Reply With Quote
Lol... you me and Kid Capri.
will miss u too tbh...
Birds and the Bees and the Coconut Trees.
Context: ate some homemade 'shrooms... and totally digging everything I'm doing right now.
I've been saying the same thing recently and it's why they should attempt to do something significant now. Hayward is even more unrealistic than Paul though, because of the Leonard overlap. Spurs' respect level is such that just about anyone would probably give them a token meeting, but it would be waste of time on both sides.
If these were robots and not human beings, keeping Parker would be perplexing. As is, it's understandable; especially if it's not an impediment to a significant move (and it's highly unlikely it will be).
If Mills is re-signed, barring Murray setting the world on fire, expect Parker, when he returns, to start sooner than later because his game isn't compatible with either but theirs is with each other.
Obviously, a lot can change in a year, but at this writing, for all the talk of '18, I think the most likely scenario, is the core being similar to now. Aldridge may not be thrilled as a Spur and vice versa, but it's no different than why he signed in the first place: can either side find someone who checks more boxes? Probably not.
Lol... you me and Kid Capri.
will miss u too tbh...
Birds and the Bees and the Coconut Trees.
Context: ate some homemade 'shrooms... and totally digging everything I'm doing right now.
This seems like a place to put this:
This guy makes a lot of mistakes no matter what side of the argument you're on. Also, even though this was published today, it seems to have been recorded during Rockets series
Unlike some others I'm fine keeping Aldridge, i just accept that his game has faded enough that he's more of a third wheel now.
Which would be fine if they had a second banana, either scoring or playmaking. Not necessarily a superstar #2, just someone else that can function dependably at a high level and in matchups like GSW, Houston, Cleveland and probably Boston.
Hayward is that, though i don't bother to entertain him. Chris Paul is that. And i think Hill, Lowry, and Holiday can fill that role. Teague not so much. But I'm sure that Mills isn't that. Bad quad 35/36 year old Parker isn't that. A returning 40 year old Manu isn't that. Old Pau isn't that, and it would cost the team Pau to get one of those guys i listed.
Right now - at this moment - the Spurs have a PG rotation of Murray and Forbes. And theoretically, TP for the second half of the season. That means they have to have another PG for the first half of the season, or another playmaker (like Simmons or Manu?) to simulate a PG for the first half.
If you start stepping through what has to happen, or at least what is likely to happen, you'll start seeing that they really have to push hard to pick up a serious player this offseason. You say "star", and I wouldn't go that far. But one that is going to cost them a chunk of change to sign.
If they are really going to take a year to rebuild, then they can go find someone like Laprovittola to get them through the first half of the season, so that they will still have "ultimate flexibility" in 2018. And bringing Tony back mid-way through a likely-lottery season. And convincing Kawhi that it's going to get better, so he'll accept an extension. And, and, and...
This, all of this, is why I wanted the Spurs to bite the bullet and rebuild this past season. So Kawhi could actually see the team ascending in 17-18. So that this year's FA's could see the skeleton of a contender.
Personally, I think the Spurs have to make a big push at getting a solid FA this season now. Objective mentioned getting Hayward to sign - that would be my dream scenario. I would LOVE to see him on the court with Kawhi, playing against "today's NBA" teams. And getting guys like that will be almost impossible without stretching Parker's salary. But if they can't pull that off, I have a good feeling about this year's draft. I would love to see them buy a second-rounder for cash, like we've seen teams do the last several years. And if they moved Aldridge and/or Gasol and/or Green to come up with a good first-rounder, even better. That's the one scenario where I don't think they need to stretch Tony.
Just don't look in the mirror.
I Like Parker I don't understand all the hate it's up to Pop and RC to either keep or get rid of him. So if you want to hate then put it on the right people.
As far as Parker and his injury are concerned I think pretty much this has ended his career he already was having major hamstring issues which leads me to think his tear was a lot worse then is being reported. To rehab and the get into NBA shape to me is just not something he is going to put himself through that is a of a lot of painful hours. In the end I will think he will claim medical issue and just collect his disability check.
It's not hate. He's 35 years old, has more mileage than all but a handful of the PG's in NBA history (including playoffs and summer), he's had a terrible injury and is out until January at minimum. And he's going to be taking $15.5M of the cap next year. I've never been a Parker-hater, but that's not a happy picture for a team.
People have to face the fact that the players we love get old and finally have to retire. If there was another great player (but not a Spurs great) who was Tony's age, had Tony's injury, and was going to cost $15.5M next year? There's no way you would be in favor of it. No way. Zero.
+10000 = To me for 2017 and 2018 the only big names I would want and that we have a legit chance to get are Gordon Hayward and Kistaps Porzingis who is not a happy camper with New York right now and is making it well none he doesn't like Phil. To get these two players I would open the bank and LMA/Gasl/Green/Parker would be on the trading block.........ONE CAN DREAM..........
IF Pop and RC don't have the balls to do that the they better at least get us do a trade to get a stud in the draft or get 3 draft picks this year
They'll probably give Mills some absurd deal like 4/60 or 3/45.
Heck, didn't one ESPN writer call $17 million a year for Mills being reasonable?
Have to keep that corporate knowledge, Pop doesn't like to have roster turnover. Too many new players and then they have more work to do coaching.
Everyone on here except me wanted gaysol. Your theory is shot
I hope TP gets the chance to go out on his own terms, even if just for a half season. It really sucks if the injury retires him.
Which self? The self that's a s of prime Parker or a s of that s ? If it's the latter, he shouldn't even be handing out towels.
You cannot build a culture by wholesaling the community every other year. 29 other teams have tried it.
Gotta admire his optimism but he's done, needs to gtfo TBH. We don't need a Kirby/Lakers situation on the Spurs.
What culture do they keep by paying Mills a deal like 4/60?
Improving rosters is what teams have to do.
Bogut and Barnes were champs baked into.the Warriors culture. I don't think they are missing them.
Pau had a ruptured quadriceps tendon when the Spurs signed him? I didn't know. My bad.
He's got to change the way he plays. Got to be more of a threat from the outside. If he uses the timeoff to work on his shot then it will be worth it.
Bogut was there 4 years. He was hardly baked into the culture. Patty has 6 with the Spurs and he's still culturally on the fringe. Warriors signed Kevin Durant. Do you think Paul George or Chris Paul are coming to the Spurs? If so I'd be all for releasing Mills. Otherwise, you'll just have a new meh level player trying to fit into the system.
If Manu retires and Tony isn't there most of the season, Patty is the vet on the team, same number of years as Kawhi Leonard. Only Green has been there longer but even then Danny is hardly a floor general. You cannot expect Murray to be a floor general and lead the team. Kawhi is too introverted to rally the troops, just leads by example.
Unless you want wholesale slaughter of the team, you're not improving by moving Patty out for some washed up player from the bottom of the list.
Don't bet against him.
I don't know where you got that first part from. But I agree with you in principle about culture and corporate knowledge. The piece you're leaving out is skills. I don't think Patty is suitable as a starting PG, and he's too short to be a 2 guard. Several others here have said the same thing, but that's an opinion and we aren't going to convince each other.
What I don't think is debatable is that CP3 is a lot stronger than Patty. He can fight through contact better, and bounce off of contact and finishes much better. That's a pretty big thing when it comes to the playoffs, where the refs allow a lot more contact. It's also pretty well understood with (unbiased) NBA fans that Paul is a much better defender than Patty. Also a big deal in the playoffs.
I have my doubts about CP3's personality/ego. But if the Spurs are going to take it back to that next level, I think they have to have a stronger starting PG than Patty. And if they have to make that change, this year is by far the best time to do it. Yeah, they would be giving up some corporate knowledge. But the skills upgrade more than makes up for it, IMO. I'm not disagreeing with the idea you're talking about. I just think it's worth the trade-off to upgrade the point, if they get that chance. I sure as wouldn't want them to make a lateral move, skills-wise.
Lol this isn't Manu we're talking about. This is a career starter.
so this means his fat ass is going to finally get in shape?
Agreed. Manu wouldn't have been a good starter. Playing against backups padded his stats a little (and they weren't that impressive still) .... just look at Paddy as a starter
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions