The Case for More Matt Bonner
by LasEspuelas on Feb 9, 2010 7:38 PM CST
Email
PrintMatt Bonner has been much maligned this season for his poor rebounding and defense. He has been the target of serious scapegoating and blame. Poor Bonner just does what he is told and although he is not a star by any means he plays an important, albeit limited, role for the Spurs.Lets take a look at some on/off court statistics that suggests the problem is not Bonner but the lack of Bonner.
Lets start with the necessary disclaimer. These statistics dont tell the whole story and some people might suggest they are misleading. They are also skewed in that all players do not play with each other an equal amount of time on the court (as an extreme example, Mahinmi is never on the court when Duncan is). Regardless of these limitations I believe they tell a story worth noticing. All data was collected from 82games on 02/08/2010.
The data presented here involves the teams performance in several categories when each player is on and off the field. If the team shoots 54% from the field when Bonner is on the court and 50% when Bonner is off his FG% differential would be 4% (sort of like shown in the first graph). What we are going to look at here is the differentials in effective FG%, effective FG% allowed, defensive/offensive/total rebounding percentage and net points per 100 possessions. Notice that in an effort to be fair I provided plenty of ammunition for you to tell me these statistics are Bull(&#(@# but they are what they are.
Back to Bonner. My central argument is that Bonner should be used to build a lead when game pressure is low. We have all seen how Bonner's shot disappears and his overall performance decreases in high pressure situations (he is definitely not what one would call clutch). Im not suggesting that Bonner should be on the floor in the 4th quarter but we should use him tactically at the beginning of games and quarters. The effective FG% differential when he is on/off the court is the best in the team. This likely has to do with the spacing he provides which we all know about. Notice that the other three point shooters dont have nearly as good a number as he has. This, in my opinion, is because Bonner usually pulls either the C or PF of the other team out of the paint and into the perimeter area. This opens up the paint for our slashers to go get their layups. Without this spacing it is more difficult for Tim to go to work and for Parker to penetrate. When Mason or Finley spot up on the three point line they just pull a SG or SF out which leaves two bigs protecting the paint. This fundamental difference between Bonner and other shooters is where all of Bonner's value to the team can be found. Now is this increase in offensive efficiency with Bonner on the court worth the downside? Lets look at the team's FG% allowed and rebounding numbers when Bonner is on and off the court.
The EFG%A graph is very confusing. Mason leads the team in this category (go figure?). When he is on the court the oppenents shoot about 1.5% lower than when he is off the court. On the other hand one of the perceived better defenders in George Hill gets the worst rating in this category. The point of showing this statistic however is to determine if Bonner undermines our ability to keep other teams from shooting a high percentage. It turns out that Bonner has a very small effect on the EFG% of the opposing team. So although he clearly is not a great defensive player, team defense holds up while he is on the court.
Another weakness that Bonner gets criticized for is his rebounding. The next three graphs show what happens to the team rebounding % when the players are on and off the court. A -1.00% might mean that the team collects 72% of defensive rebounds when player A is on the court and 73% when he is off. Bonner's effect on the team defensive rebounding percentage is negative but his effect on offensive rebounding is positive for an overall positive effect (total rebounding %). This means that throughout this season the team has been rebounding better when Bonner is on the court. Granted, the increase in offensive rebounding might be like someone has suggested that we clank a lot more three point shots when Bonner is on the floor and therefore we have more long rebounds. Who knows?
Defense seems to be OK and rebounding is not bad either with Bonner on the floor. This is were things get whack and you ask me what the hell Ive been smoking lately. Bonner leads by far in the category of Net points per 100 possessions with about 7. That is approximately double our second best player in this category (Duncan).
For the season Bonner leads the team in this category and I think its probably skewed because at the beginning of the season he was absolutely on fire. According to this statistic we should play Bonner the most minutes of anyone else on the team. Of course I do not advocate this, but the way he is currently used he is an effective weapon in the Spurs arsenal.
65 comments
|
3 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
-178 for defending Bonner.
Oh wait, Fred’s not here yet? Otstanding analysis, but I’m hesitant to believe that George is the worst defender on the team.
Don't compare RJ to Sean unless he's coming up clutch while playing with a failing kidney.
He is not the worst defender on the team, but the team allows a higher field goal percentage when he is on the court for some unexplained reason. The reasons can be numerous of which one would be that he is not a very good team defender yet, but I dont think that is the case here.
"If an expert says it can't be done, get another expert"
- DBG
He wouldn’t play on any other team above 500
AKA: Linix129
by sw12 on Feb 10, 2010 11:51 AM CST via mobile up reply actions
It is not like he is playing for the Spurs, his minutes since coming back from injury:
6
3
10
14
11
17
7
5
24 (blowout against the clipped)
7
"If an expert says it can't be done, get another expert"
- DBG
by LasEspuelas on Feb 10, 2010 11:59 AM CST up reply actions
Great stuff, thank you. It is especially nice to see it as I just recently had a discussion about Bonner, where I made some very similar points. Now these points can be supported by statistics. At the start of this season I thought that Bonner didn’t struggle quite as much as other Spurs, and was actually able to contribute positively. Unfortunately, he got injured, and it looked like the team got worse. I could never understand the irrational hate that some fans seem to have toward Bonner. In contrast, RJ hate seem to be very well justified and supported by statistics. I personally don’t remember ever hating any Spur, I can only hate players from other teams. To me it is just painful to see how RJ struggles with his game. But in case of Bonner he is clearly a good presence on the team, and still people just give him the hell all the time.
IDK, I think only sometimes he can shoot. Graphs are as good as the number plugged in & I just can not believe it. Like, I dont believe all red heads have a bad temper. Like Allie, Caulifieds’ brother in ‘Catcher in the Rye’ never had a bad temper. I dont think Bonner is what that stat on paper hold him up to be. Not to get off on any tangents but I personally haven’t an irrational hate for “red” I just dont care for him too much mostly because he’s more often not good than good and it seems on the stat that he should do much better than he does. Maybe a fiery redheads temper would help. Then I will under my breath say less of “flipping Bonner you’re ticking me off” when I watch the games.
by cojones2thewall on Feb 10, 2010 1:36 AM CST up reply actions
he’s more often not good than good
How do we know this? One way to know these kinds of things is to look at different numbers. Like, if you look at a trader and he tends to make more money on his trades than he is losing, you would say that he is more often than not a good trader. If you look at the performance of a poker player, and he wins more often than not, you’d say that he is a good player. So, if you look at the numbers, you should conclude that Bonner is more often good for the team, than not good. This is how it looks like if you just look at the numbers, you may not know anything about Bonner and his hair color.
The other way is to say that Bonner cannot be any good, because you know that he is bad. If the numbers say otherwise, hell with the numbers, they must be somehow lying. If you know the answer apriori “Bonner is bad”, you don’t need to look at the numbers. This is exactly what I call “hating”, or prejudice, or “irrational”.
Call it exactly what you like. I like him less on the floor & still can take’m or leave’m as a Spurs.
by cojones2thewall on Feb 10, 2010 10:05 AM CST up reply actions
I’m not really not that good in math & graphs, so I can’t really comprehend this all that much. But, I’m with you on this, the Red Rocket can definitely be a great weapon when used effectively, if not, then why would Pop bother to put him on the floor in the first place?
Bonner, can definitely shoot that 3ball, and with size, opposing teams will have to adjust defensively as you have stated above. The problem is, is he being used effectively? Because IMO, for Bonner to be effectively,he has to be with the right kind of people on the floor. The ones who can complement his style of play and compensate for his weaknesses.
Bring it on!!!
Although I would prefer a more traditional PF/C off the bench, I agree with you. I only like him in certain rotations/match-ups and when he can’t seem to miss.
I like how he set screens and moves to his spot on the floor but he only seems to do this well with Mason, Manu, or Parker. His hustle is good on the long rebounds (hint at the matchup I prefer) but I don’t think much of his defensive or rebounding ability around the basket.
Very tough role player to put into the right situation… but if he hits his shots, then the opponents defense gets a bit more stretched and that helps open the driving lanes for the guards and forwards. Again, not the style of play I prefer but it works great sometimes.
Problem is, when was the last time it worked? Last season?
"We suck on 'D. Both individually and team-wise, we suck. We're pretty consistent that way. I don't know if I have an answer to that. If I did, we wouldn't suck quite so bad." - Popovich
by Aaron "Hirschof" Preine on Feb 10, 2010 7:27 AM CST up reply actions
Matt Bonner
He’ll score 10 points but he’ll then serve his role as the human crash dummy on defense..
Get rid of him please…We need defense
but besides scoring 10 he will help tony, tim and jefferson score 25, 25 and 5 respectively : )
"If an expert says it can't be done, get another expert"
- DBG
When will that happen?
AKA: Linix129
by sw12 on Feb 10, 2010 11:52 AM CST via mobile up reply actions
Dude, can you please do my taxes? The way you crunched these numbers, I am sure you can get me a tax return that I didn’t deserve.
Bonner should not be given any minutes unless they are garbage mins. The other day TImC asked me about Okur.
I’m sure he was thinking about how effective Utah used Okur to stretch defenses.
And I wouldn’t be surprised if our coaching staff had the same thing in mind. First of all, Okur is a true center, he has all the things that go with being a true center, he can post, he can defend, and he can rebound, PLUS he can stroke it from deep.
Heres the problem with Bonner.
Bonner is not a true C/PF/SF. (See the above)
Before a player can begin to play an unorthodox style he has to be able to defend on the other end. At the very least in some kind of cross match up that will leave no mismatches.
This is impossible with Bonner.
Bonner can’t guard any C/PF(too small) or any SF(too slow).
Against the Lakers they didn’t even run a play, they just threw the ball to Bonner’s side of the floor and played. They didn’t need the triangle they could just attack Bonner and he doesn’t have the foot speed or hops to defend.
When Bonner is on offense he is getting those open looks because defenses are breaking down and losing him.
If a team stayed focus and wanted to defend him they can easily run him off the 3pt line and if they are scoring on him on the other end, then we are basically playing 4 on 5 basketball. Because one defender can guard Bonner and his man if he is quick in his rotations and shade more towards Bonner.
The easiest person to guard is the guy standing 30 feet from the basket shooting set shots unless you lose focus. And a good coach won’t let that happen too many times.
There are a lot of other things that put us at risk when we play Bonner, like long rebounds starting fast breaks, opps 2nd chance points, getting into the bonus quicker.
Basically, Bonner makes everyone have to play harder to compensate for his lack of defense, and this would irritate most players but the Spurs are nice guys and they would never blame a fellow team mate. That is the coaches job, but when the coach keeps calling his number what can you do?
I never thought I’d say this but we need Bonner more than ever. Teams lately have been laying off of us to make an outside shot, and we have shot poorly.
Bonner spreads the floor, i’m mean if you watch the games just about every look he gets is wide open. Unfortunately, he is also a scapegoat for the refs.
offense has not been the problem lately, defense has IMO, and I frankly don’t think Bonner will help in that regard.
GTFOML!
by the little o on Feb 11, 2010 12:40 AM CST up reply actions
Like we didn’t have those bad shooting nights recently? When we shot 2-15 for the 3s and the other team would shoot 60% and beat us by 5. I mean, defense is great, it brought us 4 rings, but the team we have now cannot play defense on that level, this looks pretty evident. So we can try to compensate for subpar defense with superior offense, or we can just suck in both.
You guys just don’t get it. Offense comes and goes. Defense is FOREVER!
Trying to outscore your opponents when you can’t stop your opponent DOES NOT WORK! (ask the Suns)
Stopping your opponent then TRYING to out score your opponent works. (ask the 99,03,05,07 Spurs and all the other champs)
Stopping your opponent then TRYING to out score your opponent works because it gives you more opportunities to score on your opponent without the score getting away from you.
If you can’t stop anyone, one or two bad trips on offense will have you playing catchup, and you can’t come back if you can’t stop anyone.
Which gets us right back to why we should be focused on defense. (No BONNER)
If defense was FOREVER! we would have a perfect record this season.
"If an expert says it can't be done, get another expert"
- DBG
OK, Mr. Defense is FOREVER, explain how Matt Bonner is bad for team defense when the graphs above show opponents score less often when he’s on the court. I don’t want “he’s bad for defense because he sucks” circularity. I don’t want “other teams iso on him”. I don’t want “he’s slow and can’t block shots”. I don’t care about style points, I care about making the other team miss. That is the whole point of defense, right? And the data clearly shows the other team misses more shots when Matt is playing.
There are ways to answer my question intelligently. You can perhaps find data showing Matt causes a decline in other aspects of defense not measured by EFG%. You can perhaps adjust the data shown above by matchup. But bloviation is not a valid response. We already know how you feel (believe me, we know). We want to see you back it up with data and intelligent analysis.
by doggydogworld on Feb 11, 2010 8:56 AM CST up reply actions
You guys just don’t get it.
Way to win your audience over from the start.
I have flying monkeys at my disposal, and I'm not afraid to use them.
Yeah, I always prefer to use the “What the hell is wrong with you people?” intro.
The Lakers "Too big, too strong, too long, too good."
That’s a good one, too!
Other favorites:
“If you knew what you were talking about. . . .”
“Are you out of your gourd?”
and old reliable — "No offense, but . . . "
I have flying monkeys at my disposal, and I'm not afraid to use them.
Ok, how about this, you guys who think that Bonner should be playing don’t get it.
Is that better?
The only stat that REALLY matters is wins and losses.
So here ya go:
06-07 Spurs 58 – 24 Champs and Bonner hardly played at ALL!
07-08 Spurs 56 – 26 1st yr Bonner in the rotation we lost in the conference finals
08-09 Spurs 54 – 28 2nd yr Bonner in the rotation we lost in the 1st round
09-10 Spurs 47 – 35 3rd yr Bonner in the rotation we ????
If there are any stats that show Bonner is making the Spurs a stronger defensive team, those stats should be strongly scrutinized.
Let me try to explain:
On Defense, how would the stat show up if a team is getting multiple offensive rebounds and then score while Bonner is on the floor? Yes, Opp FG% would go down, but does that matter if they scored. So in the end there were multiple offensive rebounds by the opponent and a score. This is usually what happens with Bonner on the floor.
Which is why the above stats show we don’t defensive rebound that well with Bonner on the floor.
The defensive rebounding stat is all you need to know about Bonner’s defense, because you are not done playing defense until you have the defensive rebound.
If it shows he can’t defensive rebound, then the team is being hurt defensively.
Padding Bonner’s total rebounding number with offensive rebounds does nothing for what he is doing on the defensive end of the floor.
It is impossible, that we are better defensively and offensively with Bonner on the floor and we are losing more games each season.
We may be slightly better with him on the floor offensively, but we don’t need his offense to win. We didn’t need it in 07 and we don’t need it now, we need defense and playing Bonner is not going to help the defense get better. Read the stats…
It is impossible, that we are better defensively and offensively with Bonner on the floor and we are losing more games each season.
So, the fact that we’re losing more games this season, with Bonner getting far less minutes than he did last year, is still his fault? I’m sorry, but that defies all logic.
Don't compare RJ to Sean unless he's coming up clutch while playing with a failing kidney.
The logic is this:
Please keep Bonner off the floor unless it is garbage time.
It is what it is.
Either he is helping us defensively or he is hurting us. It doesn’t matter about the quantity of minutes played, it is the quality of minutes that count.
Because so much can effect minutes like how much garbage time he gets you can’t just go by minutes played.
If we are playing close games then he might not get that much garbage time to pad his minutes but if he was in the game during a crucial stretch his lack of defense can allow the other team to hang around. And they steal the win at the end.
This is how Bonner can play less minutes and still contribute to the loss. So my solution would be, never play him unless garbage time.
It is true that the Spurs are a slightly worse defensive rebounding team with Bonner on the court. However, and Im not sure of the math here, if a team shoots the ball and misses and then shoots again one of two things can happen.
If they make the shot, they just went 1 for 2 for a 50% in that series. If they miss the shot they would get a 0/2 for 0%. Given that the Spurs allow their opponents 48% (overall) the offensive rebounding argument cannot completely tell the whole story. If the opponents make a shot on their first second chance opportunity their eFG% would actually increase and not decrease. Only in the rare events in which they collect more than one extra opportunity will the eFG% go down.
All of this is besides the point however because the argument is not that we are a better defensive team with Bonner but that his offensive enhancement of the team is larger than his defensive short-comings and he can be used in a limited fashion at the beginning of games to try to build a god lead.
"If an expert says it can't be done, get another expert"
- DBG
Example of how OPP FG PCT can be misleading in regards to playing good defense:
If a team has 4 possesions: (NO BONNER ON FLOOR)
1st possesion 1/1 100% OPP FG PCT
2nd possesion 0/1 50% OPP FG PCT
3rd possesion 1/1 66% OPP FG PCT
4th possesion 0/1 50% OPP FG PCT
Total 4pts 50% OPP FG PCT
If a team has 4 possesions: (WITH BONNER ON FLOOR)
1st possesion 0/2 0% OPP FG PCT
2nd possesion 1/3 20% OPP FG PCT
3rd possesion 1/2 28% OPP FG PCT
4th possesion 1/2 33% OPP FG PCT
Total 6pts 33% OPP FG PCT
The first example has no Bonner and the defense only gave up 4pts on 50% shooting. Not great, but not terrible either.
The second example has Bonner on the floor with his poor defensive rebounding and the defense gave up 6pts on 33% shooting. The OPP FG% is good but we gave up 6 pts. This is bad defense.
As you see, if you don’t have good defensive rebounding it doesn’t matter how poorly a team’s FG PCT is, defensive rebounding is a major part to playing good defense.
This is all hypothetical because I don’t have any game to point to, but this is how the stats can mislead you to thinking Bonner is not hurting the team when he is.
No rebounds no rings. :P. Riley.
The rebounding statistics state the following. When Bonner is on the floor the Spurs collect approximately 72% of their defensive rebounds, when he is off the floor they approximately collect 73% of their rebounds.
On average for the season the Spurs get 41 defensive rebound opportunities per game. 72% of that is ~30 rebounds and 73% of that is ~30 rebounds. Even if we round up that translates to one extra offensive rebound for the competition when Bonner is on the court than when he is not.
Now, lets assume for now that the opponents take advantage of that rebound 100% of the time and get 3 points. When Bonner is on the floor the Spurs shoot 54% and when he is off the floor they shoot 50%. On average the Spurs make 81 field goal attempts per game. If they make 54% of those (assuming only 2 point shots) that is 44 shots made. If they make 50% of those that is 41 shots made. The difference between Bonner off and on the field then is equivalent to 6 points.
That is an improvement of 3 points when Bonner is on the floor compared when he is off it and that is a conservative approach using assumptions that favor your argument and not mine.
Im oversimplifying things and I try to avoid that when posting analysis. I just dont want my stuff to be misused like you have been doing with the rebounding numbers. Given that you are not going to convince me that Bonner is useless and Im not going to convince you that he has a well defined role I will stop arguing with you at this point.
"If an expert says it can't be done, get another expert"
- DBG
by LasEspuelas on Feb 11, 2010 4:24 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
This is a good first step. But your example is based on opponent offensive rebound percentage going from 0% with Matt on the bench to 83.33% with him in the game. The graph above shows the actual degradation with Matt in the game is 1%, not 83%. So let’s do an analysis based on actual data instead of numbers you make up.
Opponent eFG% is 0.5% lower when Matt plays, call it 48% when he’s in and 48.5% when he’s out. Opponent’s offensive rebound % improves 1% when Matt plays, call it 27% when he plays and 26% when he’s out. So what happens per possession?
Matt in:
48% – opponent make 1st shot
52% – opponent miss 1st shot
52% * 73% = 37.96% – Spurs dreb
52% * 27% = 14.04% – opponent oreb
14.04% * 48% = 6.74% – opponent make 2nd shot
14.04% * 52% = 7.30% – opponent miss 2nd shot
7.30% * 73% = 5.33% – Spurs dreb
7.30% * 27% = 1.97% – opponent oreb
If you continue this through the third shot, fourth shot, etc. the opponent ends up scoring on:
48% + 6.74% + 0.95% + 0.13% + 0.02% + ….. = 55.84%
The same math with Matt on the bench starts out:
48.5% – opponent make 1st shot
51.5% – opponent miss 1st shot
51.5% * 74% = 38.11% – Spurs dreb
51.5% * 26% = 13.39% – opponent oreb
etc…
Add it up through all the shots and you get 56.00%. So when we perform your analysis using real data your theory falls flat. Even though the Spurs don’t get as many defensive rebounds with Matt in the game opponents still score fewer points due to the lower eFG%.
by doggydogworld on Feb 11, 2010 5:11 PM CST up reply actions
The “Play Bonner” group wins.
You were going to win anyway because Pop is going to keep playing Bonner, and we will keep losing.
But as I have always said prior to Bonner stepping on the floor against any winning team. If he plays, we will lose.
As a team, we are not big enough to compensate for a weak defender and rebounder like Bonner. The only stat that matters is the win/loss record. And since Bonner’s arrival in San Antonio we have been losing a little more each year.
Whenever I see Bonner is on the floor, it always seems like we are taking the ball out of the nets.
It doesn’t matter if they shot once, or if they shot 4 times, pound the glass and finally scored, in the end, they SCORE! And we get the ball out of the nets.
If you look closely, that is in those stats that you provided. It’s there.
The reason it is not roaring out, is because we are still in the game, the games are close.
However, I believe without Bonner, we could get more separation and win more games.
We did it for the 17 games he was injured and we could do it again.
I think some people are missing the point. the question is is he worth having out there not is he great on def. If he is +7 when he is on the court then the idea that for every point he scores he gives up 2 can possible be true. if he doesn’t score at all but he opens up the floor and the offense scores better with him out there then he is worth having on the floor.
I’m not saying his offence OR defense are awesome but the logic of so many people is he gives up more then he gets makes no sense when he leads the team at +7. im not saying plus minus is the best stat either but the Bonner haters are the ones who bring this up every time. If you need a def stop hes not your man but if you want to open up the off he is. start of quarters and halves when you want to get the offence into a grove is perfect for him…end of haves when the def intensity is meant to go up he should sit.
It’s a shock to me how many of you are giving this argument credence by replying so often and also getting so worked up.
Then again most of the annoyed responses are coming from the females. Yet again more proof women are incapable of controlling their emotions :)
"I will five all over this blog." - JRW
Give Blair his time
When Matt Bonner has an off night,wat exactly will he do to compensate???He dosent play any defense…He cant rebound…He’s good for nuthin…
And thats what its about….
When your not scoring,how will you compensate???
At least Blair hustles and rebounds
Too many long comments. How can people actually keep up?
Oh, the new Facebook integration sucks. Thank you, SB Nation.
Bone breaking? -340
Dunkin' Cheerleaders
what don't you like about the facebook integration?
we’re willing and able to make it better.
It helps if the hitter thinks you're a little crazy. - Nolan
by Trei Brundrett on Feb 12, 2010 7:44 AM CST up reply actions
Because Facebook is taking over the world, of course. And people don’t see it.
Bone breaking? -340
Dunkin' Cheerleaders
Okay.
The intanglibles are with us tonite…its just those dang tangibles lke making shots and playing defense - bones
After watching Bonner play in the 1st Quarter against Pacers, you still wanna make a case for Bonner???
Listen to PJ, he said exactly what I have been telling you Bonner fans. The stats are misleading when it comes to Bonner. It is because he gives up too many 2nd chance points.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
Featured Stories
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Days of NBA Lives: Wherein Roy Hibbert tap-dances to Maine
- Grizzlies Valentine’s Day cards are the key to love
- Kevin Love would like the NBA to take the MLB’s approach on All-Star games
- Kobe Bryant fires a few hilarious salvos at Jeremy Lin
- Brandon Jennings states the obvious regarding his 2014 free agency, everyone goes nuts
Certain photos copyright © 2012 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.
