Rumor: Malik Hairston to Montepaschi? (Confirmed)

[Trill Clinton]

is dragic that kid that bukkaked all over us in that playoff game last season?


yes

[Libri]

IIRC, Dragic was playing for Tau Ceramica and the Spurs had failed to sign, the year before, the Argentine forward who shall not be named. At that time, most wanted the Spurs to pick an American player instead of going European, especially from Tau Ceramica.

[Obstructed_View]

To be a role player on a good team, you need to have a singular skill that you can hang your hat on. Hairston didn't have one. Pretty good at most things but not great at anything. He needs minutes to improve and he wasn't going to get them on the Spurs, who can't afford to wait and see if he can be a regular contributor. At least with Gee, we know that no matter what he can get to the rim. With Neal we know he can score. With Hairston, maybe one night he'd rebound well. The next night he'd shoot well. The third night he'd D his man up well. But with reserves, the coaching staff needs to know exactly what they are going to get.

Don't look at his defensive stats.

It's interesting that the Spurs fail to give minutes to guys on the team, and then when it's several years later and they still don't know anything about the guy, they suddenly "don't have time to find out" as justification for letting him go. I certainly wish it required something more substantial and consistent than Pop's love to earn minutes in this organization.

[Obstructed_View]

Well, regardless, he's someone else's problem now. Onward and upward. I hope Gee and Temple get some shots to play. Let's see what they can do.

[ChumpDumper]

Don't look at his defensive stats.

It's interesting that the Spurs fail to give minutes to guys on the team, and then when it's several years later and they still don't know anything about the guy, they suddenly "don't have time to find out" as justification for letting him go.They have plenty of time.

They probably just told Malik he was probably going to be waived out of camp and he decided to take some guaranteed money in Europe rather than take his chances trying to catch on another NBA roster.

It appears your faith in Malik's being a sure-fire NBA player is greater than that of Malik himself.

[ohmwrecker]

So what? The question is "is anyone happy with the Dragic/Hairston trade". Say you aren't. I dare you.

Are you trying to start an argument with me over a moot point? We all know how it went down, or at least we should. There is really nothing to be upset about. If you're asking, in hindsight, if I would rather have had Dragic over Hairston, then yes, I would, but it's fairly meaningless.

[ohmwrecker]

The Spurs weren't going to pick Dragic for themselves anymore than they picked Barbosa or Salmons for themselves.


That wasn't really a "trade". The Spurs picked Dragic for the Suns. It was a pre-arranged deal. It would've been pretty shitty of the Spurs to back out. Funny, but shitty, nonetheless.

You are being very silly today.

[Obstructed_View]

They have plenty of time.
All the time in the world, which is why they let him go.


They probably just told Malik he was probably going to be waived out of camp and he decided to take some guaranteed money in Europe rather than take his chances trying to catch on another NBA roster.
Probably. Or they told him that he could go to Europe now or take his chances trying to catch on another NBA roster after he's waived out of camp. I think the Spurs have let guys go early to have a chance to sign up with another NBA team in the past. Chances are a guy in that situation is going to take the guaranteed money regardless.


It appears your faith in Malik's being a sure-fire NBA player is greater than that of Malik himself.
Hello, strawman. Should have known you'd show up.

[Spurs Brazil]

Good luck to Malik

Spurs must sign a veteran SF

[Vic Petro]

Don't look at his defensive stats.

I have looked at his defensive stats, which given the sample size leave me with an impression that he's a pretty good defender. Am I ready to proclaim him an elite defender based on those stats? No, and I have great reservations that he'd ever be an elite defender. And apparently the Spurs had the same reservations.

I agree with you though in that you're right, I'm right, it doesn't matter. He is indeed someone else's problem and we're both Spurs fans. So let's go Temple and let's go Gee. Time to win #5.

[murpjf88]

So what? The question is "is anyone happy with the Dragic/Hairston trade". Say you aren't. I dare you. The Spurs weren't going to pick Dragic for themselves anymore than they picked Barbosa or Salmons for themselves.

I aren't.

[Obstructed_View]

Are you trying to start an argument with me over a moot point? We all know how it went down, or at least we should. There is really nothing to be upset about.

No, I was just kidding with the "I dare you" thing. I should have put a :) in there.


If you're asking, in hindsight, if I would rather have had Dragic over Hairston, then yes, I would, but it's fairly meaningless.
No that's not the question. That may have been the way someone originally intended the question, but it's not based in reality. The only thing the Spurs got out of Dragic/Hairston was the pick. You and I have agreed that the Spurs wouldn't have picked Dragic so the choice based on the "happy with the trade" question is to have Blair or to not have Blair. I was daring you to say that you'd be happier with Hairston and no blair than Hairston and Blair. Again, I was just having some fun because it's such a ridiculous question.

[ChumpDumper]

All the time in the world, which is why they let him go.Yep. It was Malik who didn't have the time.



Probably. Or they told him that he could go to Europe now or take his chances trying to catch on another NBA roster after he's waived out of camp.That's what I said.


I think the Spurs have let guys go early to have a chance to sign up with another NBA team in the past. Chances are a guy in that situation is going to take the guaranteed money regardless.That's what I said.


Hello, strawman. Should have known you'd show up.Not a strawman at all. What do you think his chances of getting a guaranteed deal from an NBA team were if he got waived from the Spurs' camp?

[Bruno]

Spurs release Hairston:
http://www.nba.com/spurs/news/spurs_release_malik_hairston_100729.html

[DesignatedT]

per his request. makes more sense.

[coyotes_geek]

“We’ve enjoyed having Malik in our organization,” said Spurs General Manager RC Buford. “He is a hard-worker, a talented basketball player and an outstanding young man. After Malik approached us we were happy to honor his request as it will, after he clears waivers, allow him to pursue an excellent overseas basketball opportunity.”

[timvp]

Spurs release Hairston:
http://www.nba.com/spurs/news/spurs_release_malik_hairston_100729.html

Looks like it was Hairston's doing. I stand by my statement that his contract is for more than the NBA minimum.

[Blackjack]

Spurs release Hairston:
http://www.nba.com/spurs/news/spurs_release_malik_hairston_100729.html


:depressed

[DesignatedT]

:depressed

sorry for your loss blackjack. my t&p are with you.

[elemento]

well gl Malik and WELCOME BACK CENTERPIECE !

[Blackjack]

Looks like it was Hairston's doing. I stand by my statement that his contract is for more than the NBA minimum.


I'd like to know if that request was made after the Spurs told him he'd be in much the same position as last year, only he wouldn't be able to play at all with no D-League eligibility.

Probably will get paid a little more than his $854,389 but I imagine it won't be too much more and the difference wouldn't have probably meant much to him if he really saw a role for himself on the team. Playing in the NBA and in the States is worth it to most if the contract's are close.

[ohmwrecker]

Looks like it was Hairston's doing. I stand by my statement that his contract is for more than the NBA minimum.

I still stand by my statement that it was either going to be Gee or Hairston. Malik just made their decision easy.

[ohmwrecker]

well gl Malik and WELCOME BACK CENTERPIECE !


That's enough out of you!

[HarlemHeat37]

Makes a lot more sense..they obviously weren't going to cut him without giving him a real chance in preseason, so I guess he took more money and minutes..

Sucks for the team though imo, but on to the next one..

[Solid D]

well gl Malik and WELCOME BACK CENTERPIECE !

:lol No way Bogans rejoins the Spurs. The Spurs played Mason more minutes than they played Bogans in the playoffs.

[MannyIsGod]

Seems like Chump hit the nail on the head. Most in here think more highly of Malik's NBA prospects than he did.

[ElNono]

Farewell Malik...

We'll see you soon in the next "Malik Hairston in Italy highlights" youtube thread... :lol

[Bruno]

The whole "it's Malik choice" is just the usual BS PR.

[Blackjack]

Farewell Malik...

We'll see you soon in the next "Malik Hairston in Italy highlights" youtube thread... :lol

He's got a thread dammit! WE'VE gotta thread (and you'll be able to find all of the latest from Montepaschi and their dalliance with THC :smokin).

[ElNono]

the whole "it's malik choice" is just the usual bs pr.

+2

[ElNono]

He's got a thread dammit! WE'VE gotta thread (and you'll be able to find all of the latest from Montepaschi and their dalliance with THC :smokin).

:lol

[DesignatedT]

Alright well there goes our backup SF. now what? Sign another or roll with Gee/Anderson...

[Solid D]

The Spurs lose their 12th man, meanwhile Eddie House signs with the Heat.

[coyotes_geek]

Alright well there goes our backup SF. now what? Sign another or roll with Gee/Anderson...

In all likelihood, RJ gets big minutes with Manu/Anderson/Gee filling in the rest.

[ChumpDumper]

The Spurs lose their 12th manThe Spurs waived Neal already?

[DesignatedT]

In all likelihood, RJ gets big minutes with Manu/Anderson/Gee filling in the rest.

I liked the 3 guard lineup vs Dallas in the playoffs. It's what won us the series IMO.

The Lineup of Tony, Hill, Manu is definitely small but with Duncan and now Splitter down low it might work out pretty well. It will sure be hard to guard also.

[ElNono]

I liked the 3 guard lineup vs Dallas in the playoffs. It's what won us the series IMO.

The Lineup of Tony, Hill, Manu is definitely small but with Duncan and now Splitter down low it might work out pretty well. It will sure be hard to guard also.

That worked a treat against the Suns though... :tu

[Solid D]

The Spurs waived Neal already?

:lol Well, in minutes/game last reg. season, Hairston was the 12th man.

[DesignatedT]

That worked a treat against the Suns though... :tu

Did I say that or even imply that? Just saying that having a 7 footer next to Duncan might help that lineup out a bit. :tu

[SpursTillTheEnd]

no fuck no hell no wtfffffffffffffffffffffff, why why fuck, bigest mistake in spurs franchise history noooooo man fuck this shit im mad as fuck right now im out fuck this

[elemento]

no fuck no hell no wtfffffffffffffffffffffff, why why fuck, bigest mistake in spurs franchise history noooooo man fuck this shit im mad as fuck right now im out fuck this

update the pic of your sig man =) hahahahahah

[DesignatedT]

no fuck no hell no wtfffffffffffffffffffffff, why why fuck, bigest mistake in spurs franchise history noooooo man fuck this shit im mad as fuck right now im out fuck this

thereeeee it is. finally.:lol

[ohmwrecker]

Maybe the Spurs' plan all along in releasing Hairston was to get Tothrowed off Spurstalk.

[DesignatedT]

Maybe the Spurs' plan all along in releasing Hairston was to get Tothrowed off Spurstalk.

:lol

[coyotes_geek]

Thank god hes gone, now maybe we can stop talking bout his ass.

Don't get your hopes up. The first time Hairston scores 20 overseas and RJ has a bad night you know what's going to happen.

[Blackjack]

Haters . . .

Well, I guess the Spurs can go out there and get themselves a veteran. I think it's pretty clear that the reason Malik asked to be released is he was unwilling to relinquish his #1 jersey to T-Mac.

[rmt]

I liked the 3 guard lineup vs Dallas in the playoffs. It's what won us the series IMO.

The Lineup of Tony, Hill, Manu is definitely small but with Duncan and now Splitter down low it might work out pretty well. It will sure be hard to guard also.

I think what won us the DAL series was Dice's defense on Dirk and Carlisle's stubbornness (not playing Roddy enough, trotting out Barea, Terry and Kidd and allowing the Spurs to play 3/4 of their best players (Manu, Hill and Parker) together.) Manu playing SF is not going to cut it against the better SFs of this league.

[024]

wtf. hairston is better than gee. i thought the spurs withheld hairston from summer league because they were "confident" of his abilities already.

[Blackjack]

wtf. hairston is better than gee. i thought the spurs withheld hairston from summer league because they were "confident" of his abilities already.

He asked for his release, despite those that believe it to be nothing more than a smokescreen. He wasn't guaranteed anything but the words and actions of the team would have led any reasonable person to believe he was going to be given an opportunity. He wasn't released because they didn't think he could help or because they didn't want to give him an opportunity to show he could (again).

[jag]

He asked for his release...
He wasn't released because they didn't think he could help or because they didn't want to give him an opportunity to show he could (again).

So the Spurs thought he could help and wanted to give him the opportunity but he would rather play for Siena?

[8FOR!3]

Haters . . .

Well, I guess the Spurs can go out there and get themselves a veteran. I think it's pretty clear that the reason Malik asked to be released is he was unwilling to relinquish his #1 jersey to T-Mac.

Clearly, George Hill was afraid for his job as #3, so they had to get rid of one of McGrady's two numbers to take away some of his fear.

[angelbelow]

Wow - Good luck to Malik. If he pans out I hope he gives the Spurs first dibs if they decides to the return to the NBA.

Not such a surprising move though.. not sure how much playing time Malik would have gotten next year anyways.. even with him being slotted behind RJ as our next SF.

[Chomag]

Well thankfully the Spurs FO tried so much harder to keep Bonner...

[crc21209]

Damn...well best of luck to Malik. :tu. I thought the dude couldve been pretty good here....

[jag]

Clearly, George Hill was afraid for his job as #3, so they had to get rid of one of McGrady's two numbers to take away some of his fear.

Ha ha ha ha ha lol

Thank God you put that in blue or i would have been so lost.

[DPG21920]

Don't get your hopes up. The first time Hairston scores 20 overseas and RJ has a bad night you know what's going to happen.

So very often.

[DPG21920]

Spurs are not making very good basketball moves this off season imo. They are making business moves it seems right now. Can't really fault them with how they flamed out last season. I just hope the team has enough juice to really compete.

We will see if it works out and there is still a lot of time for change.

[Blackjack]

So the Spurs thought he could help and wanted to give him the opportunity but he would rather play for Siena?

Yes. They wanted to give him the opportunity to beat out Gee or prove that they needed to keep him on the roster.

But I don't believe they envision him playing much, or Gee for that matter, and told him so. So it was basically, prove once again that you're the best player for the position and expect to play about as much as you did this year; except you'll have to ride the pine because we can't send you down to the D-League.

Spurs obviously don't believe they need help on the wing defensively or that either Hairston or Gee are going to be of huge help to them -- they need to score more and shoot 3-pointers.

Thus, they'd at least like the prospect of sending Gee down to the D-League. But they did favor Hairston over him, IMO.

Malik just made the best decision for himself that he could after being given the facts by the Spurs. Good for him, not so good for the Spurs -- another couple years of "corporate knowledge" down the drain -- for a team that values defense and corporate knowledge so much, they sure haven't really been showing it with their decisions over the last few years.

[Obstructed_View]

Don't get your hopes up. The first time Hairston scores 20 overseas and RJ has a bad night you know what's going to happen.

Hairston was one of the leading scorers in the D League, so he's pretty likely to do that a few times. Unless he's quite a bit better than Neal was then there's probably nothing to talk about.

[SpursNextRomanEmpire]

no fuck no hell no wtfffffffffffffffffffffff, why why fuck, bigest mistake in spurs franchise history noooooo man fuck this shit im mad as fuck right now im out fuck this

Been waiting a long time for this :lol

nah fuck this im out

[TD 21]

Haters . . .

Well, I guess the Spurs can go out there and get themselves a veteran. I think it's pretty clear that the reason Malik asked to be released is he was unwilling to relinquish his #1 jersey to T-Mac.

McGrady wore number three last season per his request.


Yes. They wanted to give him the opportunity to beat out Gee or prove that they needed to keep him on the roster.

But I don't believe they envision him playing much, or Gee for that matter, and told him so. So it was basically, prove once again that you're the best player for the position and expect to play about as much as you did this year; except you'll have to ride the pine because we can't send you down to the D-League.

Spurs obviously don't believe they need help on the wing defensively or that either Hairston or Gee are going to be of huge help to them -- they need to score more and shoot 3-pointers.

Thus, they'd at least like the prospect of sending Gee down to the D-League. But they did favor Hairston over him, IMO.

Malik just made the best decision for himself that he could after being given the facts by the Spurs. Good for him, not so good for the Spurs -- another couple years of "corporate knowledge" down the drain -- for a team that values defense and corporate knowledge so much, they sure haven't really been showing it with their decisions over the last few years.

Just as I had predicted earlier in the day when many were acting as if the Spurs had cut him or didn't want him, I knew this was per his request. I've got to believe this caught them off guard, but with such unappealing options available, what do they do?

They can't honestly stand pat, but at the same time, it's obvious they don't want Bogans back and I presume they don't want to have to resort to a guy like Hayes, either. But something's got to be done. They talked about getting younger and more athletic, but I don't see a realistic option available to fill this role who fits that mold.

This is an organization that has always prioritized having a defensive specialist on the wing. Just a season ago, they talked quite a bit about that. They haven't once this off season, which leads me to believe they had Hairston pegged to fill this role (he also fit with getting younger and more athletic).

[Blackjack]

McGrady wore number three last season per his request.

Yeah, I realize that. But I figured he'd probably go back to 1 seeing as 3 ain't really up for grabs. :hat


Just as I had predicted earlier in the day when many were acting as if the Spurs had cut him or didn't want him, I knew this was per his request. I've got to believe this caught them off guard, but with such unappealing options available, what do they do?

I'd like to think that it caught them off guard, as it would mean they're thinking the way I'd like them to (defensively), but I have my doubts.

I get the feeling with them being hell-bent on finding the 3-point shooting and the glut of talent at the 2 (which will force them to play minutes at the 3), the Spurs just didn't see much of a role for Malik. And given the fact he has no D-League eligibility, they probably made him aware of that and allowed him to make the best decision possible for his development and financially -- and if that's the case, Malik really helped them out because I believe they would have been compelled to keep him even knowing they wouldn't use him enough and ended up wasting his and their time next year. Gee at least can go to Austin.


They can't honestly stand pat, but at the same time, it's obvious they don't want Bogans back and I presume they don't want to have to resort to a guy like Hayes, either. But something's got to be done. They talked about getting younger and more athletic, but I don't see a realistic option available to fill this role who fits that mold.

I believe this team's going to inevitably need a trade for a wing. The problem is, I want no part of shipping Hill out and the Spurs don't have the time or a realistic opportunity to trade Parker for someone who gives them a better shot at winning a title. So I just don't see how it is they bring back any value without giving up Hill or Blair -- two players I want no part of moving but could theoretically be moved to make your team better by addressing the balance of talent on the roster. You could have your best personnel on the floor at all times, IOW.


This is an organization that has always prioritized having a defensive specialist on the wing. Just a season ago, they talked quite a bit about that. They haven't once this off season, which leads me to believe they had Hairston pegged to fill this role (he also fit with getting younger and more athletic).

That's what I believed as well. I hope you're right, I just have my doubts -- but if Anderson and Temple can come through for them and that's why they believe Malik wouldn't see minutes, and the Spurs wind up right in believing so, that's fine by me. I just have my doubts.

[Bruno]

Temple and Gee are more interesting prospects than Hairston, that's just my opinion. Spurs can't indefinitely stockpile young perimeter players with defensive skills and letting go the weakest of the bunch makes sense.

[TD 21]

I'd like to think that it caught them off guard, as it would mean they're thinking the way I'd like them to (defensively), but I have my doubts.

I get the feeling with them being hell-bent on finding the 3-point shooting and the glut of talent at the 2 (which will force them to play minutes at the 3), the Spurs just didn't see much of a role for Malik. And given the fact he has no D-League eligibility, they probably made him aware of that and allowed him to make the best decision possible for his development and financially -- and if that's the case, Malik really helped them out because I believe they would have been compelled to keep him even knowing they wouldn't use him enough and ended up wasting his and their time next year. Gee at least can go to Austin.



I believe this team's going to inevitably need a trade for a wing. The problem is, I want no part of shipping Hill out and the Spurs don't have the time or a realistic opportunity to trade Parker for someone who gives them a better shot at winning a title. So I just don't see how it is they bring back any value without giving up Hill or Blair -- two players I want no part of moving but could theoretically be moved to make your team better by addressing the balance of talent on the roster. You could have your best personnel on the floor at all times, IOW.



That's what I believed as well. I hope you're right, I just have my doubts -- but if Anderson and Temple can come through for them and that's why they believe Malik wouldn't see minutes, and the Spurs wind up right in believing so, that's fine by me. I just have my doubts.

I find it hard to believe they went from prioritizing this role as recently as a year ago to completely disregarding it this season. It makes no sense.

Maybe we've got this all wrong, though. Maybe it's not that they're no longer prioritizing it or that they had Hairston necessarily pegged to fill this role, maybe they think (or at least, want to believe/hope) they've got that role filled in house? You know what I'm getting at...Jefferson. This was their intention a year ago and at this point (given what's available), it wouldn't surprise me if it is now.

Even if they do it by committee, ultimately, one guy has to be the primary guy. Hill is a small guard; he can't realistically be counted on to consistently guard wings who are significantly bigger and stronger. We all know Jefferson can't fill this role even adequately, but with the way this team is constructed, if they play the nine man rotation many expect they will, by default almost he has to fill this role.

They are. The problem is, as I alluded to earlier in this thread, how can they acquire the player they need without giving up a single veteran? They probably can't afford to (if they want to contend) nor do I think they view any of their veteran pieces as expendable for the type of player they'd likely to acquire to fill this role.

[Texas_Ranger]

Temple and Gee are more interesting prospects than Hairston, that's just my opinion. Spurs can't indefinitely stockpile young perimeter players with defensive skills and letting go the weakest of the bunch makes sense.

:tu

[Blackjack]

Temple and Gee are more interesting prospects than Hairston, that's just my opinion. Spurs can't indefinitely stockpile young perimeter players with defensive skills and letting go the weakest of the bunch makes sense.

As it pertains to this particular team, I'd definitely agree with Temple. Gee, not so much. I just don't see him being the defensive player Hairston is and his offense isn't strong or complete enough for him to be thought of as a better prospect than Hairston. I think Gee's got a chance to be good and I'd agree he's more of a prototypical athlete and specimen for a 2/3 but I wouldn't say he's a better prospect; I do think they and Malik will be better served seeing as I believe neither will play a big enough role to improve with the team and Gee at least has D-League eligibility.

[rmt]

I find it hard to believe they went from prioritizing this role as recently as a year ago to completely disregarding it this season. It makes no sense.

Maybe we've got this all wrong, though. Maybe it's not that they're no longer prioritizing it or that they had Hairston necessarily pegged to fill this role, maybe they think (or at least, want to believe/hope) they've got that role filled in house? You know what I'm getting at...Jefferson. This was their intention a year ago and at this point (given what's available), it wouldn't surprise me if it is now.

Even if they do it by committee, ultimately, one guy has to be the primary guy. Hill is a small guard; he can't realistically be counted on to consistently guard wings who are significantly bigger and stronger. We all know Jefferson can't fill this role even adequately, but with the way this team is constructed, if they play the nine man rotation many expect they will, by default almost he has to fill this role.

They are. The problem is, as I alluded to earlier in this thread, how can they acquire the player they need without giving up a single veteran? They probably can't afford to (if they want to contend) nor do I think they view any of their veteran pieces as expendable for the type of player they'd likely to acquire to fill this role.

Ever since the Mavs series 06, Popovich has over reacted to the team they've lost to. With the Mavs, he got rid of the 7 footers (Nazr & Rasho) and relied too much on small ball. Now with the sweep by the Suns, he's over reacted again signing Bonner to a ltd and looking for more 3 point shooters.

Why not try to build a versatile, balanced team that can play many styles with the big emphasis on defense? How many SGs can they carry - just because those are the only shooters they can find? Why try to fit a round peg in a square hole? There's a serious glut at SG and nobody after RJ at SF. Better pray hard that RJ doesn't get injured.

Maybe I should give up hoping for defense. Why bother when Popovich had RJ play so much at PF and Hill trying to guard players such as Durant. I feel like the players aren't playing to their strengths but trying to fit into whatever Popovich's latest scheme is.

[Blackjack]

I find it hard to believe they went from prioritizing this role as recently as a year ago to completely disregarding it this season. It makes no sense.

If you've looked at what they've done in recent years, it's skew offensive and small to adjust to the smaller, quicker and more-beneficial-to-the-offensive-rules game. They've expressed and put importance on all the right things defensively, but their actions haven't exactly fallen in line with that (whether it's personnel decisions or groupings/minute disbursement).


Maybe we've got this all wrong, though. Maybe it's not that they're no longer prioritizing it or that they had Hairston necessarily pegged to fill this role, maybe they think (or at least, want to believe/hope) they've got that role filled in house? You know what I'm getting at...Jefferson. This was their intention a year ago and at this point (given what's available), it wouldn't surprise me if it is now.

We all know RJ isn't going to be a stopper but I expect him to be lighter coming into camp and on much better footing -- the guy did get traded in the offseason and go through some drama with the whole wedding fiasco, I'm guessing his training and focus didn't put him in a great place to start.

But I'm hoping for Anderson to be the Spurs' Courtney Lee of '09. We haven't had the chance to see him against NBA-caliber athletes but he may just surprise some people defensively. Too soon to know for sure, but he'll be able to focus on it more know with less responsibility offensively and that would be an absolute godsend if he could come through. It'd be nice to have a complete player on the court as a stopper at times -- could Temple prove to be a 6-5 Doug Christie? (one can hope -- minus the wife and purse).


Even if they do it by committee, ultimately, one guy has to be the primary guy. Hill is a small guard; he can't realistically be counted on to consistently guard wings who are significantly bigger and stronger. We all know Jefferson can't fill this role even adequately, but with the way this team is constructed, if they play the nine man rotation many expect they will, by default almost he has to fill this role.

It's pretty much the same discussion we had last year. They're still just a little ill-fitted and missing a small piece or two, but pieces that are vital and needed to tie everything together.


They are. The problem is, as I alluded to earlier in this thread, how can they acquire the player they need without giving up a single veteran? They probably can't afford to (if they want to contend) nor do I think they view any of their veteran pieces as expendable for the type of player they'd likely to acquire to fill this role.

Hill and/or Blair. That's basically what it comes down to. I don't want to move either of them and I don't think they could really find the right piece to leave them better off in the short-term, but it basically comes down to them.

If they trade Parker, I can't see them incorporating someone quick enough to get it done (in the unlikely event they actually make a quality trade), and I don't see the Spurs receiving enough value in return for anyone outside of Hill and Blair. I'd love to see Martell Webster in a Spurs jersey ... but I'm not sure the Spurs could get him or if I could actually pull the trigger on a deal that included Hill and/or Blair.

[Bruno]

As it pertains to this particular team, I'd definitely agree with Temple. Gee, not so much. I just don't see him being the defensive player Hairston is and his offense isn't strong or complete enough for him to be thought of as a better prospect than Hairston. I think Gee's got a chance to be good and I'd agree he's more of a prototypical athlete and specimen for a 2/3 but I wouldn't say he's a better prospect; I do think they and Malik will be better served seeing as I believe neither will play a big enough role to improve with the team and Gee at least has D-League eligibility.

When I compare Gee to Hairston, I always keep in mind that Gee has spend significantly less time with Spurs than Hairston. To me, Gee is the better prospect because he has the most upside. Defensively, he isn't at Hairston's level but he has show some flashes in that area and in has the physical tools to catch him up. The D-League eligibility is, as you said, a huge edge for Gee. Gee is also $192K cheaper to keep than Hairston.

[Mal]

Good for Malik. Montepaschi is proven brand in Europe, great organisation and one of the best coaches in european basket.

[analyzed]

If the Spurs feel Gee isn't ready for prime time yet, this makes one wonder WHY the team didn't bother to go after another SF?

The problem is none of you guys want to accept what the Spurs FO has been saying all along , that they expect Anderson to be the primary back-up for both wing positions ( SG and SF) and provide impact immediately. We have a false sense of value of hight over talent , that a 6'8" SF has to play the position even as back-up , over a talented guy 2 inches shorter who has all the tools to be a decent defender ( which his role in college din't allow him to showcase due to his focus on being the main scorer)

[benefactor]

The problem is none of you guys want to accept what the Spurs FO has been saying all along , that they expect Anderson to be the primary back-up for both wing positions ( SG and SF) and provide impact immediately.
Then the Spurs aren't that serious about being a contender.

[analyzed]

Then the Spurs aren't that serious about being a contender.

There is no point in acquiring a defensive SF it he's not part of the top 8 or 9 rotation, the names mentioned : hariston , gee etc are at best 10-12 carbage minutes guys. The availabe cap $ 2M won't get us a top 8 rotation guys as well. So unless were open to trades were not getting anyone significant for the SF defensive role. Think about it, if FO priortiy was to fill the defensive SF role over talent they should have drafted a Damion James over an Anderson. Obviously they see talent in regardless of position being more important than just simply filling a need. I tend to agree with FO position , talent over need anytime. (MJ over Sam Bowie anytime even if you have a drex)

[benefactor]

He's still a rookie...and saying that you are depending on a player that has not played a single NBA minute to be the primary backup is not very smart.

[admiralsnackbar]

He's still a rookie...and saying that you are depending on a player that has not played a single NBA minute to be the primary backup is not very smart.

I dunno, man... sometimes necessity trumps smart.

[spursbird]

Temple and Gee are more interesting prospects than Hairston, that's just my opinion. Spurs can't indefinitely stockpile young perimeter players with defensive skills and letting go the weakest of the bunch makes sense.
So how can they be undrafted?

[Darkwaters]

So how can they be undrafted?

Good point. Obvioiusly undrafted free agents are always garbage. And it seems to be universally true in every sport.

We see it from scrubs like Tony Romo and Miles Austin to that turd SF the Spurs used for years named Bruce Bowen.

Clearly, all undrafted players are worthless. :toast

[admiralsnackbar]

Clearly, all undrafted players are worthless. :toast

And the inverse: all drafted players are studs.

[dbestpro]

Gee will become the new Hairston.

[benefactor]

I dunno, man... sometimes necessity trumps smart.
The Spurs seem to be taking that approach a lot this offseason.

[coyotes_geek]

Gee will become the new Hairston.

Just like Hairston was the new Marcus Williams, who was the new James White, who was the new Melvin Sanders and so on and so forth..........

[Obstructed_View]

I'd like to think that it caught them off guard, as it would mean they're thinking the way I'd like them to (defensively), but I have my doubts.

I get the feeling with them being hell-bent on finding the 3-point shooting and the glut of talent at the 2 (which will force them to play minutes at the 3), the Spurs just didn't see much of a role for Malik. And given the fact he has no D-League eligibility, they probably made him aware of that and allowed him to make the best decision possible for his development and financially -- and if that's the case, Malik really helped them out because I believe they would have been compelled to keep him even knowing they wouldn't use him enough and ended up wasting his and their time next year. Gee at least can go to Austin.

Hairston got cut in favor of a guy who hit a few threes in summer league once before. He wasn't going to allow it to happen a second time.

[Bruno]

So how can they be undrafted?

First, NBA draft isn't something perfect, just look at the past.
Second, I don't consider Temple and Gee are awesome prospect. I'm just saying they are better prospects than Hairston.

[SpurCharger]

I think Pop is in love with Temple's D and shooting, and said as much when interviewed. I definitely see the Temple SF experiment extensively tested this season.
I see It happening Too.... But I Think Bigger small Forwards Can Take Temple On The Block..He has wingspan, but not very strong.

[Chieflion]

I see It happening Too.... But I Think Bigger small Forwards Can Take Temple On The Block..He has wingspan, but not very strong.

I believe that chance can be easily taken as the SFs now don't even post up with the exception of a few, like Carmelo Anthony. The rest of the scoring SFs work from the perimeter, and not the mid-post.

[EricB]

I don't see how the spurs could match the italin offer. Most likely it's more money and pt. Good luck to him.

[K-State Spur]

Now with the sweep by the Suns, he's over reacted again signing Bonner to a ltd and looking for more 3 point shooters.


More? Other than Bonner and Ginobili - we don't have any...

[Mr.Bottomtooth]

I don't see how the spurs could match the italin offer.

Good thing they're not trying to.

[EricB]

Good thing they're not trying to.


I meant that in a more of, when presented at the time of.

Im sure Malik's people went to them, asked for the release saying we got a contract for this much....

[ohmwrecker]

What are the rules regarding an agent/player negotiating with a European team while said player is currently under contract with an NBA team?

Bruno?

[slick'81]

oh well maybe malik can improve his game and actually get some pt in the league down the road

[ElNono]

The problem is none of you guys want to accept what the Spurs FO has been saying all along , that they expect Anderson to be the primary back-up for both wing positions ( SG and SF) and provide impact immediately.

The Spurs FO said that? I must have missed it.

I'm not doubting you, I would just like to read about it.

Do you have a link?

[ohmwrecker]

Do you have a link?

Give him a minute to pull it out of his ass.

[TD 21]

If you've looked at what they've done in recent years, it's skew offensive and small to adjust to the smaller, quicker and more-beneficial-to-the-offensive-rules game. They've expressed and put importance on all the right things defensively, but their actions haven't exactly fallen in line with that (whether it's personnel decisions or groupings/minute disbursement).


I realize that, but they've still always had at least one player who was a defensive specialist or who they were (presumably) grooming to take on that role. Bowen, Udoka, Bogans, Hairston, etc. I find it hard to believe we won't see a player of a similar ilk brought in to fill this role, even if it is in a lesser capacity.


We all know RJ isn't going to be a stopper but I expect him to be lighter coming into camp and on much better footing -- the guy did get traded in the offseason and go through some drama with the whole wedding fiasco, I'm guessing his training and focus didn't put him in a great place to start.

But I'm hoping for Anderson to be the Spurs' Courtney Lee of '09. We haven't had the chance to see him against NBA-caliber athletes but he may just surprise some people defensively. Too soon to know for sure, but he'll be able to focus on it more know with less responsibility offensively and that would be an absolute godsend if he could come through. It'd be nice to have a complete player on the court as a stopper at times -- could Temple prove to be a 6-5 Doug Christie? (one can hope -- minus the wife and purse).We know he can't be even an adequate stopper, but like I said, given the way this team is built and their projected nine man rotation, I think there's a good chance Jefferson and Hill combined to play this role.

Really, it's just process of elimination. We know Ginobili won't be playing this role for obvious reasons and I'd be very surprised if a rookie who's not noted as a quality defender plays this role, so that leaves Jefferson and Hill. Hill is too small to do it without regard for the opponent's size, which means Jefferson will have to take on this role by default. He's the only one with the size and strength (and he doesn't have a ton of offensive responsibility) and he'll be starting and playing 30+ mpg.

Not a bad comparison. It's possible Anderson could surprise us defensively, but I'd be surprised if Anderson is of the same caliber as Lee is defensively. Also not a bad comparison. But I doubt Temple plays anything more than spot minutes.


It's pretty much the same discussion we had last year. They're still just a little ill-fitted and missing a small piece or two, but pieces that are vital and needed to tie everything together.Yeah. Though I think it'll be difficult to match salaries (without giving up a key veteran and unlike past years, when there was guys like Elson or Barry who they viewed as expendable, I don't see such a veteran on this team), the piece they need this year should be theoretically easier to attain than the primary piece they've needed the past few years and they do have more assets now than they've had in a while.


Hill and/or Blair. That's basically what it comes down to. I don't want to move either of them and I don't think they could really find the right piece to leave them better off in the short-term, but it basically comes down to them.

If they trade Parker, I can't see them incorporating someone quick enough to get it done (in the unlikely event they actually make a quality trade), and I don't see the Spurs receiving enough value in return for anyone outside of Hill and Blair. I'd love to see Martell Webster in a Spurs jersey ... but I'm not sure the Spurs could get him or if I could actually pull the trigger on a deal that included Hill and/or Blair.Not necessarily; it depends on the quality of the player coming back. Anderson and/or the 1st are other options. I don't think providing value will be the most difficult obstacle to overcome, I think it'll be matching salary.

Agreed.

[Solid D]

well gl Malik and WELCOME BACK CENTERPIECE !


:lol No way Bogans rejoins the Spurs. The Spurs played Mason more minutes than they played Bogans in the playoffs.

Now that Bogans just signed with the Bulls, can we just put that whole "CENTERPIECE" thing to bed now?

[EricB]

Can we put the idea that Pop adores bad veterans over good rookies too?

Cause apparently he's going young on the wings...

[DPG21920]

Uhhhhhhhhhh, that is yet to be seen and Pop has favored vets over young guns for a while. One year, where he is forced financially to play younger guys, does not erase anything.

Bogans started 50 games. 50.

[Bruno]

The whole "fuck vets, play young guys" makes absolutely no sense when the young players aren't good enough.

[Obstructed_View]

The fact is, Pop plays favorites with certain guys over others, whether it's Michael Finley or Anthony Tolliver, whether it's Nick Van Exel or George Hill. Let's not pretend that it doesn't happen, okay?

[ChumpDumper]

An NBA coach plays certain players over other players?

Bold.

[DPG21920]

What does not make sense is playing Finley too much or Bogans when they have no upside and do very little on the court.

[Obstructed_View]

An NBA coach plays certain players over other players?

Bold.

Your reading comprehension is as weak as your arguments. You are to be pitied.

[admiralsnackbar]

The fact is, Pop plays favorites with certain guys over others, whether it's Michael Finley or Anthony Tolliver, whether it's Nick Van Exel or George Hill. Let's not pretend that it doesn't happen, okay?

I agree with this, but not with the dubious assertion that he plays favorites based on players ages exclusively. I think he appreciates poise/confidence, and if a player looks unsure (Hairston, Beno, Tolliver) or plays beyond himself (Rose, Mahinmi, Bonner), he can go consider it in the doghouse of woe.

[admiralsnackbar]

What does not make sense is playing Finley too much or Bogans when they have no upside and do very little on the court.

Unless they're both better than Hairston, and then it doesn't seem so incomprehensible. Dwayne Schnitzus had plenty of upside and got plenty of burn... but he always sucked.

[ChumpDumper]

Your reading comprehension is as weak as your arguments. You are to be pitied.So did Malik clear waivers and no other NBA team wanted him?

Thanks in advance for your answer.

I know he was a favorite of yours; some fans like certain players over other players. Don't even try to deny it!

[Bruno]

Players below 30 that get some minutes with Spurs but failed to get a consistant role these past 5 years:
Alex Scales
Melvin Sanders
James White!
Jackie Butler
Darius Washington
Jeremy Richardson
DerMarr Johnson
Ian Mahinmi
Bobby Jones
Keith Langford
Marcus Williams
Blake Ahearn
Pop Mensah-Bonsu
Desmon Farmer
Anthony Tolliver
Malik Hairston
Marcus Haislip
Cedric Jackson

Among these 18 players, only one (Tolliver) can be considered as a legit NBA player. These guys are certainly owning the league right now...

Anyway, Fuck Pop. He should have played these young guys and been able to turn lead into gold. What an awful coach, fire him.

[ElNono]

How many players under 30 were members of championship teams in the past 5 years?

At least in a contributing role, obviously.

[DPG21920]

:lol at taking it to extremes. Just because a player like Malik beat out Bogans, yet Bogans started 50 games and Malik was given very little time to prove himself, does not mean Pop sucks.

Even great coaches make mistakes. Like not giving a player like Ian, who most likely is a bust, time early in a season to prove himself. It just made no sense not doing something like that. It was low risk, high reward.

Over playing guys like Bogans and Finley was a low risk, no reward.

[yavozerb]

:lol at taking it to extremes. Just because a player like Malik beat out Bogans, yet Bogans started 50 games and Malik was given very little time to prove himself, does not mean Pop sucks.

Even great coaches make mistakes. Like not giving a player like Ian, who most likely is a bust, time early in a season to prove himself. It just made no sense not doing something like that. It was low risk, high reward.

Over playing guys like Bogans and Finley was a low risk, no reward.

:lol, at POP making a mistake by not playing Hairston...People, malik right now in his career is sub-par NBA player. Maybe he can develop some sort of confidence in his shooting and come back in about 2 yrs and contribute.

[ElNono]

Tony Parker for one...

[ChumpDumper]

:lol at taking it to extremes. Just because a player like Malik beat out Bogans, yet Bogans started 50 games and Malik was given very little time to prove himself, does not mean Pop sucks.If Malik didn't start all those games, then Malilk did not beat out Bogans.

[ElNono]

Can we put the idea that Pop adores bad veterans over good rookies too?

I recall Hill watching from the bench while Finley was sucking up a storm in 2009. You don't?
Or Blair minutes going from 20 to 10 once the playoffs came around?

When has Pop played a good rookie over a bad veteran?


Cause apparently he's going young on the wings...

I expect Manu and RJ to get the bulk of the minutes there. I would only call RJ a relatively bad veteran based on what he displayed last season though (he wasn't as bad as, say, a completely over the hill Finley).

Who do you think Pop is going to hand the minutes to?

[DPG21920]

:lol, at POP making a mistake by not playing Hairston...People, malik right now in his career is sub-par NBA player. Maybe he can develop some sort of confidence in his shooting and come back in about 2 yrs and contribute.

So what? You are missing the point. When the option is a player like Bogans or Finley, then not giving some marginal prospects some extra time makes little sense.

It is a mistake. It is not some catastrophic mistake, but it would be nice to get more of a sample. A guy like Malik would do no worse than Bogans. It would be nice to see what Ian had to offer when the risks were low. That is all.

Pop is still a great coach.

[DPG21920]

If Malik didn't start all those games, then Malilk did not beat out Bogans.

That is just silly. Malik out played Bogans in limited sample size. Coaches choose certain players over others all the time.

See Barea over Roddy B.

[ElNono]

It's hard to just blame Pop. Most coaches have fetishes with certain players like that. Even other great coaches, like Phil Jackson or Larry Brown.

[ChumpDumper]

That is just silly. Malik out played Bogans in limited sample size. Coaches choose certain players over others all the time.

See Barea over Roddy B.So Roddy B. didn't beat out Barea.

I agree your saying a player who didn't beat out another player beat that player out is silly.

[Cane]

Players below 30 that get some minutes with Spurs but failed to get a consistant role these past 5 years:
Alex Scales
Melvin Sanders
James White!
Jackie Butler
Darius Washington
Jeremy Richardson
DerMarr Johnson
Ian Mahinmi
Bobby Jones
Keith Langford
Marcus Williams
Blake Ahearn
Pop Mensah-Bonsu
Desmon Farmer
Anthony Tolliver
Malik Hairston
Marcus Haislip
Cedric Jackson

Among these 18 players, only one (Tolliver) can be considered as a legit NBA player. These guys are certainly owning the league right now...

Anyway, Fuck Pop. He should have played these young guys and been able to turn lead into gold. What an awful coach, fire him.

Good stuff :toast

[DPG21920]

So no one who out played someone statistically ever played behind another player, Chump?

[yavozerb]

So what? You are missing the point. When the option is a player like Bogans or Finley, then not giving some marginal prospects some extra time makes little sense.

It is a mistake. It is not some catastrophic mistake, but it would be nice to get more of a sample. A guy like Malik would do no worse than Bogans. It would be nice to see what Ian had to offer when the risks were low. That is all.

Pop is still a great coach.

I am missing the point....Teams like the clippers, warriors,etc. (non-winning teams) have been trying your formula for years with little success.

[Blackjack]

This is really getting to be comically ridiculous in spectacularly gratuitous fashion. Like humongously humorous and stuff.

[ChumpDumper]

So no one who out played someone statistically ever played behind another player, Chump?Malik didn't beat out Bogans.

If he had, he would have beat out Bogans.

[Blackjack]

Players below 30 that get some minutes with Spurs but failed to get a consistant role these past 5 years:
Alex Scales
Melvin Sanders
James White!
Jackie Butler
Darius Washington
Jeremy Richardson
DerMarr Johnson
Ian Mahinmi
Bobby Jones
Keith Langford
Marcus Williams
Blake Ahearn
Pop Mensah-Bonsu
Desmon Farmer
Anthony Tolliver
Malik Hairston
Marcus Haislip
Cedric Jackson

Among these 18 players, only one (Tolliver) can be considered as a legit NBA player. These guys are certainly owning the league right now...

Anyway, Fuck Pop. He should have played these young guys and been able to turn lead into gold. What an awful coach, fire him.

I really do appreciate the proper spelling of James White! :lol

In all seriousness though, look at each and every one of those players and think to when they were on the team, the position they played and their chief competition. Different time and circumstance -- alot of those were championship teams and those players were playing positions predominantly the same as the Spurs' best players.

Pop's a great coach, deserving of all the praise one wants to heap on him, but he isn't perfect, nor would he ever claim to be. He made his decision with regards to Malik last year, and he had some legitimate reasons why he did (wanting a known quantity and some veteran consistency on the court complimenting the stars and being somewhat of a stabilizer for a roster in flux), but Bogans simply couldn't be the player he needed him to be. He rolled the dice with a vet, which is something that usually bears fruit more often than with a young player, but he crapped out. The logic wasn't terrible, the player pretty much was.

There's no reason that Hairston shouldn't have been given the opportunity to see if he could help the team. We're not talking about being Bowen, an offensive force or a top 5 or 6 player on the team, we're talking Keith Bogans here. There has to come a point in time where you come to the conclusion that Bogans isn't good enough to accomplish what you want and since you've got this pretty decent player sitting on the bench, one you witnessed with your own eyes outplay Bogans in the pre-season and show flashes in limited minutes, you've gotta say to yourself: "Well, let's see what he's got. Couldn't be worse and he might just help us out."

It's no secret I'm a fan of Malik but my fandom has in no way deluded reality.

When it really comes down to it, the Spurs went about as far as they should've last year under the circumstance. Malik playing instead of Bogans wasn't going to make them a championship contender, so it's obvious the argument has devolved into a "I'm right, you're wrong" sitch-e-ation. It's not even about basketball anymore it's a pissing contest.

Great coach, bad decision, it's time to move on.


And just to let you know ...


I win. :hat

[ChumpDumper]

Nah, the legend of Wouldacouldashoulda Hairston will live on. His fans will be mapping out the alternate timeline where he is a rotation player this season and tell us how the Spurs are doing with him.

It will happen whenever someone scores on Neal or some other dude Malik kept from scoring once makes a basket.

Just wait.

[lowdown]

I really do appreciate the proper spelling of James White! :lol

In all seriousness though, look at each and every one of those players and think to when they were on the team, the position they played and their chief competition. Different time and circumstance -- alot of those were championship teams and those players were playing positions predominantly the same as the Spurs' best players.

Pop's a great coach, deserving of all the praise one wants to heap on him, but he isn't perfect, nor would he ever claim to be. He made his decision with regards to Malik last year, and he had some legitimate reasons why he did (wanting a known quantity and some veteran consistency on the court complimenting the stars and being somewhat of a stabilizer for a roster in flux), but Bogans simply couldn't be the player he needed him to be. He rolled the dice with a vet, which is something that usually bears fruit more often than with a young player, but he crapped out. The logic wasn't terrible, the player pretty much was.

There's no reason that Hairston shouldn't have been given the opportunity to see if he could help the team. We're not talking about being Bowen, an offensive force or a top 5 or 6 player on the team, we're talking Keith Bogans here. There has to come a point in time where you come to the conclusion that Bogans isn't good enough to accomplish what you want and since you've got this pretty decent player sitting on the bench, one you witnessed with your own eyes outplay Bogans in the pre-season and show flashes in limited minutes, you've gotta say to yourself: "Well, let's see what he's got. Couldn't be worse and he might just help us out."

It's no secret I'm a fan of Malik but my fandom has in no way deluded reality.

When it really comes down to it, the Spurs went about as far as they should've last year under the circumstance. Malik playing instead of Bogans wasn't going to make them a championship contender, so it's obvious the argument has devolved into a "I'm right, you're wrong" sitch-e-ation. It's not even about basketball anymore it's a pissing contest.

Great coach, bad decision, it's time to move on.


And just to let you know ...


I win. :hat:toast

[Blackjack]

Yeah, you're probably right. I could definitely see myself saying Malik would've held Kobe to 3-27 and been the difference maker the team needed to get #5.

The Lakers have Kobe, Gasol, Odom and Bynum while the likes of Miami has LeBron, Wade and Bosh. Seems inevitable that Malik will be the difference.

[ElNono]

Nah, the legend of Wouldacouldashoulda Hairston will live on. His fans will be mapping out the alternate timeline where he is a rotation player this season and tell us how the Spurs are doing with him.

It will happen whenever someone scores on Neal or some other dude Malik kept from scoring once makes a basket.

Just wait.

It's like the final season of Lost!

[ChumpDumper]

Yeah, you're probably right. I could definitely see myself saying Malik would've held Kobe to 3-27 and been the difference maker the team needed to get #5.

The Lakers have Kobe, Gasol, Odom and Bynum while the likes of Miami has LeBron, Wade and Bosh. Seems inevitable that Malik will be the difference.Just wait.

[Blackjack]

Will do. ;)

[admiralsnackbar]

In all seriousness though, look at each and every one of those players and think to when they were on the team, the position they played and their chief competition. Different time and circumstance -- alot of those were championship teams and those players were playing positions predominantly the same as the Spurs' best players.


I think you're missing Bruno's point, though. Regardless of the line-ups we've run the past 5 years, the need to constantly improve on the cheap at every position is a going concern with our and any franchise, and players that fell to us on the cheap have unsurprisingly been busts by an overwhelming margin. Not just busts as Spurs players fighting for minutes on championship rosters, but busts in NBA terms. Busts who often ended up in marginal foreign leagues if they were lucky enough to still play professionally.

So maybe you're right that Hairston was unfairly benched because Pop preferred Bogans/Fin despite their being an obvious liability on the floor, but you have to acknowledge the assumption that Pop would be ok fielding a losing team in Timmy's twilight while deep into the lux tax. Next you'd have to contend with the fact that probability isn't on your side per Bruno's list. Finally, you'd have to grant that you have no more proof to support your suspicions than anyone who disagrees with you.

If you're cool with those three issues, then cool. If not, that's cool, too. It doesn't matter anymore. Let's just wish the kid luck and move on. Last season is mercifully over

[lowdown]

Pop doesn't trust young players and has way too much faith in vets. This is a fact. George Hill should've of been playing more his rookie year in the playoffs. Look at Blair's inconsistent minutes last year.

[admiralsnackbar]

Pop doesn't trust young players and has way too much faith in vets. This is a fact. George Hill should've of been playing more his rookie year in the playoffs. Look at Blair's inconsistent minutes last year.

Besides kinda disagreeing with this for reasons mentioned upstream, the Hill example ultimately undermines the point Hairston supporters are trying to make because; a) Pop played Hill throughout the regular season (unlike Hairston) whether or not Parker was injured, and; b) Pop realized his mistake and corrected it, which Malikists contend is impossible.

[Bruno]

There's no reason that Hairston shouldn't have been given the opportunity to see if he could help the team. We're not talking about being Bowen, an offensive force or a top 5 or 6 player on the team, we're talking Keith Bogans here. There has to come a point in time where you come to the conclusion that Bogans isn't good enough to accomplish what you want and since you've got this pretty decent player sitting on the bench, one you witnessed with your own eyes outplay Bogans in the pre-season and show flashes in limited minutes, you've gotta say to yourself: "Well, let's see what he's got. Couldn't be worse and he might just help us out."


In preseason, Hairston was clearly better than Bogans who was horrible and shoot beyond 10% but it didn't matter. Bogans is a vet with tons of NBA minutes and what he does in preseason doesn't really matter because he was a known quantity. Bogans did this year more or less what he has done his whole career. He wasn't that bad until the playoffs where he sucked which is likely the reason why Spurs don't bring him back.

Spurs and Pop obviously didn't have the same evaluation than you on Hairston. They liked him enough to keep him even if he cost some money with the luxury tax but not enough to give him some minutes. Near the end of the season, it looks like they had more and more doubts about him with the signing of Temple and Gee. They finally let him go this summer.

Spurs evaluated Hairston through the limited minutes he played and they came to the conclusion that he wasn't worth being tried with more minutes or even being kept. Given Spurs track record on these quick evaluations, you had to take a little part of humble pie and admit that you likely the one who is wrong about Hairston and that he isn't NBA material.

[wildbill2u]

Bogans signed with Chicago and is still potentially an NBA player in one team's plans. Malik didn't get an NBA offer and is in Italy.

Temple got some play as a rookie, and even played in the playoffs. Malik Didn't.

Shoulda, woulda, coulda but didn't is pretty definitive.

[DPG21920]

I am missing the point....Teams like the clippers, warriors,etc. (non-winning teams) have been trying your formula for years with little success.

Teams have also tried the Spurs formula of giving bad fits 40M contracts and we see how that works out.

LOL "my formula". No one is saying Malik or Ian was the savior. But when you are not a contender and the guys in front of them are Bogans, Finley and Bonner, it does not hurt to give them more minutes to see what you have.

Its not about Malik or Ian being NBA material. It is about not really knowing because they weren't given ample opportunity at the expense of a below average Finley (who still has no team) and Bogans.

That is all. It does not make Pop a bad coach. But it is a mistake none the less.

[TD 21]

In preseason, Hairston was clearly better than Bogans who was horrible and shoot beyond 10% but it didn't matter. Bogans is a vet with tons of NBA minutes and what he does in preseason doesn't really matter because he was a known quantity. Bogans did this year more or less what he has done his whole career. He wasn't that bad until the playoffs where he sucked which is likely the reason why Spurs don't bring him back.

Spurs and Pop obviously didn't have the same evaluation than you on Hairston. They liked him enough to keep him even if he cost some money with the luxury tax but not enough to give him some minutes. Near the end of the season, it looks like they had more and more doubts about him with the signing of Temple and Gee. They finally let him go this summer.

Spurs evaluated Hairston through the limited minutes he played and they came to the conclusion that he wasn't worth being tried with more minutes or even being kept. Given Spurs track record on these quick evaluations, you had to take a little part of humble pie and admit that you likely the one who is wrong about Hairston and that he isn't NBA material.

I think people have misinterpreted the reasoning for Hairston being released. I don't think it had anything to do with what the Spurs thought of him and everything to do with them doing him a favor. I'm convinced he was going to take over the Bogans role towards the end of last season: 10th man/backup SF/spot minutes as a pseudo stopper. Was he going to make the difference between winning a championship or not? Obviously not. So they did him a favor, allowing him to make guaranteed money and play consistent, (presumably) at least relatively significant minutes.

Their track record on these evaluations is irrelevant. Each player needs to be looked at as an individual case. Blackjack did a good job of explaining why Hairston's case was unique to almost every player on that list.

I don't think anyone is under the illusion that this was a devastating loss or that this somehow is going to drastically alter the team's fortunes this coming season, but he could have helped.

Is he a surefire NBA player? No. But he's a guy who can, at minimum, play in the league and he's clearly comparable to a guy like Dahntay Jones and players of that ilk. Jones was a fringe player for years until the Nuggets, one of the five best teams in the league in 08-09, decided to not only play him, but start him. Because they had so many talented players, his limitations weren't nearly as exposed as they would have been on a less talented team. Hairston could have played a similar role with the Spurs, only in a lesser capacity. It's not about talent as much as it is about fit. Putting together a team is like putting together a puzzle; all the pieces have to fit. Hairston could have brought something that no other player on this team could have.

People need to get past this stigma of, "well, if he were good enough, he'd have been playing" (not always true) or "if he were so good, then why wasn't he a 1st round pick?" or "he's unproven; Bogans was a proven veteran". I used to think that way, but I came to realize that it's irrelevant. If you know the game and you know the league, you can easily see how a player like Hairston would have fit in on a team like the Spurs.

[ChuckD]

People need to get past this stigma of, "well, if he were good enough, he'd have been playing" (not always true) or "if he were so good, then why wasn't he a 1st round pick?" or "he's unproven; Bogans was a proven veteran". I used to think that way, but I came to realize that it's irrelevant. If you know the game and you know the league, you can easily see how a player like Hairston would have fit in on a team like the Spurs.

If you knew the Spurs, you'd realize a few things. Probably only 20-25% of the league's players would succeed here, so what his chances would be around the league are irrelevant. You'd also realize that a wing player who can't knock down the 3 pointer has no chance in SA. Bogans played because he hit 36% from downtown. Finley, having HIS WORST SEASON EVER, still shot 32% and played in front of Malik.

If you don't shoot the 3 pointer effectively, you won't play for the Spurs on the perimeter, period.

[DPG21920]

If you knew the Spurs, you'd realize a few things. Probably only 20-25% of the league's players would succeed here, so what his chances would be around the league are irrelevant. You'd also realize that a wing player who can't knock down the 3 pointer has no chance in SA. Bogans played because he hit 36% from downtown. Finley, having HIS WORST SEASON EVER, still shot 32% and played in front of Malik.

If you don't shoot the 3 pointer effectively, you won't play for the Spurs on the perimeter, period.

So why did RJ get 40M? RJ shot 25% from 3 in the first round and did not make a 3 in the 2nd round sweep.

He shot 31% during the regular season.

[TD 21]

If you knew the Spurs, you'd realize a few things. Probably only 20-25% of the league's players would succeed here, so what his chances would be around the league are irrelevant. You'd also realize that a wing player who can't knock down the 3 pointer has no chance in SA. Bogans played because he hit 36% from downtown. Finley, having HIS WORST SEASON EVER, still shot 32% and played in front of Malik.

If you don't shoot the 3 pointer effectively, you won't play for the Spurs on the perimeter, period.

Hairston is the type of player who would fit it with the Spurs. A selfless, hard working, defensive minded player. That's their type. As for his shooting, he never received consistent enough playing time to say definitively he couldn't shoot, say, 30-32% from three. He very well might have been capable of that. It's not like his D-League, Summer League or college numbers suggest that he couldn't shoot the three at all.

Since when is 32% effectively? I'm not convinced Bogans and Finley played in front of Hairston for that reason. I think there was more to it than that. This is pro sports. Anyone who's followed them long enough knows politics often play a role in who plays and who doesn't, among other things.

DPG brings up a good point about Jefferson's three-point shooting (or lack thereof) and him getting $38.9 million.

[ChuckD]

So why did RJ get 40M? RJ shot 25% from 3 in the first round and did not make a 3 in the 2nd round sweep.

He shot 31% during the regular season.

Thanks for making my point for me. What did Malik shoot again? I'm not sure what the percentage is, but I'm pretty sure he's made TWO three pointers in sixty-something games over two seasons.

[ChuckD]

Hairston is the type of player who would fit it with the Spurs. A selfless, hard working, defensive minded player. That's their type. As for his shooting, he never received consistent enough playing time to say definitively he couldn't shoot, say, 30-32% from three. He very well might have been capable of that. It's not like his D-League, Summer League or college numbers suggest that he couldn't shoot the three at all.

Since when is 32% effectively? I'm not convinced Bogans and Finley played in front of Hairston for that reason. I think there was more to it than that. This is pro sports. Anyone who's followed them long enough knows politics often play a role in who plays and who doesn't, among other things.

DPG brings up a good point about Jefferson's three-point shooting (or lack thereof) and him getting $38.9 million.

Hairston got 60-something games over two seasons to show SOMETHING from beyond the arc, and epic-failed. I know he shot well in the d-league, but the d-league ain't the NBA. It could be that simple, or it could be that he can't do it on the big stage. He wouldn't be the first.

[DPG21920]

Thanks for making my point for me. What did Malik shoot again? I'm not sure what the percentage is, but I'm pretty sure he's made TWO three pointers in sixty-something games over two seasons.

Your point is that if you aren't a good 3 point shooter, you don't play for the Spurs. Well, RJ sucked and got 40M.

[ChuckD]

C'mon guys, it isn't that hard. Pop will always play his best 3 point shooters, even if they aren't as good as those of years past. Shit, Garrett Temple literally came out of NOWHERE, knocked down 43.5% of his treys, and got double Hairston's minutes with a few starts thrown in.

It's not that he isn't a good guy. It isn't that Pop hates him. Malik Hairston failed as a Spur because he couldn't knock down the gotdamn three pointer. Period. End of story.

[ChuckD]

Your point is that if you aren't a good 3 point shooter, you don't play for the Spurs. Well, RJ sucked and got 40M.

Actually, my point was that Pop will ALWAYS play his best three point shooters, even if they aren't as good as the ones he's had in years past. Richard Jefferson looks like Ray Muthafuckin' Allen compared to Malik.

[The Truth #6]

Are we talking about a different RJ? The one I remember was so afraid to shoot a 3 in the PHX series he would set up two steps inside the line.

[DPG21920]

20% in the playoffs for RJ from 3 point land.

[ChuckD]

20% in the playoffs for RJ from 3 point land.

Alright, you made me look it up. 16.7% career for Malik. 62 games 478 minutes. That's a bigger sample size than you're using.

[DPG21920]

So 40M for 20% 3PT shooting in the playoffs for a team that values 3PT shooting and has championship aspirations?

Malik was not being paid 40M.

[ChuckD]

So 40M for 20% 3PT shooting in the playoffs for a team that values 3PT shooting and has championship aspirations?

Malik was not being paid 40M.

RJ wasn't signed to that because he deserved it, he was signed to that for tax relief and so that they could bring over Splitter. His cap/tax number was ~ $22.7M, a crippling figure. If you haven't figured it out, that deal was done WELL in advance, before they even announced that they were going hard after Splitter this summer. If you add the luxury tax REFUND that the Spurs will get next summer, what they essentially did, was restructure his contract, pay him some money that would have gone to the league as tax anyway, and extend him for 3 yrs/$15M. Splitter doesn't come over if this doesn't happen.

BTW, Malik would STILL BE HERE if he hadn't ASKED FOR HIS RELEASE.

[ElNono]

Splitter doesn't come over if this doesn't happen.

How do you know that?

[ChuckD]

How do you know that?

Because, while the Spurs are willing to go a little bit into the tax, they'll never go a lot. They were already at $64.4 with just 5 players, Tim, Tony, Manu, RJ's old salary, and McDyess.

[ElNono]

Because, while the Spurs are willing to go a little bit into the tax, they'll never go a lot. They were already at $64.4 with just 5 players, Tim, Tony, Manu, RJ's old salary, and McDyess.

Well, Splitter having an opt out clause in his contract this season meant there was a window of opportunity there that might not have been there for the rest of whatever is left of the Duncan era if they didn't act now.

That's why, even if expensive, I'm not sold it wouldn't have happened anyways.

[ChuckD]

Well, Splitter having an opt out clause in his contract this season meant there was a window of opportunity there that might not have been there for the rest of whatever is left of the Duncan era if they didn't act now.

That's why, even if expensive, I'm not sold it wouldn't have happened anyways.

You're entitled to your opinion. IIRC, Scola also had such a decision tipping point in his Euro contract, and we couldn't afford him, taxwise. You saw how that turned out.

I might even go so far as to say they would have dumped their pick in the 2010 draft. They've done it before to dodge the tax.

[ElNono]

You're entitled to your opinion. IIRC, Scola also had such a decision tipping point in his Euro contract, and we couldn't afford him, taxwise. You saw how that turned out.

I might even go so far as to say they would have dumped their pick in the 2010 draft. They've done it before to dodge the tax.

Actually, Scola was a completely different situation, IMO.
We were coming out of winning it all, and Tim was still very much in his prime.
I actually think that's why the Spurs had much more urgency with Splitter than they ever had with Scola.

[yavozerb]

Wow, all these posts over a player who averaged 1 minute of PT for his spurs career. Gotta love the summer. We need to group this with the Pops, Tolliver, and Ian threads.

[Obstructed_View]

Hey remember that time Hedo beat out Manu? How about that time Finley beat out Manu.

[ChumpDumper]

Manu was on the inactive list all year?

And Manu chose to go back to Europe because he figured he wouldn't get any minutes?

And no other NBA teams expressed any interest in Manu?

No, I don't remember that.