Post by Bibby10 on Sept 9, 2005 19:13:47 GMT -5
To brighten up the NBA section, I will be covering a NBA player (whenever I feel like making a new thread) to talk about impact players that don't recieve a lot of credit.
Today, Bruce Bowen comes into play. I chose Bruce because he's a guy that really nobody understands or appreiciates the value to his squad. Yeah, yeah, yeah he can play D like nobody's buisness, but he's so much more to the team than that.
I will look back to 2002 stats for Bowen, because that's the time before the Spurs really become "too good for the NBA." And were just as good as the next guy in line.
I firmly believe this statement, "Without Bruce Bowen, the Spurs wouldn't have taken the NBA Finals." Some people may call me crazy, but the fact is, the Spurs are 3,000x better with Bowen in the lineup, despite the fact he racks up NO STATS AT ALL. People calll him great on defense, but he doesn't even average high in steals. He's just a "frustrater".
When Bowen fell to injury in 2002, he missed 23 games. In those 23 games, the Spurs went 11-12. With Bowen, the Spurs finished 47-12. That's amazing. When Bowen played, the entire defense sparked. And the Spurs could shut down any givin team.
Also a surprising fact, despite is poor rebounding rates, he can box out like nobody's buisness. When Bowen went out that year their Def. Reb % was 73%. With Bowen it was a higher, 76%. Sure it's only three percent, but it's three percent based on one guy on the team who isn't a good rebounder. When you look at that, Bowen is a beast to any team. And I feel he should be paid higher.
Today, Bruce Bowen comes into play. I chose Bruce because he's a guy that really nobody understands or appreiciates the value to his squad. Yeah, yeah, yeah he can play D like nobody's buisness, but he's so much more to the team than that.
I will look back to 2002 stats for Bowen, because that's the time before the Spurs really become "too good for the NBA." And were just as good as the next guy in line.
I firmly believe this statement, "Without Bruce Bowen, the Spurs wouldn't have taken the NBA Finals." Some people may call me crazy, but the fact is, the Spurs are 3,000x better with Bowen in the lineup, despite the fact he racks up NO STATS AT ALL. People calll him great on defense, but he doesn't even average high in steals. He's just a "frustrater".
When Bowen fell to injury in 2002, he missed 23 games. In those 23 games, the Spurs went 11-12. With Bowen, the Spurs finished 47-12. That's amazing. When Bowen played, the entire defense sparked. And the Spurs could shut down any givin team.
Also a surprising fact, despite is poor rebounding rates, he can box out like nobody's buisness. When Bowen went out that year their Def. Reb % was 73%. With Bowen it was a higher, 76%. Sure it's only three percent, but it's three percent based on one guy on the team who isn't a good rebounder. When you look at that, Bowen is a beast to any team. And I feel he should be paid higher.
