroyo - PG
Mario Chalmers - PG
Juwan Howard - PF/C
Jamal Magloire - C

This is the first official time, but certainly not the last time to say that George Hill would actually solve all of the PG woes that Miami has. If he were healthy and we got Udonis Haslem somehow out of that deal I'd think about it.

Milwaukee Bucks:
Earl Boykins - PG
Jon Brockman - PF
Luc Richard Mbah a Moute - F

I like Mbah a Moute, a lot. Question is though, is Blair that much better than Brockman. Yes he is better, but is he better enough to lose your best perimeter defender? Mbah a Moute would solve problems like Jerebko or Hermann would've, not the ideal fit, but we can make it work.

New Jersey Nets:
Stephen Graham - SF
Damion Jones - SF
Quinton Ross - SF
Joe Smith - PF

If Brook Lopez is supposed to be the next Tim Duncan than Blair wouldn't work next to him. Besides, aren't they developing Derrick Favors? Plus, most of the players they can offer are ones I wouldn't want either.

New York Knicks:
Toney Douglas - G
Andy Rautins - G
Bill Walker - SG

How much more are we willing to add to this if we could get Wilson Chandler or Anthony Randolph? Seriously. Randolph is more of an upside potential thing, but he'd also be a great fit in San Antonio (though attitude might be an issue, or perhaps maturity rather). Chandler would make a huge impact right away. Out of the three straight up, I like Bill Walker, I don't know about his defense though. For the record Tim Varner likes Bill Walker, for Blair? Maybe we can get more.

Orlando Magic:
Malik Allen - PF
Daniel Orton - PF
Jason Williams - PG

When I think bevy of shooters this is the team, but then, isn't this what they have Brandon Bass for?

Philadelphia 76ers:
Tony Battie - PF/C
Jodie Meeks - G

I know Tiago already addresses this need, but Spencer Hawes anybody? Worth a look I think. Otherwise, don't go near this team.

Toronto Raptors:
Solomon Alabi - C
Joey Dorsey - PF
Sonny Weems - SG

While Toronto is kind of that "bevy of shooters" place, I really wouldn't wish that on DeJuan. Besides, there really isn't anyone worth trading for on that team.

Washington Wizards:
Hilton Armstrong - C
Trevor Booker - C
Alonzo Gee - SF
Cartier Martin - SG/SF

We cut Gee for a reason. No one else looks worth it, besides they already have Blatche and Yi.

Dallas Mavericks:
Brian Cardinal - PF
Dominique Jones - SG
Ian Mahinmi - PF/C
Steve Novak - SF/PF

We let Ian Mahinmi walk for a reason and Matt Bonner is way better than Brian Cardinal and Steve Novak.

Denver Nuggets:
Anthony Carter - PG
Melvin Ely - PF/C
Shelden Williams - PF

The only player I would REALLY want from the Nuggets would be Tiago Splitter's fellow Brazilian: Nene Hilario.

Golden State Warriors:
Rodney Carney - SF
Reggie Williams - SG/SF

Another bevy of shooters, this is a maybe depending on if Reggie Williams can defend, otherwise I don't like anybody.

Houston Rockets:
Chase Budinger - SF
Jermaine Taylor - SG

We're actually not too much in terms of salary off from being able to pull off a DeJuan Blair for Courtney Lee straight up. Would I do it? That's iffy.

Los Angeles Clippers:
Jarron Collins - C
Brian Cook - PF
DeAndre Jordan - C

DeAndre Jordan is an interesting look, but that's about it. Matt Bonner is better than Brian Cook too. I passed on the first Collins twin, the second one isn't getting my nod either.

Los Angeles Lakers:
Theo Ratliff - C

Theo's a great guy, but we didn't retain him for a reason.

Memphis Grizzlies:
Darrell Arthur - PF
DeMarr Carroll - F
Acie Law - PG
Greivous Vasquez - G
Sam Young - G

Darrell Arthur is a maybe, but frankly I don't see why Memphis would want Blair. Not enough of a bevy of shooters. Can someone please tell Memphis to trade us Marc Gasol for nothing?

Minnesota Timberwolves:
Wayne Ellington - PG

Um... no.

New Orleans Hornets:
Aaron Gray - C
D.J. Mbenga - C
Quincy Pondexter - SF
Marcus Thornton - SG

I like Quincy Pondexter, it might have something to do with being a fellow UW alumnus. While I think he can thrive in the system, he, at this point, is not necessarily going to pan out more than James Anderson, who says we can't use them both? We could, but I don't think the Spurs necessarily want two major developmental projects on the wings.

Oklahoma City Thunder:
Serge Ibaka - C
Royal Ivey -PG
Byron Mullens - C
D.J. White - PF

I like the numbers Ibaka is putting up, I'm sure OKC does too. As much as I think Blair might help the Thunder, they really don't have anything I would want in return. Not that they're willing to give up anyways.

Phoenix Suns:
Earl Barron - C

Nope.

Portland Trailblazers:
Dante Cunningham - F
Sean Marks - F
Patrick Mills - PG

Cunningham is another one of those, I like him but so does the team that currently has him, players. No one else interests me too much. Patty Mills reeks too much of a poor man's Tony Parker for me to pull the trigger.

Sacramento Kings:
Donte Greene - F
Luther Head - G
Darnell Jackson - PF
Hassan Whiteside - PF/C

I like Greene, I think he has potential, but there must be a reason he's playing behind Omri Casspi and Francisco Garcia. I don't know enough of his game to say for sure. Jason Thompson is officially expendable, I frankly like him, not sure why other teams don't, but again, how much more are we willing to fork out for him? At this point in time I can only surmise he'd be Antonio McDyess plus.

Utah Jazz:
Francisco Elson - C
Earl Watson - PG

It's not 2007 anymore so we're not going back to Elson.

Well that's pretty much my take. If Blair is indeed on the block, the question then becomes first how badly Pop needs that 5th big (we could always bring back Marcus Cousin) to give Timmeh a break. I'm still of the mind that we could use a "wing" player, someone who can play both SG or SF as a sort of defensive stopper, ultimately, someone like Ricky Davis (a poor man's Stephen Jackson who won't need the ball that much). The options really are limitless, but also remember, there is a limited list of free agents we could probably get for the Veteran's minimum as well (the top choices in my opinion being Courtney Sims, Chris Mihm, and Marcus Cousin). I really don't know. I see the Spurs at least waiting until December when the free agents signed this summer can be traded, but honestly it's going to be a tough call. I know we all like Blair, but he's obviously not a great fit. The question for the DeJuan Blair project becomes: can he become one (a great fit)? or do we end the project by trading him to someone who fits better? I'm not R.C. Buford or Gregg Popovich so I don't have to answer that difficult question, but these are the possibilities I see out there.

Fixing the Spurs on Paper

2010-11-24T15:12:00.000-08:00

We're 12-1 and I'm still talking about needing to fix things? Really? Well, yes. While we are 2nd in total points scored 107.82 ppg we are also 11th in points allowed at 98.08 ppg. I don't know about you, but while 11th isn't bad, it isn't really something I think Pop is happy about. I mean, from what I understand, and his "Law of 22" Pop only wants to be allowing 88 ppg, FYI that's 3 points below the league leader in points allowed, that being Milwaukee and New Orleans at 91.08 ppg. I can go on how while we're 4th in rebounds allowed, how we're also 10th for rebounds per game, how while we are 5th in FG% per game at 47.3% we're 15th in FG% allowed at 45.7%, while we might be first in 3pt percentage at 44.4% per game, we're 29th in opponent 3pt percentage at 40.8%. So yeah, we're 12-1, but we're also still a work in progress.

What exactly do I mean by "fixing on paper" then? Well, to put it succinctly, instead of extensive analysis breaking down exactly what plays are working and aren't I'm simplifying and taking a general look at our roster as currently constructed and who (be it realistic or not) can help out. Currently as constructed our lineups look something like the following:

PG - Tony Parker, George Hill
SG - Manu Ginobili, Gary Neal
SF - Richard Jefferson
PF - DeJuan Blair, Antonio McDyess, Matt Bonner
C - Tim Duncan, Tiago Splitter

With James Anderson's injury, it seems like Manu and Neal are seeing some time at the SF spot behind Jefferson. Ideally, by playoff time, I see our roster looking like so:

PG - Tony Parker, George Hill
SG - Manu Ginobili, Gary Neal
SF - Richard Jefferson, James Anderson
PF - Tim Duncan, DeJuan Blair, Matt Bonner
C - Tiago Splitter, Antonio McDyess

While I can harp about how I want a versatile big man to play with Duncan (read: Pau Gasol, Marc Gasol, LaMarcus Aldridge, Al Horford, etc...) Blair, Bonner, Splitter, and McDyess are doing an excellent job shoring up the other big man spot. What bothers me the most about the above stat, is that our opponents are shooting 40.8% from beyond the arc, and frankly, that is what I believe the Spurs really need right now, that is a wing defender that can lock-down opponents on the perimeter. However, I don't want to tinker too much with the lineup as it currently stands, given that Manu and RJ both in the starting lineup works. That's why I don't necessarily think the typical single position defensive specialists like Shane Battier, Tayshaun Prince, Andrei Kirilenko, Raja Bell, etc... is exactly what we need or are looking for. While we definitely expect James Anderson to fill that role, and I think, in the few games he's played, he's done an admirable job, I think in the wake of his injury and the waiving of various attempts at mending the perimeter defense issue (Bobby Simmons, Alonzo Gee, Danny Green, etc...) this is where we need to improve. Apparently, as I typed, the Spurs decided to give Ime Udoka another shot. Not exactly what I had in mind, but Udoka is a known quantity, and he can't be significantly worse than Keith Bogans last season, small risk, marginal rewards, but a sufficient stopgap if that's all he is to be until Anderson gets back. Personally, here's my list:

Free Agents:

Sasha Pavlovic (SG/SF, 6-8, 210 lbs, 27 yrs old)
It's really been like 3 years since I've seen Sasha Pavlovic play, yes, that was the last time the Spurs won a championship. One of the big stories about the Cavs going through the playoffs that year (outside of LeBron decimating the Pistons) was the effective defense Pavlovic had against Vince Carter during the series against the Nets. I'm actually not really sure why he still doesn't have a contract, which leads me to believer personally that his agent is asking for more money than he's worth possibly...

Damien Wilkins (SG/SF, 6-6, 225 lbs, 30 yrs old)
I don't know that James Anderson can't become everything that Damien Wilkins is and more, but in the interim, he's not a bad stopgap.

Outside of these two, there isn't really anybody I can think of in free agency that would be a significant improvement over Ime Udoka, though some honorable mentions might include Larry Hughes, Devean George, and if you're looking for potentially another project; Joe Alexander.

Not Free Agents:

I really don't know if these guys are even available for trade and even if they were whether we would have the assets to trade for them, but they're intriguing to consider.

Wilson Chandler (NY Knicks, SG/SF, 6-8, 230 lbs, 23 yrs old)
Ultimately the players we're looking for you can think of as something like Stephen Jackson lite, we want the defensive tenacity and three-ball, but it's not imperative that he have the ball handling skills of Jackson. Chandler is a nice fit given his defensive tenacity and explosiveness, he's kind of everything that the Spurs have been looking for over the past couple of years; youth, athleticism, and defense.

Martell Webster (SG/SF, SG/SF, 6-7, 210 lbs, 23 yrs old)
The advent of Nicolas Batum (who honestly reminds me a lot of Tayshaun Prince) made Webster fairly expendable after Batum returned to the court from his injury. Webster was noted for his defensive effort against Kobe in those heated Blazers-Lakers contests. While he is one of those hot-or-cold shooters, I like to think of him as Michael Finley-plus.

I could throw in other names like Kelenna Azubuike, Courtney Lee, Anthony Parker or even completely non-realistic ones like John Salmons and/or Stephen Jackson himself. That's my take.

The Revolution of Richard Jefferson: Should We Worry About the Defense?

2010-11-10T16:02:00.000-08:00

Would you believe me if I told that Richard Jefferson currently has the league-leading FG% of all wings in the NBA? Would you believe me if I told you that he's 9th overall in terms of FG% in the league? What if I told you he was the leading scorer of all players averaging 10-11 shots per game? What if I told you he's taking 1-5 fewer shots per game than other players in the league averaging 18 points per game?

So what's my point?

Well, certainly it's a small sample size, but it's already a very promising one. Jason Rogers has named Richard Jefferson as our X-factor player. And he does have some rather compelling evidence for why Jefferson's performance (not Splitter or Blair's) will be crucial for the success (or lack thereof) as we continue through the season. That's what an X-factor player is. Most are aware that Lamar Odom is the Lakers' X-factor player, Josh Smith for the Hawks, the non-marquee player upon whom the team's success hinges, not to say that his scoring double digits will be a direct 1-1 correlation to wins and losses, but it's a good indicator. There are a lot of ways to explain away Richard Jefferson's stellar 18 PPG, 3.8 RPG, 2.2 APG on 60.3% from the field and 52.2% from 3 point land. Oh yeah, he's averaging 2 threes per game (that's made).

He's not being involved significantly more in the offense than he previously was, he's only getting about 1 extra shot per game from last season. In a BDL Live Chat with Yahoo's Kelly Dwyer I asked about Jefferson's shooting and Dwyer said that Richard appeared to be getting his legs under his shots. His set shot, I have to say, is very reminisce of Bruce Bowen and Mario Elie at this point in time, and this is something, now that he's comfortable with it, will only continue, perhaps not at a 18 PPG clip, but at a rate that will drive the Spurs' success.

How about his defensive game? Certainly I can't deny that he's hustling , and maybe this should go in a different post, but I'm consolidating it here. We can't deny that the Spurs have improved offensively. They're now 5-1, 4th in the league for points scored per game at 106.67, behind only the Lakers (112.13), Rockets (112), and Suns (108.29). While that's a nice number to look at, we're also 21st in points allowed at 103. It's only because of that narrow 3 point margin that we're winning these games now. Lakers are holding their opponents to 99.63 points per game while Houston and Phoenix are allowing 112.67 and 109.57 respectively, hence their losing records. To me, it's more distressing to hear that we're giving up 103 points per contest than it is surprising to hear we're putting up 107. Sure, if averages pan out we'll win more than we lose, but I know that's definitely not good enough. I know that Pop has this "Law of 22" which is a goal of limiting opponents to 88 points per game (22 points per quarter). Spurs are hot now, and a lot of that is Richard Jefferson's hot shooting, but it really comes down to defense, and so far it's been a little lacking.

What's hurting us? Well simply put, our perimeter defenders (as good as they are) aren't as good as our perimeter defenders were in our championship years (read: nobody defends like Bruce Bowen). Tack on to that the lack of a shot blocking presence outside of Tim Duncan on the floor consistently, and it really hurts us when our wings are beaten on the dribble. I'm not going to go into a list of every single big man I wish could play next to Timmeh, but I seriously hope that Splitter steps up soon. While Blair may be a more viable offensive option at this point, his liability on the defensive end may cost us later.

Regular Season Game 4: Visiting the Suns

2010-11-03T12:22:00.000-07:00

Incidentally the only full NBA game I've seen this season thus far was the Suns losing to the Blazers on opening night.

	SPURS	SUNS
PG	Tony Parker	Steve Nash
SG	Manu Ginobili	Jason Richardson
SF	Richard Jefferson	Grant Hill
PF	DeJuan Blair	Hedo Turkoglu
C	Tim Duncan	Robin Lopez
Bench	Gary Neal	Goran Dragic
	James Anderson	Josh Childress
	Bobby Simmons	Jared Dudley
	Antonio McDyess	Hakim Warrick
	Tiago Splitter	Channing Frye

I don't normally consider any bench matchup to be "key" but in this case I think I'll make an exception. Why? Well, because Hedo has been downright disappointing (there's a reason they played Rashard Lewis instead of Hedo at 4 in Orlando) and Hakim Warrick has been a huge spark plug off the bench, connecting with a lot of electrifying pick-and-roll plays with Nash. Ultimately what this game boils down to is containing Steve Nash. He's the key cog that will keep this team moving, and everything else moves off of him. Not much else to be said. I'm holding out on George Hill since I expect Pop to be extra careful with him, especially this early in the season, where we have the time buffer to do so. For those of you that don't know what I'm talking about, George Hill injured his shoulder after an awkward fall due to a flagrant foul from Craig Smith on a layup.

Boxscore Analysis: Spurs 97 - Clippers 88

2010-11-03T10:26:00.000-07:00

I wasn't really expecting to do this, but when I started to catch the game on the DVR mode on League Pass, the game actually ended and they blackout the replay for a bit, and I went to bed. Sorry. I watched the 1st quarter and that's about it. So back to these notes.

- Eric Gordon went off. I think someone commented that we're conceding the mid-range jumper way too much.

- Manu got two quick fouls early, not cool, but hey it happens. He still got 14 pts and 7 assists in 27 minutes. I like the efficiency.

- Gary Neal is a nice pickup. Somewhere in between Roger Mason Jr. and Steve Kerr?

- Blair is still struggling to find his role. Just calm down and play your game.

- Splitter finally got some floor time. He looked a little tentative.

- 10 boards for 'Dyess off the bench. Good production.

- Jefferson looks like a man reborn, this could be the start of something very good.

- We need to blow out more teams so James Anderson gets more playing time.

Regular Season Game 3: Visiting the Clippers

2010-11-01T10:32:00.000-07:00

It's entirely possible and exceedingly likely that I probably will be doing a box score analysis review of this game. Just warning you in advance. With that being said, come on. It's the Clippers. I really should be ending my analysis with just that. Seriously though, I REALLY don't want to be the first team to lose to the Clippers this season.

	SPURS	CLIPPERS
PG	Tony Parker	Baron Davis
SG	Manu Ginobili	Eric Gordon
SF	Richard Jefferson	Ryan Gomes
PF	DeJuan Blair	Blake Griffin
C	Tim Duncan	Chris Kaman
Bench	George Hill	Eric Bledsoe
	Gary Neal	Rasual Butler
	James Anderson	Al-Farouq Aminu
	Antonio McDyess	Craig Smith
	Tiago Splitter	DeAndre Jordan

While I hesitate to give Griffin the definitive advantage over Blair, it's possible it's just me being a homer. I've seen enough Griffin highlights to know that while he does have a very wild (somewhat uncontrolled) style of play, he certainly does know how to translate his freakish athleticism into production. That being said, the Clippers are still 0-3 despite Griffin averaging 16.7 points and 11 rebounds per game. It'll be interesting how Pop devises the defense to try to contain him, or even let him get his own while mitigating the damage from the other players, namely Eric Gordon.

This brings us to our key matchup. While I believe that Ginobili has the decided advantage over Gordon, Gordon is a fairly potent threat offensively, and thereby needs to be carefully guarded. His shot wasn't falling against the Mavericks but I don't expect him to take significantly fewer shots. Manu and RJ need to just continually make him work on the defensive end, either drawing silly fouls or just getting to the rim. Hopefully that flusters Gordon enough that he can't focus on the defensive end. That being said, I want Anderson and Jefferson and Manu, whoever is guarding him (maybe Hill too) to just be aggressive with him, don't let him get easy shots. Force him to take shots with a hand in his face.

Finally, this may be the first game we get to see Splitter in action. I hope that he gets decent burn what with Bonner out and all. I think he'll be a definitive difference maker, and will make the matchups very interesting. I'm eager to see how he gets things moving on both ends of the court. While not a tremendous rebounder, I hope that his shot altering ability combined with Blair's natural affinity for snatching the carom will work together very nicely. I'm excited to see if he develops a particular mojo with any one player on the roster.

Boxscore Analysis: Hornets 99 - Spurs 90

2010-11-01T09:41:00.000-07:00

You'll probably be seeing more of these than you'd like, which means I'll probably be writing more of these than I like, but frankly, I'm not going to get to every game, and I don't actually have television, which means I won't catch any of the nationally televised games either (blacked out on League Pass). I'm already kind of flailing to catchup with everything, so if you didn't get your news fix, Tony Parker signed an extension. Yay. Okay, so what this boils down to is what I can read from the box score.

Saturday I was a little busy so I didn't watch the game, but I was needless to say, disappointed that the Spurs lost to what seems to be an aimless Hornets organization. Of course with that in mind, I noticed that the Hornets are now 3-0 in the regular season... hrm... Well anyways... here are my notes:

- The fact that both Timmeh and Tony played under 30 minutes leads me to believe that Pop ceded this game fairly early on

- Paul only had 5 assists... I don't know what to make of that.

- Paul, West, Thornton, and Green all scored in double digits, going a combined 4-6 from beyond the arc. I'm led to believe that we were killed on mid-range jumpers.

- DeJuan Blair was only 2-10 and blocked 3 times, methinks he's forcing things a little offensively, especially considering he didn't shoot a single free throw. Though 11 rebounds is nice.

- Team only shot an overall 38.8%... yeesh. Are we settling or forcing? Either way, not good. Maybe shots just weren't falling?

- Manu had 23 points but had to take 19 shots with 42% shooting to get it.

- Only TP (50%), RJ (63.6%), and Gary Neal (50%) shot anything resembling a respectable FG%.

- The bigs (McDyess, Duncan, Blair) went a combined 7-28. I know Okafor is decent defensively... but David West and Jason Smith?

I think this is a degree of inconsistency with the role players we have to get used to. I'm glad that Jefferson is showing great efficiency in the first couple of games of the season and I hope that continues, because that will be a great benefit, but with Timmeh seeing reduced minutes and decreased production thereby, we're going to need other players (namely Hill and Blair) to step it up. Hopefully having Splitter back soon will help.

Regular Season Game 2: Hosting the Hornets

2010-10-29T11:23:00.000-07:00

Ever since they took us to 7 games in the 2008 Western Conference Semi-Finals, the Hornets have kind of been in a downward spiral... That being said, there's not a night we can really afford to take off, especially since we're looking for homecourt advantage this year.

	SPURS	HORNETS
PG	Tony Parker	Chris Paul
SG	Manu Ginobili	Marco Belinelli
SF	Richard Jefferson	Trevor Ariza
PF	DeJuan Blair	David West
C	Tim Duncan	Emeka Okafor
Bench	George Hill	Jerryd Bayless
	Gary Neal	Marcus Thornton
	James Anderson	Willie Green
	Bobby Simmons	Jason Smith
	Antonio McDyess	D.J. Mbenga

Well, we know that Bonner is out for 10-14 days, and with Splitter still sidelined until Monday, this means we have to run small, which works out okay since West and Okafor isn't exactly the biggest frontline you'll run into. It'll be interesting to see how Blair fares against this kind of front line. I don't relish having to play small ball with Bobby Simmons manning the 4 in the reserve squad, so I expect Blair to get a lot more burn, and McDyess ultimately to get the brunt of the minutes freed up by Bonner. While McDyess doesn't have the floor stretching capabilities of Bonner, he's been hitting those midrange jumpers at a fair clip, so I'm not too concerned except with trying to contain the Hornets' guards. Paul, Thornton, and Bayless are all fairly good at penetrating the defense, with how Collison worked us over last time, we really need to tighten up on denying penetration by the Hornets' backcourt.

Essentially this comes back to a duel once again between Parker and Paul, but the big difference is that I think Tony has a lot more help than CP3 does. That being said, we cannot dismiss shooters like Belinelli, Green, and Peja, while shots may not have been falling, we can't give them open threes. Since Timmeh is our only real shot-blocker, the defense needs to tighten up a little. I expect Blair to continue to play aggressively, hopefully forcing the opposing frontcourt into foul trouble. While Okafor didn't take a single shot in his first game of the season, I don't expect that trend to continue, and he is a decent back-to-the-basket threat. I don't know that he'll have his way like Roy Hibbert did, he'll still be a force to be reckoned with. While I don't necessarily consider Okafor a go-to option, and I didn't watch the game against Milwaukee game, I'm a little confused as to why they don't go to him more. Then again, I haven't watched enough of Okafor to say otherwise. David West naturally will be something of a handful, so it will be interesting to see how Blair matches with a more versatile PF this season as opposed to an athletic energy guy like Josh McRoberts.

I get the hunch that Ariza will be put on Manu, but either way, whoever ends up having the off-guard (be it Belinelli or Thornton or Green) needs to really attack the basket. Word is that Monty Williams is starting Belinelli because his defense is supposedly better than Marcus Thornton's which is saying a lot about Thornton, because Belinelli's defense is pretty atrocious. So, I'm guessing it's going to be RJ and Anderson who will have those players on them, which means, attack, attack, attack. While with CP3 anything is possible, this is another game we theoretically should win. Of course, the question then potentially comes down to playing the Big 3 extended minutes or going for the kill. I hope it doesn't come to that, but again, CP3 is just that good. Without major shotblocking/altering on defense, the perimeter players are going to have to go at it much more aggressively.

Notes on the Season Opener

2010-10-28T10:05:00.000-07:00

I was able to catch about 2 and a 1/2 quarters on League Pass before going to bed last night (I got home late and I was tired, sorry), and overall, seeing the 122-109 victory we had over the Pacers I'd say that we're looking in pretty good order for the most part. Of course, that being said, there are points of concern for me personally. This probably isn't going to be a full-fledged recap, but just some things that I've noticed with in this game.

The Good
- Early in the game the Spurs were pressuring the ball on defense, causing a lot of miscues and were able to poke the ball away for some easy buckets. Good job at keeping the ball in play, I like how Tony knows to leak on those opportunities.

- RJ is playing aggressively, some easy shots aren't falling, but he's not letting that get to him. I also like how he's starting to be very active without the ball and attacking the basket consistently. He won't be the Paul Pierce or even Corey Maggette type foul machine, but he'll get to the line a good bit if he keeps this up. 16 points on 6 shots, I like the efficiency.

- Timmeh is hitting mid-range jumpers like he's a shooting guard. 10-12 from the field, 23 points that I didn't catch watching most of the game. He's sticking with what he knows works. He won't be backing people down, but the pick and pops with Tony are working very well.

- James Anderson has a sweet shot. I hope they find him more. I also liked his hustle on both ends of the court. Michael Finley 2.0 people, I'm calling it.

- Antonio McDyess has a very smooth 12-15 foot jumper, gives Manu and Tony a ton of room to operate.

- DeJuan Blair has developed an immensely smooth free throw. I like how he's hustling for the ball, while the box score may not have been entirely favorable for him last night, if he does the dirty work he'll get more than his fair share of free throws, and with his touch from the line now I'm sure it'll make a huge difference.

- Overall everyone looked really comfortable with whatever lineup on the court, there is excellent chemistry and everyone seems pretty comfortable with their parts are whatever role they need to do.

- Manu is healthy, and Manu.

The Bad
- I shouldn't have a whole lot of call-outs here, but I can't say that the game was perfect, I mean, I know the Pacers are a hot-shooting offensive team, but we did allow 109 points.

- While I liked the hustle on the defensive end, and I understand what Dwight Howard means when he says Darren Collison is "jerky", there was way too much penetration. Defense seemed to be sort of like an every-other play thing. I appreciate us being able to run with the Pacers and keep up with them, we mirrored them too much defensively as well.

- There were a couple (not a whole lot) of broken plays which ended in ugly Matt Bonner dribble-drives. Can he please not put the ball on the floor? 2nd unit needs to develop a go-to guy (not Matt Bonner).

- Until Tiago Splitter gets back I'm concerned about size. Roy Hibbert kind of had his way out there with us, which makes me sad because we were projected to have drafted him but Pacers took him early (we got Hill instead, so it ends up being okay). At the end of the 1st quarter Pop had a lineup of TP, George Hill, James Anderson, Matt Bonner, and Antonio McDyess. Yikes.

The Ugly (and other random thoughts)
- Manu drew a 3pt shooting foul on Danny Granger by doing the leg flail and accidentally kicking Granger in the 'nads. Ouch. Sorry Danny.

- Mike Dunleavy drew a foul away from the ball for not being able to move backwards near Manu without falling over.

- Overall, the reffing as per usual was a little suspect, but hey, it is what it is.

- Can somebody please box out Josh McRoberts?

- George Hill and RJ got in some foul trouble early in the game. Fortunately RJ had already done his damage by the end of the first half.

- While the Spurs were able to cling on in the frenetic pace, they need to set the tempo. I know they want to run, but at times it seemed they were trying to play a little too fast; not every team is going to be as sloppy passing the ball around as Indiana.

Regular Season Game 1: Hosting the Pacers

2010-10-27T09:35:00.000-07:00

So this is something that I was planning on doing last season, but didn't get around to, so hopefully, I do a better job this season. In terms of NBA games, this is one we should win, should being the operative word there, but of course, since it is the NBA, you never know with a single game. Here's what the matchups are boiling down to:

	SPURS	PACERS
PG	Tony Parker	Darren Collison
SG	Manu Ginobili	Mike Dunleavy
SF	Richard Jefferson	Danny Granger
PF	DeJuan Blair	Josh McRoberts
C	Tim Duncan	Roy Hibbert
Bench	George Hill James Anderson Bobby Simmons Matt Bonner Antonio McDyess	T.J. Ford Dahntay Jones Paul George Tyler Hansbrough Jeff Foster

So this is a good opportunity for Jefferson's new-found defensive tenacity and summer work with Pop to really start showing some fruit. I unfortunately didn't have the opportunity to catch any of the Spurs' preseason games, but from what I read, the reaction to Jefferson's production thusfar has been mixed. In the preseason, statistically, he wasn't significantly improved from last season, but some people put it that he looks much better than last year, looking more decisive and comfortable on the court, in the offense, and much more aggressive on defense. He also seemed to show good mojo with Manu Ginobili (then again, who wouldn't?), which may be part of why Pop moved Manu back to the starting lineup. Anyways, we know Danny Granger can score, he's got a nice touch from mid to long range. However, the criticism has been that he doesn't really do a whole lot else, which is why he was bench fodder on Team USA during FIBA in the offseason. As I've said plenty of times before, in addition to Jefferson being aggressive in with his man defense, he has to punish the opposition on the other side of the floor as well, forcing whoever is guarding him to work or give up easy buckets.

With the slowing Duncan, and lack of Tiago Splitter thusfar, the matchups ultimately come down to pick-and-rolls. Dwight Howard once said in an interview that Darren Collison is one of the more difficult players to guard off a pick-and-roll simply because he's difficult to anticipate (or in Dwight's words "He's real jerky"). Yahoo Sports has T.J. Ford starting this game, which may be entirely possible, but I'm think it's a Collison start. How well Parker and Duncan can contain a Collison-Hibbert pick-and-roll offense is really, I think going to mitigate the effectiveness of the Pacers. Outside of Granger, the Pacers really don't have much of an offensive option, of course that's also pending the effectiveness of Bill Walton working with Roy Hibbert during the offseason. While Mike Dunleavy is back and healthy, he apparently has nothing between the bones in his knee, so I see his effectiveness being very limited.

While preseason was a good indicator of who will actually make the rotation, this game will be a better indication of what that rotation will specifically look like. While the Spurs should handily roll over the Pacers, we do need a lot of things to be clicking. Mostly, I'm looking for smart defensive rotations and aggressive offensive play from our backcourt. I say Spurs by 5.

Making the Matchups: Utah Jazz

2010-10-21T13:58:00.000-07:00

And so on and on and on we go. Pop has settled into a starting lineup so I'll use that for now, and we'll move forward from there, assuming that Tiago Splitter is healthy by the time this matchup really means anything significant.

	Spurs	Jazz
PG	Tony Parker	Deron Williams
SG	Manu Ginobili	Raja Bell
SF	Richard Jefferson	Andrei Kirilenko
PF	DeJuan Blair	Paul Millsap
C	Tim Duncan	Al Jefferson
Bench	George Hill James Anderson Bobby Simmons Matt Bonner Antonio McDyess	Earl Watson C.J. Miles Gordon Hayward Jeremy Evans Kyrylo Fesenko

So I know I'm leaving off Tiago Splitter and Mehmet Okur, but both are currently injured, and while we might have an idea of what might happen when they get back, I'm not going to jump into any major conclusions. I'm no longer entirely confident in a Splitter/Duncan starting lineup, but of course, there's no real way of telling that having yet to see Splitter play a single NBA game. Okur will likely slide back to the starting C spot for the Jazz when he returns, moving Jefferson back to a more natural PF slot and Millsap back to the bench. I know that Alonzo Gee could surprise us and somehow make the roster, but I'm really leaning towards Pop going for at least the known quantity of Bobby Simmons. Probably not the greatest name you can get, but he'll get the job done.

A lot of question goes to how well Al Jefferson will do replacing Carlos Boozer. While putting up similar stats, Jefferson is a pretty different player from Boozer, preferring to post up on the left block and isolate. I can't say I've seen Jefferson play enough to determine anything, but I think he'll be someone that Pop focuses a the defense on a lot. I also expect Pop to try to push the ball inside, trying to get Jefferson into early foul trouble since he's been known to not move his feet very well on defense. While Raja Bell is a definitive improvement over Ronnie Brewer and Kyle Korver or rather a fusion of the two, I still don't know that he'll entirely mitigate the threat that is Manu Ginobili. If a matchup occurs early in the season, it'll be interesting to see how well Blair matches up against his undersized counterpart of Paul Millsap. Both are stellar rebounders and just have a nose for the ball, it'll be an interesting matchup. When Splitter and Okur return to the lineups, I expect Pop to have Tiago guard Memo partially because a sweet-shooting European big is something Tiago is used to seeing.

What this matchup will ultimately boil down to will be the Tony Parker/Deron Williams matchup. Williams has generally fallen short of the Chris Paul/Deron Williams debate, but I actually really like Williams much better. For one, he's a lot bigger than Paul and with his speed and handles tacked on to that size, he becomes a nightmare to guard. While Derrick Rose may have gotten the most recent "Jason Kidd with a jump shot" comparisons, the original "Jason Kidd with a jump shot" was and to me still is Deron Williams. Not only that, he has a very good vision and basketball IQ, he's someone that Jerry Sloan says he trusts to make decisions on the floor, so he doesn't call as many plays for him to run, this from a coach that coached John Stockton. While Parker doesn't have the size, he certainly has the speed to compensate. I would try to attack Williams on offense, make him work hard on defense and force the ball out of his hands either via a difficult shot or having to dish off to teammates early. Sloan has always been a huge fan of the pick-and-roll so depending on how well Williams and either Millsap or Jefferson are connecting, our pick-and-roll defense needs to be impeccable. Essentially, the Spurs need to try to force the other Jazz players to try to make plays. This will be especially difficult trying to contain Al Jefferson on the left block as well.

Essentially the key to this matchup is aggressiveness, which seems ironic given that the Jazz are typically known as a fairly aggressive team, but the Spurs need to match if not surpass that aggressiveness. However, that's not to say that the Spurs don't play smart. They need to pressure the Jazz on offense, forcing silly fouls, especially from their frontcourt. Jazz typically are very physical so the Spurs can't be intimidated. On defense, they need to force the ball out of Deron Williams's hands, that would be ideal, making Raja Bell make tough plays, but most importantly, they need to play smart on those pick-and-rolls, rotating well and showing hard on the guards, forcing penetration along the baseline to shot blockers, like we always do (or try to).

Frontcourt Rotations: Handling the Bigs

2010-10-13T14:01:00.000-07:00

It's pretty hard for me to believe that Tim Duncan has already been playing in the league for 12 years. 34. Really? A whole dozen? David Robinson is a Hall-of-Famer, he's already been retired for 7. While we've been hearing how "old" the Spurs have gotten (reminder: Tony Parker is only 28), and how pundits keep teetering back and forth between the Spurs being "over the hill" and "not quite out of the picture yet" the Spurs have quietly been making moves to stay relevant. I mean, in those 12 years Duncan has led these Spurs to 12 Playoff appearances, 6 Conference Finals appearances, 4 Conference titles, and 4 NBA Championships. If that's not a pedigree for success, I don't know what is. Of those 12 Playoff runs, only twice have the Spurs been ousted in the first round, so to say Spurs fans are a little spoiled might just be on the money. I mean, seriously, out of the 1,098 regular season games he's coached, Pop has won 736 of them, that's 67%, last season was the only time Pop was less than 10 wins over .500 since he took over the Robinson-less Spurs 18 games into the season in 1996-1997.

With all the pretext, we jump to what I really was going to post about. Traditionally Pop has enjoyed keeping his rotations short, especially in the frontcourt, nonetheless, Pop has also been good about getting his frontcourt stars (now just Timmy) rest. Especially as they get older, Pop I think is more inclined to try to save the legs of his older stars, especially Duncan (given his NBA mileage) and Ginobili (maybe to a lesser extent) for when the games matter more (a.k.a. the Playoffs). So I wanted to take a more in depth look at who we have and what possible pairings work out. While it's obvious that Duncan will still take a majority of the minutes, the 40 minutes per game (circa 2001-2002) days are over for him. So there are still a bit of minutes to go around, with one starter and at least two reserve positions to go around. There's 96 minutes between the two frontcourt positions. So who gets them? Let's do a quick overview of the available players:

Tim Duncan (6-11, 260 lbs)

Well, duh. It's not like I really have to explain myself on this one. The main dispute in whether or not this man is the best PF of all time is simply whether or not he really is a PF, or a C disguised as a PF because he got drafted onto David Robinson's team. If you listen to Doug Collins in the 1999 NBA Finals broadcast though, Bob Costas asks (I think in game 2) why this "Twin Towers" pairing of Duncan and Robinson works and Collins says simply because both are such complete (versatile) players. Both could spread the floor, both could post up, both could alter/block shots, both could rebound, both could run with the ball, both could find the open man. It's been seven years since Duncan has played with someone the likes of Robinson, and I'm pretty sure that he isn't going to again during his career. However, since 2003, Duncan has quietly carried the Spurs on his back. He doesn't have the legs he used to, but Duncan has always been a saavy player, able to play to his strengths and high basketball IQ. He won't be alter multiple attempts and still come up with the rebound anymore, so that's why we're hoping the other guys step it up. Duncan, despite his age, is still probably one of the most complete frontcourt players in the game. He has a litany of post moves and can still comfortably hit that 19 foot wing jumper, so it's hard to imagine who wouldn't fit next to him, I mean, Nazr Mohammed was a viable option, but again, this is no longer the Duncan of old, the Duncan we remember. He's still awesome, just not 2003 awesome.

DeJuan Blair (6-7, 265 lbs)

Blair has been making a strong case for himself to be a starter next to Duncan in the 2010 preseason. In the three games Blair has averaged 15.3 points, 7 rebounds, 1 assist, 1.3 steals on 55.3% shooting in just under 23 minutes of play. Those are some pretty good numbers, but the impressive part has been where the numbers aren't. He's been effective defensively, moving his feet, and while his jumper hasn't been consistent, it's been enough with his defense to show that he can in fact play next to Duncan. Originally Pop had worried about size and being able to stop opposing frontcourts with a pairing of Duncan and Blair, but Blair's penchant for the ball off the glass as well as defensive tenacity has won Pop over, choosing to start him over the other options consistently for these preseason games. I can't say I've seen enough of Blair to know extensively how well he plays. I was elated when he fell to the Spurs in the second round of last year's draft, but aside from a couple of college stats and YouTube videos of him completely owning 2nd overall pick Hasheem Thabeet, I can't say I knew a whole lot besides the fact he had no ACLs. DraftExpress says his best case scenario is becoming like Paul Millsap, which, I think I'm pretty okay with, but at this point in time, I think he's actually looking like an even better rebounder than Millsap, don't know if he can score as well, but maybe we won't need it as much. Either way, things are looking good. I think DraftExpress was being conservative in their upside pick, I think he can get even better.

Antonio McDyess (6-9, 245 lbs)

McDyess is one of those hard working guys you can't really help but like. While he once was playing at All Star levels in Denver, a devastating knee injury in the 2001-2002 season derailed that. After bouncing around the league for a few years he resurfaced in Detroit as a super reliable 6th man off the bench. What makes McDyess so valuable, what makes him so good still (despite the drop in stats) is that he does all the little things; he hustles for those rebounds, he moves his feet on defense, and it doesn't hurt that he has a reliable 12-15 foot mid-range jumper. Though perhaps not the explosive player he once was, McDyess has the experience of playing with winning teams (Detroit Pistons from 2004-2009) and deferring to stars (Rasheed Wallace, Chauncey Billups, Richard Hamilton). He knows what he has to do, and he does the under-appreciated blue-collar work that every championship team needs done. While he won't give you the 20-10 games night in and night out, he'll be that little edge that pushes you over the top in a tight game or even a tight series.

Matt Bonner (6-10, 240 lbs)

Matt Bonner is supposedly the king of adjusted statistical plus/minus (and sandwiches). While I'm not really a plus/minus junkie, I guess that's a good thing. If there's one thing that Matt Bonner can do, it's hit open three pointers. He's actually pretty good at that. He hit 39% last season and is a career 40.6% 3 point shooter, that's better than most guards. This works out well simply because it stretches the defense. You give Duncan room to work inside, or Manu and Tony room to penetrate. He's a niche player that's found a very nice niche to fit into. He's not really ideal most of the time (lacking both athleticism and defense) he's a known quantity and Pop certainly knows where and when to fit him in. With more options, I see Bonner's minutes being limited, but him still being a contributing factor. Maybe a Danny Ferry circa 2002 role.

Tiago Splitter (7-0, 245 lbs)

We have yet to see Splitter play a single minute of NBA basketball. Still, when it comes to expectations there has to be more than just a little bit of pressure on Splitter's shoulders, I suppose being one of the best if not the best big man in Euroleague might have something to do with that. I can't say I've seen a lot of Splitter playing, even on YouTube, but from what I hear, he's a solid post player. Finishes well at the rim. From what I saw, he had a pretty ugly (albeit effective) hook shot in the paint. He's not a stellar shot blocker but he does move his feet and alter a lot of shots, which is good, we like altered shots. He doesn't rebound quite as well as I'd like, but he's also still a work in progress. A lot of people have noted after Luis Scola's dominant performance as compared to Splitter's above-average one in the FIBA world championships, that Splitter's greatest asset is his great basketball IQ. He picks up quick and makes quick and good decisions with and without the ball. Some fans are content with an improved Fabricio Oberto. I personally think he has greater upside, but I'm no basketball scout, so I can't say for sure. If the fundamentals are there though, and with Tim Duncan to mentor him, he could become something special. While he's no second-coming of David Robinson, he'll probably be one of the better centers in the league, let's just see how he diversifies his game. I don't know that Pop plays him enough or that he gets the ball enough to be RoY material, but he'll definitely make a big impact when he's on the floor.

DeMarcus Cousins (6-11, 245 lbs)

Yeah, don't I wish. I know, I couldn't help myself. Enter somebody I know absolutely nothing about. He's been pretty productive across the three preseason games, but I don't know if that means anything significant. With Tiago currently injured, it might.

I'm not Pop so anything I say now in terms of on court pairings is pretty moot, but here's my take on how things will work out. The first issue will be who is the primary big next to Duncan. While Splitter was kind of the de facto guy, Blair has made a very strong case for himself this preseason. I can see it going either way depending on the matchups, though I venture to say that in the long run Splitter generally gets the starting nod, sliding Duncan back to the PF slot. The nice thing about the trio of Duncan, Splitter, and Blair is that it can potentially work like Duncan, Robinson, and Rose, where any two of the three can play next to each other. Since Splitter is really the only "true" center on the roster, I figure he should get a lot of burn with McDyess and Bonner sopping up the extra minutes Pop opts to rest Duncan. I personally can't really envision a Blair/Bonner or Blair/McDyess frontcourt as that leaves our interior rather soft, but if that limits more the minutes of Bonner and McDyess or the minutes of Blair, I can't really say. Generally speaking, I foresee (health being a major provision here) some kind of a Splitter/Duncan/Blair rotation with McDyess and Bonner filling in spot minutes. This generally means that Cousin gets cut, but maybe Pop wants insurance. What do I know?

Does the Preseason matter?

2010-10-12T14:00:00.000-07:00

This question is almost as arbitrary as the "does Summer League matter?" question. Where does it come from? Well, simply put, my personal experience is from overly zealous fantasy basketball team managers who are trying to get the jump at the next sleeper in the fantasy draft. Scott Sereday at 48minutesofhell did an analysis showing that teams that typically did well in the preseason do well in the regular season too. While I can't argue with the numbers, my gut intuition leads me to believe that they don't necessarily correlate very well. I'm not actually going to go into the Summer League example as that's a whole other beast that I don't want to deal with right now, but the question really does boil down to, what difference do these games make if they don't count for anything? Not having actually seen a whole preseason game, I can't really say anything definitively, so while I don't necessarily believe that preseason wins will correlate into regular season wins (just as regular season wins don't correlate necessarily to postseason wins) I will say that preseason games do serve a very important purpose for each team. So does this mean that San Antonio's one loss to Houston isn't a big deal? That our one win over Miami isn't a big deal? Well, I'll go with the cop out answer: yes and no.

Realistically, Duncan is going to play more than half of the game, and LeBron and Bosh are both going to play for more than a single quarter. So what does the preseason do? Well, in the end, I don't believe that we can take too much from the simple fact that the Spurs are 1-1 right now, but rather I think what is to be taken from it is what happened during the 96 minutes of play. There are two important things that I think can be gleaned from these preseason outings: first, efficiency, I don't care who scores 20 points in a preseason game, what I do care about is how he did it. Secondly, on court chemistry, how well specific pairings or even entire lineups play with each other. These two give coaches better ideas of how to make rotations work and help fine tune who to keep and who to cut.

The first part is efficiency. You keep someone in the game for long enough and he gets enough touches, he'll put up 20+ points. Just look at Allen Iverson. Dude averaged 26.7 points on 21.8 shots per game. The man was averaging 41.1 minutes per game. That means that he's sitting for only 7 minutes. He can't come off the bench though. What coaches look for in giving younger rotation guys more burn is who can be effective in limited minutes. You know that Pop isn't going to give James Anderson more minutes over Manu or even Richard Jefferson, but what Pop is looking for is whether or not Anderson can be effective in the minutes he's given.

The second part is meshing. We knew that Zach Randolph could score in the post, we knew that Eddy Curry could score in the post, when Randolph got traded to the Knicks then, there must be double the scoring in the post, right? Wrong, Randolph and Curry ended up cannibalizing each others' games. What Pop is looking for here is how well pairings work, can DeJuan Blair and Tim Duncan be effective on the floor together, what about Tony and Hill, who does RJ play the best next to? It's these kinds of questions that in-team scrimmages can't answer but semi-casual preseason games can. That's the beauty and the benefit of preseason.

Where the Saavy Vets Come From...

2010-10-11T15:51:00.000-07:00

Spurs have always been known as an "old" team. Despite the resurgence of youth with the promising games of DeJuan Blair and George Hill and arrivals of young hopefuls like James Anderson and Tiago Splitter and of course the in-his-prime Tony Parker, the Spurs are still old. Why? Because Tim Duncan is 34. Yup, it's been 12 years since the Spurs drafted Duncan in the 1997 draft and since his RoY performance in the 1997-1998 season. That makes the Spurs old. That and the fact that Manu is 33 plus all the "older" players out there doesn't help tremendously. This isn't really intended to be a very serious post, but just random speculation I had reviewing the old Spurs championship DVDs that I have while waiting for the regular season to start.

If we look at a lot (not all) of the veteran role players that the Spurs pick up along the way, we find that there are a lot that were on teams that the Spurs had beaten previously in the Finals or Playoffs. Maybe Pop does some in-game scouting? Granted the simple answer might be that the Spurs simply are a viable destination for an aging vet with something left in the tank searching for a championship, but hey, I'm just wondering... I mean, let's look at the trend:

Michael Finley joined the Spurs in 2005-2006. The Spurs beat Dallas 4-2 in the Western Conference Finals when Finley played for the Mavs under Don Nelson (with Dirk and Steve Nash). Also Finley was on the Mavericks team that lost to the Spurs in the 2000 Conference Semifinals.

Kurt Thomas joined the Spurs in 2008 after being traded from Phoenix to the Sonics and then was traded from the Sonics for Francisco Elson and Brent Barry. Thomas was on the Suns during the controversial 2007 Western Conference Semifinals series as well as the 1999 improbable 8th seeded New York Knicks roster. The Suns lost in 6, the Knicks in 5.

Antonio McDyess was part of the 2005 Detroit Pistons roster that took the Spurs to 7 games in the NBA Finals. Despite horrendous television ratings, one of the best series ever in basketball.

Richard Jefferson, the 2003 New Jersey Nets roster with Jason Kidd and Kenyon Martin, but they lost in 6 games (also found it interesting that the Spurs 1st and 2nd championships bookmarked the Shaq-Kobe Lakers three-peat).

Robert Horry was part of that Lakers three-peat from 2000 through 2002, then joined the Spurs in the 2003-2004 season after the Spurs took the Lakers in 6 in their 2003 Championship run. He was also on the Lakers when they lost to the Spurs in the 1999 Conference Semifinals.

Drew Gooden, the 2009 mid-season free agent acquisition, was part of the unlikely appearance of the 2007 Cleveland Cavaliers squad in the NBA Finals, yes, the one that the Spurs embarassingly swept.

Brent Barry came over to the Spurs in the 2004-2005 season, he played for the Sonics in the 2002 Playoffs when they were eliminated by the Spurs in 5.

Francisco Elson, joining the Spurs for their 2007 championship run, was on the 2005 Denver Nuggets eliminated in the first round of the playoffs by the Spurs.

This may be stretching it, but Rasho Nesterovic, joining the Spurs in the 2003-2004 season was a rookie on the 1999 Timberwolves eliminated by the Spurs in the 1st round.

It's not indicative of every vet we've signed (like Roger Mason Jr.) but maybe it's telling of who we'll get next... Sasha Pavlovic anybody?

Unfettered Optimism: Playing Bigger

2010-10-08T15:15:00.000-07:00

Most of you can probably surmise what I'm posting about here. So I'm going to do a cop out right now. I have a list of 13 players. They all have one thing in common, they're smaller (shorter) than their position traditionally dictates, deeming them "undersized". I'll post more on this later, but can you guess who is who? And how would you rank the 13?

	FG	FGA	FG%	3P	3PA	3P%	FT	FTA	FT%	ORB	DRB	TRB	AST	STL	BLK	TOV	PF	PTS
PLAYER A	7.7	14.3	54.1%	0.5	1.8	26.6%	5.8	7.9	73.5%	3.9	7.6	11.5	3.9	1.5	0.8	3.1	3.0	21.7
PLAYER B	6.6	11.9	55.6%	0.0	0.0	0.0%	2.1	3.9	54.7%	4.8	7.9	12.7	1.6	1.2	0.9	2.7	5.4	15.4
PLAYER C	4.9	9.2	52.8%	0.0	0.0	0.0%	2.7	4.7	56.4%	3.7	4.7	8.5	0.8	0.7	1.6	1.5	3.9	12.4
PLAYER D	5.8	11.0	52.7%	0.0	0.1	10.0%	3.3	4.8	68.7%	3.7	6.1	9.7	1.9	1.3	1.5	2.0	5.0	14.9
PLAYER E	4.4	9.7	45.1%	0.0	0.1	22.2%	3.3	4.8	69.7%	3.3	4.1	7.3	1.4	1.1	0.5	1.9	5.4	12.1
PLAYER F	6.8	12.1	55.7%	0.0	0.1	28.6%	4.4	5.6	78.6%	3.2	4.7	7.9	1.0	0.8	0.8	1.8	3.9	18.0
PLAYER G	5.2	10.0	51.7%	0.0	0.0	0.0%	5.6	8.0	69.6%	4.3	5.9	10.2	0.9	0.7	0.9	2.1	5.5	16.0
PLAYER H	4.8	11.0	43.7%	0.0	0.2	17.7%	3.8	5.1	74.3%	3.1	5.9	9.1	1.8	1.3	0.8	2.8	5.1	13.4
PLAYER I	5.6	11.5	49.0%	0.0	0.1	0.0%	3.6	4.3	83.2%	2.9	5.3	8.1	1.1	0.6	1.2	1.9	3.4	14.9
PLAYER J	7.2	14.3	50.1%	0.0	0.0	14.3%	4.3	5.8	73.6%	3.6	5.8	9.4	2.4	0.9	1.9	2.4	3.0	18.7
PLAYER K	6.2	12.7	48.4%	0.5	1.5	33.2%	3.2	4.2	76.6%	2.5	4.9	7.4	3.2	0.7	0.4	2.0	2.7	16.0
PLAYER L	6.8	14.1	48.3%	0.8	2.4	33.5%	2.3	2.9	81.6%	2.5	6.8	9.3	1.9	1.7	1.2	1.5	2.4	16.8
PLAYER M	4.2	8.3	50.9%	0.0	0.0	16.7%	2.9	4.1	70.9%	2.2	6.3	8.6	3.5	0.8	0.3	1.8	2.8	11.4

Have at, email me or comment if you have a take. If you can't figure out who's who, I'll post that next week.

Unfettered Optimism: Developing James Anderson

2010-10-08T10:32:00.000-07:00

I'm actually a little surprised I haven't read a "Mr. Anderson" joke somewhere about this guy yet, but hey, we've had limited exposure to James Anderson at the NBA level, what with his hamstring injury and all. Anderson has now been dubbed a possible steal in this year's draft for the Spurs, which, to me is a good thing, but really, who is James Anderson? Since PtR has already beaten me to the punch, let's ask then, who do we want James Anderson to become? Because you can all look up the college numbers and how his high efficiency game will be effective in the NBA, and despite mislabeling him as the 1985 5th round pick James Anderson, DraftExpress has all the other stuff right. But for those of you not so inclined to do so, I'll give you the base numbers:

34.1 MPG, 22.3 PPG, 5.8 RPG, 2.4 APG, 1.4 SPG, 0.6 BPG, 2.4 TO, 2.2 3PTM, 34.1% 3PT%, 45.7% FG%

Those were his per game metrics. Not bad right?

25.5 points, 6.7 rebounds, 2.8 assists, 2.6 three pointers, 1.6 steals, 0.7 blocks, 45.7% field goal percentage, 34.1% three point percentage, 81% free throw percentage with 9 free throws attempted per game on 2.7 turnovers

What're those? His pace-adjusted per 40 minute metrics. I'd say he's pretty efficient about how he goes about things. While he won't be getting 26% of the Spurs possessions, his efficiency leads me to believe that he at least knows how to put the ball in the bucket, and that's fine by me. So what do we want from James Anderson? Do we want just three point shooting? What identity will Anderson find on this team? Well, let's take a look at some comparisons I drew up (as you all know I love comparing to Spurs championship past):

James Anderson: 6-6, 195 lbs
Player A: 6-7, 185 lbs
Player B: 6-5, 210 lbs
Player C: 6-7, 215 lbs
Player D: 6-8, 218 lbs

	FG	FGA	FG%	3P	3PA	3P%	FT	FTA	FT%	ORB	DRB	TRB	AST	STL	BLK	TOV	PF	PTS
Player A	3.4	8.2	.420	1.4	3.5	.403	1.0	1.5	.634	0.7	3.2	3.9	1.7	0.8	0.5	0.8	2.4	9.3
Player B	4.4	9.2	.471	1.1	3.0	.374	2.9	3.3	.866	1.0	2.8	3.8	2.5	1.3	0.3	1.7	2.5	12.7
Player C	5.4	13.1	.412	2.1	5.6	.364	1.8	1.9	.918	0.7	3.7	4.4	2.1	0.6	0.3	0.9	1.5	14.6
Player D	5.7	13.1	.435	1.5	4.7	.320	2.2	2.9	.760	1.1	3.5	4.6	2.9	2.0	0.5	2.8	3.2	15.1

Hm... would it be so wrong to at least ask this kind of performance from Anderson, at least in his first year? Hopefully he'll improve even more. A lot of people have stated that Anderson is potentially a starting caliber rookie, which leads to even higher expectations. While I see him primarily being a 3 point specialist, I can definitely see him leading the team in scoring at times when nothing seems to be going right. So who are these guys? Well, Player A is Bruce Bowen circa 2005, Player B is Mario Elie circa 1999, Player C is Michael Finley circa 2007, and Player D is Stephen Jackson circa 2003. Now what if Anderson developed into Finley and Jackson at their best? I don't know if Anderson has the defensive tenacity and passing ability of Stephen Jackson, but the offensive explosiveness and potentially hot shooting of Michael Finley? Hey, that's entirely in the realm of possibility. With such a high ceiling (I'm talking 2000 Dallas Mavericks Michael Finley) a revamped Richard Jefferson and a rested Manu Ginobili, you can't help but wonder how awesome a best case scenario wing situation we might actually have. Sure, Bruce Bowen is gone and we don't have a replacement, but you can't be entirely disappointed with what we have instead if this works out. Draft Express has him compared to Marcus Thornton, who had an excellent rookie season, by the metrics, I'd say that James Anderson looks even better.

He's not going to be the second coming of Manu, but hey, he'll still be pretty darn good if he pans out. I'm hopeful, because you know who had similar stats in college? Ray Allen. Yeah, I said it. In all seriousness though, I can definitely see him becoming a more explosive Finley, which in my books, I like.

Unfettered Optimism: Can Duncan pass the baton to Splitter?

2010-10-07T11:08:00.000-07:00

If you haven't seen it already, definitely take the time to check out this awesome video footage of the training session Dwight Howard got with the legendary Hakeem Olajuwon. It's actually pretty scary to see how well Dwight was hitting some of those shots. But that's not what I'm here to talk about. After watching that video I got inspired to look up some YouTube of another great big man of that era, legendary in his own right, of course, who else could I be talking about other than our very own David Robinson. Now I can go on and on about how awesome the 1998-1999 Spurs were, but that's not what I'm here about either. After a dismal 1996-1997 season where Robinson was injured, and landing Tim Duncan in the draft, the big story in the 1999 Finals run for the Spurs was about Robinson deferring to Duncan, passing the proverbial torch so to speak. While the 2007 Finals have the onus of leadership passing to Tony Parker, I still believe that a strong team will be rooted and anchored around a big man. I don't know that Splitter will become the dominant player that Duncan and Robinson were in their primes, but I also think he can definitely grow into something special for the Spurs. I know we're definitely in a "win-now" mode, but nonetheless, we also need to think long-term. Certainly we've conceded that we've moved beyond "put role players around Duncan" front office strategy, so who is up and coming? Well, our primary options are DeJuan Blair and Tiago Splitter. Andrew McNeil has a really good post about Blair and the waning of Duncan's dominance. I'm going to go the route of Tiago Splitter.

Splitter is 25, certainly older than most typical rookies, but with that we can also note that he's been playing international ball since he was 18, so he's in some senses a 7 year veteran. Now I know we typically do per 36, but since DraftExpress uses per 40s, I'm going to do that too, for the sake of simplicity. While Splitter's NBA experience is nil coming into the league at age 25, a lot of his fundamentals will really help and I believe carry over to the NBA. Pop has already said that he's got work to do offensively, in that he's not somebody that they'll just dump the ball to in the paint and expect something to happen. At this point, most comparisons have been of a glorified Fabricio Oberto, DraftExpress itself says that he won't become any better than P.J. Brown. His pace-adjusted per 40 numbers are promising from his last season with Caja Laboral, showing 22.5 points, 9.6 rebounds, 2.7 assists, 1.7 steals, and 1.1 blocks on 58.3% shooting. While I understand that almost nobody plays 40 minutes on Pop's team during the regular season, it's promising to see that he has that potential, and if he can improve on that with work from Duncan, then I have really high hopes. To give you a rough comparison, Duncan himself had a pace adjusted per 40 of 23 points, 13 rebounds, 4.1 assists, 0.7 steals, and 1.9 blocks on 52.2% shooting. So certainly we are somewhat leery since Splitter is obviously not the rebounder and shot blocker that Tim Duncan is or was (Duncan's highest per 40 metrics rating at 13.8 rebounds in 2007-2008 and 3.2 blocks in 2004-2005), but we have room to grow. The fact that he appears to have quicker hands and comes up with the steal more often is also quite nice too.

One quick comparable specimen I think I can draw from is Marc Gasol. In his last season in Europe on Girona, he averaged 16.2 points, 8.3 rebounds, 2.3 assists, 1.3 steals, 1.8 blocks on 65.3% shooting. His per 40 metrics showed 19.9 points, 10.2 rebounds, 2.8 assists, 1.6 steals, and 2.2 blocks on 65.3% shooting. While Splitter only averaged 15.7 points, 6.7 rebounds, 1.9 assists, 1.2 steals, and 0.8 blocks on 58.3% shooting, the per 40 metrics compare favorably. That being said, Gasol averaged 11.9 points, 7.4 rebounds, 1.7 assists, 0.8 steals, and 1.1 blocks on 53% shooting in his NBA rookie year, improving to 14.6 points, 9.3 rebounds, 2.4 assists, 1.0 steals, and 1.6 assists on 58.1% shooting the next year. I particularly like this analog because in his second year Gasol played next to a rediscovered Zach Randolph, who likely took a of the looks in the paint. Will Gasol (and thereby by comparison Splitter) ever realize his per 40 potential? Probably not, and Splitter likely won't become the shot blocker that Gasol is. Nonetheless, he can be a huge difference maker. As first he gets used to the NBA, but more than that, hopefully as Duncan takes him under his wings and shows him some of the things that have made him so successful, so far as to be called "the closest thing to a guaranteed 2 points" when in the paint.

With Splitter's basketball IQ and some of Duncan's post know-how, I certainly think he can break his projected ceiling of P.J. Brown (even at his best). So the question remains, can Splitter polish his overall game and become someone for Duncan to pass the proverbial baton that he got from Robinson. Certainly, I don't think it's necessarily the same exact baton, as the team leader baton I think is being passed to the likes of Tony Parker, but certainly, the whole defensive/low-post anchor I'd like to see passed to Splitter. I've said this before and I'll say it again; Duncan needs to become to one of our young bigs what David Robinson was to him. I think Splitter is that young big. I wouldn't mind if Blair was that young big too though. I mean, seriously:

Let's take this "random" comparison

Player A is 6-6 at 252 lbs while Player B is 6-7 at 265 lbs

Their per 36 stats compare thus:

Player	MP	FG	FGA	FG%	3P	3PA	3P%	FT	FTA	FT%	ORB	DRB	TRB	AST	STL	BLK	TOV	PF	PTS
Player A	2347	6.5	12.0	.545	0.0	0.1	.167	4.5	6.1	.733	4.1	6.7	10.8	2.4	1.5	1.2	3.2	4.6	17.6
Player B	1494	6.6	11.9	.556	0.0	0.0	.000	2.1	3.9	.547	4.8	7.9	12.7	1.6	1.2	0.9	2.7	5.4	15.4

I'm sure many of you have already guessed where I'm going with this... Player B is none other than our own DeJuan Blair. Player A is Hall of Famer Charles Barkley in his rookie year. This wasn't going to be a Blair post, but I had to throw this in here. I like the comparison. Barkley is obviously better, but hey, room to grow, it's not as far off as I thought it would be. ACLs or no I can't help but get excited about this. Splitter and Blair could be our frontcourt of the future. I like it. So while we're chasing that ring, I know we are, I hope that Tim takes the time to really mentor these young guys, he doesn't have to invite them over to his house, but he really does have so much to offer, and hopefully Blair and Splitter really can really soak in everything that this living legend has to offer.

Making the Matchups: Oklahoma City Thunder

2010-10-06T15:12:00.000-07:00

There's a lot that people say about this team; they're young, they're up and coming, they just needed some playoff experience and they're contenders... etc... I believe all of it except the last one. They have the playoff experience, but they are in no way contenders. Maybe I'm bitter being a basketball fan in Seattle. Nonetheless, the Thunder are a team that I've actually seen play live, granted this was a couple years earlier, but still, I can't say I was entirely impressed. Anyways, how do we matchup against these guys? I'm going to do this a little differently, and let's hope this works:

Starters:

SPURS	THUNDER
Tony Parker	Russell Westbrook
Manu Ginobili	Thabo Sefolosha
Richard Jefferson	Kevin Durant
Tim Duncan	Jeff Green
Tiago Splitter	Nenad Kristic

Okay, so what the heck do I mean by this? Well, quickly explained, green means where I think the Spurs have a patented advantage, red is where I think the opposing team has a patented advantage, and yellow where I think is going to be the decisive matchup.

Anyways, while I think that ultimately in the post season Pop will go with the Manu off the bench thing, if James Anderson proves to be the next coming of Michael Finley, at least, then I can see it going either way (see 2005 and 2007). I honestly see George Hill ultimately starting to take more and more PG responsibilities over time, but will still platoon time between PG and SG. Ultimately though, I think this is what the matchups will boil down to. I was going to say FIBA might give us some insight into how Splitter matches up against Kristic, but, alas, Brazil never played Serbia, of course, if I had really been closely following the FIBA championships I would've already known that.

Anyways, as the Thunder have gained experience through the years, Kevin Durant has been coming onto the scene in force. Essentially, Thunder are now basically Kevin Durant and co. Though the young guard Russell Westbrook has stepped up to be the second scoring option with Jeff Green quietly doing the duties of being the "other guy" of what could be dubbed the Thunder "Big 3". While right now, Durant is by and far the best SF in the Western Conference (sorry Melo), you can't win games, let alone a series with just one guy. Of course, try as we might, the Spurs will not, cannot, entirely contain Durant. Generally speaking, the typical homages to tough perimeter defense should be made here, chasing Durant away from his favorite spots, etc... Especially since Durant favors the one spot that kills Spurs, 20 foot jumpers. With his length and speed, it's easy for him to get shots off over defenders, as most give him ample space in case he drives. I think whoever is guarding Durant (probably Jefferson) needs to play physical defense, body him up, trusting that if he gets beat, the bigs will help and hopefully alter the shot. Westbrook has proven to be something of a pleasant surprise to a lot of Thunder fans, as he was originally brought on as a defensive specialist, so his tenacity will make Parker work for his shots. However, his inconsistency offensively is why I think the Thunder have been a little shaky here and there, as they rely too heavily on Durant in their offense at times. Furthermore, Green isn't really a true PF. He's more of a PF in the mold of Rashard Lewis, which is to say, a tall SF playing PF, only, Jeff Green isn't that tall. Now I could go on about how Sam Presti should trade Green for a real interior presence, but I'm not, because this blog is about the Spurs.

Overall, I feel that since the Thunder don't have great shot-blocking or great rebounders in general, the Spurs need to go back to the old school game of attacking the paint. In transition, they can use those quick outlets that they've become so fond of to hit Parker, Manu, and Jefferson, and in half-court, pound the ball inside, the Spurs have the decided size advantage. So attack the rim, make the Thunder foul the heck out of us. We don't have to make all of our free throws, but if we make enough by sheer volume of the amount we shoot and get the other team in foul trouble it does two things for us: first it opens up the interior even more, since players become very foul conscious and tend to reserve themselves on defense and secondly, regardless of our FT% if we shoot enough it's going to add up.

The need at the wings and Greg Popovich's 3-man rotations

2010-09-30T11:25:00.000-07:00

So most of the Spurs blogs I'm reading are currently talking about what to do about our wing situation. Most will probably ask the question: "Who will replace Bruce Bowen?". And while I understand the question from a skill-set perspective, I don't necessarily think that broad and simple question really addresses the needs that we really have. If you haven't already, read the nice prediction post at 48minutes, because they succinctly sum up all the wing players currently at Spurs training camp. I'm not here to talk about that. I'm here to address the more fundamental question of what exactly we need, at the wings.

I'm not really an expert on the game of basketball, but I believe that the specific breakdown between SG and SF was created by the game's developers for a reason. Granted we often use the term "wings" rather broadly sweeping both positions under the rug, but I think in this situation we need to get specific. In regards to our closers we have an SG in Manu Ginobili and an SF in Richard Jefferson. While Manu is, well Manu, we don't look to him for lockdown defensive prowess simply because we need his energy for the offensive end, and that suits us just fine, so long as he's decent to above average defensively, which he is. From last season's showing, most of us are probably more than a little disappointed with Richard Jefferson, and by now (at age 30) we really can't expect him to develop into that Bruce Bowen-esque mold of defensive, 3-point shooting small forward. So what do we need? Well, ideally, it's someone who can slide between SG and SF comfortably, defending multiple positions (that's his primary job) while hitting those open corner spot up threes (that's his secondary job). Someone that can, in our current situation, play next to both Jefferson and Ginobili. In 1999 that was Jaren Jackson (next to Mario Elie and Sean Elliott) in 2003 that was Stephen Jackson (next to Bowen and Ginobili) in 2005, well 2005 was kind of a weird year, but we can use that as an analog as well, and in 2007 we had Michael Finley.

Ideally, we'd want someone like another Stephen Jackson, underrated passing and ball-handling ability, decent 3-point shooting. Currently, we don't have anyone in particular super comfortable with that role, while George Hill is our touted defensive specialist, he can't guard the bigger players, making him more of a combo-guard defensive specialist similar to the mold of Kirk Hinrich or Delonte West. While an ideal Bruce Bowen replacement may be someone like Tayshaun Prince or Shane Battier, I don't know that we can readily get them as we don't really have any assets worth trading (that I personally am comfortable parting with to match salaries for said players). Okay, I wrote a bunch of stuff and I want to make sure everyone is still following me.

Historically, Pop has had the most success platooning three players across two positions, leveraging more versatile players to maintain the system that has driven the Spurs into the postseason. However, what this requires is a player that can play across two positions. From 1999 through 2003 Pop used an exclusive big man rotation of Tim Duncan, David Robinson, and Malik Rose. This worked simply because Duncan could slide to C whenever Rose entered the game and then Robinson naturally played C, so any combination of 2 out of the 3 worked, because Tim Duncan is a PF that can play C (or as Kelly Dwyer puts it: a C that can play PF). In 2005 in the Finals, Pop went with the rotation of Duncan, Nazr Mohammed, and Robert Horry. While in 2007 Pop expanded the rotation to four players, if you considered Fabricio Oberto and Francisco Elson as the two-headed center that most did, it still kind of counted as three. We're talking about wings here though. Well, the best examples I've already given above: Jaren Jackson, Stephen Jackson, and Michael Finley. Later we tried Keith Bogans and Ime Udoka, but they didn't work too well. So the question remains, are there such players left in the league? Well Stephen Jackson obviously still plays, and he's doing what we want him to do, just for a different team. I think if you look hard enough, you'll find these players, players with the size and length to compete with bigger SFs but also the footwork to contest quicker SGs. Here are my following wants, and please note, these aren't necessarily realistic possibilities, but I think they'd be great fits next to Jefferson and Ginobili:

Wilson Chandler (6-8, 220 lbs, currently on Knicks roster)
When Wilson Chandler first came into the scene, he was heralded as thus: "Renaldo Balkman with a jump shot", mainly because Isaiah Thomas drafted him a year after he drafted Balkman, another 6-8, 210 lb forward. Both hustle on defense, while not with the effectiveness perhaps of Bruce Bowen (though I don't know that there would be a lot of players who would have that), he's done a decent job and has also developed a long range game, boasting a decently respectable 30.8% career 3pt shooting percentage. While significantly lower than Bowen's career 39.3% if we go into the shooting breakdown, Chandler's shooting percentage was impaired by his inability to hit wing 3s. However, from the right corner he was shooting a nice 43.5% and a decent 30.6% from the left last season for a combined 35.6% from either corner. In his previous season he shot a nice 37.9% from the corners, 40.5% from the right and 36.1% from the left. I attribute this dropoff to a confusion in his role, especially with Danilo Gallinari being healthy and throwing Chandler around the roster. Chandler is also known for being able to finish strong at the rim finding most of his shots right at the basket, so he definitely fits the younger and more athletic mold.

Kelenna Azubuike (6-5, 220 lbs, currently on Knicks roster)
Azubuike is another one of those D-League call-up success stories. He's strong, athletic and finishes strong at the rim. While probably not the best defender in the league by any stretch, nor even one of the better ones possibly, he's stalwart and works hard to defend his man. After Baron Davis fled the Bay Area for sunny LA, Azubuike started to see a lot more playing time and he did much with it. He is a career 40.9% 3 point shooter and only his mid-range game seems really suspect. Since he was injured much of last season, let's look to the season before, where he shot over 40% on all 3 point zones. While he seems to favor the left wing, he did shoot a combined 44.4% from the corners on a total of 54 attempts. While he's a little shorter than many SFs, he has the size and strength to compete with the best of them. If you're tracking my Spurs history analogs, think of him as a better Devin Brown or a more athletic Jaren Jackson.

Martell Webster (6-7, 235 lbs, currently on Timberwolves roster)
Webster was credited as one of the defensive specialists in Portland, playing excellent defense against Kobe Bryant during Lakers games. Then, to make room for youngster Nicolas Batum, he was traded to the Timberwolves. He also is credited with being a very streaky shooter. He's fairly athletic and good at keeping with opposing wings. As for his shooting, well, he is also something of a 3 point specialist finding a large majority of his shots from beyond the arc, and showing a decent 37.3% career 3-point shooting percentage. Last season, he found a degree of success from the corners, nailing 40% from the right and 37.6% from the left, making him a viable threat from either corner at a combined 38.6% over 140 shots.

Dorrell Wright (6-9, 210 lbs, currently on Warriors roster)
Wright isn't a very realistic possibility as the Warriors just brought him in this season, for something we like in him, that is: defense. He's long, and he's decent defensively, was slated as potentially the SF to play next to Dwayne Wade, but a series of injuries bogged him down and then he got stuck behind Michael Beasley and Shawn Marion on the depth chart. Career-wise he's a 34.4% 3 point shooter. Last season he shot 38.9% overall from beyond the arc, including 41.8% from the corners (39% from the left, 43.9% from the right on a total of 98 attempts). He got almost half of his looks from the corners so, it's a pretty good fit I would say.

DeShawn Stevenson (6-5, 218 lbs, currently on Mavericks roster)
Stevenson really is more of an SG, so how well he'd fare against bigger SF players is questionable, but he was the defensive specialist on a Wizards squad that did decently. Since Stevenson was traded and in limbo last season, and injured for much of the season prior, we jump all the way back to 2007-2008 for some of the metrics. From the left corner he shot a decent 31.4% from the right a blistering 50%, combined that's 40.8% from the corners on 103 attempts. As a side note, he also shot 40.3% on 243 attempts for his wing 3s. While not entirely analogous, he did do this playing with the Wizards Big 3 of Gilbert Arenas, Caron Butler, and Antawn Jamison, granted, for a lot of that season, one of them was always injured.

Sasha Pavlovic (6-7, 235 lbs, currently free agent)
For metrics on Pavlovic, I'm going to have to go back to when he had solid rotation minutes, which was basically 2006-2007 when as the starting SG he helped the Cavs make it all the way to the NBA Finals. Of his noted accomplishments that season, the premier was playing excellent defense against Vince Carter in the first round of the Playoffs against the Nets. That year he hit 38.2% of his corner 3s, though mostly from the left as he only hit 27.3% of his right corner threes. Career wise he's a respectable 35.2% 3 point shooter, and does a decent job of getting to the rim.

Anthony Parker (6-6, 210 lbs, currently on Cavaliers roster)
Parker was once the second option behind Chris Bosh on the Raptors. Oftentimes he drew the most difficult defensive assignments there too, and while he didn't shut anyone down, he did as admirable a job as anyone could have hoped for. Parker is also known for his long range touch. Last season playing behind Delonte West Parker shot 41.4% from beyond the arc which closely correlates to his career average of 41.5% long range. If we break it down Parker definitely favors the corners, taking 167 shots (of his season total of 261 3 point attempts and 475 total FG attempts) from there, hitting 44.9% of his corner threes. Having worked with Mike Brown, a former Greg Popovich man, I'd say he would fit into the system pretty well.

While we could laud the likes of Josh Childress or Thabo Sefalosha, I don't know how entirely realistic or cost effective it would be to land the likes of said players. I'm sure there are a lot more players out there that warrant our attention on this matter, but I'm just raising the issue of what I think our roster needs at the wing currently are. If someone we have now steps up and fills that gap I'll be happy, but until then, we need to find a way to fit somebody around Manu and Jefferson, as it stands, I don't know that we have that somebody. A lot of people think it'll be a combination of young talent and older folks, some combination of Alonzo Gee, James Anderson, and Bobby Simmons. Hey, if it works, then it works. We all agree this guy has to be a defensive specialist, we all agree he needs to be able to hit corner threes, I think we can all agree we're not going to find the next coming of Bruce Bowen, Richard Jefferson certainly isn't, and isn't going to be, but if Jefferson is to be our SF for better or worse at this point, let's compromise a little and meet in the middle. If we take our last successful roster wing rotation of primarily Finley, Ginobili, and Bowen, and figure out who that third guy is going to be this season next to Ginobili and Jefferson, let's try this: better than Finley on defense and better than Bowen on offense, that's not so bad now is it?

Making those matchups: Dallas Mavericks

2010-09-21T21:48:00.000-07:00

As long as I can remember there's always been some contention between Dallas and San Antonio, and despite Dallas's penchant for fading during the Playoffs (see 2006 and 2007 seasons) they are a legitimately good team. There's no question about it. I may be a little biased, but I personally still think that the trend (since 1996) no team from the Western Conference not called the Lakers or Spurs will win a championship. I frankly don't think any of the Western Conference teams have what it takes. Certainly OKC Thunder are up there, but that's another post for another time. Dallas, while a good team, especially in the regular season, has failed to prove its mettle in the postseason. That being said, it was Dallas that ousted us from the playoffs in 2009, in the first round no less. Unprecedented!

Anyways, the Dallas roster looks something like this:

PG: Jason Kidd, Jose Juan Barea, Rodrigue Beaubois
SG: Caron Butler, Jason Terry, DeShawn Stevenson
SF: Shawn Marion
PF: Dirk Nowitzki
C: Brendan Haywood, Tyson Chandler, Alexis Ajinca, Ian Mahinmi

Matched up against our own little roster of:

PG: Tony Parker, George Hill, Curtis Jerrells
SG: Manu Ginobili, Alonzo Gee, Garrett Temple, James Anderson
SF: Richard Jefferson
PF: Tim Duncan, Antonio McDyess, DeJuan Blair, Matt Bonner
C: Tiago Splitter

Since Tim Thomas decided to care for his ailing wife rather than play another season for the Mavericks, the Mavericks effectively are thin in the PF department. Granted Dirk is going to sop up most of the minutes anyways, it'll be interesting to see how Rick Carlisle will work around that. I personally see a platoon of Marion, Chandler, and maybe even Mahinmi/Ajinca behind Dirk depending on the matchups, but Dallas has the unique dilemma of being overly backcourt-heavy. What do I mean by this? Dallas has 5 starting caliber players at the PG, SG, and SF slots (if you recall DeShawn Stevenson was a starter, so yes I am counting him), plus the young emerging talents of J.J. Barea and Rodruige Beaubois and there definitely aren't enough minutes to go around for all the players that want to. The addition of Brendan Haywood and Tyson Chandler definitely give Dallas the interior presence that Erick Dampier and DeSagana Diop didn't in previous years.

Overall, the main issue with this matchup is containing Dirk and exploiting mismatches due to Dallas's awkward rotations. Basically, my strategy remains essentially the same, attack Jason Kidd on the defensive end. When Kidd is on the floor, he has to guard somebody, be it Jefferson, Parker, or Ginobili, whoever has Kidd guarding him on defense, he just has to keep attacking. We all know that Kidd isn't stopping anyone anytime soon, so that's the kink in the armor. Of course with the likes of Brandon Haywood and Tyson Chandler patrolling the paint, there is a more legitimate shot blocking presence than Erick Dampier, so that's something. That being said, Caron Butler isn't really comfortable as an SG and Shawn Marion is just not comfortable on the court much anymore, still, we shouldn't be comfortable, the Mavericks are still a legitimate threat and good team, good enough to knock us out of the playoffs again if we're not at our top game. Here's to hoping Dirk sees a bit of time at center, especially since I don't relish the fact that we have to contain so many offensive weapons (Dirk, Butler, Terry, at the very least), while I like the matchup overall, it's not one I particularly look forward to immensely. Still all-in-all, I think we have a good shot.

Making those matcups: Los Angeles Lakers

2010-09-17T15:07:00.000-07:00

If HoopsHype is fairly accurate the current roster list consists of:

PG: Tony Parker, George Hill, Curtis Jerrells
SG: Manu Ginobili, Garrett Temple, Alonzo Gee, James Anderson, Gary Neal
SF: Richard Jefferson
PF: Tim Duncan, Antonio McDyess, Matt Bonner, DeJuan Blair
C: Tiago Splitter

The essential core of the roster, I think will be Parker, Ginobili, Duncan, Jefferson, Splitter, Hill, McDyess, and Blair/Bonner. I'm not so certain about Temple, Gee, and Anderson, but I think they have a shot at making the rotation. Nonetheless, it's a solid lineup, but every team (except maybe Minnesota) has been beefing up. So essentially, let's consider who we have to be afraid of, or in other words, which teams will give us the most trouble, and maybe a few teams that won't.

WESTERN CONFERENCE

Los Angeles Lakers

Naturally, when you're in the same conference as the reigning NBA champs, you have to fear the NBA champs. I believe that the Lakers roster looks as follows:

PG: Steve Blake, Derek Fisher, Jordan Farmar
SG: Kobe Bryant, Sasha Vujacic
SF: Ron Artest, Matt Barnes, Luke Walton
PF: Pau Gasol, Lamar Odom
C: Andrew Bynum, Theo Ratliff

This team is essentially the same as last season. However, rumors are abounding about how after playing through all his hand injuries, his hand is now irreparable, but of course, everyone was noting how he ended up shooting better, I don't know that that's indicative of anything other than maybe Kobe's taking better shots because he knows he can't take as many, who knows? Anyways, you can argue that the team has been somewhat upgraded, Steve Blake is essentially a white, right-handed, slightly younger Derek Fisher, a sound, safe ball-handler that can hit threes. He's no stalwart on defense, but of course, he doesn't have the contract of Kirk Hinrich or the mental issues of Delonte West, all in all a good pickup. Likewise, Matt Barnes is dogged on defense, less the craziness, sort of, but hey, he's solid. He's a good defender, shoots the three, basically everything you want from one of the wings outside the triangle. The addition of Ratliff adds a legitimate defensive big man outside of the Bynum, Gasol, Odom frontcourt trio.

As usual, the entire scariness of the Lakers (outside of Kobe) depends first on the healthiness of Andrew Bynum, secondly on the dominance of Pau Gasol, thirdly on the performance of Lamar Odom, and lastly their concentration in running Phil Jackson's triangle offense.

A healthy Bynum gives the Lakers a monstrous starting front court, but the bonus is that Bynum and Gasol don't necessarily fit into the triangle together as well as everyone thinks they should. Nonetheless, a Bynum/Gasol frontcourt cannot be called anything except scary. Should we be as scared as everyone else though? Fortunately, now with Splitter added into the mix, we do have the size to compete. As Splitter develops NBA size into his body, he is used to guarding those versatile European big men a la Pau Gasol. While Euroleague hasn't thrown talent like Gasol at Splitter, the familiarity of the style is there. Perhaps a switch of Splitter on Gasol and Duncan on the bigger Bynum.

To me, a on par Lamar Odom is a bigger issue. Odom has the size of a PF but the ball-handling and versatility of a wing player. Overall, he's just a handful, and frankly, I'm not entirely certain we have anyone with the size and/or versatility to really defend him. No one really had the potential since Marcus Haislip, and obviously, Pop didn't think Haislip didn't have what it took. He'll be a handful, but then, hopefully the additional presence in the paint of Splitter with Duncan might be sufficient help to throw Odom off his game. It'll all be about rotations, and pressuring Odom into difficult jump-shots, which he doesn't like, or rather, isn't that great at.

There's no doubt that perimeter defense needs to improve, but hopefully with the improved interior defense that will come naturally. The Lakers remain scary simply because they have 2 viable starters at three different positions, while superficially the Lakers haven't changed a whole lot, the added depth (which was always the weakness of the Lakers), especially at the pivot, the point, and the SF slots, really ease the workload if they all fit into their respective spots correctly. While I do like the backcourt trio of Manu Ginobili, Tony Parker, and George Hill, the lack of continued proven depth at the guard spots somewhat worries me. Hopefully additions of Garrett Temple, Alonzo Gee, and James Anderson alleviate some of that concern. Naturally, a lot of our hopes lies on Richard Jefferson figuring himself out, determining where and how he'll fit into everything. It's still early to tell, but I personally don't really like our chances against the Lakers, but I'd have to say we have a better shot than most if it does come down to it.

Spurs can't regret off-season decisions

2010-09-17T14:58:00.000-07:00

I decided to write this quick post after reading some excellent posts on 48minutesofhell. The first was one about how Luis Scola is absolutely dominating in the FIBA world championships, and thereby rubbing in the Spurs faces their off-season for trading his draft rights to the Rockets after 5 years of waiting. The second was another article regarding how the age-old Spurs tradition of finding solid role players (think Bruce Bowen, Robert Horry, Fabricio Oberto, Malik Rose, Steve Kerr, Matt Bonner, etc...) to fit around the stars (think Tim Duncan, Manu Ginobili, Tony Parker, or David Robinson), and how it doesn't work anymore. I think both articles are on point, but they really should be taken more as a grain of salt moving forward and how to do so more so than a scathing review on how R.C. Buford screwed up because Scola finally decided to come to the NBA in 2008. Sure, Scola is better than Splitter, and maybe Splitter doesn't have the star potential, but it's what we have.

I lived in California for a couple of years and if you want off-season or draft miscues you need look no further than the Golden State Warriors. Don't believe me? Ask any W fan, they know this by heart. At least the Spurs scouted the talent, they just couldn't wait. Warriors fans are still cringing at the 1995 draft, and that was 15 years ago, for taking Joe Smith before Jerry Stackhouse, Rasheed Wallace, and Kevin Garnett. That's 3 All-Stars that were taken after a journeyman. Todd Fuller was taken a year later over the likes of Steve Nash and Kobe Bryant, that's two MVPs taken after a guy I frankly have never heard of before until I researched this. There will always be regrets, but that's the risk we all take going into the draft. In 1999, no one thought that the New York Knicks had a prayer without Patrick Ewing, but they made it to the finals. Let's not count anyone out yet. We may not have the best team on paper, but that doesn't mean we can't go all the way. There's always a chance, and while it's slimmer, it's a chance I'm willing to root for.

Someone for Richard Jefferson to Emulate

2010-09-01T11:24:00.000-07:00

I know I've said this a lot before, and I'll say continue to say it. We all know that Richard Jefferson isn't going to be much of a defensive specialist a la Bruce Bowen. He's not going to be shutting anyone down and gaining the reputation of his contemporaries in Tayshaun Prince, Shane Battier, or Ron Artest, let alone the all around two-way talent of the likes of Stephen Jackson and Gerald Wallace (perhaps even John Salmons). On the flip side, his offense is waning and he cannot be expected to rely on his athleticism as of old to get to the rim at will like he used to. If we go back to Spurs championship formulas of old I think it's relatively unrealistic to think that Jefferson, at this point in time, will ever develop the court-saavy of Bruce Bowen, or somehow develop the ball-handling capabilities of Stephen Jackson. As dismal as Jefferson's performance was last season, we can still use it as a kind of baseline:

12.3 points, 4.4 rebounds, 2 assists, 0.6 steals, 0.5 blocks, on 46.7% shooting and 31.6% from beyond the arc in 31.1 minutes of play.

Way shy of his previous season in Milwaukee of 19.6 PPG and the season prior in New Jersey of 22.6 PPG, Jefferson does have the unenviable position of moving from becoming a key cog in the offensive rotation to more of a role-player. Seeing his shot attempts drop from 16.2 to 14.9 to 9.6 season after season, though it wasn't the result we were looking for, it's not totally unreasonable for him to have struggled to fit into as complex an offense as Greg Popovich's. It may not be the most perfect analog but I think a former Spur that Richard Jefferson would do well to emulate is Sean Elliott. We look at Elliott, and at age 30 (which Jefferson is at now), when they won a championship in 1999, Elliott had comparable numbers:

11.2 points, 4.3 rebounds, 2.3 assists, 0.5 steals, 0.3 blocks, on 41.0% shooting and 32.8% from beyond the arc in 30.2 minutes of play.

Okay, so the numbers are similar, Elliott used to be a 20 PPG contributor as well, until Duncan came along. How did Elliott adapt? During the 1999 Finals, Duncan and Robinson dominated I would say almost 3/4 of the possessions, but Elliott was a key part of that success, how did he do it? Firstly, Sean Elliott started with picking his shots. The offense is a constant motion, and while Elliott doesn't put up flashy numbers, he made some crucial shots. That requires quick split second decisions on taking the shot or throwing it back into the paint. Secondly, Elliott got aggressive on defense, I know he wasn't the stalwart that teammate Mario Elie was, but he worked hard at it, being aggressive on the perimeter and hounding the ball-handlers on the wing. Sure maybe it was because you had two massive shot-blockers in Robinson and Duncan patrolling the paint, but I would also like to believe that someone who alters shots as well as Tiago Splitter will help Jefferson be aggressive as well. Jefferson ultimately needs to learn to move without the ball and make those quick decisions when he does get it. Sean Elliott, Mr. Jefferson, emulate Sean Elliott.

Richard Jefferson 2.0

2010-07-22T14:53:00.000-07:00

Who is Richard Jefferson really? And how does he fit in the offense? I might not be the first to say that I'm not sure Richard Jefferson fits very well. Nonetheless, he's here, for just shy of $40 million over 4 years. Yikes. Wait, he's 30? I thought we were going younger. Yikes. Or maybe not quite so yikes. Last year the Bucks unloaded Richard Jefferson for Kurt Thomas, Bruce Bowen, and Fabricio Oberto, of the three, they only kept Thomas, waiving Bruce Bowen (who pretty much retired) and Fabricio Oberto (who went on to a mediocre season on the Wizards). Essentially, Jefferson was to be a Bruce Bowen upgrade/replacement. Perhaps not quite as refined or established defensively, but someone definitely more athletic and more dynamic on the offensive end. Unfortunately, what we will dub as year 1 of the Richard Jefferson experiment failed with rather dismal results. Jefferson averaged 12.3 points, 5.2 rebounds, 2.8 assists with less than a steal and block per game on 46.7% shooting and 31.6% from beyond the arc. So how can he fit into the team? Can he?

Sebastian Pruiti has convinced me that he can. Jefferson has always been a player known for his explosiveness, much of his successful career in New Jersey may be attributed to playing with Jason Kidd in his prime years, but a lot of people have noted that he is something of a Vince Carter clone, less some of the IQ. As age catches up to everyone, including Jefferson (who is now 30) it takes away a lot of the athleticism that players once boasted in their mid-20s. The Tim Duncan we saw run the floors in 1999 now has shaky knees and has a hard time getting lift. The Manu Ginobili of 2003 is now wiser, but also more fragile. Likewise, Jefferson, who once had great athleticism, needs to adapt his game. He has never been known as a wily player, and certainly we're not expecting him to suddenly become a crafty ball-handler in the like of Stephen Jackson. However, Jefferson and the Spurs need to come to an agreement on how he can work with the rest of the Spurs.

With the addition of Tiago Splitter, I can definitely see Pop going into a lot of his older sets, now that there is something of a legitimate post presence next to Duncan once again. Depending on Splitter's mid-range game, Pop may go to the low-post/high-post game that Pop used to run with Duncan and Robinson. Generally speaking, when that happened, the remaining three players (Avery Johnson, Sean Elliot, and Mario Elie) would generally spot up around the perimeter for kickouts. Times are changing though, the three players probably out there now are Tony Parker, Manu Ginobili, and Richard Jefferson. The kickout option becomes less attractive as Parker and Jefferson aren't spectacular spot up shooters. They're serviceable, but spot up threes are not really their game. I don't know a lot about basketball plays, but I would surmise that off-ball screens and cuts would probably be the most effective. While we like Timmy in the low post, I know that he is an highly underrated passing big-man, and running him as a passer out of the high-post (a la Chris Webber) could be a very effective means of getting Jefferson involved in the offense. Not to say we have to run this all the time, but it's plays like these that I think Jefferson can definitely work with. That being said, Jefferson needs to get his head in the game and keep alert for opportunities. Last season he had a tendency to get lost in the offense, hopefully, that doesn't happen as much this year.

Moving on...

2010-07-15T21:54:00.000-07:00

So as the hubbub of the 2010 free agency continues to swirl, and we continue to hear about how every other semi-legitimate player is taking a massive pay cut to play with the Miami trifect of Dwayne Wade, LeBron James, and Chris Bosh, such names including Udonis Haslem, Zydrunas Ilgauskas, and Mike Miller. No, the Spurs haven't really had much happen in the free agency, that is not much if you're not a Spurs fan. Finally, the long awaited signing of Tiago Splitter did occur just the other day though. So what does this mean for the future? Well, Splitter is supposed to be the difference maker. He is that big man that can defend next to Duncan. This is no knock on DeJuan Blair or Antonio McDyess, but those extra inches make leaps and bounds of differences. The nice thing I hear is that the Splitter deal is actually somewhat below the MLE, so that does leave us some room to sign some players (about $2.37M of room according to 48MoH). With Richard Jefferson opting out and only $2.37M of MLE left to use, who then should we sign? Well, a good place to start is looking at what we have under contract:

PG - Tony Parker, George Hill
SG - Manu Ginobili, Malik Hairston
SF -
PF - Tim Duncan, Matt Bonner, Antonio McDyess, DeJuan Blair
C - Tiago Splitter

So the glaring, obvious hole is in the SF spot, or more generally speaking, the wings. I haven't seen or herad enough of Malik Hairston's play to say anything for or against him. I'm also presuming now, that one of those wing spots will go to rookie James Anderson, who was drafted at number 20. If draft reports are to be believed, Anderson is potentially starting quality material. That's 10 players, leaving us $2.37M of MLE plus any veteran's minimum contracts to sign 3-5 more players. So who's available? Well I don't really know that I want Richard Jefferson back, though a sign-and-trade is potentially an option now that all the major big-name free agents have been gobbled up. I'd rather have Josh Howard to be frank, but he's in the probably-too-expensive-for-our-budget category. So who can be had at let's say $2M (roughly) or at veteran's minimum (aprrox $1.14M?)?

Here are some names I think are fairly viable:

Sasha Pavlovic

He's not great, some would say he's not even that good. He can shoot the three, was something of a defensive specialist when he was on Cleveland and has bounced around a bit, did an admirable job guarding Vince Carter during the 2007 New Jersey-Cleveland series, and showed spurts of good play in the Finals sweep that same season. Note, he was on the team that got swept, by us, yeah. I mean, we like to pick up old vets from rival teams we played against before anyways right? Mario Elie (from Houston), Robert Horry (from L.A. Lakers), Richard Jefferson (from the Bucks but originally from New Jersey), Antonio McDyess (from Detroit).

Damien Wilkins

I know a little bit about Wilkins because I was in Seattle right before the Sonics were stolen. Wilkins is known to be a decent defender and shoots the three moderately well. He fizzled out halfway through a career-season as a starting SG on the Sonics, but I don't think he'll be called upon to play too many minutes on the Spurs. I think he might be something of a Keith Bogans upgrade, and I know to some of you that's probably not saying a whole lot.

Joey Graham

The Graham brothers have probably been as big a bust as any out there in the NBA. Nonetheless, he has the tools to be a decent defender, maybe Pop can motivate him. He did have a decent season last year in Denver.

Rodney Carney

Another one of those athletic players who never realized their potential. It's a matter of motivation. There are a lot of these guys out there for good reason.

Joe Alexander

See above.

Matt Barnes

Barnes worked his butt off for Orlando as a stop plug defender last season. With the possibility of his return dwindling, can we steal him away? I think he's one of those intense hustle guys we can always use in the realm of Mario Elie.

Jarvis Hayes

Essentially he's a poor man's Bruce Bowen. Probably not as proficient defensively, but a fairly reliable spot up shooter.

James Singleton

He intrigues me, I don't know much about him except he's a hustle defense kind of guy, worth taking a look at.

This is a fairly basic list of the guys I think we might want to consider. From what I read about our draft pick, James Anderson, he's supposed to be something of a steal like Marcus Thornton previously, touted to be the most efficient player with the highest usage, we'll see how that translates, but having a Marcus Thronton-like scoring ability isn't bad. If that efficiency translates, I'm happy. So $2.37M plus a couple of veteran's minimum contracts for 3-5 players, I think we got a decent shot, let's hope it works this year. It is odd.

The 2010 Free Agency: 10 difference makers at MLE

2010-06-30T16:12:00.000-07:00

Here's the deal, it's the 2010 free agency, and as much as I'd love to add LeBron James, Dwayne Wade, and/or Chris Bosh to the roster, frankly Spurs don't really have much in terms of cap room available. I understand that there are more roster needs, but these are some names that I'm willing to spend a good chunk of the MLE on. Generally speaking, I think we need bigs to play next to Timmy, so these 10 are those bigs I think we can make a run at in the FA.

1.) Brendan Haywood

Haywood is a starting caliber center, an above average defender, with a decent back-to-the-basket game. He's a legit 7-footer who can fit well next to Duncan. He probably doesn't have a great mid-range game to compliment Timmy's post game, but then, he's probably a step up from Nazr Mohammed. Seriously. I like Haywood here, but he could be pricey.

2.) Zydrunas Ilgauskas

Besides his age, Big Z is actually a fairly ideal player to play next to Timmy. He's a decent mid-range catch-and-shoot face up shooter, for a big man, he's also a decent defender. He's obviously not the most ideal candidate, and we know that he couldn't hack it as LeBron's second string. However, he fits precisely the mold that the Spurs are looking for.

3.) Udonis Haslem

Kelly Dwyer from Yahoo's Ball Don't Lie blog calls Udonis Haslem one of the better defenders out there. He's not a shot blocker, but he's a top notch rebounder and he and has a solid, legitimate offensive game. For the pessimist, he's kind of an Antonio McDyess upgrade, but I trust Dwyer, and if he says that Haslem has got one of the stellar defensive games in the league, for a big man, then I'm sold.

4.) Channing Frye

A 6-11 Matt Bonner, who plays defense. Frye torched the Spurs in the playoffs and did a decent job against Timmy on defense. Another one of those players I'm not sure if we'd be able to get for the MLE, but someone I'm willing to take a swing at.

5.) Jermaine O'Neal

O'Neal is old, he's got no knees, but he's a decent center and defender. If he's healthy. Pretty big "if" but it's a risk I'm kind of willing to take.

6.) Brad Miller

American, druggy version of Big Z, minus the defense.

7.) Darko Milicic

Darko has to be among the most maligned big men in the league. He's definitely up there next to the likes of Kwame Brown and Eddy Curry. He at least tries on defense, while he had his shot at Minnesota, and he didn't seem like much, I still think he has a decent chance to be something, not a second overall pick, but something, under the influence and leadership of Timmy.

8.) Johan Petro

Petro showed some promise this past season with the Nuggets when Kenyon Martin got injured. He's shown he's a solid defender and decent rebounder. Not a bad take, could do worse, I might not spend the entire MLE on him, but he's worth looking at.

9.) Shelden Williams

A body that can produce relatively well, he had a couple of good games with Boston when he got playing time through Kevin Garnett's injuries.

10.) Chris Hunter

Another one of those Warriors D-League projects. You have to take his production with a grain of salt as it was on the Warriors, but hey, I like his game.

Update: Trade Picture

2010-02-15T23:30:00.000-08:00

Guess Brendan Haywood is out of the picture...

So's Marcus Camby apparently...