Reply With Quote
Why is this rumor thread still up when we all knew notta would come out of it?
When the Lakers need to contend, they get Fisher for nothing, Ariza for a scrub, Gasol for a scrub and proyects to maybe be good players in 5-6 years. When they need to unload an overpaid scrub, inmediately someone takes Radman for MLE with 4-5 years left, they even get a backup PG in the process.
And "do it" Mitch is such a genius that he traded Caron Butler to sign Kwame for $27M.
I'm not talking about getting feed by the golden spoon only like the Lakers, if the reports are true with the first roudner the Spurs are offering a fair value for Chandler, but unfortunately few teams help the Spurs.
I can't imagine the Spurs getting by "trades" 1 franchise player, 2 starters and unloading a bad contract - all that during only one season.
Why is this rumor thread still up when we all knew notta would come out of it?
jeez Robert Mason Jr starting SG for Amar'e's team? I'd be pissed LOL
I wouldn't be so sure about that. I'd be willing to bet the Spurs are the "mystery team" that has the unspoken deal with the Knicks to deal a 1st round pick to them. It's just like the Spurs to swear the Knicks to secrecy. I wouldn't write this trade off just yet.
..damn.....we'd be right back in the le hunt again......
Exactly.
ing RJ.
It would be hilarious (but not in a franchise-re ing way) if they pull off this trade, work out that Chandler is imminently more suited to the Spurs system than RJ, then have to eat RJ's contract for the next 3 years!
Actually, to be fair, maybe Wilson Chandler concentrating on being the number one perimeter defender would free RJ up to play a scoring role off the bench which he's actually suited to. Still they are paying RJ about the same as Maggette.
ok guys this isn't gonna happen....
Exactly.
ing RJ.
It would be hilarious (but not in a franchise-re ing way) if they pull off this trade, work out that Chandler is imminently more suited to the Spurs system than RJ, then have to eat RJ's contract for the next 3 years!
Still they are paying RJ about the same as Maggette.
Is that the best material you can come up with? I mean seriously? Is it?
" RJ."
"RJ is Gay."
"I hate his contract (even though I'm blind when it comes to actually seeing and understanding the financial situation the Spurs are in now and the future.)"
I'm just asking because that's the only "knowledgeable" take you've contributed to this board for the past 6 months.
Getting pretty old bud.
I thought you contributed more to this board. Then again I can be wrong at times.
I don't use phobic slurs, I abhor them, so don't conflate what other people say with my stance.
Did you read the RJ thread? Before I read this, I just lauded your post there and replied to it and others at length. I hope that better addresses your objections.
BTW, it's Friday night here, I'm drinking and relaxing and not taking life too seriously right now. In the last 6 months my life focus has shifted somewhat and I'm not around so much. I'm waiting for the season to begin, then maybe my insight will pick up. Not promising anything though.:
I think I've seen more accusations of RJ critics using gay slurs than I've actually seen RJ critics using gay slurs in the last week, almost like a distraction technique.I don't use phobic slurs, I abhor them, so don't conflate what other people say with my stance.
Did you read the RJ thread? Before I read this, I just lauded your post there and replied to it and others at length. I hope that better addresses your objections.
BTW, it's Friday night here, I'm drinking and relaxing and not taking life too seriously right now. In the last 6 months my life focus has shifted somewhat and I'm not around so much. I'm waiting for the season to begin, then maybe my insight will pick up. Not promising anything though.
Classic internet debating. Strawman argument.
One thing I will always object to is people putting words in my mouth. I am usually (not always) very specific about what I say, but it's common for people to generalise with their own interpretation and take things to extremes, ignoring what I actually said, in order to "win the argument". We should all strive to be better than that... or at least funnier!
Let's say the Spurs did trade for Chandler. Would it be a safe assumption to say that the Spurs could potentially lose him because they could not afford to match an offer sheet that he signs with another team this summer?
As safe as assuming they could lose Parker and, because of this and the rapidly degrading knees of Duncan, this is the last season they have a vaguely remote chance of winning it all.
I think when trading for a player all positives and negatives of the trade need to be evaluated. One of the negatives of such a trade I believe is that he believes he is worth more $ than the spurs believe he is worth (which is usualy the case with the spurs) and therefore would get better offers from other teams.
Well, I doubt ANYONE will be signing an offer sheet during the lockout, but yes, he would likely be a rental, between RJ's contract, and Parker's prospective new one, whenever contract signings resume.
Him getting re-signed would be more tied to the Spurs cap situation than it would be perceived worth.
Exactly.
Don't overlook that second part. If anything, that will be the cause, not RJ's.
Exactly.
So wiping away 9 million would not help?
They could certainly lose him, unless Spurs make a hypothetical trade ( like the one your presenting) to make room to match the offer under the new luxury tax; or unless Holt and his investors decided to go a little into the luxury tax for another season (little as in 4-5 million into the luxury--costing them 8-10 million--if all holds true in the new CBA). In all honesty, the only way it would be smart to retain him is if he's significantly better than what they have right now; which right now is questionable because both have relatively the same skill-set. If he's not significantly better than what the Spurs have already-- I'd simply let him walk--Spurs do own a first round pick next year where they can address the back up 3 spot if they need to and they'll still have Anderson developing. So it's not such of a dilemma as you are implying if Chandler is "so-so", which could most likely be the case because he's not a very efficient player to stand out on a limited 15-20 minute role.
On the other hand of the hypothetical scenario:
If he is significantly better than what the Spurs have, then Spurs will be put in a great position to win this year. And if they do win and Chandler makes a significant contribution, then I think Holt would try retain him by going a little into the luxury tax just for his first year (the guy loves to win-- and that is his ultimate goal). Especially considering the fact that him and his investors did save 25 million this past season when they solidified the huge whole at SF by agreeing with RJ under the table. If this is the hypothetical scenario that plays out-- then I think Spurs would try to cut corners in finances-- such as trading their 1st round pick for a future 1st round pick--trading Bonner or trading Anderson. Which wouldn't be so bad if it meant retaining a hypothetical important piece for a championship.
Last edited by MaNu4Tres; 10-15-2010 at 10:47 AM.
It's certainly cooled down (mostly, I assume, because Kori groused about it), but are you ting me? There were whole threads dedicated to "RJ is gay". Please. You are better than that. Just because it hasn't happened as much this week doesn't mean it didn't happen. I'm not against a joke or two, if it's funny, but it was beaten to death and used in legitimate arguments. I had gay insinuations directed at me when I defended RJ.
GTFO.
It's not a "strawman argument" if it actually happened. In fact, using "RJ is gay" in a real discussion is more of a strawman. You guys use this term way too often to not know what it means.
What exactly is a strawman arguement? Just wondering since I too have been called this for crossing the "Bonner/RJ haters".
Its claiming someone made an argument that you did not in fact make. Instead of arguing what a person actually said, you make up something else (a strawman) and argue that instead. Typically its something easy to discredit.
RuffNReady never actually said that RJ was gay. Someone else may have but he did not. You claim he did so anyway and argue that. Its kind of blurred in a forum of 100 people.
Its been said by the antiRJ camp a lot.
With the training camp ending, I think that it isn't the right time to do a trade.
Spurs first need to evaluate what they really have. It looks like James Anderson has a good training camp considering that he came from a big injury and hadn't played a game for 6 months. It's possible that in a couple of months Anderson will be good enough to fill the backup SF spot. Spurs also need to evaluate if Blair and Splitter are good enough that they can give up McDyess or Boner in a trade. Fixing the backup SF problem would be moot if it creates a hole in the frontcourt.
Thanks...
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
