TMD's interview with Spurs G.M. RC Buford.

[tdunk21]

Here is TMD's interview with Spurs G.M. RC Buford.

He talks about The Finals, Richard Jefferson and how the Spurs will get better in the offseason.

http://www.ticket760.com/pages/TheMorningDrive.html

Note: see post #76 for the full interview with the audio problem fixed

[tdunk21]

http://www.projectspurs.com/2011-articles/june/spurs-to-build-via-trade.html


In an interview this morning with Ticket 760 AM in San Antonio, San Antonio Spurs' GM R.C. Buford said the team would attempt to build via trade and not through the draft or free agency which is the team's traditional route.

This is big news coming from the Spurs who have always taken a pretty conservative approach to acquiring talent.

With Tony Parker's recent comments regarding the Spurs ability to win the title and him being the Spurs most trade-able asset, he would have to be the most likely player involved in such a trade to get premium talent back. And if they do trade, Spurs fans are hoping it will be a quality big man. Something they been severely lacking as was evident in the playoffs versus Memphis.

Not to mention if they do consider Parker as trade bait, sitting on the bench is another capable point guard - George Hill.

What do you think about this news Spurs fans? What trade scenarios would you like to see?

[dbreiden83080]

If they can trade Tony for a good big, do it.. Let Hill start and see what he has. Might as well try and shake things up because the team as is has no shot to win it all..

[Buddy Holly]

I do not want Hill running the point. Heck no.

If we trade Tony we have to either get a decent PG back (along with a big) or draft a PG.

[Fabbs]

Here is TMD's interview with Spurs G.M. RC Buford.

He talks about The Finals, Richard Jefferson and how the Spurs will get better in the offseason.

http://www.ticket760.com/pages/TheMorningDrive.html
Anybody able to do a text?

[ducks]

Not to mention if they do consider Parker as trade bait, sitting on the bench is another capable point guard - George Hill.




LOL


CHAMBERS OWNS HILL at point

[Bruno]

Trade is the way to go for Spurs. It is a given that it's the only way to really improve the team but it's nice to hear that RC doesn't want to stand pat.

And :lol at the blogger going from "Spurs will do some trades" to "Parker will be traded". That's quite a reach. Spurs blogs suck.

[FromWayDowntown]

I do not want Hill running the point. Heck no.

If we trade Tony we have to either get a decent PG back (along with a big) or draft a PG.

I agree with this. Upgrading the bigs while entrusting Hill to run the show wouldn't (IMO) improve the team.

If they can't get a PG through those avenues, I'd love to see them find a Brent Barry type who can step in at times to reliably initiate the offense even without being a true PG. It's not about the number of assists, necessarily; it's about ensuring that the offense doesn't stagnate -- that happened too often last year when Hill was the primary initiator on the floor.

[tdunk21]

imo trade tony for a reliable big, then draft a PG or sign one using MLE, coz hill cant run the offense

[FromWayDowntown]

imo trade tony for a reliable big, then draft a PG or sign one using MLE

If you're going to trade Tony Parker for big, the best adjective to describe that big had better not be "reliable."

[y2kbug]

Man, getting rid of Tony for anyone seems like when Detroit let Billups go and decided to let a SG run their point.

[Buddy Holly]

How about this trade:

Tony Parker
Richard Jefferson
Pick 29

for

Steve Nash
Channing Frye
Josh Childress
Pick 13

Spurs get a starting HOF point guard who would be perfect with Tim and Manu plus a starting Tiago. Add in the high draft pick they can use to draft a quality big.

Suns get a in his prime point guard which they need as they rebuild plus save some future cap space.

Spurs lineup could look like:

Nash/Hill/?
Manu/Neal/Anderson
Childress/Butler/Green
Tim/Frye/Bonner
Tiago/Blair/Vucevic?

[tp2021]

Bruno posted a link in the Think Tank Draft thread a few days ago. In it, the Jazz are said to be exploring trades for a starting PG. They have picks #3 and #12. I wonder if the Jazz and their lottery picks could be a potential suitor for TP.

[Ed Helicopter Jones]

I agree with this. Upgrading the bigs while entrusting Hill to run the show wouldn't (IMO) improve the team.

If they can't get a PG through those avenues, I'd love to see them find a Brent Barry type who can step in at times to reliably initiate the offense even without being a true PG. It's not about the number of assists, necessarily; it's about ensuring that the offense doesn't stagnate -- that happened too often last year when Hill was the primary initiator on the floor.


I third that motion. Hill is out of position at the point, or, at best, should only be a backup point guard. He's a very good role player, but I still don't ever see him as an upper-tier starter...especially at the 1 spot.

[lefty]

I smell a trade with Toronto

The Raps have the 5th pick and are very high on 2 PG's (forgot their names)

However, those 2 players may be gone by the time Colangelo is picking, and since they are looking to add depth at that position, we may trade Parker for something interesting in return

[Ed Helicopter Jones]

Bruno posted a link in the Think Tank Draft thread a few days ago. In it, the Jazz are said to be exploring trades for a starting PG. They have picks #3 and #12. I wonder if the Jazz and their lottery picks could be a potential suitor for TP.

Trading picks in a deal that involves Tony would be fine, but it would also have include some proven, verifiable NBA talent I think. Tony is really the only valuable trading chip the Spurs have.

[Fabbs]

Weakest draft in years from what I've seen.

Be real cautious about trading for picks with this years crop.

[yavozerb]

How about this trade:

Tony Parker
Richard Jefferson
Pick 29

for

Steve Nash
Channing Frye
Josh Childress
Pick 13

Spurs get a starting HOF point guard who would be perfect with Tim and Manu plus a starting Tiago. Add in the high draft pick they can use to draft a quality big.

Suns get a in his prime point guard which they need as they rebuild plus save some future cap space.

Spurs lineup could look like:

Nash/Hill/?
Manu/Neal/Anderson
Childress/Butler/Green
Tim/Frye/Bonner
Tiago/Blair/Vucevic?


Bruno posted a link in the Think Tank Draft thread a few days ago. In it, the Jazz are said to be exploring trades for a starting PG. They have picks #3 and #12. I wonder if the Jazz and their lottery picks could be a potential suitor for TP.


I smell a trade with Toronto

The Raps have the 5th pick and are very high on 2 PG's (forgot their names)

However, those 2 players may be gone by the time Colangelo is picking, and since they are looking to add depth at that position, we may trade Parker for something interesting in return

TP is not going anywhere, sorry to be the realist in this thread...

[Man In Black]

What can a guy like GHill bring the Spurs back? I'm sure the LAL would prefer to have him over Fisher, Blake, and Brown.

[yavozerb]

What can a guy like GHill bring the Spurs back? I'm sure the LAL would prefer to have him over Fisher, Blake, and Brown.

and what would you want back from the lakers?

[Buddy Holly]

TP is not going anywhere, sorry to be the realist in this thread...

There's just as much chance he's traded as he isn't traded.

You're not being a realist.

[Buddy Holly]

This trade works.

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=6y2j927

Plus throw in a swap of the 12 and 29 picks.

[TJastal]

Bruno posted a link in the Think Tank Draft thread a few days ago. In it, the Jazz are said to be exploring trades for a starting PG. They have picks #3 and #12. I wonder if the Jazz and their lottery picks could be a potential suitor for TP.

Somehow I just can't see TP heading out to Mormon city esp with his new glamour girlfriend. He'll fake an injury or worse yet, pull a Derek Fisher on em.

lol

[elemento]

and what would you want back from the lakers?

I would want Odom and they would say HELL NO.

[SenorSpur]

Unless the Spurs are willing to part with their best trade asset (Parker), I don't see how the Spurs can expect to obtain a mid-career level-type player with assorted pieces like, RJ, Bonner or Hill.

That said, stranger things have happened. I still would rather they part with the underperforming parts (Bonner, RJ, Hill) and retain their late 1st round pick. The only way, I'd want them to part with this year's pick is if they're able to obtain an additional 1st round pick next year. That's because next year's draft is a better class.

There are no quick fixes or short term solutions. Outside of the above-listed scenarios, I'd just as soon the Spurs hold firm on the plan to improving their team via the draft.

[mariners]

Knight and Kemba won't go 3/4, Kantar is pretty much a lock at 4

[TJastal]

I agree with this. Upgrading the bigs while entrusting Hill to run the show wouldn't (IMO) improve the team.

If they can't get a PG through those avenues, I'd love to see them find a Brent Barry type who can step in at times to reliably initiate the offense even without being a true PG. It's not about the number of assists, necessarily; it's about ensuring that the offense doesn't stagnate -- that happened too often last year when Hill was the primary initiator on the floor.

I guess you don't remember the Hill, Manu, & Jefferson starting lineup that in less than a month tore through the majority of the top 10 teams in the league back in 2009?

Hill is quite capable of "initiating" the offense. He may not have the playmaking skills of Parker, but with Manu in the starting lineup he doesn't need them. Jefferson also seemed to become a much more aggressive offensive player when the spurs used this lineup.

[SenorSpur]

Trading picks in a deal that involves Tony would be fine, but it would also have include some proven, verifiable NBA talent I think. Tony is really the only valuable trading chip the Spurs have.

Potentially delcious scenario with the Jazz. Remember the Jazz are every bit as cost conscious as the Spurs. They are already overloaded in the frontcourt and the Spurs always liked Derrick Favors. After all, no one in their right mind would take Al Jefferson.

Perhaps a trade involving TP could net a swap of draft picks and Favors?

[Cane]

McDyess will probably be a given when it comes to future trades. Imo Parker's the most replaceable of the Big 3 in this era of score-first PG's. Parker's playmaking nosedived big time in the playoffs and you can see it with these stat totals: 20 turnovers and 31 assists. Also doesn't help that Parker's shooting and defense fell by the wayside as well.

But I don't see Parker being traded unless the return is well worth it and/or if they can ship out some of the defensive liabilities on the squad.

[polandprzem]

I just had 3:39 of the interview when RC said dave could go outside

[SenorSpur]

I just had 3:39 of the interview when RC said dave could go outside

That's as far as I was able to get too. I would've liked to have heard the rest.

[dylankerouac]

Yep, same here. I'd love to hear the rest.

[mariners]

Potentially delcious scenario with the Jazz. Remember the Jazz are every bit as cost conscious as the Spurs. They are already overloaded in the frontcourt and the Spurs always liked Derrick Favors. After all, no one in their right mind would take Al Jefferson.

Perhaps a trade involving TP could net a swap of draft picks and Favors?
Jazz value Favors more than any other player on that team, they would probably ask for 2 additional firsts which the spurs obviously would not do. The Jazz are looking to get younger, they are fine with being bad but only if it puts the future in place.

[lefty]

Knight and Kemba won't go 3/4, Kantar is pretty much a lock at 4
At what picks do you see them get picked?

[lefty]

I just had 3:39 of the interview when RC said dave could go outside


That's as far as I was able to get too. I would've liked to have heard the rest.


Yep, same here. I'd love to hear the rest.


CIA Pop :hat

[mariners]

At what picks do you see them get picked?
I honestly think both will be there at 5 and go 5/6. But its not out of relm of possibility 1 of them go at 3

[baseline bum]

Bruno posted a link in the Think Tank Draft thread a few days ago. In it, the Jazz are said to be exploring trades for a starting PG. They have picks #3 and #12. I wonder if the Jazz and their lottery picks could be a potential suitor for TP.

So the Spurs can draft Brandon Knight and thus have a way worse point guard? I'm going to have to pass those lousy picks.

[lefty]

I honestly think both will be there at 5 and go 5/6. But its not out of relm of possibility 1 of them go at 3
Probably

Cleveland would love to add a SF, but they will pick twice before Toronto, so they may also pick a PG.

Since Minny since to love Rubio so much :lmao, they may not be interested in a PG.

Utah is probably looking for a Big Man or a SG.

So yeah, TO is probably gonna pick a PG

[baseline bum]

Potentially delcious scenario with the Jazz. Remember the Jazz are every bit as cost conscious as the Spurs. They are already overloaded in the frontcourt and the Spurs always liked Derrick Favors. After all, no one in their right mind would take Al Jefferson.

Perhaps a trade involving TP could net a swap of draft picks and Favors?

Now that I could go for. Too bad there's no way they'd move Favors and his affordable deal while still paying the huge contracts of Millsap and Jefferson.

[baseline bum]

I smell a trade with Toronto

The Raps have the 5th pick and are very high on 2 PG's (forgot their names)

However, those 2 players may be gone by the time Colangelo is picking, and since they are looking to add depth at that position, we may trade Parker for something interesting in return

I'd rather have Davis and DeRozan than the rest of the crap that will be left once Irving, Williams, Knight, and Kanter are off the table.

[Fireball]

I will not try to guess what the trade plans are at this point, I am just happy they are going this way. However, I would take the gamble and let Hill run the point ...

[SenorSpur]

Jazz value Favors more than any other player on that team, they would probably ask for 2 additional firsts which the spurs obviously would not do. The Jazz are looking to get younger, they are fine with being bad but only if it puts the future in place.

Makes total sense.

I would advocate the Spurs stick to the same plan - get younger, bigger and quicker.

[baseline bum]

I will not try to guess what the trade plans are at this point, I am just happy they are going this way. However, I would take the gamble and let Hill run the point ...

That's not a gamble. That's Russian Roulette without leaving a chamber in the cylinder empty.

[lefty]

I'd rather have Davis and DeRozan than the rest of the crap that will be left once Irving, Williams, Knight, and Kanter are off the table.
Yup
Ed Davis has a great upside

[mariners]

raptors wont trade davis or derozan except for possibly the number 2 pick

[TJastal]

That's not a gamble. That's Russian Roulette without leaving a chamber in the cylinder empty.

If Hill can't run the point then please explain why the spurs never lost a beat any time Hill was subbed in for Parker anytime he was out of the lineup for the past 3 seasons for various injuries and actually did better in many cases...

[lefty]

raptors wont trade davis or derozan except for possibly the number 2 pick
Of course not

But shit, we could use Reggie Evans (not sure about the injuries though)

Heck, even Amir Johnson



Anybody who shits on Bonner, TBH

[spurs10]

My audio quit arounf the time he started talking about David and Tiago and if Tim and Tiago can play together. What else was said???

[jjktkk]

Bruno posted a link in the Think Tank Draft thread a few days ago. In it, the Jazz are said to be exploring trades for a starting PG. They have picks #3 and #12. I wonder if the Jazz and their lottery picks could be a potential suitor for TP.

I like the possibilities, but trading for lottery picks wouldn't be helping the Spurs now, but more down the road.

[EMS33]

If anyone on here actually watched the Spurs they would realize that when Parker is off the floor Manu is the primary ball handler. So if they do trade Parker and move Hill into the "starting PG" position he is actually really playing the 2 guard. Manu will have the ball in his hands and be the initiator on offense.

[baseline bum]

If Hill can't run the point then please explain why the spurs never lost a beat any time Hill was subbed in for Parker anytime he was out of the lineup for the past 3 seasons for various injuries and actually did better in many cases...

1.1 assists in 30 minutes per game in the playoffs. George Hill is a bench player who can occasionally get hot offensively and can guard iso players who don't use a lot of screens. Nothing more.

[Brazil]

I have no issue at all with parker being traded if its the best interest of the franchise I'm just :lmao @ the idea to get Hill running the point... we are going to cry and think shit that parker was not so bad after all

[TJastal]

1.1 assists in 30 minutes per game in the playoffs. George Hill is a bench player who can occasionally get hot offensively and can guard iso players who don't use a lot of screens. Nothing more.

If the spurs are winning ballgames, does it matter how many assists George Hill has?

[baseline bum]

Hill's about as smooth as Antonio Daniels was running the offense.

[TJastal]

Hill's about as smooth as Antonio Daniels was running the offense.

And who runs 90% of the offense if that Manu guy starts?

[spurs10]

Did anyone hear the entire interview? He might have spoken about what they are planning to do.....

[SenorSpur]

Hill's about as smooth as Antonio Daniels was running the offense.

:lol

It's amazing that even after 4 years, the kid still can't run an effective pick-n-roll.

[baseline bum]

:lol

It's amazing that even after 4 years, the kid still can't run an effective pick-n-roll.

Or guard one.

[TimmehC]

Or guard one.

This. If you can't run or defend the most commonly-run offensive play in the league, you're not a very good guard.

[dylankerouac]

Did anyone hear the entire interview? He might have spoken about what they are planning to do.....

This.

No one else seems to notice the audio cut out and instead keeps repeating their thoughts on possible trades. Would really love to know what the Spurs, not fans, will do with RJ.

[SenorSpur]

This. If you can't run or defend the most commonly-run offensive play in the league, you're not a very good guard.

Exactly. Combo or otherwise.

[baseline bum]

Hill's still a good utility player off the bench. I just can't understand wanting to hand off the reins to him. If you trade Parker, you should blow up the team completely (which I still think the Spurs should do at least after next season once Tim's deal expires).

[TJastal]

:lol

It's amazing that even after 4 years, the kid still can't run an effective pick-n-roll.

Questions:

How have the spurs managed to win games when Parker has been out then?

Oh, and how many chances has he had to learn this stuff? Since He's always spotted up in the corner while either TP or Manu have the ball in their hands. Hard to learn something when basically never are called upon to do it.

I would be willing to wager he'd become more proficient in P&R situations after 3 months in a starting role situation getting comfortable with it.

[TJastal]

Hill's still a good utility player off the bench. I just can't understand wanting to hand off the reins to him. If you trade Parker, you should blow up the team completely (which I still think the Spurs should do at least after next season once Tim's deal expires).

Why blow up the team when you still have Manu & Tim? You really think the spurs are that finished, a team that won 62 games in the regular season with essentially garbage playing next to Tim Duncan the whole year? Put some legitimate size and shotblocking next to Duncan and let Manu run the offense while Hill learns the ropes, and you still have a contending team with a shot IMO.

[jjktkk]

If the Spurs do trade tp, I could see the Spurs siging, or trading for a vet. pg, to compete with Hill. But like others have mentioned, Ginoboli is the defacto backup pg. So as long as the Spurs get back equal or more value trading tp., I don't see a problem with a trade.

[Buddy Holly]

If the spurs are winning ballgames, does it matter how many assists George Hill has?


http://www.imglols.com/wp-content/main/2010_12/Dog-Not-Sure.jpg

[Buddy Holly]

TJastal = Hill?

[SenorSpur]

Hill's still a good utility player off the bench. I just can't understand wanting to hand off the reins to him. If you trade Parker, you should blow up the team completely (which I still think the Spurs should do at least after next season once Tim's deal expires).

...and for those who want Parker gone, remember Pop elected to evolve the Spurs offense into more of an uptempo one. Because Parker has been, and still is, a one-man fast break for this team, you take him away and a chunk of your transition baskets go away with him - unless of course, the Spurs can get another lightening-fast PG in return.

[SenorSpur]

Questions:

How have the spurs managed to win games when Parker has been out then?

Oh, and how many chances has he had to learn this stuff? Since He's always spotted up in the corner while either TP or Manu have the ball in their hands. Hard to learn something when basically never are called upon to do it.

I would be willing to wager he'd become more proficient in P&R situations after 3 months in a starting role situation getting comfortable with it.

I doubt that. He's had numerous PnR opportunities in games. If you watch him, he NEVER passed the ball or even looks to setup the roll man. eh ALWAYS looks for his offense and his offense alone.

It's fair to place a lot a large share of this on Pop because it is HE, who forced Hill into becoming this scoring guard, who only looks for HIS offense first. It's also Pop who has continously overrated Hill as a defender, since Day one.

[jjktkk]

...and for those who want Parker gone, remember Pop elected to evolve the Spurs offense into more of an uptempo one. Because Parker has been, and still is, a one-man fast break for this team, you take him away and a chunk of your transition baskets go away with him - unless of course, the Spurs can get another lightening-fast PG in return.

First of all, I personally rather have Parker stay with the Spurs. But if they do trade em, I hope they get back a starting caliber 4,5, and a quality backup pg, if not a starting caliber pg in return.

[ElNono]

I don't want TP to go, but if he can be used to get rid of one other bad contract and help shore up the frontline and wing position, then you do what's best for the franchise. Agree we need a backup PG. I've been saying we need one for a couple of seasons now. Hill is a SG, and we're stacked at that position. The only reason to keep him around is that his contract is cheap right now.

[TJastal]

...and for those who want Parker gone, remember Pop elected to evolve the Spurs offense into more of an uptempo one. Because Parker has been, and still is, a one-man fast break for this team, you take him away and a chunk of your transition baskets go away with him - unless of course, the Spurs can get another lightening-fast PG in return.

I thought it was pretty clear that style of basketball wasn't compatible once the playoffs started.

Kind of a "run at your own risk" type strategy that backfired, with Parker being the embodiment of this style of basketball.

That's not to say the spurs can't redefine themselves with elements of that up-tempo team intact, in fact if you recall the Hill/Manu/RJ trio that took over in late 2009 did alot of running and gunning.

[ElNono]

The biggest concern I have is what this FO considers good value for somebody like Tony.

[cantthinkofanything]

The biggest concern I have is what this FO considers good value for somebody like Tony.

+1. Pretty sobering concern.

[TJastal]

I doubt that. He's had numerous PnR opportunities in games. If you watch him, he NEVER passed the ball or even looks to setup the roll man. eh ALWAYS looks for his offense and his offense alone.

It's fair to place a lot a large share of this on Pop because it is HE, who forced Hill into becoming this scoring guard, who only looks for HIS offense first. It's also Pop who has continously overrated Hill as a defender, since Day one.

Give him a week of 1-hour practice sessions once training camp rolls around where he runs P&R and has to hit the roll man with a pocket pass and he'll be doing it in his sleep by the all-star break.

As for his defense (which admittedly didn't look great against Memphis), its still better than Parker. He is a much more versatile defender as well.

[tdunk21]

full interview with the audio problem fixed:

http://www.ticket760.com/pages/TheMorningDrive.html

[tdunk21]

RC indeed says spurs will improve through trade and not draft or free agency....

[Buddy Holly]

RC basically all but admits (non-directly) to the fact that if anyone gets traded it'll be Tony.

[Brazil]

I don't want TP to go, but if he can be used to get rid of one other bad contract and help shore up the frontline and wing position, then you do what's best for the franchise. Agree we need a backup PG. I've been saying we need one for a couple of seasons now. Hill is a SG, and we're stacked at that position. The only reason to keep him around is that his contract is cheap right now.

+21

BTW I would feel more confortable with Neal running the point than Hill, Neal has better passing skills.

[Bruno]

RC talking about improving the team through trade could mean that Spurs still have some good deals on the table. The trade season truly start in about 10 days.

The first player that Spurs put on the trading block this off-season is obviously RJ. He has a big contract and was o bad that he only played 10 minutes in the last playoffs game. We all see him as someone with a negative trade value but who knows ? Maybe there is a GM who thinks he can still be a good starting SF.

The second player that Spurs put on the trading block is Dice. His contract is a good trade asset that must be used before the end of the month.

If there is a trade it should at least features these players. Saying that, you can go back talking about Parker's trade swhile it's highly unlikely Spurs are even considering trading him.

[yavozerb]

RC indeed says spurs will improve through trade and not draft or free agency....

You left out that he also ended that same statement with " if it presented itself". No big deal really, if the spurs come across a good trade they will do it, if not, they will have the same 60 win roster next season....

[elemento]

I cannot listen to the interview because I do not live in the US.

Is there anyone that lives outside USA that can listen to the interview?

[baseline bum]

I don't want TP to go, but if he can be used to get rid of one other bad contract and help shore up the frontline and wing position, then you do what's best for the franchise. Agree we need a backup PG. I've been saying we need one for a couple of seasons now. Hill is a SG, and we're stacked at that position. The only reason to keep him around is that his contract is cheap right now.

Dumping Jefferson's contract or getting a nice young player might be possible in exchange for Tony, but both?

[SenorSpur]

I don't want TP to go, but if he can be used to get rid of one other bad contract and help shore up the frontline and wing position, then you do what's best for the franchise. Agree we need a backup PG. I've been saying we need one for a couple of seasons now. Hill is a SG, and we're stacked at that position. The only reason to keep him around is that his contract is cheap right now.

I don't want TP to be shipped out either - as I'd much rather Bonner, RJ and Hill go (in that order). However, TP clearly has the best trade value, meaning he would likely net the biggest return.

Therefore, I'm with you. As long as the Spurs can shore up their frontcourt with the acquisition of a young, emerging big, and maybe even fenagle a future 1st round pick, I'm down for it.

I cannot stress the need for getting a future 1st round pick enough. The 2012 draft will be a very strong one. How sweet would it be to begin the post-Duncan era, than with a double whammy in a strong draft?

[TD 21]

An admission such as this is uncharacteristic. Sounds to me like they have something on the table, or close enough to where they're confident it'll get done in short order.

I expect a trade somewhere between the conclusion of the Finals and July 1st, with the most likely date being the draft. McDyess' partially guaranteed contract, which is obviously a key trade chip, has to be used by then. Others who could be moved: Jefferson, Bonner, Blair, Anderson, 1st round pick (either this years or a future one).

I wouldn't be stunned if they find a way to rid themselves of Jefferson without taking back a fellow albatross. The Cavs are probably the best hope for this, but it might take an unprotected 1st at some point in the next few years.

It's like '09 all over again. I get the sense that somethings about to go down. But unlike '09, where the Jefferson trade wasn't all that surprising, this one probably will be.

[SenorSpur]

An admission such as this is uncharacteristic. Sounds to me like they have something on the table, or close enough to where they're confident it'll get done in short order.

That's a key point right there. It's highly unusual for the Spurs, RC in particular, to make such an admission. It does smell like there is definitely some things on the table.

[stxspurs]

tony stays....hill,jefferson,blair,dice all trade bait

[SenorSpur]

tony stays....hill,jefferson,blair,dice all trade bait

Let's hope that's all there is. If you were to throw in Pop's butt-boy Bonner, that would make it a straight flush.

[tdunk21]

i am still not counting on a trade, coz the last trade by the spurs for RJ proved to be a disaster for 2 full seasons.....i could be wrong but i personally think spurs should trade for stephen jackson(scoring and knows the system) and tyrus thomas(for defense)....

[Big P]

Did anyone hear the entire interview? He might have spoken about what they are planning to do.....

Do you really think that RC is going to start naming names that he is interested in trading? Not sure how long you have been a Spurs fan, but the FO does not work that way...and besides if he did name names, that would drive the value of the players down...bad move.

[Vic Petro]

If there's no good deal on the table for Tony then call Chicago and see if they'll take Hill for Taj Gibson. They are starting Keith Friggin Bogans.

[ElNono]

Dumping Jefferson's contract or getting a nice young player might be possible in exchange for Tony, but both?

Well, you have to match salaries, and that's a lot of salary to match. Should a trade for Tony happen, unless it's way too one-sided, you would hope they use the opportunity to dump one of those contracts (RJ specifically, Bonner too because while he might not have a 'bad' contract, he's not cheap either and he has to go, IMO). Truth be told, Tony *IS* the best trade chip in that, unlike Dice who is seemingly retiring, he's a player that other teams will covet and might give you more wiggling room to make a bigger deal.

[ElNono]

People need to understand that Hill/Blair/Anderson are not going anywhere unless you're sweetening a deal for a different player. They're cheap contracts, and thus they wouldn't give you much of anything in return. Plus the Spurs need to fill up their roster and that's the kind of contracts you want to fill it up with.

[Laredoart]

ElNOno Tu Muy Bien, Muy Bien

[underdawg]

People need to understand that Hill/Blair/Anderson are not going anywhere unless you're sweetening a deal for a different player. They're cheap contracts, and thus they wouldn't give you much of anything in return. Plus the Spurs need to fill up their roster and that's the kind of contracts you want to fill it up with.

so, what are the chances that 2 trades go down with tp in one and hill and rj in the other? I hope the plan would not be to rely on Hill, so hopefully they would have something in mind for a pg replacement anyways.

Call it what it is - if the Spurs trade tp, they really don't have a starting pg and that's why trading Hill to get rid of rj wouldn't really hurt the Spurs either.

[ElNono]

so, what are the chances that 2 trades go down with tp in one and hill and rj in the other? I hope the plan would not be to rely on Hill, so hopefully they would have something in mind for a pg replacement anyways.

Call it what it is - if the Spurs trade tp, they really don't have a starting pg and that's why trading Hill to get rid of rj wouldn't really hurt the Spurs either.

It all depends on what other teams want. As Bruno said, maybe some team will still take Richard, as crazy as that sounds. And maybe they want Anderson or Neal as part of the package. If there's no other offer on the table, do you pull the trigger?

I think Tony is different, where the Spurs wouldn't be dumping a salary but actually trading top talent that can improve another team. When you're in that position, it's easier to set parameters and make demands.

You also have to consider moving Manu instead of Tony. When you balance his age, and the fact you can still get as good a return for him, there's no way you wouldn't consider it. The thing with Manu is that he's undeniably a fan favorite. As a fan, I want to see him retire with the Spurs. But if we're putting the franchise above the players, then it shouldn't be any different between Manu and Tony.

[Spurs da champs]

Not to mention if they do consider Parker as trade bait, sitting on the bench is another capable point guard - George Hill.




LOL


CHAMBERS OWNS HILL at point

Get parkers nuts out of your mouth!

[spurs10]

Does anyone have an idea what RC said?

[Ditty]

It all depends on what other teams want. As Bruno said, maybe some team will still take Richard, as crazy as that sounds. And maybe they want Anderson or Neal as part of the package. If there's no other offer on the table, do you pull the trigger?

I think Tony is different, where the Spurs wouldn't be dumping a salary but actually trading top talent that can improve another team. When you're in that position, it's easier to set parameters and make demands.

You also have to consider moving Manu instead of Tony. When you balance his age, and the fact you can still get as good a return for him, there's no way you wouldn't consider it. The thing with Manu is that he's undeniably a fan favorite. As a fan, I want to see him retire with the Spurs. But if we're putting the franchise above the players, then it shouldn't be any different between Manu and Tony.

I can see a Darko,Webster and Ridnour for Mcdyess,Jefferson, and Neal/Blair...Spurs get 3 bad contracts, but fill some needs though....The Twolves can use RJ as there veteran, and see some value in there system and the triangle offense of someone who can just spot up, and shoot, and possibly move Wesley Johnson to the 2, and have Derrick Williams back up RJ, and I always like Websters game, guy is scorer, but doesn't have a great contract....They can get Mcdyess to get rid of Darko's contract, and Ridnour would be another bad contract they can give up to us, and the Spurs finally get a true backup point guard who's not that bad, and makes Hill expandable....Twolves would then have there choie of Blair or Neal, which I think they get Blair to make them have someone back up Beasley. Would be nice if Bonner could be included, and we get Tolliver back. Twolves can also tank another season to get Anthony Davis.

Twolves:
Love/Pekovic/Randolph
Beasley/Blair
RJ/Williams
Johnson/Ellington
Flynn/Rubio

Spurs:
Darko/Splitter/A free agent big man
Duncan/JaJuan Johnson :)/Tolliver or Bonner :(
Webster/Butler
Manu/Neal/Anderson
Parker/Hill/Ridnour

If there is a free agency we should go after a SF,Pf/C...Like a Cheap SF like Earl Clark, and maybe a Kwame Brown :p: to back up Timmy .

[cdcast]

If there's no good deal on the table for Tony then call Chicago and see if they'll take Hill for Taj Gibson. They are starting Keith Friggin Bogans.

+1

or trade Hill for a young starting SF

[IknowU]

Trade jefferson + bonner for beasley

As much of a nutcase beasley is, we cant afford to be picky anymore certainly better then what we have atm.

[objective]

The first player that Spurs put on the trading block this off-season is obviously RJ. He has a big contract and was o bad that he only played 10 minutes in the last playoffs game. We all see him as someone with a negative trade value but who knows ? Maybe there is a GM who thinks he can still be a good starting SF.


The only possible hope I could see is Jordan doing more idiocy with the Bobcats. Only Jordan could trade an expiring above average starting center (when healthy) for an extra 3 seasons of about 12 million in empty contracts like Matt Carroll and Eduardo Najera.

Jordan is our man.

RJ plus Hill and whatever to get Stephen Jackson.

----

Beyond that, I would with regards to Bruno's list of trade-list Spurs that Hill should be right up there. Mostly because his contract is small enough to trade on draft night with only taking back an unguaranteed scrub back that could be cut without much cost in exchange for a pick without having to wait out a new CBA that could hurt their trade opportunities.

This draft could be weak enough that Hill would be enough to move up to get Chris Singleton, freeing us from Jefferson's disgraceful displays.

[dbestpro]

There are some players who might have a higher value than the average Spur fan thinks.
Blair is young and can rebound. Hill has shown at times great defensive presence and the ability to score when given the minutes. Bonner presents himself as one of the best 3 point shooters in the NBA. RJ, well not everyone can be considered an asset.

Teams that value the qualities of the previous three may be inclined to take on RJ, which in turn would provide us with addition by subtraction.

[ohmwrecker]

If there's no good deal on the table for Tony then call Chicago and see if they'll take Hill for Taj Gibson. They are starting Keith Friggin Bogans.

That makes sense. They could then try to move Blair for a cheap, legit backup PG. I would like to see them strike a deal with Phoenix. Jefferson is an Arizona kid and he would do well with a PG like Nash. I would like to see a package that yields Grant Hill in return. McDyess' expiring might be enough to make it work. Phoenix could maybe give us back a big (Gortat, Lopez, Warrick, etc.) in the deal.
Wishful thinking for the most part.

[TJastal]

I can see a Darko,Webster and Ridnour for Mcdyess,Jefferson, and Neal/Blair...Spurs get 3 bad contracts, but fill some needs though....The Twolves can use RJ as there veteran, and see some value in there system and the triangle offense of someone who can just spot up, and shoot, and possibly move Wesley Johnson to the 2, and have Derrick Williams back up RJ, and I always like Websters game, guy is scorer, but doesn't have a great contract....They can get Mcdyess to get rid of Darko's contract, and Ridnour would be another bad contract they can give up to us, and the Spurs finally get a true backup point guard who's not that bad, and makes Hill expandable....Twolves would then have there choie of Blair or Neal, which I think they get Blair to make them have someone back up Beasley. Would be nice if Bonner could be included, and we get Tolliver back. Twolves can also tank another season to get Anthony Davis.

Twolves:
Love/Pekovic/Randolph
Beasley/Blair
RJ/Williams
Johnson/Ellington
Flynn/Rubio

Spurs:
Darko/Splitter/A free agent big man
Duncan/JaJuan Johnson :)/Tolliver or Bonner :(
Webster/Butler
Manu/Neal/Anderson
Parker/Hill/Ridnour

If there is a free agency we should go after a SF,Pf/C...Like a Cheap SF like Earl Clark, and maybe a Kwame Brown :p: to back up Timmy .


1. No team is going to use Jefferson as their "veteran"
2. Kwame Brown really?
3. No team is going to use Blair to back up a small forward
4. lmao @ hoping they'll take Bonner after taking RJ & Blair

[spurs10]

Do you really think that RC is going to start naming names that he is interested in trading? Not sure how long you have been a Spurs fan, but the FO does not work that way...and besides if he did name names, that would drive the value of the players down...bad move.
Yeah, I wasn't insinuating he mentioned any names. The interview stopped in mid sentence and I was curious about what he said.

[spurs10]

full interview with the audio problem fixed:

http://www.ticket760.com/pages/TheMorningDrive.html
Thanks....:toast

[Ditty]

1. No team is going to use Jefferson as their "veteran"
2. Kwame Brown really?
3. No team is going to use Blair to back up a small forward
4. lmao @ hoping they'll take Bonner after taking RJ & Blair

1.It's Kaun.
2. Jefferson is a veteran small forward has been whatever you want to call him, and isn't Rubio coming over last time I checked he's best at transition, who is going to run with him?
3. Kwame Brown is not a bad player, I guess you haven't seen much since his Lakers days, but it's not like there's alot of affordable back up PF free agents on the market, unless the Salary cap stays the same, and Duncan opts out which I doubt.
4. I never said Blair was going to be there back up Small Forward if so it was a typo, but he is a decent power forward if he has size next to him, and that's what Minnesota has.
5.Bonner was just an idea, that why I said "it would be nice", he is better shooter than Tolliver but you never know it was an idea I just threw in there.

[rasho8]

I would trade Tony for a stick of used chewing gum if RJ and Bonner were in the deal.

[TD 21]

Surprised no one picked up on this, but Buford pretty much ruled out Splitter starting next to Duncan. The usual nonsense about Splitter not being able to spread the floor (as if Mohammed or Oberto ever could, as if Blair can and as if Duncan is consistently doubled anymore) and about Duncan not being mobile enough to guard fours anymore. Which, for the most part, is true. But I don't understand why they don't think Splitter can guard fours. They act like he's a traditional five.

It's difficult to discern who they may be looking to acquire to be the starting four, but I can't imagine they want it to be Blair (since he brings neither shooting nor defense), who right now would be the starter by default. The Bobcats are a possibility, particularly if they draft Morris (Marcus). That would give them three rotation caliber fours. Diaw is more likely to be moved than Thomas, but I've got to think the Spurs would be more interested in Thomas. The only way I could see them taking on his contract is if they rid themselves of Jefferson, though. Other than that, I just don't see a lot of realistic possibilities, for one reason or another.

[objective]

Yeah, they might as well trade Splitter and just start Bonner like the Spurs want. They don't know what to do with him, might as well get some other scrub to go with their foundation pieces the next 3 seasons in Jefferson and Bonner.

Even with RC talking up how much of a factor he was against Memphis when he was finally allowed to play, he still didn't get too much time. 17 minutes a game? No point in keeping him chained up here, he should still have value on team's that are smart enough to not dump DNP-CDs on him.

[TJastal]

I would be willing to bet as well that if its the bobcats they're looking at Thomas, his contract is considerably longer than Diaw's and we we've all seen who cheap Jordan is, hell he makes Sterling look like a big spender.

Or perhaps a little French Connection is in the works (Parker & Diaw). Either one would be a good pickup, with Thomas you get a midrange J, athleticism & rim protection. With Diaw you get 3pt shooting, a post game, & a bigger body.

I have to think Thomas would be the better fit in the starting lineup. The spurs have to have one of the most un-athletic rosters in basketball, and bringing in one of the most athletic players in the league would be a good start at finding the cure.

[rascal]

Why blow up the team when you still have Manu & Tim? You really think the spurs are that finished, a team that won 62 games in the regular season with essentially garbage playing next to Tim Duncan the whole year? Put some legitimate size and shotblocking next to Duncan and let Manu run the offense while Hill learns the ropes, and you still have a contending team with a shot IMO.

Manu can't run the offense for extended periods of time. The spurs would need to add a legit pg because Hill is better suited for sg.

[ducks]

manu I think has more value then alot of spur fans think he does

he could provide a big punch off the bench for a team like the thunder if they move harden to a starter
I take durant for manu

[tdunk21]

manu I think has more value then alot of spur fans think he does

he could provide a big punch off the bench for a team like the thunder if they move harden to a starter
I take durant for manu

:wow

[Tyrone Jenkins]

Interesting lil blog discussion...

TP is really the only VALUABLE trade asset (ie. the only asset that can be expected to get something just as valuable - like a quality big man - in return).

I'm unlike many here in that I think Hill would be adequate at the point as his lack of penetrating ability is offset by his 3 pt shooting ability (which would stretch the floor). At least he'd be adequate enough to run things until next year's draft when the Spurs can use their 1st round pick on a potential starting PG.

This year, the priorities should be franchise C or PF w/ length and defensive capability and then a defensive SF. If TP is traded, acquiring another starting PG is still a distant third.

[Jace]

manu I think has more value then alot of spur fans think he does

he could provide a big punch off the bench for a team like the thunder if they move harden to a starter
I take durant for manu

There are a bunch of playoff teams who could use him, the Bulls needed someone who could score and Manu would have helped. Dallas could use another good scorer, he couldn't do worse than Kidd.

[elemento]

A lot of teams could use Manu

The problem here is: If we trade him, who starts? Hill ? It is a huge downgrade.

And do not expect teams to pay a lot for a 34 year old with injury concerns, even if it is Manu Ginobili. Trading him does not make any sense.

The only guy that can give us a really good player is Parker.

[Erick_CSF]

and what would you want back from the lakers?

How about this?
http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=3u63clj
This trade works, but not sure if feasible. I wonder if spurs fans would accept this.

[TD 21]

I would be willing to bet as well that if its the bobcats they're looking at Thomas, his contract is considerably longer than Diaw's and we we've all seen who cheap Jordan is, hell he makes Sterling look like a big spender.

Or perhaps a little French Connection is in the works (Parker & Diaw). Either one would be a good pickup, with Thomas you get a midrange J, athleticism & rim protection. With Diaw you get 3pt shooting, a post game, & a bigger body.

I have to think Thomas would be the better fit in the starting lineup. The spurs have to have one of the most un-athletic rosters in basketball, and bringing in one of the most athletic players in the league would be a good start at finding the cure.

The more I think about it, the more I'm convinced this is the most likely trade: Thomas for McDyess, Blair and Anderson.

For the Bobcats, it makes sense because: they not only slash salary -- which is their favorite thing to do -- but they also get two solid, young, inexpensive players. Considering they have the shallowest talent pool in the league, getting two of those for one isn't a bad idea. They desperately need wing depth and outside shooting, so Anderson would be a good fit. As for Blair, he's a positional replacement for Thomas and in terms of sheer production, they wouldn't be losing much, if any. Plus, there's a Thomas type player in this draft, in Biyombo, who could replace him, if they choose to do so. Even if they don't draft Morris or Biyombo, they have depth at PF: Diaw, White, Najera; plus they'd add Blair.

Thomas, from a personality standpoint, is not Spurs material. I don't recall any off court incidents, he's more just immature and he has a temper. But there were rumors at the '10 trade deadline that they had interest and the overall package is similar to what they seemingly want in a starting four (essentially, a young McDyess), so they may be willing to overlook that. He's got 4 years and roughly $33.2 million left on his contract, but makes "only" $7.3 million next season. So for next season, the Spurs wouldn't add salary in the trade.

Then, at 29, they could either go big, or, if Honeycutt is available, they could take him (potential to be a plus defender) to be the backup three. Failing that, they could just go with a combination of Green/Butler, or take a flier on another young, unestablished three to compete with them for minutes.

[ducks]

A lot of teams could use Manu

The problem here is: If we trade him, who starts? Hill ? It is a huge downgrade.

And do not expect teams to pay a lot for a 34 year old with injury concerns, even if it is Manu Ginobili. Trading him does not make any sense.

The only guy that can give us a really good player is Parker.

depends on what spurs get back

without manu would rj be more aggressive?

[Rick Von Braun]

How about this?
http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=3u63clj
This trade works, but not sure if feasible. I wonder if spurs fans would accept this.

Hey, since we are just dreaming, how about this instead:

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=63utn5u

Could you imagine Orlando doing this? :lol

You could add Bonner and it would still work! :lmao

[Erick_CSF]

Hey, since we are just dreaming, how about this instead:

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=63utn5u

Could you imagine Orlando doing this? :lol

You could add Bonner and it would still work! :lmao

haha. Dude the league would be so pissed off if that trade went down. I would be happy, but alas I live in the fantasy world where the Spurs will always be title contenders / or win the lotto when There is a Super big man available. Heck maybe they could pull this off and once again get a franchise big star without missing a beat. :lol

I only said fisher and gasol because all during the playoffs all you heard was how gasol didn't step up and how he may be traded to orlando for howard. I figured throw Tony in (star) and Jefferson (sucks with spurs, but just our luck becomes some ridiculous all-star role player for LA.) for an aging fisher and Gasol and perhaps throw some draft picks around to make it work. Oh well Im just in denial that the Spurs are back to the good ol days of first round playoff exits to the Jazz and Blazers. "Rod Strickland what are you doing?!!!!!" :bang

[Erick_CSF]

Oh and In your trade, I would sweeten the deal for Orlando by releasing Turkey-glue so Orlando could resign him for less 30 days later. Turk blew dogs for quarters when he was with the Spurs. Just not the right system for him. It would also free up money for Spurs to sign a role player if available in the market. Cmon orlando Pull the trigger! :rollin

[TJastal]

The more I think about it, the more I'm convinced this is the most likely trade: Thomas for McDyess, Blair and Anderson.

For the Bobcats, it makes sense because: they not only slash salary -- which is their favorite thing to do -- but they also get two solid, young, inexpensive players. Considering they have the shallowest talent pool in the league, getting two of those for one isn't a bad idea. They desperately need wing depth and outside shooting, so Anderson would be a good fit. As for Blair, he's a positional replacement for Thomas and in terms of sheer production, they wouldn't be losing much, if any. Plus, there's a Thomas type player in this draft, in Biyombo, who could replace him, if they choose to do so. Even if they don't draft Morris or Biyombo, they have depth at PF: Diaw, White, Najera; plus they'd add Blair.

Thomas, from a personality standpoint, is not Spurs material. I don't recall any off court incidents, he's more just immature and he has a temper. But there were rumors at the '10 trade deadline that they had interest and the overall package is similar to what they seemingly want in a starting four (essentially, a young McDyess), so they may be willing to overlook that. He's got 4 years and roughly $33.2 million left on his contract, but makes "only" $7.3 million next season. So for next season, the Spurs wouldn't add salary in the trade.

Then, at 29, they could either go big, or, if Honeycutt is available, they could take him (potential to be a plus defender) to be the backup three. Failing that, they could just go with a combination of Green/Butler, or take a flier on another young, unestablished three to compete with them for minutes.

Could you imagine the ST meltdown if your hunch is correct? :lol :rollin

[Fireball]

Oh and In your trade, I would sweeten the deal for Orlando by releasing Turkey-glue so Orlando could resign him for less 30 days later. Turk blew dogs for quarters when he was with the Spurs. Just not the right system for him. It would also free up money for Spurs to sign a role player if available in the market. Cmon orlando Pull the trigger! :rollin

your Avatar irritates me ... when I flip through the pages of a thread I always ask myself: did I already post here? Then I see it was you :toast

[TD 21]

Could you imagine the ST meltdown if your hunch is correct? :lol :rollin

Why, because Blair would be going the other way? I think most fans would be pleased with this trade. It makes sense on a lot of levels.

The only way I could see the Bobcats turning it down is if they feel like they're not getting one real significant piece back. If it takes it to close the deal, the Spurs could throw in their 1st (29th) for the Bobcats 2nd (39th).

[DPG21920]

You don't give up Blair and Anderson for Tyrus. Sorry.

[Erick_CSF]

your Avatar irritates me ... when I flip through the pages of a thread I always ask myself: did I already post here? Then I see it was you :toast

Sorry, but i didnt have time to go through everyone's avatars before I picked mine. I will look for another one soon.:toast

[TJastal]

Why, because Blair would be going the other way? I think most fans would be pleased with this trade. It makes sense on a lot of levels.

The only way I could see the Bobcats turning it down is if they feel like they're not getting one real significant piece back. If it takes it to close the deal, the Spurs could throw in their 1st (29th) for the Bobcats 2nd (39th).

I don't think Jordan would demand another pick (nor would I give it to him), seeing as he'd already be getting a former 1st rounder in Anderson, plus an early 2nd rounder (in Blair) both of whom are locked up for another 2+ years on cheap contracts, while getting Thomas' lengthy contract off his books.

[TD 21]

You don't give up Blair and Anderson for Tyrus. Sorry.

Thomas has his issues and he'll never be a star, but he's essentially a young McDyess (not as good of a scorer as McDyess was though). It's clear from their comments that that's what they'd like at power forward. There aren't many players in the league with this type of package and most of the other ones aren't attainable, given what the Spurs have to offer.

Blair and Anderson are solid young assets, but let's face it, at their peaks, Blair will probably be no better than a 3rd big/7th man and Anderson will probably be no better than a 3rd wing/8th man. Plus, if they added Thomas, Blair wouldn't play anyway.

TJastal, they may not. A former 1st rounder and early 2nd rounder; that's irrelevant. Thomas is a former 4th overall pick. Once a player is a couple of years removed from being drafted, where they were drafted no longer matters. Does anyone think Brown and Milicic have high trade value, because they were former 1st and 2nd overall picks? No.

[Duncan2177]

This trade?

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=3geljwl

[TJastal]

This trade?

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=3geljwl

I'm sure the bucks are just dying to get Jefferson back with an even more shitty contract and ship out there just blossoming soon-to-be-all-star center, cool story bro.

[spurtech09]

If they can trade Tony for a good big, do it.. Let Hill start and see what he has. Might as well try and shake things up because the team as is has no shot to win it all..
do spurs really need another big.....spurs already have splitter and blair...than the spurs are gonna add ryan richards to the mix.....the problem is pop giving bonner more mins than there bigs....I say if pop give splitter and blair more mins the spurs will be fine...I would trade bonner and rj for a decent sf

[spurtech09]

I do not want Hill running the point. Heck no.

If we trade Tony we have to either get a decent PG back (along with a big) or draft a PG.
agree but I say spurs keep parker....

[spurtech09]

TP is not going anywhere, sorry to be the realist in this thread...
agree....parker is not going to be traded

[spurtech09]

Thomas has his issues and he'll never be a star, but he's essentially a young McDyess (not as good of a scorer as McDyess was though). It's clear from their comments that that's what they'd like at power forward. There aren't many players in the league with this type of package and most of the other ones aren't attainable, given what the Spurs have to offer.

Blair and Anderson are solid young assets, but let's face it, at their peaks, Blair will probably be no better than a 3rd big/7th man and Anderson will probably be no better than a 3rd wing/8th man. Plus, if they added Thomas, Blair wouldn't play anyway.

TJastal, they may not. A former 1st rounder and early 2nd rounder; that's irrelevant. Thomas is a former 4th overall pick. Once a player is a couple of years removed from being drafted, where they were drafted no longer matters. Does anyone think Brown and Milicic have high trade value, because they were former 1st and 2nd overall picks? No.
this....

[Proxy]

agree....parker is not going to be traded

Keep Parker for what? So the team can be mediocre instead of rebuilding with a chance at a franchise rookie?

[Spurs da champs]

TP is not going anywhere, sorry to be the realist in this thread...

Well your not their is no point of keeping a medicore PG who had 1 good year.
He will be traded eventually at least while he still has value.

[mariners]

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=5wqp86o

[DPG21920]

Tyrus Thomas is a marginal talent and you don't give up two guys that look to have at least as much talent + even more upside for a guy like him.

[Spurs da champs]

His contract is worse then RJ's.

[TD 21]

Tyrus Thomas is a marginal talent and you don't give up two guys that look to have at least as much talent + even more upside for a guy like him.

He's better than a marginal talent. But you're missing the point. This is less about talent and more about fit. Thomas and Blair, in terms of sheer production, are similar. But Thomas shoots better from mid range, is 6-9 (I don't buy his 6-10 listing), freakishly athletic and an excellent shot blocker. I'd prefer if he was making $5-6 million a season, were less volatile and had more strength, but that's about as close to a young McDyess as this team can realistically come.

Anderson is going to be hard pressed to crack the rotation, unless the Spurs go to the rare ten man rotation or Neal falls off the face of the earth.

Pop has talked about getting back to being a top 5-7 defensive team. It's easy to say "why not trade Jefferson and Bonner?", but there's a good chance neither get's traded and I can't see Splitter, Hill or Neal being traded either. So that leaves starting four and tenth man as the spots that can be upgraded defensively (Splitter will already upgrade fourth big). This trade would accomplish that. Anderson can be replaced either internally, with Green/Butler or via the draft, if Honeycutt falls to 29.

Or they can overvalue their team, nitpick every last attainable player who could make them better, come back with virtually the same team, win their usual 50+ regular season games and be bounced in the 1st round again.

[DPG21920]

Even fit he's not that great. I'd take him, but I don't think he helps enough to give up two better talents for. Spurs will need talent here in the next few years and unless there is some miracle trade plus luck, Spurs aren't contending anyways. So keep the young talent.

[tdunk21]

Even fit he's not that great. I'd take him, but I don't think he helps enough to give up two better talents for. Spurs will need talent here in the next few years and unless there is some miracle trade plus luck, Spurs aren't contending anyways. So keep the young talent.

:depressed

[TD 21]

Even fit he's not that great. I'd take him, but I don't think he helps enough to give up two better talents for. Spurs will need talent here in the next few years and unless there is some miracle trade plus luck, Spurs aren't contending anyways. So keep the young talent.

Maybe so, but he's about the best they can realistically do, without surrendering one of the big three, as well as Splitter, Hill and Neal (which I suspect is their intent).

Blair and Anderson may be more skilled, but Thomas is the best asset of the three, so long as his contract is digestible (I've already detailed why it should be for the Spurs).

They wouldn't really be losing young talent, in terms of quantity. Thomas would replace Blair and whoever they draft at 29 would replace Anderson. Quantity isn't their issue, though and Blair and Anderson are replaceable parts.

They may not be contending, but that's seemingly still their intent. I look at Thomas as a guy who could be a bridge, in the sense that he could help them now, while being a key piece in the future. We know he's not a star and he's overpaid, but it's San Antonio. Unless they plummet down to the bottom and hit the jackpot the next time a surefire superstar big is in the draft, fluke out like the Lakers did with Bynum, or drastically overpay for someone like Boozer in free agency, they're not getting anything resembling a star big.

[DPG21920]

I think you are undervaluing James Anderson. When he was healthy, he played very well on both ends. You are also overrating Tyrus IMO. I don't see him as any better fit overall.

[TD 21]

I think you are undervaluing James Anderson. When he was healthy, he played very well on both ends. You are also overrating Tyrus IMO. I don't see him as any better fit overall.

I like a lot about Anderson, but you've got to give something to get something. I see his upside as that of a third wing and with how this team is currently constructed, I fail to see how he plays much.

I'm not a big Thomas fan, but like I said, he's about as good a McDyess replacement as this team can realistically do (it's clear from their comments in recent weeks that they'd like a similar four). He can be overpowered in the post in certain match-ups and he's not the mid range shooter McDyess is, but by and large, he's not a liability when it comes to shooting, defending or rebounding, unlike Blair, Splitter and Bonner. Add that to his elite athleticism and shot blocking and I fail to see how he's not a better fit.

[jjktkk]

I think you are undervaluing James Anderson. When he was healthy, he played very well on both ends. You are also overrating Tyrus IMO. I don't see him as any better fit overall.

This. Spur fans desperate for youth and athleticism(understandable), even if said athlete is a knucklehead like Thomas. Thomas might eventually turn out to be a player, but he needs to grow up a bit first.

[TJastal]

I like a lot about Anderson, but you've got to give something to get something. I see his upside as that of a third wing and with how this team is currently constructed, I fail to see how he plays much.

I'm not a big Thomas fan, but like I said, he's about as good a McDyess replacement as this team can realistically do (it's clear from their comments in recent weeks that they'd like a similar four). He can be overpowered in the post in certain match-ups and he's not the mid range shooter McDyess is, but by and large, he's not a liability when it comes to shooting, defending or rebounding, unlike Blair, Splitter and Bonner. Add that to his elite athleticism and shot blocking and I fail to see how he's not a better fit.

+1
Danny Green also showed upside in what would be an almost identical role to Anderson, so its not like the spurs would be up shi!t creek without a paddle.

Off the bench last year, in 21 minutes a game Thomas put up 10pt/6reb/2blk, which are solid numbers. Extrapolated out to 30 as a starter your looking at 14/9/3 which is near double double territory. And he is a solid defender who can guard a variety of players in this league which is where his real value comes into play IMO.

Plus he brings an defensive attitude that would be infectious to the rest of the team IMO. The bulls IMO really miss that from a few years ago when he was with them, now being stuck with Boozer, a guy who plays almost no defense. Does that sound familiar? Dejuan Blair is our Boozer, and Bonner is Blair's red headed stepchild when it comes to defense.

Thomas brings a whole new attitude of defense first, and takes pride in patrolling the paint, which would really help Tim Duncan's knees from having to do that job all by his lonesome once again. To top it off he has a knockdown midrange jumper he can pretty much get with very little spacing (less than McDyess needs even). Which is a good solid option to have that Blair didn't/doesn't provide at all in the starting lineup.

The one worry I have with Thomas is the learning curve, and Pop with his increasingly limited patience. Who knows what Pop would do. His coaching is becoming increasingly erratic and he's only going to get worse this next season.

[Nick Manning]

The end is fucking nigh

[TJastal]

This. Spur fans desperate for youth and athleticism(understandable), even if said athlete is a knucklehead like Thomas. Thomas might eventually turn out to be a player, but he needs to grow up a bit first.

Your still living in 3 years ago, come join us here in the present where its nice and warm, sunny. :hat

He already has turned into a player, seem my post above.

[outmap]

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=4xm7m7w

[outmap]

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=3c2u7qe

[Vic Petro]

http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/columnists/article/Drafting-of-Parker-A-way-to-remember-1432741.php

It's interesting how many parallels there are to 10 years ago. In 2000/01 the team won 58 games and looked bad in a playoff loss to the Lakers (albeit in WCF). This year they won 61 and looked bad against Memphis.

In 2001, Pop said there was nothing in the draft that could help immediately. This year RC says he'll build through trade rather than the draft.

In 2001 the Spurs picked 28 in a "weak draft", now they pick 29 in a "weak draft".

In 2001 they drafted Tony Parker. Hopefully this year turns out even half as good.

[ducks]

pop was not sold on tp