Past Trade Target: Jeff Foster

[MaNu4Tres]

And what? Trade away our trading assets for a player that would compliment the team with the role that Ratliff has now?

Would be a waste of our trading assets, especially if you include a 1st rounder. You could fill the void he would bring by signing a player like Ratliff, which we did by the way, for the minimum.

I'd rather wait and use our trading assets for a player that would see quality time (20-23 plus minutes) in a potentially tightened 8-9 man rotation when it counts in May and June.

We can agree to disagree. I think you think Foster is still 26 years old.

[mountainballer]

And what? Trade away our trading assets for a player that would compliment the team with the role that Ratliff would?

Would be a waste of our trading assets, especially if you include a 1st rounder. You could fill the void he would bring by signing a player like Ratliff, which we did by the way, for the minimum.

I'd rather wait and use our trading assets for a player that would see time in a tightened 8-9 man rotation when it counts in May and June.

We can agree to disagree. I think you think Foster is still 26 years old.

Foster would be the 3rd big in our rotation. he would be a nice compliment to Tim and Dice, so he would also be part of the PO rotation. he is 32, no reason to assume he will slow down significantly over the next two seasons.

on the other hand: Ratliff averaged 24 games per season over the last 3 years. so what role are you thinking he will take you think Foster also would get??? maybe you are the one thinking about the wrong age of a player.
and btw. Ratliff and Foster are not similar players, not at all and even less at this point of their careers. so, whatever role you were thinking Ratliff will play, it will be different to what Foster would play.

so, no different opinion to 2 months ago: if Spurs can get Foster for just expiring contracts (Matt+Fin) it would be a steal.(why should the Pacers do it?). and yes, I would give the 2011 1st rounder if necessary. 2010 can't be traded anyhow and gives another chance for a young player, Spurs also have a good chance to also add Splitter 2010.
Hill, Blair, Splitter, 2010 1st rounder, maybe Hairston, Williams, maybe even De Colo......that's quite a deep pool of young players, who also need to be integrated.
I don't think Spurs can't afford to trade the 2011 1st round pick.

[benefactor]

^^Pretty much sums up my thoughts on it.

[MaNu4Tres]

Foster would be the 3rd big in our rotation. he would be a nice compliment to Tim and Dice, so he would also be part of the PO rotation. he is 32, no reason to assume he will slow down significantly over the next two seasons.

on the other hand: Ratliff averaged 24 games per season over the last 3 years. so what role are you thinking he will take you think Foster also would get??? maybe you are the one thinking about the wrong age of a player.
and btw. Ratliff and Foster are not similar players, not at all and even less at this point of their careers. so, whatever role you were thinking Ratliff will play, it will be different to what Foster would play.

so, no different opinion to 2 months ago: if Spurs can get Foster for just expiring contracts (Matt+Fin) it would be a steal.(why should the Pacers do it?). and yes, I would give the 2011 1st rounder if necessary. 2010 can't be traded anyhow and gives another chance for a young player, Spurs also have a good chance to also add Splitter 2010.
Hill, Blair, Splitter, 2010 1st rounder, maybe Hairston, Williams, maybe even De Colo......that's quite a deep pool of young players, who also need to be integrated.
I don't think Spurs can't afford to trade the 2011 1st round pick.

I disagree and you can't convince me otherwise sorry. Foster would be clumped together in the 3rd-6th spots in the rotation in the frontcourt IMO. All of them have obvious negatives ( Foster on the offensive end, Bonner on the defensive end physically ( Bonner does have good position defense, it's just his physical ability doesn't allow him to be as effective as he should be), Ratliff on the offensive end, Blair pick and roll defense and NBA BBIQ). None of them are clear cut number 3 players in the frontcourt rotation.IMO

And Foster would play the same role as Ratliff which would be to play great interior defense, rebound, set efficient screens, and convert wide open scenarios when others create for him or finish garbage points after an offensive rebound. Nothing more nothing less.

Unless Blair/ Mahimni/ Haislip end up as busts and if Bonner or Ratliff were to get hurt then I'd consider trading my assets for him close to the deadline. Right now his skills doesn't justify giving up as much as you would for a player that wouldn't see more than 15 minutes a game. Especially if we signed a player ( Ratliff) already for the minimum that fits the role Foster would. All Foster would do right now is slow down the development of Blair/ Haislip/ Mahimni and also make the signing of Ratliff irrelevant. Ratliff brings elements to the Spurs that no one on the roster can do outside of Duncan. There is a reason they brought him in, even if it's for 8-10 minutes a game. We need what Ratliff can bring.

[mountainballer]

I'm really shocked that there is a need to point out the differences between Ratliff and Foster.
jesus, Ratliff is done. he can play the Willis/Massenburg role at best (if he is healthy enough)
every team has it's 3rd stringers. Ratliff is ours this year. that's ok.
Foster would be a 2nd stringer.
and NO, Ratliff can't do what Foster could. he couldn't defend Gasol and Dirk and he doesn't help in the rebounding department. (always been awful there, totally useless on the board these days.) Ratliff is an insurance policy. like every insurance, it's better we don't need it at all.

[MaNu4Tres]

I'm really shocked that there is a need to point out the differences between Ratliff and Foster.
jesus, Ratliff is done. he can play the Willis/Massenburg role at best (if he is healthy enough)
every team has it's 3rd stringers. Ratliff is ours this year. that's ok.
Foster would be a 2nd stringer.
and NO, Ratliff can't do what Foster could. he couldn't defend Gasol and Dirk and he doesn't help in the rebounding department. (always been awful there, totally useless on the board these days.) Ratliff is an insurance policy. like every insurance, it's better we don't need it at all.

Ratliff is not done. He had been injured in recent years and I agree that's a concern. But he played quite a bit most recently in favor of Dalembert in the playoffs against the Magic. He will have a role more similiar to Willis did in 2003. http://www.nba.com/spurs/stats/2002/index.html which is just what the Spurs need from him.

There's 96 minutes available for the frontcourt position.

And here's a rough estimate on how it looks considering what happened last year and what R.C has said in many interviews about how Blair is a guy who can come in and give the team about 20 minutes instantly.

Duncan 31-33 mpg
Dyess 23-25 mpg
Bonner 15-17mpg
Blair 15-17 mpg
Ratliff 8-10 mpg

Where and who would you sit for Foster?


Go ahead and pull the Bonner card, but he did have a productive year and was granted PT over Gooden, Kurt and Oberto. That indicates him getting some run this year. Especially if Pop is still the coach.

[mountainballer]

Where and who would you sit for Foster?

Go ahead and pull the Bonner card, but he did have a productive year and was granted PT over Gooden, Kurt and Oberto. That indicates him getting some run this year.

ok, saves time if you answer you own question.
and "Mr. Productive" Bonner had 3.0 PPG on 0.65 PPS in the last PO. (his best career PO production though)
didn't you tell us that this is when it counts?
as long as Bonner doesn't crack the 3.0 PPG barrier in the PO, I don't think there are indications that he is in position for an important role next season.

[benefactor]

Bonner playing ahead of Foster? Seriously?

It matters little anyway...because Bonner would be gone in the trade.

[benefactor]

A Duncan/McDyess/Foster/Blair front line would give us the best offensive rebounding front line in the league.

[Bruno]

With the luxury tax threshold dropping next year, Pacers will need to trade for expiring contracts one of Ford, Murphy, Dunleavy or Foster to avoid paying the tax in 2010-2011. I wouldn't be surprised to see Foster being the one gone.

[mountainballer]

A Duncan/McDyess/Foster/Blair front line would give us the best offensive rebounding front line in the league.

A Duncan-Foster tandem would also give us one of the best (if not THE best) frontcourt defenses in the league.

[benefactor]

A Duncan-Foster tandem would also give us one of the best (if not THE best) frontcourt defenses in the league.

Indeed. There have been many discussion on this forum about whether or not we are on the same level up front at the Lakers...even with the improvements we have made. If we were able so somehow steal Foster from Indy then discussions would no longer be necessary because there would be no doubt that we would be above them.

[MaNu4Tres]

ok, saves time if you answer you own question.
and "Mr. Productive" Bonner had 3.0 PPG on 0.65 PPS in the last PO. (his best career PO production though)
didn't you tell us that this is when it counts?
as long as Bonner doesn't crack the 3.0 PPG barrier in the PO, I don't think there are indications that he is in position for an important role next season.

Go ahead and pull the Bonner card, but he did have a productive year and was granted PT over Gooden, Kurt and Oberto. That indicates him getting some run this year. Especially if Pop is still the coach.

Matt is working out with the first team right now. They are expecting 15-20 minutes from him. The Spurs have already talked to his agent about a new contract. Not saying they wouldn't trade him but right now doesn't appear to be a possibility. Pop loves Matt.

[benefactor]

I'm gonna have to call BS on the 15-20 minutes projection. We didn't go out and make a bunch of major upgrades to the front line just to have the same situation we had last year with Bonner.

We have seen from all the times that Bonner has been in Pop's doghouse just how much he loves him. The love affair will end pretty quickly now that we have much better options on our bench.

[MaNu4Tres]

I'm gonna have to call BS on the 15-20 minutes projection. We didn't go out and make a bunch of major upgrades to the front line just to have the same situation we had last year with Bonner.

We have seen from all the times that Bonner has been in Pop's doghouse just how much he loves him. The love affair will end pretty quickly now that we have much better options on our bench.

Will it's obvious to anyone we have better options in the front court compared to last year. Bonner will still get some time this year, just not as much. He will most likely get the first look as the 3rd/4th big considering his production in 82 games out of 87 last year. Pop makes new guys earn there spots going into the year unless the transaction was an obvious upgrade like when Derek Anderson came and now Richard Jefferson.

[MaNu4Tres]

And I call that the Spurs will never make a dumb business like move trading our trading assets for a player to fill in a role they could sign for the minimum like Ratliff. ( Which they did.)

[mogrovejo]

Foster would easily be the Spurs 3rd best big, but:

- he's declining quickly. Just a couple of years ago, he was the best offensive rebounder in the league and a top-5 rebounder; today he's an above average one but not that good any more.

- his lack of an offensive game 5ft away from the rim makes him a subpar pair to Duncan.

- the Pacers will ask for too much to let him go. Bird, Morway and O'Brien value the intangibles he brings, especially in terms of locker-room leadership, very highly. You have better chances of getting Troy Murphy than Foster.

[benefactor]

Foster would easily be the Spurs 3rd best big, but:

- he's declining quickly. Just a couple of years ago, he was the best offensive rebounder in the league and a top-5 rebounder; today he's an above average one but not that good any more.

- his lack of an offensive game 5ft away from the rim makes him a subpar pair to Duncan.

- the Pacers will ask for too much to let him go. Bird, Morway and O'Brien value the intangibles he brings, especially in terms of locker-room leadership, very highly. You have better chances of getting Troy Murphy than Foster.

Yeah...he's not quite the player he used to be but he is still a very solid all around big man. I don't think you would see much of him playing with Duncan. He would probably come in for Duncan and McDyess would slide to PF as the extra shooter. This would actually work out very nicely defensively too because McDyess is a good perimeter defender for a big man and Foster is a good post defender. The offensive rebounding benefits speak for themselves.

As Bruno indicated earlier in the thread...Foster is probably the most likely to get traded sometime this season so that the Pacers can avoid the tax. Dunleavy and Murphy both have 2 years and over 20 million left on their contracts, so the Pacers would be hard pressed to find a taker for either of them. Foster is getting 6 million this year and 6.6 million next year, which is a reasonable price for a good rotation big man. His contract also fits well into the window the Spurs are working with. What the Pacers get in return for him probably won't matter, because the priority will be getting under the tax threshold. If they take Finley/Bonner/pick, they will at least have players that can contribute something instead of a straight salary dump.

[MaNu4Tres]

Would the Foster worshipers still trade our trading assets for him? Just wondering?

[Chieflion]

Would the Foster worshipers still trade our trading assets for him? Just wondering?

I am definitely not a Foster worshipper and I would hate to see giving a 1st round pick which may end up being a steal for an average player like Foster who does not really give the Spurs a clear upgrade.

[MaNu4Tres]

I guess not.

[Bruno]

Gloating over a player's injury is quite lame.

[MaNu4Tres]

Gloating over a player's injury is quite lame.

It was a question. Don't go making accusations out of spite.

Thanks

[MaNu4Tres]

Even if he wasn't injured like he has been the past 2 weeks, the idea to trade for him was and still is a terrible idea. Just saying.

[Bruno]

Foster has been basically injured since the start of the season. I don't know how it shows that an healthy Foster could have help or not Spurs. Just saying.