Spurs running a big man factory in SA?
by bj1der on Jul 25, 2009 4:36 AM CDT
55 comments
The Spurs seem have a loaded roster for next season, definitely seems like one of the deepest teams in the league. It should be fun to see what the regular rotation would look like. That's just my biggest question; the rotation. What exactly would it look like? There are a bunch of different options for a starting line-up and the main reason is the ridiculous number of bigs on our roster. I mean are Pop and R.C. running a big man camp in SA? Tim Duncan asked for some help up front on the boards but it seems like the Spurs got big-happy this summer. I wonder how all these bigs will work out.
via media-2.web.britannica.com
Right now the line up is as follows:
PG: Tony Parker, George Hill
SG: Manu Ginobili, Roger Mason, Malik Hairston
SF: Richard Jefferson, Michael Finley
PF: Tim Duncan, Antonio McDyess, DeJuan Blair, Marcus Haislip, Matt Bonner
C:Ian Mahinmi, Theo Ratliff
Anybody see a problem here? I count seven Big men 5 of which are power forwards. The problem I have here is not that there are too many big men, I know there have been teams with 7 bigs before but the thing is that all these guys are capable players. And furthermore, all these guys (with a couple exceptions) can possibly start. Lets think about it, we know the starting line up is as follows: Tony at the point, Mason at the 2, RJ at 3 and we'll say Timmy is the first big. Then there's the hole, the second big. Who gets that spot in the starting line up? With 6 other bigs on the roster, any of them could make it into the starting line up (depending on what Pop wants to do) Who knows what Pop has in mind. Well here are the different guys we have that can possibly fill this role.
DeJuan Blair
The rookie. The steal of the draft. The human rebounding machine. So Blair brings exactly what the Spurs were looking for, so does that mean that he's capable of a starting spot? Probably not. He isn't exactly ready to bang with the bigger forwards in the league yet. Not quite yet. He's definitely better off coming off the bench because as it stands the rebounding of the bench unit is dismal so he could surely help.
via www.nba.com
Matt Bonner
Alright we know Bonner had a bad second half of the season and we know that he wasn't completely comfortable with the starting role, but lets face it, the man played the starting role and played it well for the better part of his season. We all now that Pop has fallen in love with that perimeter big man kind of line up and like i said, the guy played well in the starting line up so he might just get it back. The reality is though that because of all the bigs we now carry its not likely that he will.
via www.nba.com
Ian Mahinmi
Ian is the Spurs project for the next few years so i don't think he will be involved in any trades. But is he ready to start next to Timmy? I doubt but you never know. He did some good things in the summer league and shows that he has a lot of potential. But unless that potential kicks in before training camp, I don't see him in the starting line up. But again, you never know. The one thing he has going for him is that he is one of our only two centers on the roster, and I have a thing about putting people (Timmy) back into their natural positions. So if he shows some good things in camp, there's a chance.
Marcus Haislip
Ok here's my question; How good is Marcus Haislip? I've seen tonnes of articles and videos on this guy but the articles didn't really clarify much and we all know that videos tend to embellish things a lot, so at this point I'm still lost as to how good this guy really is. All the articles talk about his play when he was in Europe, but he was injured for part of that time. Right now I don't have any information that tells me how good he is right now. But I trust the guys in the Spurs front office so if they think that he's good then I'll go with that. As for if he's a starter of not it's not likely. I do know that he can shoot the 3 so if Pop likes him as a more athletic version of Bonner who can play some defense then he might make it.
via www.sportsnet.ca
Theo Ratliff
Theo Ratliff is the next true center on the roster, but I doubt he would get the minutes at the starting spot. Again, because he's an actual center he might, and I mean MIGHT (yea chances are really slim) get the starting spot. I just don't see how that would happen. He has has injury problems his entire career and he is up there in age so can't expect more than about 12 minutes a game. There isn't much chance of Theo getting the start.
via dunkonu.files.wordpress.com
Antonio McDyess
Antonio McDyess is probably the best option to get the starting spot. The only reason I think he might not is because he is used to coming off the bench and to be honest the bench could use some scoring up front. But yea, he definitely is the best suited player to play next to Tim. Only downside is that Timmy would have to play center but its not like its a big problem. Dyess and Timmy up front seems to be the best option but anything can happen.
Well there are your possibilities and my thoughts about their chances. Either way it goes down we have a deep front court for next season, and it should help bring some results. Not saying a championship is guaranteed, but it will help. I'm looking forward to seeing how this works out.
1 recs |
55 comments
Email
Print
Comments
Great post bj1der
I fell to that McDyess should come of the bench. He seems more active if you watch him when he come’s off the bench. Probably due to his knee’s I guess. I think the starters will be Tim at the foward and Ian at the Center. That is if Ian can prove himself. Maybe Ratiff could be starting it would be very unlikely though. It wouldnt be excatly bad if he could stay healty becuase when Ratiff is healty and has min he is a shot blocking machine. Then Blair should come of the bench. Then Haslip is some kind of Foward. He can play both Foward postions. As for Bonner I have no idea were he will be. This is going to be a very intresting to see were some guy’s end up.
P.S.
I wont be on here as much im going on vaction back to San Antonio till Agust 16.
GO SPURS GO
SPURS 2010 NBA Champions (if team is healty LoL)
by Manu-20 on Jul 25, 2009 8:06 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I wouldnt expect much at all from Haislip
If hes a more athletic version of Bonner, fine, but Bonner’s got a few years experience on him. So either Haislip isnt breaking camp with San Antonio or Bonner gets traded or Haislip spends a year in Austin
Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.
by bren on Jul 25, 2009 8:46 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I think that Haislip is going to surprise us.
by spursfan87 on Jul 25, 2009 12:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreedest.
"Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect." - Mark Twain
by spurchief on Jul 26, 2009 3:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreedester.
"He's Manu Ginobili"
by the little o on Jul 26, 2009 9:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You can’t re-agree after you already agreed….that’s called an “agreegious” foul.
by Big50 on Jul 27, 2009 9:08 AM CDT up reply actions 3 recs
As I was wondering what would be the easiest way for me to agree with your statement about TLO’s superfluously redundant self-agreement, without simply agreeing with you myself — I decided to just rec your comment and have done with it.
5 in 10
I want my Manu o;—-)
by jollyrogerwilco on Jul 27, 2009 9:24 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
agreed
"You'll take my life but I'll take yours too. You'll fire you musket but I'll run you through. So when your waiting for the next attack. You'd better stand there's no turning back"- "The Trooper" by Iron Maiden
by KA1Z3R on Jul 27, 2009 5:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn’t exactly call it superfluous. I instructed everyone what means “to have agreed more than agreedest” (agreedester). Now, it’s not my fault if you don’t find my choice of word funny (yes it is), or if you only choose to focus on the fact that i’ve re-agreed (maybe that’s yours), but the purpose of my comment wasn’t to do that, I assure you. Anyways, agreed Big50, agreegious is certainly a more agreeable term than agreedester, specially when used in the context that you did, hence the rec.
"He's Manu Ginobili"
by the little o on Jul 27, 2009 7:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Then you might want to revise the way you’re “instructing” us. Because the way you did that looked identical to using an your (admittedly cool) term to concur with yourself.
5 in 10
I want my Manu o;—-)
by jollyrogerwilco on Jul 28, 2009 12:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
By the way, Big50 — I’m currently drawing up papers to request that agreegious be added to the PtR lexicon.
I’ll let you know what the committee decides. But I don’t think it’s premature to tell you that you have a very good case.
5 in 10
I want my Manu o;—-)
by jollyrogerwilco on Jul 27, 2009 7:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
A committee? So, what’s next? We vote on everything? Dagnabbit, I thought this was a dictatorship, where someone smacked us down when we stepped out of line! ;)
Hmmm, I might be a little cantankerous today (it’s Monday), but if you are taking votes on the addition of agreegious, you get a resounding yes from me, not that that’s worth anything.
My people call it "sarcasm." - Lauri
by CapHill on Jul 27, 2009 7:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right now, since I’m the one keeping the list and prepping the Lexicon Thread, it’s a committee of one. ME.
I was trying to make it sound more established than it actually is, by calling it a committee instead of telling Big50, “I think it’s so awesome that I’m adding it to the lexicon.” Also, I was attempting to avoid implying that any one person can decide which terms and misspellings the group can/will use — because that’s just ridiculous.
I’ll make a note to try to stay on your good side on Mondays. Finally, thanks for your support of agreegious — it’s duly noted.
5 in 10
I want my Manu o;—-)
by jollyrogerwilco on Jul 28, 2009 10:13 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
hey man
can I have psot on your “committee”?
"You'll take my life but I'll take yours too. You'll fire you musket but I'll run you through. So when your waiting for the next attack. You'd better stand there's no turning back"- "The Trooper" by Iron Maiden
by KA1Z3R on Jul 28, 2009 10:28 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It’s already in there my friend.
And, you’ll be pleased to note that it has already been used thirteen times on PtR, prior to you just asking about it.
But you’ll also have to give due credit to LasEspuelas for actually coming up with the definition for it, without which it would just be an interesting collection of meaningless letters.
5 in 10
I want my Manu o;—-)
by jollyrogerwilco on Jul 28, 2009 10:59 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I thought Kaizer was asking to be on your “committee of one”. I didn’t think he was requesting for psot to have a psot on your lexicon.
BLAIR FORCE ONE
by FreshmakerDTM on Jul 28, 2009 11:19 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Semantic discussions confusing and fun
Hmmm, yeah, I can see that. I had wondered about the way he’d phrased it “can I have psot on …” — and wasn’t sure why he hadn’t said that he wanted “a psot”, but then figured that he’d italicized it in order to let me know he was talking about the word, instead of just using the word. Guess I still got it wrong, though.
So, Kaiser, you can join the committee — in fact, you’re on it already. I mean, I can post whatever lexicon list I compile, but it takes everybody chiming in with anything I’ve missed, and commenting on their favorities to make it work. Finally, none of it means anything if nobody actually uses the words. So, anybody who’s interested can be on board — and you vote with your keyboard as you comment everyday.
5 in 10
I want my Manu o;—-)
by jollyrogerwilco on Jul 28, 2009 12:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah i was asking to be on your committee
thank you very much LasEspuelas for turning my typo into an official part of the lexicon.
"You'll take my life but I'll take yours too. You'll fire you musket but I'll run you through. So when your waiting for the next attack. You'd better stand there's no turning back"- "The Trooper" by Iron Maiden
by KA1Z3R on Jul 29, 2009 9:45 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ok, Eddie.
5 in 10
I want my Manu o;—-)
by jollyrogerwilco on Jul 29, 2009 10:37 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Remember he’s not a rookie, he’s played in the NBA before so he has experience. I don’t know how good he is but I don’t think D-League is necessary
"I've got Tim (Duncan) and you don't. That's the difference." -Gregg Popovich
by bj1der on Jul 25, 2009 3:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Really excellent post and anaylisis bj1der! I think at the end of the day it will be Mcdyess. (Not that money and ego generally have anything to do with the Spurs, but I don’t think they’re going to sign him as a free agent, and then pay him 5M a year to come off the bench either.) I could be wrong though.
They oughta package Bonner’s contract, and a few more and trade them to Houston for Battier. I had to throw that it.
Hi, my name is Ed, and I despise the Lakers.
by dfjmed on Jul 25, 2009 11:21 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I expect Mcdyess to start along side Duncan, because he is the best player available to start along side timmy. But it can also depend on the matchup, it would not surprise me if we start with Haislip against a team like Dallas or the LaKers (w Odom). This team is very versatile, we can play any style.
One other thing, I dont really see Duncan as a PF anymore., he is a center, he’s just listed as a PF for the all star and all the records, but maybe this year he can return to his natural position.
by spursfan87 on Jul 25, 2009 12:36 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Duncan is a PF, always has been. He’s just been forced to play center a lot over the years because the Spurs didn’t have a true center to start, but he’s a PF.
"I've got Tim (Duncan) and you don't. That's the difference." -Gregg Popovich
by bj1der on Jul 25, 2009 2:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
7 big men makes a LOT of sense
Duncan’s knees, McDyess’s history, Mahinmi’s big injury not too long ago, Blair’s lack of ACL’s, this is the best thing the Spurs can do is to have this amazing surplus of big men. Some say it creates a logjam and will make it very difficult to dole out he minutes properly. With all these injury histories, it’s nice to have all these extremely talented and high-ceiling big men.
"You'll take my life but I'll take yours too. You'll fire you musket but I'll run you through. So when your waiting for the next attack. You'd better stand there's no turning back"- "The Trooper" by Iron Maiden
by KA1Z3R on Jul 25, 2009 4:02 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
i agree, and probably Pop is going to sit Duncan and Blair in the second game of back to backs, so 7 bigs is not a big deal
by spursfan87 on Jul 25, 2009 4:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
especially when you factor in what each one is getting paid
- Duncan: as much as he makes, its less than hes worth and knows it and the FO knows it
- Dice: took less than the MLE for 3 years and an unguaranteed 4th year lets him retire as awesome trade asset to the Spurs
- Yawn: Rookie contract, unguaranteed
- BFO: Rookie contract
- Haislip: Veteran minimum I think since we still have the LLE
- Ratliff: Veteran minimum
- Bonner: earned his $3 million last year (in terms of having to start and the minutes he played) but might not earn it this year…not a horrible price for a quality role player who has experience in the system and comes off the books at the end of the season though
by BlaseE on Jul 25, 2009 5:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
(citation needed)
5 in 10
I want my Manu o;—-)
by jollyrogerwilco on Jul 26, 2009 3:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
::sigh::
yes, really
5 in 10
I want my Manu o;—-)
by jollyrogerwilco on Jul 27, 2009 1:34 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Blase had 7 bullet points in his comment.
I used to be a c+x kind of guy, but nowadays I just go nuts with my z. - LatinD
Retire Bowen's #12!
by Tim C. on Jul 27, 2009 3:00 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dunce me if you want
But I was asking for a citation for the image of the bullet. It looks so familiar. Like from a Gorillaz video, or something similar. I thought DTM said “really?” because it should have been obvious for some reason.
5 in 10
I want my Manu o;—-)
by jollyrogerwilco on Jul 27, 2009 3:42 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dunce removed!
relax boys…
here is the webpage that google picked it up from.
http://blog.startingintopractice.com/2008/09/avoid-the-silve.html
also its a “silver” bullet, for the spurs of course.
I asked “really?” because I didn’t know if it was mandatory to cite sources. is it? cause its not in the guidelines.
BLAIR FORCE ONE
by FreshmakerDTM on Jul 27, 2009 1:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It’s not mandatory at all — I was just trying to find a fun way to ask you where you found it and playing off wikipedia’s omnipresent “Citation needed” seemed the best way to do so.
5 in 10
I want my Manu o;—-)
by jollyrogerwilco on Jul 27, 2009 4:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
just consider the dunce cap to be for my idiotic assumptions.
I used to be a c+x kind of guy, but nowadays I just go nuts with my z. - LatinD
Retire Bowen's #12!
by Tim C. on Jul 28, 2009 2:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
What I’ll consider it, is a good find of a nice image — about as nice as that pic of the silver bullet.
But not quite.
5 in 10
I want my Manu o;—-)
by jollyrogerwilco on Jul 28, 2009 3:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
good point. We can have 14 bigs as long as we are not paying gobs of money for them and we have a reliable backcourt,
"Rock and Roll angels bring that HardRock Hallelujah"
by Chilai on Jul 26, 2009 2:24 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
14 bigs huh?… ummm, that means only one spot for tony or manu.
lets go with 13 bigs.
BLAIR FORCE ONE
by FreshmakerDTM on Jul 26, 2009 10:38 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Who needs Parker when we all know that Manu can play every position well
"Rock and Roll angels bring that HardRock Hallelujah"
by Chilai on Jul 26, 2009 8:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Pop just misses the Robinson/Duncan/Purdue lineup, that’s why we gots 7 big men.
Just call me The Profit
by Manuwar on Jul 26, 2009 1:43 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
You’re right Profit, he does, and so do I. My rants on putting more power in the paint must be shared with a few in the FO. As far as the starter goes, I think Pop goes with the Red Rocket because he knows the system and we know how Pop feels about the System!
"It's the ten-thousandth and one hammer blow that makes the team"
by Artis Gilmore on Jul 27, 2009 12:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If I could dream...
Actually to be honest, if Tiago Splitter weren’t potentially in the picture, and even if he is, I actually think the big man in the league right now that would be an amazing fit next to Duncan in terms of skillset and a great guy for Duncan to mentor and take under his wing and make a significant impact, and perhaps revive the twin tower standing would be:
Emeka Okafor.
Poor Man's GM @ poormansgm.blogspot.com
Fundamentally Sound: Much Ado About the Spurs @ fundamentally-sound.blogspot.com
by Jaceman on Jul 28, 2009 11:05 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
If the FO lands him somehow...
I will explode, because of the awesomeness of the Spurs.
Poor Man's GM @ poormansgm.blogspot.com
Fundamentally Sound: Much Ado About the Spurs @ fundamentally-sound.blogspot.com
by Jaceman on Jul 28, 2009 11:06 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He’s a Hornet now.
5 in 10
I want my Manu o;—-)
by jollyrogerwilco on Jul 28, 2009 12:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I actually wouldn't be opposed to a 3 for 1 for Okafor
If the Hornets are still cost cutting come trade deadline. Bonner, Finely, Mason, maybe throw in Ian. That’s how well I think he’ll fit.
Poor Man's GM @ poormansgm.blogspot.com
Fundamentally Sound: Much Ado About the Spurs @ fundamentally-sound.blogspot.com
by Jaceman on Jul 28, 2009 3:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wow, that’s saying alot — don’t see it happening, but still, a man can dream, can’t he?
5 in 10
I want my Manu o;—-)
by jollyrogerwilco on Jul 29, 2009 1:35 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
All our shooters for Okafor??? I dont think he’s that good.
by spursfan87 on Jul 29, 2009 12:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would do it. Of those 3 shooters, 2 are defensless and one dimensional.
"Rock and Roll angels bring that HardRock Hallelujah"
by Chilai on Jul 29, 2009 1:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Plus, Hairston can shoot.
I used to be a c+x kind of guy, but nowadays I just go nuts with my z. - LatinD
Retire Bowen's #12!
by Tim C. on Jul 29, 2009 1:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ahhh, let’s have the “one-dimensional” conversation again. That was so much fun the first time.
5 in 10
I want my Manu o;—-)
by jollyrogerwilco on Jul 29, 2009 2:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The guy will fit nice in SA, but there are other things to consider like cap space. Okafor has a huge contract, and Manu is a free agent at the end of the year.
Also we need shooters to open up the floor, Hairston is a nice prospect, but he is unproven at the NBA level. Also we already have a pretty deep front court.
by spursfan87 on Jul 29, 2009 3:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m wondering if the original twin towers, or a modified version of them would fare well in today’s NBA game. The 4 position has changed so drastically over a few years. David and Tim played during the time when true big men were still around, granted, dying, but still around. Tim was also so much more athletic back in those days, and although he was old, the Admiral perhaps the most athletic center to play the game. This helped them in terms of most combos of big men. Nowadays, Tim doesn’t have the speed and mobility, to guard the new breed of 4’s that is emerging in the league, not to mention his deteriorating knees. Okafor will never be able to guard 4’s either, he’s just not quick enough is strictly a center.
We’d need an athletic 4 that also has good post moves. Bosh seems like the ideal player for this, but that’s never gonna happen, and there aren’t too many players like him to choose from, which is why I don’t think a twin towers reincarnation would occur.
"He's Manu Ginobili"
by the little o on Jul 29, 2009 3:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
