Spurs dropped the ball

[Gregzilla]

now before you guys start laying in on me, just know that I am a die hard spurs fan and in no way am trying to say the spurs suck or are stupid, but they certainly have not improved the teams chances for a championship by sitting idle while free agents/ trades happen/happened across the league. This rant is about how we need a big badly and didn't do shit about it.

First off, for the past 12 years SIZE in the front court has helped tremendously to win championships.
Spurs- duncan, robinson, nazr, rasho, elson, fabricio, horry
Lakers- shaq, horry, pau, bynum, odom, vlad, turiaf, walker
Heat- shaq, zo, haslem, doleac, walker
Celtics- KG, perkins, pj brown, leon powe, pollard, glen davis, scalabrine

Now from this list you can see that there is ONE main presence down low (duncan, shaq, kg, pau) and the rest are role players/ rebounders with size and length to help protect the paint.

..This is all common knowledge to us because you always here ppl talk about size and defense. We all know how important size is, as do the nba analyst we see on tv. Right now the consensus is that the Spurs are too small and they're right. They know it, we know it, the spurs FO knows it. You can tell that we (us spurs fans) know this because even though the spurs have the best record in the league and were on pace to set a franchise record in wins, not a single person on this board would brag about it, hell even hardly mention it. Even the head coach of our team would repeatedly state we weren't the best team in the league and the record was meaningless. Why? because deep down we, and them (spurs FO), know that in order to win the ship we have to go through either dallas, la, boston, orlando, or miami..all teams that are experienced, talented, REBOUND, and are big. The other 25 teams are non existent really. Size wise against those other top tier teams, we're at the bottom of the barrel. Our joint hatred toward bonner, paired with blair's undersized frame..add in dice's old age and the 7 footer that continues to rot on the bench and our frontcourt is easily our achilles heal and for the past decade, strong front courts have won championships. Regardless of how great kobe was, he needed pau to win. Boston was average in the east until they got KG. Miami won when they traded for shaq, and we won by starting any 7ft avg joe next to Timmy. Having BIGS is a must right now and has been since mj retired. Reality should have set in for everyone when the Phoenix fucking Suns SWEPT us last year.

Back to the FO, I understand when you have the best record in the league you have no reason to trade anyone and break up your roster. I 100% agree with that. But that doesn't mean you couldn't do ground work in the offseasons/drafts or even trade away players who rarely contribute to wins. The past two offseasons, FA's, drafts and mid season trades were flooded with big men who could have bolstered our front court... Tyson Chandler, Stromile Swift, Nazr, Al Jefferson, Turiaf, Kaman, Camby, Landry, Dampier, Zeke, Shaq, Jermaine Oneal, Haslem, Favors, Gortat, DeAndre Jordan, Haywood, Diop, Okafor, Dalembert, Villanueva..the list goes on. Before some of you start talking about bball IQ, and defensive "systems", that's all bullshit. We won ships with rasho, nazr, fab and elson...the system for Centers/forwards besides duncan is just REBOUND. ...now we're stuck with pops man crush Bonner, 6'8 blair, and a young 7 footer on the bench who pop refuses to play because he doesn't know the system yet. FUCK YOU pop, Duncans on his last years and we got swept by phx last year because we had no presence in the paint. I know the future is bright with all our youth and young talent and offense but once duncan is gone and kobe is done, all the powerhouses will be out east. We got 2 maybe 3 years left to make a real run. Get us a fucking BIG!!!!

Yes we have the skills and talent to compete with anybody but the reality is, after 82 regular season games...players get tired and hurt. Then the 7 games series start where your opponent knows you like the back of their hand and size/physicality starts to play a MAJOR role. Maybe its just me but I don't see this team winning a championship this year with this current roster. I see the San Antonio Suns, too small and offensive oriented.

[Juanobili]

lol

[MannyIsGod]

Never start a thread again please.

Thanks.

[Leetonidas]

If Splitter starts playing decently, we will have plenty of size.

[Juanobili]

..This is all common knowledge to us..

[cheguevara]

If Splitter starts playing decently, we will have plenty of size.

sorry bro. That won't happen this season. Splitter won't see any minutes in the playoffs unless an injury.

I agree another bigman would help immensely. We are small. At the same time, we are not the Suns, get real.

[Shifty]

I did not see a single trade example in all that. Everyone can get better, the problem is that to do so, you need to give up something. The Spurs are not holding path because they don't want to get better, they are holding path because any trade available does not make them better. It would have to be an obvious, sure thing for them to pull the trigger and there is only so many Kahn's and Wallace's out there.

[Fireball]

This year is the last chance for a title run ... seeing the problems new players have to adapt to the Spurs system midseason trades will help nothing to improve the team. A healthy Splitter and Anderson should help enough in the playoffs where the rotations shorten anyway ...

[egtonecity]

blah blah blah, we need a big, blah blah blah ... pretty much sums all that up.

[FkLA]

I did not see a single trade example in all that. Everyone can get better, the problem is that to do so, you need to give up something. The Spurs are not holding path because they don't want to get better, they are holding path because any trade available does not make them better. It would have to be an obvious, sure thing for them to pull the trigger and there is only so many Kahn's and Wallace's out there.

:lol

[easjer]

Awesome, I needed a good laugh today.

[jjktkk]

:sleep

[coyotes_geek]

The past two offseasons, FA's, drafts and mid season trades were flooded with big men who could have bolstered our front court... Tyson Chandler, Stromile Swift,

...........and right about here is where any chance you had at credibility went out the window.

[mathbzh]

I did not see a single trade example in all that. Everyone can get better, the problem is that to do so, you need to give up something. The Spurs are not holding path because they don't want to get better, they are holding path because any trade available does not make them better. It would have to be an obvious, sure thing for them to pull the trigger and there is only so many Kahn's and Wallace's out there.

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=4s9rxdj:king

[Mel_13]

Stromile Swift

:lol

4.7/10 on the troll job scale

[8FOR!3]

I heard we've got this new guy, Tango Splinter...

[FkLA]

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=4s9rxdj:king

Darko in a Spurs uni would be sick tbh.

Wouldnt give up TP though. Id offer Anderson, Booner, and a pick maybe.

[lefty]

Onozomygod !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[coyotes_geek]

I heard we've got this new guy, Tango Splinter...

Gonna be better than Blake Griffin according to some....... (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=158999)

[Gregzilla]

:lol

4.7/10 on the troll job scale

my bad guys, I seriously meant to put H Warrick...I have always confused the two. My mistake

[coyotes_geek]

my bad guys, I seriously meant to put H Warrick...I have always confused the two. My mistake

Are you sure you didn't mean Marcus Fizer?

[8FOR!3]

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=4nqpnp6

I would do this, but only if we knew we could get Dice back. Send a draft pick with it obviously, they're not just going to trade Quinn for him. It's not going to happen. But in a perfect world.

[George Gervin's Afro]

I give gregzilla an A for effort!

[Mel_13]

Are you sure you didn't mean Marcus Fizer?

or Marcus Haislip?

[Cry Havoc]

Are you sure you didn't mean Marcus Fizer?

He meant Cherokee Parks.

[ManuTastic]

And because size always = ships, ladies and germs:

http://lonelytailgater.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/schintzius.jpg

[DesignatedT]

:lmao

[George Gervin's Afro]

And because size always = ships, ladies and germs:

http://lonelytailgater.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/schintzius.jpg

I was working on the Riverwalk at the time we drafted this dude and I saw him getting our of a car at the Marriott.. his mullet was bigger that I was..

[Blake]

best record in the NBA and some still continue to complain.

[Gregzilla]

I am not paid to think of trade scenarios that would work and play with salary cap numbers, that's RC's job. My point is the Spurs have needed an upgrade in the front court for several years especially with duncan getting older and they did nothing about. I just gave a list of more than 10 guys who are all better than Rasho, Fab, and Elson. All those guys were up for grabs via trade or free agency and they did nothing. Now it's gonna cost us a chance at a ship and when duncan retires in 2 yrs were back to being low seeds in the west. I would rather sit in the #5-6 seed area with a strong front court and same key pieces (duncan, manu, tp) than #1 w/o a low post presence. We ARE the new phoenix suns guys.. compared to the top tier teams. Spurs #1 offensively, last defensively.

[Beau]

Knock one of my fellow new guys all you want but there's some truth to what he's saying. The Spurs aren't going to win it all unless they can manage to thrive with 2 bigs playing on the court - at the same time - for a significant amount of time or in certain matchups and situations.

They're still not equipped to defend good small-ball teams and the elites' big game is better than the Spurs. Where the Spurs do have an advantage, it's in what some would call fool's gold areas for playoff success.

They're not a championship caliber defensive team. They're not proficient enough in the open court game to exploit the slower half court teams at the elite level in a 7 game series.

Not sure there's much they could have done or still could do to bolster their chances realistically, but that doesn't change the fact that they're seriously flawed for a contender...

[bus driver]

now before you guys start laying in on me, just know that I am a die hard spurs fan and in no way am trying to say the spurs suck or are stupid, but they certainly have not improved the teams chances for a championship by sitting idle while free agents/ trades happen/happened across the league. This rant is about how we need a big badly and didn't do shit about it.....

i find your lack of faith disturbing...

RcL6DwSufMI

[George Gervin's Afro]

I am not paid to think of trade scenarios that would work and play with salary cap numbers, that's RC's job. My point is the Spurs have needed an upgrade in the front court for several years especially with duncan getting older and they did nothing about. I just gave a list of more than 10 guys who are all better than Rasho, Fab, and Elson. All those guys were up for grabs via trade or free agency and they did nothing. Now it's gonna cost us a chance at a ship and when duncan retires in 2 yrs were back to being low seeds in the west. I would rather sit in the #5-6 seed area with a strong front court and same key pieces (duncan, manu, tp) than #1 w/o a low post presence. We ARE the new phoenix suns guys.. compared to the top tier teams. Spurs #1 offensively, last defensively.

I feel you man but every team would like better depth...

[Solid D]

Spurs dropped the ball

I didn't realize the Spurs had picked up the ball since dropping it on the Scola trade. Hmmm, go figure.

[Budkin]

It's nice to want things.

[egtonecity]

Knock one of my fellow new guys all you want but there's some truth to what he's saying. The Spurs aren't going to win it all unless they can manage to thrive with 2 bigs playing on the court - at the same time - for a significant amount of time or in certain matchups and situations.

They're still not equipped to defend good small-ball teams and the elites' big game is better than the Spurs. Where the Spurs do have an advantage, it's in what some would call fool's gold areas for playoff success.

They're not a championship caliber defensive team. They're not proficient enough in the open court game to exploit the slower half court teams at the elite level in a 7 game series.

Not sure there's much they could have done or still could do to bolster their chances realistically, but that doesn't change the fact that they're seriously flawed for a contender...

What contender isnt flawed? You're cutting on the spurs size when they have 5 bigs that can be used for different situations... What about the c's? they're old, battlin injuries, struggle to score if jumpers aint fallin ... the heatles dont have any legit bigs unless they flip mike miller for something... the bulls start fuckin Keith Bogans ... the lakers have size but their backcourt is weak as fuck (minus Kobe, obviously), no depth either... not saying i wouldnt love to flip spurs trash for some1 like Nene but I'm also not sitting here with my hand in my vagina crying about what the spurs could have done...

[Shifty]

I am not paid to think of trade scenarios that would work and play with salary cap numbers, that's RC's job. My point is the Spurs have needed an upgrade in the front court for several years especially with duncan getting older and they did nothing about. I just gave a list of more than 10 guys who are all better than Rasho, Fab, and Elson. All those guys were up for grabs via trade or free agency and they did nothing. Now it's gonna cost us a chance at a ship and when duncan retires in 2 yrs were back to being low seeds in the west. I would rather sit in the #5-6 seed area with a strong front court and same key pieces (duncan, manu, tp) than #1 w/o a low post presence. We ARE the new phoenix suns guys.. compared to the top tier teams. Spurs #1 offensively, last defensively.

Again, it's not that they are not willing to improve. There are very few options that make the team better and most, if not all of them, are not really available either because of cost, cap numbers, other team willing to accept, players actually being better than what the Spurs have.

Tyson Chandler (too expensive, injury prone, did not have the assets to trade for him)
Stromile Swift :lol
Nazr (not an upgrade over ANY of our current bigs)
Al Jefferson (see Chandler)
Turiaf (see Nazr)
Kaman (see Chandler)
Camby (see Chandler)
Landry (see Chandler)
Dampier (see Chandler AND Nazr)
Zeke (Dikembe? Moving on...)
Shaq (see Chandler and at this point in his career see Nazr)
Jermaine Oneal (see Shaq)
Haslem (see Chandler)
Favors (no assets that would interest them)
Gortat (see Chandler)
DeAndre Jordan (see Favors AND Nazr)
Haywood (see Dampier)
Diop (Maybe... but who would you give up for?)
Okafor (see Chandler)
Dalembert (see Diop)
Villanueva (see Dampier)

OUt of your whole list, you can only really consider a few as viable, possible trades that both teams wouldn't slam the phone right away.

[Rummpd]

Spurs sit 6th in defense efficiency and despite having Duncan playing about 26 minutes a game who by the way is blocking despite that just about as many a game as D. Howard and is actually blocking more on a 40 minute basis.
http://espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/teamstats/_/sort/defensiveEff/order/false

http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/player/_/stat/blocks/sort/avgBlocks/year/2011/seasontype/2

The sky is falling! There are actually two and only two teams playing BOTH consistently better defense and have size = Bulls and Boston and both of those teams also have flaws.

[xellos88330]

Spurs are fine. Size is good sure, but quality is a completely different story. McDyess, Duncan are proven in the playoffs. I wouldn't worry too much about them. Bonner actually has been playing better defense. Blair despite his size is doing a solid job. If Blair is overmatched, Pop changes his rotation or defensive assignment. You could easily see this change based on the last game with the Bulls. Spurs lost that game, but it wasn't due to size. It was due to a career night by Rose (He is a fucking stud btw). The man killed the Spurs with his jumper, not his inside game.

Everyone seems to say that the pace changes in the playoffs. They are mostly right, but what people overlook is that if a player is fast, there is nothing you can do about it. A faster player will still get from point A to point B faster than a slower one. This includes half court sets. Combine this with a perimeter that can score from anywhere on the court (even the bench can do this) and get there faster than most defenses and you have a great advantage.

Bottom line, Spurs are fine. If they needed a trade as badly as you say they do, they would have done it already. I don't think you know more than the FO, otherwise you would be working for them and not posting on an internet forum.

[DJB]

Don't fix it if it ain't broke, mothertrucker.

[mathbzh]

Spurs are fine. Size is good sure, but quality is a completely different story.

This. Having a random 7ft on Gasol would not help much

[Beau]

What contender isnt flawed? You're cutting on the spurs size when they have 5 bigs that can be used for different situations... What about the c's? they're old, battlin injuries, struggle to score if jumpers aint fallin ... the heatles dont have any legit bigs unless they flip mike miller for something... the bulls start fuckin Keith Bogans ... the lakers have size but their backcourt is weak as fuck (minus Kobe, obviously), no depth either... not saying i wouldnt love to flip spurs trash for some1 like Nene but I'm also not sitting here with my hand in my vagina crying about what the spurs could have done...

I don't have a vagina. Having said that, I'd probably have my hand in it if I did. Not sure about the crying, it'd have to be some really good shit.

The Spurs are a contender. Yes, they're not the only team flawed. But to me Boston is clearly a better and more sound team than the Spurs, all things being equal, the Heat have the ability to kill the Spurs on the wings, limit Parker and not get murdered in the frontcourt and the Bulls may be the most sound team there is in the league. People are finally starting to take notice but they can defend with the best, their frontcourt is unreal if they get Noah back healthy, and they've got a legit MVP candidate at the reins - God help the league if they acquire a 2.

I'm not gonna gloss over the 2-time defending champs because of a seeming disinterest at this stage of the game. When it comes down to it, they've still got the best player of the two teams - still one of the Top 2-3 players in the league - and they've got the size and interior game to succeed at a higher percentage than the Spurs do from the outside. They've still got the better real estate. And I'm not sleeping on the Mavs. They've got a lot of the really good championship ingredients trending their way - star play, defense and success against a great schedule.

All of those teams have better championship indicators for me than the Spurs. All things being equal, I think Boston beats the Spurs for sure and I may favor 1-2 others.

I don't see the Spurs winning the title unless they receive a healthy amount good fortune via matchup or others' misfortune (i.e., injuries). But shit happens... and sometimes it benefits the team you pull for.

[egtonecity]

I don't have a vagina. Having said that, I'd probably have my hand in it if I did. Not sure about the crying, it'd have to be some really good shit.

The Spurs are a contender. Yes, they're not the only team flawed. But to me Boston is clearly a better and more sound team than the Spurs, all things being equal, the Heat have the ability to kill the Spurs on the wings, limit Parker and not get murdered in the frontcourt and the Bulls may be the most sound team there is in the league. People are finally starting to take notice but they can defend with the best, their frontcourt is unreal if they get Noah back healthy, and they've got a legit MVP candidate at the reins - God help the league if they acquire a 2.

I'm not gonna gloss over the 2-time defending champs because of a seeming disinterest at this stage of the game. When it comes down to it, they've still got the best player of the two teams - still one of the Top 2-3 players in the league - and they've got the size and interior game to succeed at a higher percentage than the Spurs do from the outside. They've still got the better real estate. And I'm not sleeping on the Mavs. They've got a lot of the really good championship ingredients trending their way - star play, defense and success against a great schedule.

All of those teams have better championship indicators for me than the Spurs. All things being equal, I think Boston beats the Spurs for sure and I may favor 1-2 others.

I don't see the Spurs winning the title unless they receive a healthy amount good fortune via matchup or others' misfortune (i.e., injuries). But shit happens... and sometimes it benefits the team you pull for.

Now THIS I agree with. :toast

The Bulls are scary, real talk. DRose is a beast and agreed, if they land a 2, then they are super stacked.

Definitely cant sleep on Mavs, Lakeshow, or Spurs in the west. My only point was that everyone can nitpick that their team needs this and that but as things are currently constructed, spurs got a chance. :king

[m33p0]

Back to the FO, I understand when you have the best record in the league you have no reason to trade anyone and break up your roster. I 100% agree with that. But that doesn't mean you couldn't do ground work in the offseasons/drafts or even trade away players who rarely contribute to wins
look back at the time when the Spurs finally got Tiago to sign and tell me it wasn't a big deal. and if you've been following the spurs for some time, you would know they don't do anything drastic mid-season. also, i'd like you to point out who doesn't contribute to a win and tell me if they can be traded for anyone of worth.

[JR3]

I dont' think we need a trade.. but how can you say we dropped the ball when the deadline has not even passed?

[Obstructed_View]

Bill Curley, ladies and gents.

[UnWantedTheory]

Someone's balls dropped?

Congrats! :toast

[I. Hustle]

I was waiting for the fresh prince theme song

[rascal]

I agree 100%
Many of us have been saying this all along. The regular season record is fools gold and the spus frontline will be exposed in the playoffs by bigger frontlines. Its a different game come playoff time.


The run is nearly over for the spurs as Duncan gets older and other teams are stockpiling up stars like the Knicks( don't be surprised when they add a star pg in the future) Boston, Miami and count the Lakers( as they always find a way to make big moves to add stars).

The mega teams in the big markets are starting to form with multible stars, as players dictate which teams they play for and the league is not against the forming of super teams in media markets. Thats exactly what they like. The spurs will be sitting on the outside.

The push for a title should be this year and adding another big is a must. Forget about counting on getting much from Splitter. Bonner is worthless in the playoffs as an interior presence and McDyess is an over the hill pf and won't come up big throughout the entire playoff run. Duncan will be left alone in the paint with little help other than an undersized Blair playing with all heart but getting outsized.

The front office sits on their hands doing nothing far too often when it comes to upgrading with trades.

[ChumpDumper]

I am not paid to think of trade scenarios that would work and play with salary cap numbersYou aren't paid to start crappy threads either, yet here we are.

[EricB]

As usual rascal and his morons bitch yet still never provide a realistic name nor trade. Seriously. Cut with the river not against and do the world a favor.

[ElNono]

These are things we know, tbh

[ChuckD]

Never start a thread again please.

Thanks.

[Capt Bringdown]

The front office sits on their hands doing nothing far too often when it comes to upgrading with trades.

I'm not sure the Spurs had/have any good trade options. Everyone besides the Lakers & Celtics could use another serviceable big.

It would have great to have Splitter contribute this year, but I doubt that's going to happen.


Bonner is worthless in the playoffs as an interior presence and McDyess is an over the hill pf and won't come up big throughout the entire playoff run. Duncan will be left alone in the paint with little help other than an undersized Blair playing with all heart but getting outsized.

Pretty hard to argue with that assessment IMO. Folks can talk about other teams having weaknesses, which is true, but rebounding and D are so critical in the second season. Lakers or Celtics are taking it this year. Despite the regular season glory, Spurs are not the real deal.

[SequSpur]

Bonner....Fo

[Gregzilla]

Again, it's not that they are not willing to improve. There are very few options that make the team better and most, if not all of them, are not really available either because of cost, cap numbers, other team willing to accept, players actually being better than what the Spurs have.

Tyson Chandler (too expensive, injury prone, did not have the assets to trade for him)
Stromile Swift :lol
Nazr (not an upgrade over ANY of our current bigs)
Al Jefferson (see Chandler)
Turiaf (see Nazr)
Kaman (see Chandler)
Camby (see Chandler)
Landry (see Chandler)
Dampier (see Chandler AND Nazr)
Zeke (Dikembe? Moving on...)
Shaq (see Chandler and at this point in his career see Nazr)
Jermaine Oneal (see Shaq)
Haslem (see Chandler)
Favors (no assets that would interest them)
Gortat (see Chandler)
DeAndre Jordan (see Favors AND Nazr)
Haywood (see Dampier)
Diop (Maybe... but who would you give up for?)
Okafor (see Chandler)
Dalembert (see Diop)
Villanueva (see Dampier)

OUt of your whole list, you can only really consider a few as viable, possible trades that both teams wouldn't slam the phone right away.


No way you can say that only a few of these guys would have been viable. That's 20 big's that have been drafted/traded, re-traded/ and signed and almost every one of them would have been an upgrade at STARTING center or PF. Bonner is a bench player, and blair is better off the bench imo because of his energy going against opposing teams bench. Having a 6'10 - 7ft big next to timmy has won us 4 championships. Why do anything different with the same core of manu,tp, and duncan?....What i'm saying is that the spurs had a PROVEN formula for success and championships and they seem to be straying from that....Bonner (joke), 6'9 Kurt thomas , 6'8 Blair, phantom splitter, 6'9 dice is not gonna get the job done against the elite's in the paint or on the glass especially. With the championship system, every big besides duncan only needed to rebound, rotate defensively, and put a body on their man. That's it. With duncan's skills and speed regressing, we needed one more than ever. Duncan ain't the anchor he used to be on defense so long bigs to surround him with should have been a TOP priority. Again, I am just voicing my frustration with the FO the past 3 years for not getting a reputable big man next to duncan. They were out there. IMO w/o one, I don't see us winning a championship.


*edit* sorry guys I really did mean Hakim Warrick instead of Swift on that list. I'll give myself a -1 rep for that, honest mistake.

[EricB]

Youve yet to pontificate on how to get said bigman.

[Gregzilla]

Youve yet to pontificate on how to get said bigman.

Shouldn't the question be "how did the spurs NOT get one?"...instead of "how are we supposed to get one?"....that's their job to figure out and get done. I'm not gonna come up with a scenario that fits the cap/holt's pocket book, I'd probably confuse myself bc I know its not easy to do. But the point is, SEVERAL gm's got big's in different ways and we didn't.

[EricB]

Shouldn't the question be "how did the spurs NOT get one?"...instead of "how are we supposed to get one?"....that's their job to figure out and get done. I'm not gonna come up with a scenario that fits the cap/holt's pocket book, I'd probably confuse myself bc I know its not easy to do. But the point is, SEVERAL gm's got big's in different ways and we didn't.


So your just bitching for zero reason at all and are ripping a FO that 100% fo the NBA community considered the best or one of the best in basketball history.


Your a pathetic excuse for a fan.

[Gregzilla]

So your just bitching for zero reason at all and are ripping a FO that 100% fo the NBA community considered the best or one of the best in basketball history.


Your a pathetic excuse for a fan.

No, i'm a spoiled fan. I want more championships, that is all. They have respect because they win and do things the right way which is great. But all I care about is winning bro, keep your moral victories and division/conference titles to yourself. I like real banners. Like I said this is MY opinion, and still believe they could have and should have done more to get someone next to timmy. They have a great future though, no doubt.

[EricB]

No, i'm a spoiled fan. I want more championships, that is all. They have respect because they win and do things the right way which is great. But all I care about is winning bro, keep your moral victories and division/conference titles to yourself. I like real banners. Like I said this is MY opinion, and still believe they could have and should have done more to get someone next to timmy. They have a great future though, no doubt.


BY TRADING WITH WHAT?!?!?!


You want to move Ginobili? or someone else?

THEY HAVE NO TRADEABLE ASSETS WHAT DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND ABOUT THAT!?

[gospursgojas]

Don't worry tomorrow we're getting Kevin Love

[Gregzilla]

BY TRADING WITH WHAT?!?!?!


You want to move Ginobili? or someone else?

THEY HAVE NO TRADEABLE ASSETS WHAT DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND ABOUT THAT!?

I understand completely, the time has passed and no I don't want to give away manu or tp or duncan,cmon . And I disagree, we have/had PLENTY of tradable assets..we just don't want to give them up. Again , this has nothing to do with whats going on right now and our current roster. This has everything to do with the past 2-3 years of our FO not being aggressive enough in going after a big man that would complement duncan (which to me was a MAJOR role in the spurs championship runs).

[EricB]

I understand completely, the time has passed and no I don't want to give away manu or tp or duncan,cmon . And I disagree, we have/had PLENTY of tradable assets..we just don't want to give them up. Again , this has nothing to do with whats going on right now and our current roster. This has everything to do with the past 2-3 years of our FO not being aggressive enough in going after a big man that would complement duncan (which to me was a MAJOR role in the spurs championship runs).

What were these plenty of tradeable assets.


Again your bitching for zero reason.

[UnWantedTheory]

Youve yet to pontificate on how to get said bigman.


BY TRADING WITH WHAT?!?!?!


You want to move Ginobili? or someone else?

THEY HAVE NO TRADEABLE ASSETS WHAT DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND ABOUT THAT!?


What were these plenty of tradeable assets?

[Gregzilla]

What were these plenty of tradeable assets.





Do you guys really need to me type out every single player on our roster for the past 3 years not name tony, manu, or tim? Because those would be the trade assets. Hell we got RJ for scrubs (bowen, fab, kurt thomas)..couple that with draft picks that we really don't need especially if we're trying to contend while timmy's around. There are your trade assets. Obviously you gotta give some to get some, so yea we could have lost out on some good players. Hill and blair especially but even then, right now those guys aren't VITAL for us to win a championship...the same 3 guys are vital, #9,#20,#21

[ChumpDumper]

Hill isn't vital?

lol

[FromWayDowntown]

I'm always amazed by the deduction that goes:

1. Player A was traded
2. I think the Spurs should have traded for Player A
3. Player A was traded to a team that isn't the Spurs
4. The Spurs didn't try to trade for Player A

I mean, obviously, if the Spurs decide that they want to trade for a player, there's absolutely no reason that another team would ever turn them down.

Thus, it necessarily follows that if the Spurs haven't made a trade, the Spurs haven't even tried to make a trade.

Besides, history tells us that when the Spurs are discussing the possibility of a trade with other teams, those discussions are highly publicized even when the trade doesn't ultimately happen. We don't call him "Completely Transparent Pop" around here for no reason . . . .

[anakha]

Lurk more.

[Shifty]

I'm always amazed by the deduction that goes:

1. Player A was traded
2. I think the Spurs should have traded for Player A
3. Player A was traded to a team that isn't the Spurs
4. The Spurs didn't try to trade for Player A

I mean, obviously, if the Spurs decide that they want to trade for a player, there's absolutely no reason that another team would ever turn them down.

Thus, it necessarily follows that if the Spurs haven't made a trade, the Spurs haven't even tried to make a trade.

Besides, history tells us that when the Spurs are discussing the possibility of a trade with other teams, those discussions are highly publicized even when the trade doesn't ultimately happen. We don't call him "Completely Transparent Pop" around here for no reason . . . .

Nice. Although probably ultimately worthless. If he hasn't understand it by now he won't get it even if explained with drawings.

[rascal]

I'm always amazed by the deduction that goes:

1. Player A was traded
2. I think the Spurs should have traded for Player A
3. Player A was traded to a team that isn't the Spurs
4. The Spurs didn't try to trade for Player A

I mean, obviously, if the Spurs decide that they want to trade for a player, there's absolutely no reason that another team would ever turn them down.

Thus, it necessarily follows that if the Spurs haven't made a trade, the Spurs haven't even tried to make a trade.

Besides, history tells us that when the Spurs are discussing the possibility of a trade with other teams, those discussions are highly publicized even when the trade doesn't ultimately happen. We don't call him "Completely Transparent Pop" around here for no reason . . . .

Its only the end results that matter and there is no trade made to bring in another big. Job is not done.

[rascal]

Youve yet to pontificate on how to get said bigman.

Its no ones job here to get said big. I want to see results from the spurs front office on getting that big.

[ChumpDumper]

Eh, rascal wasn't happy when the Spurs actually won championships because they didn't make the trades he wanted.

Nothing will change.

[FromWayDowntown]

Its only the end results that matter and there is no trade made to bring in another big. Job is not done.

So the Spurs can force teams to accept their offers? Or the Spurs should accept being royally screwed in the process of making a trade to address a perceived need?

History says that when the Spurs have been able to make reasonable deals for bigs, they've done it -- Kurt Thomas in 2008, Nazr Mohammed in 2005, Drew Gooden in 2009. So, I don't see much truth to the idea that the Spurs aren't willing to deal for bigs as a basic matter.

I've yet to see any proof that the Spurs have failed to pursue a reasonable trade for the sort of player that you want. What I see is the faulty deduction I noted -- the Spurs didn't make a trade, so the Spurs somehow didn't even try to make a trade . . . .

[Gregzilla]

Come playoff time when pop starts bonner or Blair against pau, Bynum, odom, dirk, Chandler, haywood in a 7 game series....everyone will bitch about it then hopefully come read this thread again so we can all discuss how we should have gotten a decent big...oh and FYI....there's a reason why Boston who had a near perfect team decided to sign BOTH O'neal's to their roster. You honestly think those guys are regular season players? Nope. But even a team who has been closer to a championship contender than we have know how important size is in the playoffs....well them, and me, and LA (who copied our system with 2 starting 7 footers along with Boston), Orlando, and Miami

[FromWayDowntown]

Come playoff time when pop starts bonner or Blair against pau, Bynum, odom, dirk, Chandler, haywood in a 7 game series....everyone will bitch about it then hopefully come read this thread again so we can all discuss how we should have gotten a decent big...

Who should they get and for what? And what proof do you have that the Spurs haven't already tried to do this?

Is your ultimate point that the Spurs should accept some ridiculous, lopsided (and still unspecified) trade just so that they'll have more size?

[Shifty]

Lets try with this:

R.C.: Hi, I'm looking for a big man and you have some, want to trade?
Other team's GM: Sure, who are you interested in?

R.C.: I want player X (7ft 260lbs 15ppg 10rpg).
OTGM: We don't want to get rid of him but what do you offer?

R.C.: Everyone is up for discussion outside of my big3. How about Bonner and Hill?
OTGM: mmm Sounds good but I'm actually looking for SF and you only have RJ, he costs too much and you don't have good draft picks to sweeting the deal. How about I throw Horrible Contract and Bad attitude and you give me Blair too?

R.C.: I don't think I like that.
OTGM: Yeah I know but I want to get rid of them so bad, plus the money doesn't match. Any other offers? No? Ok, good luck.
R.C.: Wait, how about we include a third team? I heard LotteryBound team is doing a firesale, would you be interested in any of its players?
OTGM: Maybe their starting SF but he is too expensive and I want to get under the Luxury tax.
R.C.: Ok, Call me if you find anyone willing to get involved.
OTGM: See you.

Now imagine 100 calls going like this a day...

Meanwhile Gregzilla: The Spurs have dropped the ball!

[EricB]

Lets try with this:

R.C.: Hi, I'm looking for a big man and you have some, want to trade?
Other team's GM: Sure, who are you interested in?

R.C.: I want player X (7ft 260lbs 15ppg 10rpg).
OTGM: We don't want to get rid of him but what do you offer?

R.C.: Everyone is up for discussion outside of my big3. How about Bonner and Hill?
OTGM: mmm Sounds good but I'm actually looking for SF and you only have RJ, he costs too much and you don't have good draft picks to sweeting the deal. How about I throw Horrible Contract and Bad attitude and you give me Blair too?

R.C.: I don't think I like that.
OTGM: Yeah I know but I want to get rid of them so bad, plus the money doesn't match. Any other offers? No? Ok, good luck.
R.C.: Wait, how about we include a third team? I heard LotteryBound team is doing a firesale, would you be interested in any of its players?
OTGM: Maybe their starting SF but he is too expensive and I want to get under the Luxury tax.
R.C.: Ok, Call me if you find anyone willing to get involved.
OTGM: See you.

Now imagine 100 calls going like this a day...

Meanwhile Gregzilla: The Spurs have dropped the ball!



Fantastic post. I can with almost certainty guarantee you that's how and how it has gone down.

[Gregzilla]

Who should they get and for what? And what proof do you have that the Spurs haven't already tried to do this?

Is your ultimate point that the Spurs should accept some ridiculous, lopsided (and still unspecified) trade just so that they'll have more size?


No what I'm saying is that if size is something NEEDED, then do what's necessary to get size.. as I type this mark stein is tweeting about Houston trying to trade for camby, go figure...Again I understand completely how the front office would be reluctant to pull the trigger on any trades being as though we have the leagues best record.. BUT IMO I would sacrifice a key role player or two just to get that guy while timmys on his last leg..repeating myself again, I've stated SEVERAL times that im not just talking about right now, but rather the past 2-3 off seasons/seasons collectively..the FO has had plenty of time to put in work for bigs to make another title run.. But what do they do? Continue to sign guards to 10 day contracts, sign bigs who can spread the floor and shoot 3s... Assign players to the D League, call them back up , send them back...draft euros who they let "blossom" overseas and then don't play them over here..the point is we didn't get one / don't have one... And I think that's gonna cost us big in the 2nd/3rd round of the playoffs. Then bye-bye Timmy in 2yrs and we start all over

[FromWayDowntown]

No what I'm saying is that if size is something NEEDED, then do what's necessary to get size.. as I type this mark stein is tweeting about Houston trying to trade for camby, go figure...Again I understand completely how the front office would be reluctant to pull the trigger on any trades being as though we have the leagues best record.. BUT IMO I would sacrifice a key role player or two just to get that guy while timmys on his last leg..repeating myself again, I've stated SEVERAL times that im not just talking about right now, but rather the past 2-3 off seasons/seasons collectively

So suppose that the Spurs go to Portland and ask about Camby -- the Blazers say "okay, but we'll only do that if we get Tony Parker." (and those salaries match). The Spurs can offer every role player on their roster, but Portland isn't shipping out Camby to SA without getting Parker. What would you have the Spurs do then?

I realize that your point is about role players, but why on earth would Portland deal with the Spurs and take back a package that's something like McDyess, Splitter, and Anderson? From a basketball standpoint, what's in that for Portland? Their problem isn't depth; as their interest in dealing Andre Miller suggests, they perceive their biggest need to be a lead guard to play along with Aldridge.

And the point about the past few seasons and offseasons is nonsense. As noted, over the last 4 seasons, they've traded for Kurt Thomas at the deadline, given a big chunk of available money to Drew Gooden, signed Antonio McDyess, drafted and signed Tiago Splitter and DeJuan Blair during that time. They've certainly sought bigs; you might believe that they've come up short in those efforts, but they have made moves for bigs.

[Gregzilla]

Lets try with this:

R.C.: Hi, I'm looking for a big man and you have some, want to trade?
Other team's GM: Sure, who are you interested in?

R.C.: I want player X (7ft 260lbs 15ppg 10rpg).
OTGM: We don't want to get rid of him but what do you offer?

R.C.: Everyone is up for discussion outside of my big3. How about Bonner and Hill?
OTGM: mmm Sounds good but I'm actually looking for SF and you only have RJ, he costs too much and you don't have good draft picks to sweeting the deal. How about I throw Horrible Contract and Bad attitude and you give me Blair too?

Funny post , but um... How do u NOT pull the trigger if you're RC on this deal bruh? .... A 7fter who's avg 15 and 10 next to Timmy. Plus we still have our big 3, Neal, dice, splitter, Anderson, and RJ?... And we lose Pops BONER?.. I know what u meant but the deal u threw out is a GO.




R.C.: I don't think I like that.
OTGM: Yeah I know but I want to get rid of them so bad, plus the money doesn't match. Any other offers? No? Ok, good luck.
R.C.: Wait, how about we include a third team? I heard LotteryBound team is doing a firesale, would you be interested in any of its players?
OTGM: Maybe their starting SF but he is too expensive and I want to get under the Luxury tax.
R.C.: Ok, Call me if you find anyone willing to get involved.
OTGM: See you.

Now imagine 100 calls going like this a day...

Meanwhile Gregzilla: The Spurs have dropped the ball!

[rascal]

Its not if the spurs have tried or not because no one in this thread knows what eactly is going on, it is the end results of not getting it done to add enough depth on the frontline.

[Shifty]

Funny post , but um... How do u NOT pull the trigger if you're RC on this deal bruh? .... A 7fter who's avg 15 and 10 next to Timmy. Plus we still have our big 3, Neal, dice, splitter, Anderson, and RJ?... And we lose Pops BONER?.. I know what u meant but the deal u threw out is a GO.


What deal, they never agree! RC offered Bonner and Hill and the other GM was not interested because he wanted to add RJ AND Blair while ALSO dumping the bad contract and shitty attitude player on us along with the player!

This would have looked like if RC would have agreed:

Spurs get:
Big man
Horrible Contract player
Shitty attitude player

Other team gets:
Bonner
Hill
RJ
Blair

Hell no! You gut out half the team to get the big man while you get stuck with 2 players you don't want just to get a player?

[Gregzilla]

What deal, they never agree! RC offered Bonner and Hill and the other GM was not interested because he wanted to add RJ AND Blair while ALSO dumping the bad contract and shitty attitude player on us along with the player!

This would have looked like if RC would have agreed:

Spurs get:
Big man
Horrible Contract player
Shitty attitude player

Other team gets:
Bonner
Hill
RJ
Blair

Hell no! You gut out half the team to get the big man while you get stuck with 2 players you don't want just to get a player?


Oh, the way its written makes it seem like the gm WANTED rj but he was too expensive. So he agreed to Hill, Bonner, And Blair if he gave us his big, shitty contract and shitty attitude player.

[Shifty]

Oh, the way its written makes it seem like the gm WANTED rj but he was too expensive. So he agreed to Hill, Bonner, And Blair if he gave us his big, shitty contract and shitty attitude player.

Yes, he wanted RJ and yes, he was too expensive and that's why he had to throw in the additional contracts to balance out the salaries while getting rid of 2 unwanted players we would have be stuck with.

[FromWayDowntown]

The hypothetical is completely unreasonable, if only because there are only 10 guys in the NBA not named Tim Duncan who are 6'10" or taller and who are averaging even 12 PPG and 9 RPG, and the Spurs aren't getting any of them for spare parts.

[Gregzilla]

So suppose that the Spurs go to Portland and ask about Camby -- the Blazers say "okay, but we'll only do that if we get Tony Parker." (and those salaries match). The Spurs can offer every role player on their roster, but Portland isn't shipping out Camby to SA without getting Parker. What would you have the Spurs do then?

I realize that your point is about role players, but why on earth would Portland deal with the Spurs and take back a package that's something like McDyess, Splitter, and Anderson? From a basketball standpoint, what's in that for Portland? Their problem isn't depth; as their interest in dealing Andre Miller suggests, they perceive their biggest need to be a lead guard to play along with Aldridge.

And the point about the past few seasons and offseasons is nonsense. As noted, over the last 4 seasons, they've traded for Kurt Thomas at the deadline, given a big chunk of available money to Drew Gooden, signed Antonio McDyess, drafted and signed Tiago Splitter and DeJuan Blair during that time. They've certainly sought bigs; you might believe that they've come up short in those efforts, but they have made moves for bigs.


I agree with you 100%, they have been somewhat "active" in trying to get a big...but with the spurs FO I honestly think they have players layed out that are Reaches (might have to give up a valuable role player or two) and players who are "safe" and would fit the mold w/o giving anything up really. And they seem to always go the safe route..As I type this, 7fters Kendrick Perkins and Thabeet are now on the Thunder and Rockets, go figure. Anyway, yea they have tried..no doubt. But have failed

[Gregzilla]

The hypothetical is completely unreasonable, if only because there are only 10 guys in the NBA not named Tim Duncan who are 6'10" or taller and who are averaging even 12 PPG and 9 RPG, and the Spurs aren't getting any of them for spare parts.

Rasho, Elson, Nazr, and Fab were all 7 footers who did NOT avg 12&9...double double numbers are not needed for what we need from timmy's frontcourt teamate.

[Gregzilla]

update---looks like OKC got 2 footers, Perkins and Nazr AND Portland shipped out J Pryz to charlotte. damn

[moisaenz]

The only trade I would do involving splitter would be for Marc Gasol.... Gasol is 28 days older and already has somewhat NBA experience.... Both are injury prone.

[Gregzilla]

*pats self on the back*

[Shifty]

*pats self on the back*

Why, are you chocking?

[4>0rings]

Generally I'd agree, a shot blocking presence and rebounding are huge keys to success but the Spurs are just playing too damn good right now to mess with it.

[Mel_13]

*pats self on the back*

:lol

What for? The OKC trades prove that the premise of this thread is terribly flawed.

[Beau]

Spurs dropped the ball, mine have yet to.

That may be TMI, Greg...

[Gregzilla]

:lol

What for? The OKC trades prove that the premise of this thread is terribly flawed.

so you think Sam Presti made a dumb move by getting two 7 footers and still keeping a core of westbrook, harden, and durant?....yea he's a dumb guy, i'm sure he wasn't thinking about LA or Dallas or Boston or Orlando or Miami when he pulled the trigger. Fukouttahere idiot

[DirkISaCocLuvinPuSSy]

@OP

dude, we didn't make a move but we didn't need to, the chemistry of a team well beat out talent any day, just look at the 99 Spurs vs Portland and LA that year.

plus

The West is weaker now and not just now but for the foreseeable future

Nuggets and Jazz in one week went from playoff contenders to rebuilding.

MEANS MORE EASY GAMES = LESS PLAY FOR VETS = Worst fear for west teams...... a healthy rested SA team in the PO's

WE ONLY NEED TO BEAT 1 EAST TEAM

with all the stars over there now, they'll just beat each other up all season and all playoffs.

also LA and Dallas aka Kobe and Dirk and wearing themselves out keeping their teams on pace with us.

This year has SO FAR been all win for the Spurs, the basketball gods are being good to us its best not to temp them.:flag:

[Mel_13]

so you think Sam Presti made a dumb move by getting two 7 footers and still keeping a core of westbrook, harden, and durant?....yea he's a dumb guy, i'm sure he wasn't thinking about LA or Dallas or Boston or Orlando or Miami when he pulled the trigger. Fukouttahere idiot

We can add reading comprehension to the list of things you fail at.

I said no such thing. Great moves by Presti. Kudos and all that stuff.

Now look at the two transactions and tell us:

How could the Spurs have made better offers? I'll save you the trouble. They couldn't.

So if they couldn't beat, or even match, the offers made by OKC in those two trades, then they didn't drop any ball.

Simple enough for you?

[Gregzilla]

We can add reading comprehension to the list of things you fail at.

I said no such thing. Great moves by Presti. Kudos and all that stuff.

Now look at the two transactions and tell us:

How could the Spurs have made better offers? I'll save you the trouble. They couldn't.

So if they couldn't beat, or even match, the offers made by OKC in those two trades, then they didn't drop any ball.

Simple enough for you?


I think we have to work on your reading comprehension too...because all along i've said COLLECTIVELY over the past 3 yrs (drafts, offseasons, mid-season trades, FA' signings) the spurs failed to acquire a proper 4 or 5 to start next to tim during his last years. In no way did I say the spurs should have made a deal for perkins or nazr...i've given a list of 25 big men who have all been shipped and signed that could have helped with our biggest weakness. I don't know how they could have done it or why they didn't..all i know is that they DIDNT and it's going to cost them when it really matters.

oh and thank god you didn't put that stupid laughing smiley face, shit's played out. thanks

[Mel_13]

I think we have to work on your reading comprehension too...because all along i've said COLLECTIVELY over the past 3 yrs (drafts, offseasons, mid-season trades, FA' signings) the spurs failed to acquire a proper 4 or 5 to start next to tim during his last years. In no way did I say the spurs should have made a deal for perkins or nazr...i've given a list of 25 big men who have all been shipped and signed that could have helped with our biggest weakness. I don't know how they could have done it or why they didn't..all i know is that they DIDNT and it's going to cost them when it really matters.

oh and thank god you didn't put that stupid laughing smiley face, shit's played out. thanks

You pointed to the OKC trades as reasons to pat yourself on the back. You'd have a very hard time making a case for those on your list, but just stay focused on today.

The OKC trades contradict the premise of this thread, yet you claim otherwise.

You can't just say "they dropped the ball". You have to demonstrate how they dropped it. Otherwise you're just bitching that the team has flaws.

So....

Tell us how the FO dropped the ball by not acquiring the players that OKC traded for today?

[Gregzilla]

You pointed to the OKC trades as reasons to pat yourself on the back. You'd have a very hard time making a case for those on your list, but just stay focused on today.

The OKC trades contradict the premise of this thread, yet you claim otherwise.

You can't just say "they dropped the ball". You have to demonstrate how they dropped it. Otherwise you're just bitching that the team has flaws.

So....

Tell us how the FO dropped the ball by not acquiring the players that OKC traded for today?


I patted myself on the back because OKC's general manager thinks the way I do and agrees with my assessment that size in the front court plays a major role in the playoffs. You want me to be specific with that trade but honestly I'm not trying to be. All i'm saying is MORE bigs have been moved around and we needed one badly...they've been moving for 3 years

[Mel_13]

I patted myself on the back because OKC's general manager thinks the way I do and agrees with my assessment that size in the front court plays a major role in the playoffs. You want me to be specific with that trade but honestly I'm not trying to be. All i'm saying is MORE bigs have been moved around and we needed one badly...they've been moving for 3 years

That's not all you're saying. See the title of the thread. Now if the title were to read "I wish we had a better frontline", I wouldn't have posted in your thread.

You've made a positive assertion that the FO has failed. You should be able provide evidence in support of that assertion.

You haven't.

[Gregzilla]

That's not all you're saying. See the title of the thread. Now if the title were to read "I wish we had a better frontline", I wouldn't have posted in your thread.

You've made a positive assertion that the FO has failed. You should be able provide evidence in support of that assertion.

You haven't.

that's my whole point mel....In My Opinion, they failed aka dropped the ball for not acquiring a big while other teams made a combined 25 transactions with bigs (#taken from my list)...In My Opinion, those guys on the list would have been an upgrade in our front court but if you certainly don't think so then that's fine. If you think our current front line can get the job done then YOURE right and the FO did NOT drop the ball. I don't agree with that

[EricB]

Im still waiting for how they could've gotten these bigs.

[Gregzilla]

Im still waiting for how they could've gotten these bigs.

with players on their roster, with matt bonners 40 million, with draft picks, etc..etc.. the same way all those other teams did it. What you're not getting is that there WERE proposals/options for the spurs..they just didn't pull the trigger. To them they were better off not giving up a key reserve or two...or better off not going over the tax...or whatever. The point is they didn't do it and I think it's gonna hurt them come playoff time.

[EricB]

with players on their roster, with matt bonners 40 million, with draft picks, etc..etc.. the same way all those other teams did it. What you're not getting is that there WERE proposals/options for the spurs..they just didn't pull the trigger. To them they were better off not giving up a key reserve or two...or better off not going over the tax...or whatever. The point is they didn't do it and I think it's gonna hurt them come playoff time.


So your assuming these teams want to make deals with the Spurs and want to take on Matt Bonner's contract is that it?

[Mel_13]

that's my whole point mel....In My Opinion, they failed aka dropped the ball for not acquiring a big while other teams made a combined 25 transactions with bigs (#taken from my list)
Wow.

A list of player transactions does not make your case. For starters, you must show that the Spurs had the assets to make a better offer for some of those players.



...In My Opinion, those guys on the list would have been an upgrade in our front court but if you certainly don't think so then that's fine. If you think our current front line can get the job done then YOURE right and the FO did NOT drop the ball. I don't agree with that

Wow again. I didn't say that some of the players on the list wouldn't be better than some of our current players. I've said over and over that you have failed to provide any evidence that the FO dropped the ball. All you've done is bitch that the team is flawed. Every team in the NBA is flawed.

[Mel_13]

with players on their roster, with matt bonners 40 million, with draft picks, etc..etc.. the same way all those other teams did it. What you're not getting is that there WERE proposals/options for the spurs..they just didn't pull the trigger. To them they were better off not giving up a key reserve or two...or better off not going over the tax...or whatever. The point is they didn't do it and I think it's gonna hurt them come playoff time.

:lol:lol:lol:lol:lol

Sorry, couldn't help myself.

Bonner got 11M guaranteed in this last contract. The Spurs used the Bird exception to sign him. If they didn't sign him, they couldn't take that 11M and spend it on a free agent. System doesn't work that way.

[ElNono]

OP dropped the ball with this thread, tbh

[jjktkk]

that's my whole point mel....In My Opinion, they failed aka dropped the ball for not acquiring a big while other teams made a combined 25 transactions with bigs (#taken from my list)...In My Opinion, those guys on the list would have been an upgrade in our front court but if you certainly don't think so then that's fine. If you think our current front line can get the job done then YOURE right and the FO did NOT drop the ball. I don't agree with that

OKC's top 3 bigmen: Ibaka, Perkins, and Mohammmed.

S.A's top 3 bigmen: Duncan, Blair, and McDyess. With Bonner also in the rotation, The Spurs have more front court depth and imo, a better overall front line than OKC. You've been ranting and raving like a little kid who was told to put back the candy bar at the grocery store, about the Spur's FO inability to get a bigman, while praising OKC's moves. OKC was in dire straits as far as desperately needing front court depth, while the Spurs, who could certainly use another bigman, they were nowhere near as desperate a situation as OKC was.

[EricB]

:lol:lol:lol:lol:lol

Sorry, couldn't help myself.

Bonner got 11M guaranteed in this last contract. The Spurs used the Bird exception to sign him. If they didn't sign him, they couldn't take that 11M and spend it on a free agent. System doesn't work that way.


but but but but Boston made trades!!!!

[Gregzilla]

Wow.

A list of player transactions does not make your case. For starters, you must show that the Spurs had the assets to make a better offer for some of those players.




Wow again. I didn't say that some of the players on the list wouldn't be better than some of our current players. I've said over and over that you have failed to provide any evidence that the FO dropped the ball. All you've done is bitch that the team is flawed. Every team in the NBA is flawed.

Bro, with every player comes a number (salary)..right?...ANYBODY can get traded as long as the #'s match up right?....regardless of what i'm able to draw up, the spurs DID have the ability to get someone off that list (make the numbers work) but didn't take the risk. There are several ways a trade/transaction can happen as long as the numbers match up. So regardless, they didn't go after one and didn't want to give up their guys. We all know the spurs know they are undersized so they SURELY made calls about bigs. Since we didn't get any of them, i'm guessing it's because the spurs didn't want to do it on their end. Look at the list, I didn't put Dwight or Noah or Bynum or shit like that..I put avg to below avg 7 footers who other teams traded away or let go...You know gm's weren't gonna ask for any of the big 3 for those guys...so i'm assuming the spurs didn't want to let go of any reserves or youth to complete a deal.

[Mel_13]

Bro, with every player comes a number (salary)..right?...ANYBODY can get traded as long as the #'s match up right?....regardless of what i'm able to draw up, the spurs DID have the ability to get someone off that list (make the numbers work) but didn't take the risk. There are several ways a trade/transaction can happen as long as the numbers match up. So regardless, they didn't go after one and didn't want to give up their guys. We all know the spurs know they are undersized so they SURELY made calls about bigs. Since we didn't get any of them, i'm guessing it's because the spurs didn't want to do it on their end. Look at the list, I didn't put Dwight or Noah or Bynum or shit like that..I put avg to below avg 7 footers who other teams traded away or let go...You know gm's weren't gonna ask for any of the big 3 for those guys...so i'm assuming the spurs didn't want to let go of any reserves or youth to complete a deal.

A bunch of assumptions. Not a shred of evidence. Not even a single plausible scenario. Come on, you can come up with one plausible scenario, can't you?

Basically just bitching.

Your thread fails, zilla.

Good night.

[jjktkk]

Bro, with every player comes a number (salary)..right?...ANYBODY can get traded as long as the #'s match up right?....regardless of what i'm able to draw up, the spurs DID have the ability to get someone off that list (make the numbers work) but didn't take the risk. There are several ways a trade/transaction can happen as long as the numbers match up. So regardless, they didn't go after one and didn't want to give up their guys. We all know the spurs know they are undersized so they SURELY made calls about bigs. Since we didn't get any of them, i'm guessing it's because the spurs didn't want to do it on their end. Look at the list, I didn't put Dwight or Noah or Bynum or shit like that..I put avg to below avg 7 footers who other teams traded away or let go...You know gm's weren't gonna ask for any of the big 3 for those guys...so i'm assuming the spurs didn't want to let go of any reserves or youth to complete a deal.

So you wanted the Spurs to make a trade, just for the sake of making a trade?

[mathbzh]

Bro, with every player comes a number (salary)..right?
Tyson Chandler makes 12.7 M$/year
How do you match that if you keep the big 3 and RJ?


I didn't put Dwight or Noah or Bynum or shit like that..I put avg to below avg 7 footers who other teams traded away or let go...
In your other trade you included Al Jefferson an expensive, undersized, all offense big.

Maybe you should start proposing a list of 3 or 4 bigs you think would fit with the Spurs. Because at this point you are basically listing every player over 6'8 in the NBA.

At this point you could tell us "Dwight Howard or Petro... we could trade for one of these"


And from your list

HASHIM THABEET
Is no better than Mahinmi let alone Splitter.

[Splits]

http://www.allfordmustangs.com/forums/attachments/2005-2010-mustang-talk/103067d1277674662-everyone-hated-my-22s-new-wheels-die-thread-die-.jpg

[Gregzilla]

A bunch of assumptions. Not a shred of evidence. Not even a single plausible scenario. Come on, you can come up with one plausible scenario, can't you?

Basically just bitching.

Your thread fails, zilla.

Good night.

here is this what you wanted..someone posted this on the "trade machine" here last night. I'm guessing the Trade Machine is what gets your attention.

Bonner, Dice, and Splitter for Rudy Fern and Marcus Camby..salaries work and we get a big..blah blah blah,"that's a dumb trade" "why would we do that" save it..I can draw up ANY stupid scenario to make the numbers work but the POINT is the spurs didn't do anything so it is ASSUMED they didn't want to give some players in return. IMO we should have made a move especially if our big 3 weren't asked for.

[Shifty]

Finally!

Now, would BOTH sides be willing to do it?

Spurs after the trade

Tony-Hill
Manu-Neal-Anderson
RJ-Rudy
TD-Blair
Camby-??

mmm we are left with 3 bigs (when we are making the trade TO GET BIG!) so we would need something more or at least have a decent 4th ready from elsewhere if we want to pull the trigger. Otherwise is no go or we end up worse than we started.

Blazers (just the bigs)

LA, Oden, Pryz, Dice, Splitter, Bonner

mm according to you they now have our "problem" with Aldridge and a bunch of extra undersized, injured or useless bigs minus Rudy...

That's a no go on their part too.

Next sceneario please.

[Gregzilla]

Finally!

Now, would BOTH sides be willing to do it?

Spurs after the trade

Tony-Hill
Manu-Neal-Anderson
RJ-Rudy
TD-Blair
Camby-??

mmm we are left with 3 bigs (when we are making the trade TO GET BIG!) so we would need something more or at least have a decent 4th ready from elsewhere if we want to pull the trigger. Otherwise is no go or we end up worse than we started.

Blazers (just the bigs)

LA, Oden, Pryz, Dice, Splitter, Bonner

mm according to you they now have our "problem" with Aldridge and a bunch of extra undersized, injured or useless bigs minus Rudy...

That's a no go on their part too.

Next sceneario please.


The guy i got this from also said Dice would be bought out and come back to us....regardless I just threw this out because it was "Specific" and that's all some of you guys wanted. What I'm saying is I can sit around all day and get a big or submit a trade that makes the numbers fit...but the reality is with the big's i've listed, GM's surely won't asking for tim,manu, or tp so it's SUGGESTED that the spurs FO didn't want to let go/go through with it. I guess what i'm saying is that I believe the Spurs for the most part are the ones to inquire and then don't go through with it because the other team is asking for more (possibly hill or blair or whatever)..I understand hill and blair are good and are great for our team..but I would trade away one of them for a 7 foot 7pts,7rebs a game starting F/C

[jjktkk]

The guy i got this from also said Dice would be bought out and come back to us....regardless I just threw this out because it was "Specific" and that's all some of you guys wanted. What I'm saying is I can sit around all day and get a big or submit a trade that makes the numbers fit...but the reality is with the big's i've listed, GM's surely won't asking for tim,manu, or tp so it's SUGGESTED that the spurs FO didn't want to let go/go through with it. I guess what i'm saying is that I believe the Spurs for the most part are the ones to inquire and then don't go through with it because the other team is asking for more (possibly hill or blair or whatever)..I understand hill and blair are good and are great for our team..but I would trade away one of them for a 7 foot 7pts,7rebs a game starting F/C

WHY? Those numbers are trash. Blair dwarfs those numbers.

[Gregzilla]

WHY? Those numbers are trash. Blair dwarfs those numbers.

I don't know why...it's sickening how much I covet bigs. Don't get me wrong, i like blair..actually know blair personally..but I'd rather have a 7 footer next to tim altering shots and clogging lanes every single game than blair having so-so nights and then a breakout game..I just loved the 2 seven footers system that pop created and everyone copied and won championships with.

[Obstructed_View]

I don't know why...it's sickening how much I covet bigs. Don't get me wrong, i like blair..actually know blair personally..but I'd rather have a 7 footer next to tim altering shots and clogging lanes every single game than blair having so-so nights and then a breakout game..I just loved the 2 seven footers system that pop created and everyone copied and won championships with.

Yeah, you aren't alone. Here's the reality: Pop doesn't love that system. Welcome to 2006.

[ColinB]

actually know blair personally

No, you don't.

[ChumpDumper]

matt bonners 40 millionWith that, you proved you are an idiot whose whining is not worth reading.

[Mel_13]

.I can draw up ANY stupid scenario

Indeed.

[easjer]

I love how team chemistry doesn't matter, nor does understanding the system, nor does the success of this very system despite a flawed team. Ripping all of that to shreds to make the OP feel better about the Spurs *doing something* is a terrific plan. Why the hell are you people complaining about such a foolproof plan?!

[dbestpro]

I love how team chemistry doesn't matter, !

This may be why Dallas did not do any deadline deals. They finally realized that it takes time for players to learn to play together and even more so for the Spurs. The big winners of the trade deadlne were those teams that were able to keep their team intact, and again, even more so for the Spurs.

[rascal]

Thabeet could be a good defensive center. He is not going to give much on the offensive end but he could be an inside intimidator and with the spurs he could have fit that role. No doubt Pop could have worked him into being a productive player concentrating on defense and rebounding.

The spurs are one of the few teams that could have taken on Thabeet because they already have enough offensive backcourt fire power.

[xmas1997]

I honestly don't know why all the fuss over bigs when the Spurs have one of the better and younger with more upside bigs in Splitter. But don't take my word for it, ask around the league. Most teams would probably give their right nut to have him. Hell, even Steve Kerr feels that the Spurs are set with Splitter and could not trade to get a better big than him!
No, IMHO they need a long athletic 3 pt. shooting SF, but most importantly with excellent defensive abilities, and as close to being a "stopper" as they can get!

[Kool Bob Love]

I hope the ball don't drop. Spurs got the ball, i know the ball wont drop.
And i pray none of these Spurs never wanna be Lakers.The Spurs get em, The Spurs got em. Tim Duncan got his feet up, vacatin on an island. Yeah, and tell ya girl the Spurs are shootin lights out. And even if you dont like mothfucker, you gonna have to NEAL WITH IT.

[ChumpDumper]

Thabeet could be a good defensive center. He is not going to give much on the offensive end but he could be an inside intimidator and with the spurs he could have fit that role. No doubt Pop could have worked him into being a productive player concentrating on defense and rebounding.

The spurs are one of the few teams that could have taken on Thabeet because they already have enough offensive backcourt fire power.Thabeet gets abused in D-League games.

[DrSteffo]

LOL Thabeet. I just wish he would be a starter on some team so we could unleash our grizzly Blair on him again.

[Gregzilla]

OKC's top 3 bigmen: Ibaka, Perkins, and Mohammmed.

S.A's top 3 bigmen: Duncan, Blair, and McDyess. With Bonner also in the rotation, The Spurs have more front court depth and imo, a better overall front line than OKC. You've been ranting and raving like a little kid who was told to put back the candy bar at the grocery store, about the Spur's FO inability to get a bigman, while praising OKC's moves. OKC was in dire straits as far as desperately needing front court depth, while the Spurs, who could certainly use another bigman, they were nowhere near as desperate a situation as OKC was.

I'm not saying OKC has a better front court than us, I said any one of those guys that they GOT would have helped us. Yea I know OKC is trying to play catch up with the rest of the elites and get size...To them (and presti), size is something needed for the playoffs and for a championship. So yes you're right..I applaud oklahoma for doing what was needed to add size in their front court...I am giving the spurs a big thumbs down for not adding size to their roster. Case Closed.

[ChumpDumper]

I'm not saying OKC has a better front court than us, I said any one of those guys that they GOT would have helped us.Great, who would you have traded to get these guys?

[FromWayDowntown]

If only the Spurs had (at any time during the last few years) a role player of Jeff Green's quality (a 25-year old lottery pick) and a throw-in like Krstic or an expiring contract with the heft of Mo Pete's ($6.6MM)!

[Gregzilla]

lmao

[ChumpDumper]

You're a douche.

[Agloco]

I'm not saying OKC has a better front court than us, I said any one of those guys that they GOT would have helped us. I am giving the spurs a big thumbs down for not adding size to their roster. Case Closed.


Great, who would you have traded to get these guys?


lmao

Agreed. lmao @ you not answering the question.

[TJastal]

OKC's top 3 bigmen: Ibaka, Perkins, and Mohammmed.

S.A's top 3 bigmen: Duncan, Blair, and McDyess. With Bonner also in the rotation, The Spurs have more front court depth and imo, a better overall front line than OKC. You've been ranting and raving like a little kid who was told to put back the candy bar at the grocery store, about the Spur's FO inability to get a bigman, while praising OKC's moves. OKC was in dire straits as far as desperately needing front court depth, while the Spurs, who could certainly use another bigman, they were nowhere near as desperate a situation as OKC was.

Oh man, how did I miss this little gem from jjktkk!? Shoot bro you gotta keep em coming, I haven't had a laugh like this in a long time.

:lmao :lmao :rollin :rollin :lol :lol