Allocation of Minutes: The Great Debate

by bj1der on Sep 29, 2010 6:39 PM CDT

With training camp under way, it's exciting to think of the battles these guys are having with each other to gain minutes in the rotation. With all the talent we have on this roster, it can be difficult to accurately predict how many minutes each player gets on the floor, or even who makes it out of camp. For the sake of debate, I decided to propose my idea of what the team's rotation would look like.

Here's how I think the minutes could stack up when the season starts:

Position:- player name (minutes at that position):::::::{situational}

PG:- Tony (34), George (14)::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::{Temple, Neal, Jerrells}

SG:- Manu (28), George (10), Neal (8), Anderson (2):::::::::::::{Temple}

SF:- RJ (28), Anderson (13), Simmons (7):::::::::::::::::::::::::::{Manu, Gee}

PF:- Timmy (25), Blair (20), RJ (2), Simmons (1)::::::::::::::::::{Gist}

C:- Tiago (24), Dice (14), Bonner (7) Tim (3):::::::::::::::::::::::::{???}

I think this allows for rest of the veterans and gives the young guys enough time on the court to be effective. And for all those small ball haters, there's only 3 minutes of scheduled small ball listed. The situational players can be defined as any player who could play that position if the situation calls for it. (injury, blowout, cold streak etc.) Of course this is not a definite thing as players minutes can fluctuate as the play better or worse. This is just what I had in mind.

As always, you are welcome encouraged to disagree and make changes where you see fit. Debates are fun and the reason I wrote this post, so if you see something you don't like, change it. Either way I think we can agree that this is a talented group of players we have.

Go Spurs Go!

Tweet Comment 21 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

There’s a ton of talent in this camp and we will probably all see it shaking out a little differently. With the wing players, you have to think competition will decide what Pop does and the frontline rotation has more to do with strategy.

I think you have the guard rotation right, until we hear otherwise it’s probably the Tony-George-Manu show. To have those combine for 86 of the 96 available guard minutes sounds crazy but is realistic.

RJ is a good jogger, he can play 35 a night at his position.

If Splitter plays 24 and Blair 20 minutes a night, that means they’re on the court together. Don’t hate me for this but Splitter-Bonner and Blair-Bonner lineups are more likely. I would adjust Dice and Blair’s minutes down to give more to Matt Bonner (I am sorry).

by greyberger on Sep 29, 2010 10:07 PM CDT reply actions

blair-bonner would be really bad! :P undersized defender and non-defender :p If blair-bonner are on the floor its garbage time or we are going to get killed underneath, imo this wont happen much if at all. Spliter-Blair makes alot more sense to me if you have to pick one.

Both manu and tony could play a few less but this looks about right. JR at 30 is perfect and likely. I don’t see Simmons in at all much with most of those going to Neal or Anderson

These min look ok for when everyone plays but manu and tim will miss games to rest and someone somewhere will be missing games due to injury, DNP because of match-ups, or something

In games he plays i feel Duncan plays about 28-30min unless we are up by 20 going into every 4th quarter but he will rest back to backs and maybe another game here or there. Bonner will have more min for sure especially at the start of the season.

i am a small ball hater btw…don’t mind 3 guards but dont like undersized 4 playing out of position much

by spurs fan on Sep 29, 2010 11:07 PM CDT reply actions

Blair-Bonner was a big part of the bench rotation last year, and lineups with both in were the best lineups that didn’t feature Tim Duncan.

Blair, Duncan and Splitter are all screen-and-roll types. Bonner and McDyess are both complementary to this type of player by drawing defenders away from the basket and shooting well when open.

In theory you’d think any combination of one from column A and one from B would work, but in practice (last year) Dice was only effective with Tim and Blair was best with Tim and Bonner.

by greyberger on Sep 29, 2010 11:31 PM CDT up reply actions

82games.com

http://www.82games.com/0910/0910SAS2.HTM

they dont have any of the spurs top 20 line ups on the floor last year with bonner/blair playing together

didn’t sound right and this seems to indicate otherwise

by spurs fan on Sep 30, 2010 12:00 AM CDT up reply actions

greyberger did say “that didn’t feature Tim Duncan”. The top 20 that you linked to had only two lineups without Duncan. Number 11 with RJ as a big with Blair, and #14 with McDyess/Blair. The ranking seems to be only according to minutes played together, so this doesn’t seem to contradict the “best lineups that didn’t feature Time Duncan”.

by Alamo on Sep 30, 2010 7:53 AM CDT up reply actions

He also said a big part of our bench rotation so i understand that
but i also know that dispite how they might work really well on offence they would be a train wreck defensively. I like both guys on our team but if they are out there at the same time what team out there doesnt have a post player that would beat them badly.

Deffensively it seems like you would need Dice, Timmy or Splitter on the floor with Bonner and Blair. Maybe last year we had more Blair/Bonner because we didnt have any other bigs but this year that shouldnt seem to happen much. I think there is no way Bonner doesnt get more min but i also dotn think it will be because we use a Bonner/Blair line up much either.

by spurs fan on Sep 30, 2010 10:14 AM CDT up reply actions

Agreed… ideally, either Timmy or Tiago would be on the floor at all times that the game is in doubt. And let’s see some “Twin T’s” as well!

Hey, if posting a sharp, insightful, yet non-sarcastic comment were that easy, even olf would do it.

by freshtunarightofftheboat on Sep 30, 2010 12:44 PM CDT up reply actions

If the suggested allocation of minutes is anywhere near correct, TD and Tiago would be playing a total of 49 minutes. If one or the other is on the floor at all times, that would leave only one minute that they are on the floor together. I would think they’re likely to play together for at least 10 minutes a game, which means either there are times when they are both resting or they play more than 49 minutes combined.

by Alamo on Sep 30, 2010 1:47 PM CDT up reply actions

well part of the min would be every one gets a bump when timmy sits and or if anyone is hurt or rested. all 5 guys up front are not gonig to play all 82 games

by spurs fan on Sep 30, 2010 2:19 PM CDT up reply actions

ideally, either Timmy or Tiago would be on the floor at all times that the game is in doubt.

Ideally… but we know the world is not ideal.

I view the allocation minutes are averages over the season… some games more, some games less (even zero, if DNP due to injury or coach’s decision – for SEGABABA’s, for example.) Duncan and/or Splitter could play fewer minutes at the beginning of the season while Coach is trying different combinations, and more as the post-season approaches.

By the end of the season, and in critical games, I could see them playing up to 10 minutes a game together and Pop still able to have one on the floor at all times the games are in doubt. That could happen if say, Duncan played 27 minutes and Splitter played 30 minutes (with both pulled in the final minute because the team is ahead by more than 3 possessions).

Hey, if posting a sharp, insightful, yet non-sarcastic comment were that easy, even olf would do it.

by freshtunarightofftheboat on Sep 30, 2010 5:37 PM CDT up reply actions

I know it sounds crazy, and indeed it looked a bit crazy when we ran out lineups like that last year. But trust me, it was effective (at least in the regular season).

If you want to look deeper into the lineup data I’d suggest basketballvalue.com and NBA’s own +/- section, like the link below.

Regular Season – top two player tandems

That’s a link to our best two-player combinations during last year’s regular season. Blair and Bonner shared the court fora total of 471 minutes last season and these lineups beat the opposition by an average of 14 points per 48 minutes.

On a per-minute basis this the Bonner-Blair tandem was the most effective out of all Spurs twosomes that played often. By a pretty decent margin too.

Of course they were playing against opponent benches and often had Manu Ginobili on the court with them as well. Still worth the emphasis.

by greyberger on Sep 30, 2010 2:04 PM CDT up reply actions

excellent

I still think that a lot of these min must be coming in garbage time or against some kind of line up where the other team doesn’t have any post presence on the floor and/or the game isnt tight. Blair is an undersized foul machine last year against anyone and bonner would never be mistaken for a post defender.

Blairs aggressiveness on the Off glass and bonners 3pters makes a great fit offensively but its just as much a neg on the other end. With splitter as an option i think you see less of this.

overall you point on bonner getting more min i think is correct and clearly we have great options, depth and flexibility here

thanks alot for the link i was looking all over for something like this

by spurs fan on Sep 30, 2010 2:15 PM CDT up reply actions

You’re exactly right about the defensive context (not going up against great post scorers) and the Manu Ginobili factor plays a big part too.

The bench last year did a lot of the heavy lifting. Our starters on average beat opposition starters but not by as much. It’s not just the deep-bench units but also the first-substitution ones (starters + Manu or Bonner) that did so well.

Going back to Bonner-Blair, which is usually on the court when the opposition’s best paint scorer is not. It’s effective because everyone’s in the right place. Hill, Manu, or even Tony (late in the year) is running the screen and roll with Blair and Bonner is keeping the tallest perimeter defender on that side of the court from helping. Since only he can hit the three from anywhere he is the only player for this. Since he’s so tall sometimes a big defends him and Blair and the guard only have to worry about one guy in the lane.

This play puts your non-ball handling perimeter players in the corners and in the crappy passing lanes. Good. You don’t really want a kickout three attempt from RJ, Mason Jr, Bogans, or anyone else from the bench. They’re in the right place which for them is out of the way.

You can run this play almost every trip down the court. It might not work against first-team defenses, admittedly. Still it was so good in 2010 that we have to cotton to the idea that it’ll be back again this year.

by greyberger on Sep 30, 2010 3:07 PM CDT up reply actions

According to basketballvalue.com, the five Spurs I considered to be the starters did quite well together:

Parker – Hill – Jefferson – McDyess – Duncan (adj +/- 33.43, std error 14.66)

Hey, if posting a sharp, insightful, yet non-sarcastic comment were that easy, even olf would do it.

by freshtunarightofftheboat on Sep 30, 2010 6:21 PM CDT up reply actions

I prefer the adjusted +/- over at basketballvalue.com mainly because they try to remove the bias of the other players on the court (and because they include the standard error values). For example, RJ had a good simple +/- and a mediocre adjusted +/- that perhaps reflects the fact that his time playing with Duncan and TP could have artificially boosted his simple +/- score.

For 2009/10 (and in decreasing minutes played together), Bonner/Blair plus

Hill, George – Bogans, Keith – Ginobili, Manu (6.44 adj +/- with a std. error of 19.75)
Mason, Roger – Ginobili, Manu – Jefferson, Richard (-1.24 adj +/-, std error 20.67)
Hill, George – Ginobili, Manu – Jefferson, Richard (35.29 adj /-, std error 22.03)
Hill, George – Mason, Roger – Ginobili, Manu (-7.16 adj +/-, std error 22.95)
Bogans, Keith – Mason, Roger – Ginobili, Manu (4.91 adj +/-, std error 23.92)
Parker, Tony – Mason, Roger – Jefferson, Richard (-13.19 adj +/-, std error 23.80)

There were 30+ more lineups with Bonner & Blair playing together, but none of them had enough minutes to generate any meaningful statistics, so we’ll just have to go with the above. Unfortunately, the standard errors are so large relative to the adjusted +/- numbers, it’s hard to draw accurate conclusions. Of the other lineups, it’s interesting to note that the ones that included Bogans were positive, and the ones without him were negative.

The Blair/Bonner/Hill/Ginobili/Jefferson 5-some stands out, but I’m reluctant to call it an outlier since it’s the only one in which the adjusted +/- (35.29) is larger than the standard error. It seems implausible to me that this lineup would do so well against opposing teams, but it’s worth investigating further, and possibly trying again this year.

Hey, if posting a sharp, insightful, yet non-sarcastic comment were that easy, even olf would do it.

by freshtunarightofftheboat on Sep 30, 2010 6:14 PM CDT up reply actions

Yeah basketball value has the best pages for any kind of +/- or on-court off-court information. along with basketballreference.com and 82games.com you can get pretty much any piece of info you’re looking for.

The adjusted +/- data sets are fantastic but clumsy for small samples (illustrated above). The sheer variety of lineups and possible ‘explanations’ for each lineup’s performance makes the errors so large. With so few lineups that are statistically significant, the player ratings part of the model (that makes the numbers ‘adjusted’) doesn’t have much to go on and is also subject to large standard errors.

One year worth of data usually isn’t enough to rate most players higher or lower than the standard error. With two years and some playoff data it gets better, but for Dejuan Blair and other new or fringe players it doesn’t have enough input to get going.

With simple +/- you have to watch out for low sample sizes but since you’re not estimating anything there isn’t a standard error to the measurements. You have to keep in mind that these are bench lineups and Manu Ginobili lineups and so on to put the numbers in context, but simple +/- and the nba combinations page are useful tools.

by greyberger on Oct 1, 2010 12:04 AM CDT up reply actions

JR at 30 is perfect and likely.

The Spurs traded for Jason Richardson? When did that happen? Checking… nope.
Yikes, JR Smith? Checking, anxiously…. nope. Whew, dodged a bullet there.
Oh…. finger slip likely? Never mind….
And oh… isn’t RJ 30 years old? You’re saying that’s perfect? Okay, here’s hoping…

Jus’ havin’ some fun early in the day….

I don’t see Simmons in at all much with most of those going to Neal or Anderson

I agree, though of course at lot depends on training camp, especially what they show on D. Simmons has a bit of an edge, in that he’s played in the league for 8 years and has presumably picked up on the tendencies of opposing SFs, but then again, he has 8 years more NBA mileage than the rookies. It remains to be seen if any of the three will do the “adequate imitation of Bruce Bowen” that Pop is searching for….

Splitter-Blair sounds good to me, even though it’s a freshman-sophomore pairing. Splitter has a rep in European ball for putting more of his focus on blocking his man out more than going after the ball himself, so if he’s able to neutralize the other teams’ best rebounders, it’ll make things that much easier for DeBeast when/if they’re playing together.

Hey, if posting a sharp, insightful, yet non-sarcastic comment were that easy, even olf would do it.

by freshtunarightofftheboat on Sep 30, 2010 9:29 AM CDT up reply actions

Splitter has a rep in European ball for putting more of his focus on blocking his man out more than going after the ball himself, so if he’s able to neutralize the other teams’ best rebounders, it’ll make things that much easier for DeBeast when/if they’re playing together.

That’s a great point. A lot of people who complain about Splitter’s rebounding numbers haven’t had the chance to see him play much. I think him being with Blair will help increase Blair’s rebounding numbers because of this.

"I've got Tim (Duncan) and you don't. That's the difference." -Gregg Popovich

by bj1der on Sep 30, 2010 10:04 AM CDT up reply actions

wait we dont have JR Smith…crap that changes everything!

why do you say heres hoping for RJ playing 30 min…he just turned 30 this year has almost never misses many games always plays 31+ min and no major injuries…there is no reason to have to hope this should be easy for us

by spurs fan on Sep 30, 2010 10:17 AM CDT up reply actions

why do you say heres hoping for RJ playing 30 min…

OK this is confusing… When you wrote “JR at 30 is perfect and likely,” you meant 30 min. per game, right? I was making a joke of the coincidence that RJ is in fact 30 years old, and pretending to misinterpret your statement to mean that you think that RJ is perfect because he is ‘at 30’ (i.e. he is 30 years old). And as we know, RJ was not perfect last year, but we are all hoping that he’ll be a lot better this year… hence the “Here’s hoping…” comment (meaning that I hope you’re right about RJ being perfect this year – regardless of whether it’s because he’s 30 or not).

Gawd, I hate to explain how my mind works. It makes me seem stupid… lol

Hey, if posting a sharp, insightful, yet non-sarcastic comment were that easy, even olf would do it.

by freshtunarightofftheboat on Sep 30, 2010 12:59 PM CDT up reply actions