Let's Talk Rebuilding

[timvp]

Typically, we Spurs fans end up talking about the pros and cons of different rebuilding strategies following a disheartening playoff loss. Let's try something else. Let's try talking about rebuilding when everything is going well. Considering that the Spurs have won their last 12* games, things really couldn't be going much better.

In the past, I thought that the best way to rebuild would be to tear everything down completely once the run is over and then rebuild through the draft. More specifically, I believed the smartest thing to do would be to trade Tony Parker and any other asset once Tim Duncan and Manu Ginobili's time was over. I also was against the idea of holding on for as long as possible because I didn't see the value of wasting years in no man's land.

But now, I'm starting to think a different way. Here would be my rebuilding strategy:

-Keep Duncan and Ginobili as long as possible. Both have deserved a lot more money than the Spurs have paid out over the years, so I don't really have any monetary concerns regarding these two. At the end of this season, I'd let Duncan name his price. If he wants to take a pay cut in order to bring in other talent, that'd be great. If he not, that's fine -- he should still be re-signed. Same with Ginobili at the end of next season if he wants to keep playing.

-Eventually, have the team revolve around Tony Parker and Tiago Splitter. While it's doubtful those two are good enough to contend for a championship, this season has given me hope that Parker and Splitter could become a playoff level tandem. They run the pick-and-roll beautifully and they are young enough to have another five solid seasons together.

-Keep adding young players in the Kawhi Leonard mold along the way. The great thing about this front office is they are amazing in the draft. And best of all, they don't need a lottery pick to find quality players. By being active in draft day trades (plus the fact that they'll eventually start drafting closer to 20 than 30), the Spurs should be able to pick up some nice assets along the way via the draft.

-Avoid handing out any bad contracts. The dumbest thing front offices do is overpay role players ... especially on teams that aren't true championship contenders. The Spurs have to keep the big picture in mind and just let role players walk instead of wasting future cap space.

-Go after max free agents each summer until someone bites. By not wasting cap space on role players, the Spurs could conceivably have rolling cap space each summer until they finally land a big name. In the new CBA, there could be a few summers where only a few teams will be in a position to make significant moves. The Spurs have to be patient and wait for those years.

-Use cap space to horde assets. Contending teams often find themselves in situations where they are desperate to dump a salary or two. By staying below the salary cap, the Spurs could get in a position where they are able to absorb other team's mistakes in exchange for draft picks and/or quality prospects.

-Use job security as an advantage. Let's be honest, the current front office basically has a life long contract. They brought four championships to San Antonio … I couldn't imagine a time when any sane owner would think there might be a better group of people to man the front office. So with that job security in mind, the Spurs front office can take long-term gambles -- such as drafting Splitter even though he had a worrisome buyout situation. More than 90% of front offices simply couldn't risk wasting a first round pick like that.

In my opinion, this strategy makes quite a bit of sense with how things have turned out. It avoids blowing everything up, which is good news for Peter Holt and the ownership group. If the Spurs were to become a 20-win team, it'd be difficult to fill the AT&T Center even halfway with fans. But a slow decline would keep the fans coming through the gates. The negative aspect is the Spurs would miss out on high lottery picks but the front office might be able to make it work regardless.

This option has become a possibility because I think Parker and Splitter might be good enough to do some damage together. Previously, there was no hope after the Duncan and Ginobili exit. While the hope is just barely a glimmer, I think it's worth exploring. Parker running the ship with Splitter in the middle and Leonard on the wing? Hmmm ... if Parker can keep up his level of play, if Splitter can become a high-usage starter and Leonard can reach his potential, that's not a bad team.

I also like it that this would allow for a "passing of the torch" to the next generation. In my opinion, that was a hugely important yet often overlooked aspect in the transition from the team of the 1990s to the Big 3 Era Spurs. That crossover in eras was invaluable. Duncan got to learn the art of being successful in the NBA from players like David Robinson, AJ and Sean Elliott. And even though Parker and Ginobili only played with Robinson for a short time, I truly believed they learned a lot from him doing things the "Spurs way".

For the next generation, it'd be great if they can be connected with this generation and avoid having to start over from scratch. For example, someone like Leonard is learning more from Duncan and Ginobili than he could ever learn from a coach in terms of playing the right way, conducting himself in a proper manner, learning how to lead, etc.

It's going to be very difficult to transition into a third era that has championship level success but I think it's worth a try. Keep Duncan and Ginobili around as long as possible, hope Parker and Splitter (and maybe Leonard) can keep the Spurs competitive and rebuild with aggressive yet savvy moves in the draft, on the trade market and in free agency.

If worst comes to worst, the Spurs will become mediocre and then bottom out in five or six years. Yeah, that could be viewed as a waste of time but now I think there's enough logic behind that strategy to support it.





P.S.

As far as coaching is concerned, I'd let Pop coach as long as he wants to coach. And then move Mike Budenholzer to the big boy chair once Pop is done.

[jason1301]

I like your idea of keeping Timmy and Manu for as long as possible. I don't think Tony and Tiago will ever stay healthy to carry us during the reg season. We need a big desperately.

[Redshadows]

Keep the big three as long as possible. Once Duncan and Ginobili retired, traded Parker for picks and young.
Keep Pop, Leonard and Splitter for rebuilding.

Well, I would wait to see what free agents the Spurs could get this summer.

[Spursfanfromafar]

Good post, Timvp.

I actually think that the Spurs' future is still quite bright for the next 2-3 years. Tim Duncan will surely acquiesce to a relative pay cut that could be enough to buy a decent FA next season. And adding a good FA (Nicolas Batum?) alongwith this core (after amnestying RJ), bringing Erazem Lorbek on a decent contract plus getting any of the vets on vet deals who would want to hop on to win a championship (there are quite a few - Kevin Garnett for e.g. or Steve Nash who are still very productive) can keep the Spurs in contention. And the later future can be built around the core of Parker, Splitter, Leonard. The future indeed seems bright.

[Robz4000]

Solid take and I agree 100%. I can see Parker, Splitter, and Leonard leading the team to the playoffs. As long as they get there anything can happen. They also have enough young role players (Neal, Green, and maybe Blair if he can become consistently productive) around that can be kept on for cheap. Just make Parker the defacto leader and see how things go. Straight-out blowing up won't solve anything and could very well screw the organization up to the point they're constantly on the rebuild.

[Seventyniner]

So many players on the Spurs are worth more to this team than they would be to any other team, at their salary levels. The Spurs could very well prefer paying Parker $12M to paying Deron Williams $17M, for example, because of the chemistry Parker has with the other players and his knowledge of the system.

And yes, I know, it's not like the Spurs really get to choose between Parker and DWill.

[timvp]

-Use job security as an advantage. Let's be honest, the current front office basically has a life long contract. They brought four championships to San Antonio … I couldn't imagine a time when any sane owner would think there might be a better group of people to man the front office. So with that job security in mind, the Spurs front office can take long-term gambles -- such as drafting Splitter even though he had a worrisome buyout situation. More than 90% of front offices simply couldn't risk wasting a first round pick like that.

Other examples:

-Low to medium risk gambles on unproven young players ... like the Jackie Butler contract. (Obviously, that didn't work out but it was a worthwhile gamble.)

-Trading for Euro players who appear unwilling to jump the pond at the moment. Due to their job security, such players are more valuable to the Spurs FO than to other teams.

-Trading or signing a player with a character red flag. For example, a player that has a "coach killer" rep is more valuable to the Spurs since he couldn't actually kill a coach here.

[timvp]

Keep the big three as long as possible. Once Duncan and Ginobili retired, traded Parker for picks and young.
Keep Pop, Leonard and Splitter for rebuilding.

Well, I would wait to see what free agents the Spurs could get this summer.

Tbh, if you are going to trade Parker, you probably have to also trade Splitter. He's already 27 so he's not someone who you can try to build around by himself for the next decade.

[baseline bum]

I can't agree. Kawhi Leonard is likely to become one of those role players you don't want to overpay. Splitter might be too. You lose one of them when someone bids high and your plan comes crashing down to the floor. Besides, I don't think Tony is going to be much by age 32 or so based on the downfall of other players whose games revolved around their quickness (e.g., Isiah, Iverson, KJ, Archibald, etc.). I can't see any way to parallel the upcoming rebuild with the one the Spurs had with a young Hall of Famer in Duncan. A 1998 Tim Duncan would be worth every single player on the current roster. Rebuilding with Splitter as your main guy going forward is a far far cry.

[TMTTRIO]

Tim Duncan I can see us keeping around for a while longer but Manu I worry about him not even lasting for the rest of this season without him having to be think retirement. I doubt Manu stays after next season. But the other points I agree. Tony, Kawhi, and Splitter are all going to be great plus bring in some other talent to surround them.

[baseline bum]

As for free agency, I personally think it's an awful idea. San Antonio will never land the Shaq or the LeBron that you need to win a title in the NBA. They might get a Joe Johnson level player at best, and that won't get it done without a franchise guy from the draft.

[Robz4000]

I can't agree. Kawhi Leonard is likely to become one of those role players you don't want to overpay. Splitter might be too. You lose one of them when someone bids high and your plan comes crashing down to the floor. Besides, I don't think Tony is going to be much by age 32 or so based on the downfall of other players whose games revolved around their quickness (e.g., Isiah, Iverson, KJ, Archibald, etc.). I can't see any way to parallel the upcoming rebuild with the one the Spurs had with a young Hall of Famer in Duncan. A 1998 Tim Duncan would be worth every single player on the current roster. Rebuilding with Splitter as your main guy going forward is a far far cry.
Tony's beginning to show some good skills outside what his athleticism brings to the table. He's making better decisions with the ball, becoming better at passing and creating (though he still relies on sprinting into the paint to dish outside), and his leadership abilities will still be key in the future considering how well he knows the Spurs' system. He may also be able to attract marque free agents in the future based on his ties to Europe and the French bball team. It's also too early to determine where Kawhi's ceiling is, imo, it's only his rookie season. Splitter is injury-prone, but when healthy is a very solid bigman. The FO should be able to hold onto Kawhi and Tiago in bidding wars if they're serious about them; I can't see the FO pulling a Memphis, Cleveland, etc. unless they go way downhill.

[Robz4000]

As for free agency, I personally think it's an awful idea. San Antonio will never land the Shaq or the LeBron that you need to win a title in the NBA. They might get a Joe Johnson level player at best, and that won't get it done without a franchise guy from the draft.
This I agree with, but there's no reason they can't put together a 2003-2005ish Detroit-like team that can come out of nowhere to win. Thinking you need a superstar to have a shot at winning is pessimistic.

[DMC]

I would not resign Tim to the salary he's getting now. That would cripple us through infinity and beyond. Our light at the end of the tunnel is Duncan's expiring contract. That will free up cap space to bring in youth and talent. Duncan can stick around, but not for that money. Same with Manu. The guy is awesome, but he's only played about half the time he's been here (or so it seems).

We aren't going to go anywhere with no cap space and the same group of "stars" surrounded by role players.

As for the front office, if it were stocks they would be gone tomorrow because the Spurs will probably never be worth more than they are now unless they get some UT like contract (which ain't gonna happen).

No, it's been fun for a decade and more, but the credits are rolling on this movie. We say it every year, but this season is truly our last chance IF we do not receive some grand charity from mega-talent (which also isn't going to happen).

Our greatest gains, ever, were to have two shitty seasons and acquire 1st overall picks on years that two of the greatest players of all time would go 1st. Almost any years between those two and we could still be ringless. Pretending we can re-manufacture that with sentiment and scouting is wishful thinking.

It's now or never for this group.

If we just want to continue getting to the playoffs and hoping for the best, that's different. We're doing ok with that now.

Oh, and I think there's a "z" somewhere in Bud's name but I like how you spelled it. :lol

[baseline bum]

I'd bring Tim back for sure for whatever he wants, and if the Spurs can show they can survive this season and have a respectable playoff run, then I bring Tony and Manu back for one more year. If the team is worn to ground by mid-April again, I trade Tony and Manu on draft day and try to stockpile picks like Presti did in Seattle. Then I hope I can draft the next Durant reasonably soon. I put it in RC's hands to find the next Westbrook and Ibaka. I don't hold onto Ray Allen to the bitter end.

[DMC]

I'd bring Tim back for sure for whatever he wants, and if the Spurs can show they can survive this season and have a respectable playoff run, then I bring Tony and Manu back for one more year. If the team is worn to ground by mid-April again, I trade Tony and Manu on draft day and try to stockpile picks like Presti did in Seattle. Then I hope I can draft the next Durant reasonably soon. I put in RC's hands to find the next Westbrook and Ibaka. I don't hold onto Ray Allen to the bitter end.
I only give Duncan that to sell tickets. If it's about winning a ring, Tim is not worth that kind of money for anything but sentiment.

[Robz4000]

I would not resign Tim to the salary he's getting now. That would cripple us through infinity and beyond. Our light at the end of the tunnel is Duncan's expiring contract. That will free up cap space to bring in youth and talent. Duncan can stick around, but not for that money. Same with Manu. The guy is awesome, but he's only played about half the time he's been here (or so it seems).

We aren't going to go anywhere with no cap space and the same group of "stars" surrounded by role players.

As for the front office, if it were stocks they would be gone tomorrow because the Spurs will probably never be worth more than they are now unless they get some UT like contract (which ain't gonna happen).

No, it's been fun for a decade and more, but the credits are rolling on this movie. We say it every year, but this season is truly our last chance IF we do not receive some grand charity from mega-talent (which also isn't going to happen).

Our greatest gains, ever, were two have two shitty seasons and acquire 1st overall picks on years that two of the greatest players of all time would go 1st. Almost any years between those two and we could still be ringless. Pretending we can re-manufacture that with sentiment and scouting is wishful thinking.

It's now or never for this group.
The Spurs have been in it years before. They've been to the Western Conference Finals several times in the past, a couple times before the Admiral was drafted. They may not ever be true contenders, but they can have a shot. You're right in that after this year the Spurs will more than likely not win a title with Tim, Tony, and Manu as their best players. However, there's no reason to think they can't find some way to win; they've found talent out of nowhere several times in the past.

[5in10]

So would it be worth going after a batum, Lopez, or Hibbert this summer, or would you see them as over paid role players?

[DMC]

The Spurs have been in it years before. They've been to the Western Conference Finals several times in the past, a couple times before the Admiral was drafted. They may not ever be true contenders, but they can have a shot. You're right in that after this year the Spurs will more than likely not win a title with Tim, Tony, and Manu as their best players. However, there's no reason to think they can't find some way to win; they've found talent out of nowhere several times in the past.
I know, I've been a Spurs fan since before David was drafted. Regardless, the Spurs best two gains were Robinson and Duncan, both came from having 1st overall picks in the draft.

Big names do not choose to come to SA. They avoid it like the plague. They speak highly of it, but prefer the limelight.

It's wishful thinking to say that the Spurs can find some way to win a ring. It's not something you conjure up with a few key subs and rotation changes and a D-league call up. It's something you build for. The Spurs kill it in the regular season but their act is the oldest in the league and everyone knows it and can adapt to it in the playoffs.

There's no way this Spurs team takes out Miami in the next 4 years. They don't even take out Dallas or OKC in a best of 7, and Memphis is doubtful.

If you're not a true contender, you don't really have a shot. You just have the appearance of a shot.

[baseline bum]

This I agree with, but there's no reason they can't put together a 2003-2005ish Detroit-like team that can come out of nowhere to win. Thinking you need a superstar to have a shot at winning is pessimistic.

The 2004 Pistons are the only team the last 32 years to win a title without a Hall of Fame level superstar still playing at prime level. The 1994 Rockets, 2003 Spurs, 2006 Heat, and 2011 Mavericks are the only ones to do it with only one.

[DMC]

The 2004 Pistons are the only team the last 32 years to win a title without a Hall of Fame level superstar still playing at prime level. The 1994 Rockets, 2003 Spurs, 2006 Heat, and 2011 Mavericks are the only ones to do it with only one.
But there's no reason the Spurs cannot do what's only been done once in 32 years.

I was thinking that there are a number of reasons, and that Timvp laid them out quite clearly in his defensive statistics thread.

[Robz4000]

I know, I've been a Spurs fan since before David was drafted. Regardless, the Spurs best two gains were Robinson and Duncan, both came from having 1st overall picks in the draft.

Big names do not choose to come to SA. They avoid it like the plague. They speak highly of it, but prefer the limelight.

It's wishful thinking to say that the Spurs can find some way to win a ring. It's not something you conjure up with a few key subs and rotation changes and a D-league call up. It's something you build for. The Spurs kill it in the regular season but their act is the oldest in the league and everyone knows it and can adapt to it in the playoffs.

There's no way this Spurs team takes out Miami in the next 4 years. They don't even take out Dallas or OKC in a best of 7, and Memphis is doubtful.

If you're not a true contender, you don't really have a shot. You just have the appearance of a shot.
I completely agree that this team can't contend, nor will they acquire a big name free agent. What I was saying is they can either find talent in the draft (doesn't have to be superstar caliber), through free agents that aren't game changers per-see, or even overseas as they've done in the past. The Spurs will need to make changes, and it may not work out, but it's hard to count out the FO with how successful it's been for generally the entire time the franchise has existed.

[Robz4000]

The 2004 Pistons are the only team the last 32 years to win a title without a Hall of Fame level superstar still playing at prime level. The 1994 Rockets, 2003 Spurs, 2006 Heat, and 2011 Mavericks are the only ones to do it with only one.
I don't really consider the 2007 Spurs a team with a superstar. Don't get me wrong, Duncan was still a highly capable bigman, Manu was still Manu, and Parker played out of his mind, but that team was mostly a group of veterans that banded together to get a ring.

[baseline bum]

I don't really consider the 2007 Spurs a team with a superstar. Don't get me wrong, Duncan was still a highly capable bigman, Manu was still Manu, and Parker played out of his mind, but that team was mostly a group of veterans that banded together to get a ring.

Would you say the same about the 05 Spurs too?

[Robz4000]

Would you say the same about the 05 Spurs too?
lol come on, that was still when Duncan was in his prime. No way they'd beat a Pistons team that Kobe, Shaq, Malone, and Grant couldn't beat without Duncan at his best.

[baseline bum]

Duncan was basically the same player in 07 that he was in 05, except he was healthier.

[DMC]

I completely agree that this team can't contend, nor will they acquire a big name free agent. What I was saying is they can either find talent in the draft (doesn't have to be superstar caliber), through free agents that aren't game changers per-see, or even overseas as they've done in the past. The Spurs will need to make changes, and it may not work out, but it's hard to count out the FO with how successful it's been for generally the entire time the franchise has existed.
Well you can only go back to the well so many times before you start drawing mud.

The difference between being a playoff team and not being a playoff team is very subtle, mindset and coaching quite often. The difference between being a playoff team and being a title contender is enormous, often cannot be overcome by better coaching of the same people or random acquisitions.

Unless Pop and crew can find enough talent to overcome the team stacking that's going on elsewhere, the Spurs are not going to see the show for a long ass time.

[sehui]

I don't really remember how San Antonio was back before Tim Duncan, but during the seasons when the team really sucked...how bad was the attendance?

[Robz4000]

Yeah, I guess when you look at it, they were basically the same. The stats from both season were similar, though Duncan seemed to be a more defensive presence than offensive. He just didn't strike me as overwhelmingly dominant anymore at the time, but it was mostly due to the fact the Cavs didn't require Duncan to go off to win.

I would like to add that the 2008 Celtics didn't really have superstar caliber players. By this time KG and Ray Allen weren't really superstars, and Pierce wasn't in his prime either. It's been debated a bit recently on the board, though.

[Cant_Be_Faded]

I'd bring Tim back for sure for whatever he wants, and if the Spurs can show they can survive this season and have a respectable playoff run, then I bring Tony and Manu back for one more year. If the team is worn to ground by mid-April again, I trade Tony and Manu on draft day and try to stockpile picks like Presti did in Seattle. Then I hope I can draft the next Durant reasonably soon. I put it in RC's hands to find the next Westbrook and Ibaka. I don't hold onto Ray Allen to the bitter end.

The irony being that an aged Ray Allen later won a championship with the team he was traded to....

[DMC]

KG and Ray Allen certainly were superstars, in every sense.

[underdawg]

with the chances of the Spurs having a top tier player again in the near future being small, the Spurs can still compete with just sticking with a commitment to defense that a lot of teams ignore (possibly just to fill seats).

Where the Spurs can go beyond just being competitive, lies in having more than 2 or 3 scorers (tony, manu and neal). In referring to scorers, I'm talking about players that can usually score regardless of the defense in the playoffs. Tiago might get there (hopefully this year), but he's more than likely going to be a defender along with Leonard and so far Green.

The Spurs are one more scorer (10 ppg in the playoffs) and one more big defender away from being true contenders.

[Robz4000]

Well you can only go back to the well so many times before you start drawing mud.

The difference between being a playoff team and not being a playoff team is very subtle, mindset and coaching quite often. The difference between being a playoff team and being a title contender is enormous, often cannot be overcome by better coaching of the same people or random acquisitions.

Unless Pop and crew can find enough talent to overcome the team stacking that's going on elsewhere, the Spurs are not going to see the show for a long ass time.
That's the one thing that's worrying me about the future. I'm hoping that Miami fails again and they decide to break up the big 3. Other teams like Chicago and OKC have gotten their talent through trades and drafting, which is basically how the Spurs will do it (again). The Spurs' ability to find foreign talent will also increase their chances.

Coaching in the playoffs can and definitely will make a difference, even if it's with the same group. Spurs were getting owned by LA through the early 2000s, then in '03 managed to find a way to beat them with the same core with added role players. Same can be said of the Suns finally beating the Spurs in '09 (though that had to do more with circumstance and father time imo). Keep in mind that match-ups are also extremely important. Had the Spurs ran into the Mavs in '07 they more than likely don't win the title, but because the Mavs faced a tough match-up in GS and lost, it opened the chance for the Spurs to reach the Finals.

The fact can't be changed that the Big 3 are just about done and the future will need to be planned out, but the future isn't bleak at all for the rest of the team sans Tim and Manu as long as the right adjustments are made and the right pieces added.

[Robz4000]

KG and Ray Allen certainly were superstars, in every sense.
By the time they got to Boston, they weren't. They were still star players and combined you could consider them superstars, but individually they were past their primes.


with the chances of the Spurs having a top tier player again in the near future being small, the Spurs can still compete with just sticking with a commitment to defense that a lot of teams ignore (possibly just to fill seats).

Where the Spurs can go beyond just being competitive, lies in having more than 2 or 3 scorers (tony, manu and neal). In referring to scorers, I'm talking about players that can usually score regardless of the defense in the playoffs. Tiago might get there (hopefully this year), but he's more than likely going to be a defender along with Leonard and so far Green.

The Spurs are one more scorer (10 ppg in the playoffs) and one more big defender away from being true contenders.

+1. However, when it comes to this year, the offense is set. Rank 7 in offensive efficiency without Manu is spectacular. They need that defensive big though.

[therealtruth]

The Spurs have done it before with Parker and Ginobili. They need to apply that magic to looking for a bigman.

[therealtruth]

That's the one thing that's worrying me about the future. I'm hoping that Miami fails again and they decide to break up the big 3. Other teams like Chicago and OKC have gotten their talent through trades and drafting, which is basically how the Spurs will do it (again). The Spurs' ability to find foreign talent will also increase their chances.

Coaching in the playoffs can and definitely will make a difference, even if it's with the same group. Spurs were getting owned by LA through the early 2000s, then in '03 managed to find a way to beat them with the same core with added role players. Same can be said of the Suns finally beating the Spurs in '09 (though that had to do more with circumstance and father time imo). Keep in mind that match-ups are also extremely important. Had the Spurs ran into the Mavs in '07 they more than likely don't win the title, but because the Mavs faced a tough match-up in GS and lost, it opened the chance for the Spurs to reach the Finals.

The fact can't be changed that the Big 3 are just about done and the future will need to be planned out, but the future isn't bleak at all for the rest of the team sans Tim and Manu as long as the right adjustments are made and the right pieces added.

With the new CBA it's going to be harder to keep the big 3 together. Especially when the new taxes kick in.

[Robz4000]

With the new CBA it's going to be harder to keep the big 3 together. Especially when the new taxes kick in.
Pat Riley is the one owner besides maybe Buss and that Russian who owns the Nets who isn't afraid of going over the cap. Cuban is trying to get ownership of two professional franchises (God forbid) so he'll be less inclined to cross it while the rest of the league's owners aren't as wealthy (at least not ridiculously so). Only way the Heat big 3 are broken up is if they fail to win this year or next.

[angelbelow]

Great write up, agree with the majority of your take.
-Not overpaying the role player part is absolutely essential. In general the Spurs have been great with the contracts they hand out. In an era where overpaying someone is trendy, the Spurs must remain smart.
-Flipping players like Hill for solid players like Leonard is definitely another great way to keep things rolling. Maybe we can get lucky with Anderson and Blair too..

[jjktkk]

Nice writeup Tim. I disagree with the open checkbook for Tim and Manu though, giving their age and injuries, especially Manu. I definitely wouldn't lowball them, but if they still want to play, give them a far contract.

[Redshadows]

Tbh, if you are going to trade Parker, you probably have to also trade Splitter. He's already 27 so he's not someone who you can try to build around by himself for the next decade.
Well, I just think Splitter would be sort of a long time start center like Varejao, not a star to rebuild around.

The Spurs are always not attractive for big free agents and they might not be able to sign a good-enough star to be with Parker to keep the Spurs a contender for the champion. That is why I think the Spurs might rebuild the team through draft.

TBH, I always believe that with Pop and RC the Spurs would have a bright future.

[angelbelow]

Nice writeup Tim. I disagree with the open checkbook for Tim and Manu though, giving their age and injuries, especially Manu. I definitely wouldn't lowball them, but if they still want to play, give them a far contract.

I used to agree with approaching Duncan and Manu from more of a cut-throat business perspective and hand them fair contracts. To do that, you would have to ignore past accomplishments and only focus on the future. From that perspective both Duncan and Manu would probably deserve something like 3-5 million a year.

However, I think the open checkbook is absolutely the way to go with these two guys.
-The chances of us winning a championship probably won't change too much the next few years. Not until we can land a big time free agent or hit the jackpot in the draft. It won't really matter if we keep Duncan and Ginobili at an inflated value or if we happen to get them to accept low ball offers.
-2012: Dwight Howard and Deron Williams are the 2 biggest names but both are rumored to team up in Brooklyn or in Dallas. Outside of those two, there aren't many realistic options.
2013: Interesting options: Josh Smith, David West, Paul Millsap, Al Jefferson.. but no big time, team changing type players.
-Therefore, we have to consider the entertainment and the business aspect of basketball. Duncan (and Ginobili) will fill seats and sell merchandise. They should hit their return of investment (roi) without much of a problem and therefore keep the ownership group happy. Sign Duncan to a 2 year 20 million contract to keep him happy and motivated, fill the seats, sell in merchandise, and wait until 2014 and see if there are any big time free agents at that time.

[Ditty]

I just hope we won't rebuild like the Rockets, and stack up on role players and tried to build a team around them except using those pieces to trade for a star:vomit:

[jjktkk]

I used to agree with approaching Duncan and Manu from more of a cut-throat business perspective and hand them fair contracts. To do that, you would have to ignore past accomplishments and only focus on the future. From that perspective both Duncan and Manu would probably deserve something like 3-5 million a year.

However, I think the open checkbook is absolutely the way to go with these two guys.
-The chances of us winning a championship probably won't change too much the next few years. Not until we can land a big time free agent or hit the jackpot in the draft. It won't really matter if we keep Duncan and Ginobili at an inflated value or if we happen to get them to accept low ball offers.
-2012: Dwight Howard and Deron Williams are the 2 biggest names but both are rumored to team up in Brooklyn or in Dallas. Outside of those two, there aren't many realistic options.
2013: Interesting options: Josh Smith, David West, Paul Millsap, Al Jefferson.. but no big time, team changing type players.
-Therefore, we have to consider the entertainment and the business aspect of basketball. Duncan (and Ginobili) will fill seats and sell merchandise. They should hit their return of investment (roi) without much of a problem and therefore keep the ownership group happy. Sign Duncan to a 2 year 20 million contract to keep him happy and motivated, fill the seats, sell in merchandise, and wait until 2014 and see if there are any big time free agents at that time.

I consider 20 mil. fair for Tim. As for Manu, I'm not sure what would be a fair contract. And I agree that these two along with tp, should be lifelong Spurs. I just don't want any crippling contracts a few years from now, that will cripple the Spur's eventual rebuilding.

[jjktkk]

I just hope we won't rebuild like the Rockets, and stack up on role players and tried to build a team around them except using those pieces to trade for a star:vomit:

It will probably be similar. The Rockets team as presently constructed is the a good description for mediocrity. Good enough to possibly get in the playoffs, but not talented enough to contend. We Spurs fans have been spoiled by the Spurs impressive run, but without a few lottery picks and lack of a big market to entice marqee free agents, as well as a owner with deep pockets, we will struggle post Duncan era.

[mercos]

I agree with rebuilding on the fly and not blowing the team up. Parker has shown this year that he is an MVP caliber player that can lead a team. Tiago has shown himself to be a top ten big. They are the perfect duo to build around for the next few years. Reports of Duncan's demise have been greatly exaggerated as he is having a much better season this year than he did last year. The Spurs front office is the best in the game at finding cheap role players.

Blowing up the team and hoping to win the lottery is a recipe for years of mediocrity. There are many years where even the top pick is nothing special. Players like Tim Duncan and David Robinson come around once a decade at best. Planning around striking gold like the Spurs have previously is not wise.

[timvp]

I can't agree.Understandable since I wouldn't have agreed prior to the season.
Kawhi Leonard is likely to become one of those role players you don't want to overpay. Splitter might be too. You lose one of them when someone bids high and your plan comes crashing down to the floor.Could happen but that's not exactly a likely turn of events. Leonard could end up being cheap if he turns into a player who just concentrates on defense and rebounding. Or he could develop and be worth matching any outside offer. Maybe Splitter won't be worth his price tag but maybe he'll become a borderline All-Star like Marc Gasol and be worth a relatively big deal. I don't see anything concrete enough to decide the "scorched earth" route is better.


Besides, I don't think Tony is going to be much by age 32 or so based on the downfall of other players whose games revolved around their quickness (e.g., Isiah, Iverson, KJ, Archibald, etc.).Probably right. But maybe he masters the midrange and turns into a Sam Cassell type and remains valuable in his mid-30s.


I can't see any way to parallel the upcoming rebuild with the one the Spurs had with a young Hall of Famer in Duncan. A 1998 Tim Duncan would be worth every single player on the current roster. Rebuilding with Splitter as your main guy going forward is a far far cry.Agreed for the most part. There's no prime Duncan on this roster. And it's going to be almost impossible to transition into another group that can be championship caliber but any avenue the Spurs decide to take is going to result in long-shot odds.

If you do this gentle transition and avoid a complete scorched earth scenario, you can keep Typical Spur Fan engaged while possibly figuring out a way to put a competitive team on the court. If in five years everything is bleak, you could always go scorched earth then. You can't, however, do it the other way around. Once you scorch, there's no turning back . . .

[timvp]

As for free agency, I personally think it's an awful idea. San Antonio will never land the Shaq or the LeBron that you need to win a title in the NBA. They might get a Joe Johnson level player at best, and that won't get it done without a franchise guy from the draft.The Jazz landed Carlos Boozer and Memo Okur shortly after the Stockton/Malone era.

If the Spurs had Parker, Splitter, Leonard, Boozer-esque player and Okur-esque player ..... that ain't bad.

And the Jazz almost landed Corey Maggette after signing him to that offersheet. If the Jazz can land Boozer/Okur/Maggette types in free agency, there's no excuse for the Spurs FO.

[yavozerb]

The Jazz landed Carlos Boozer and Memo Okur shortly after the Stockton/Malone era.

If the Spurs had Parker, Splitter, Leonard, Boozer-esque player and Okur-esque player ..... that ain't bad.

And the Jazz almost landed Corey Maggette after signing him to that offersheet. If the Jazz can land Boozer/Okur/Maggette types in free agency, there's no excuse for the Spurs FO.

Money talks and if the spurs can compete with other offers then they certainly have good shot to land players. The usual case for the spurs in the past is the lack of $ offered to most FA's and therefore little interest from those FA's..

[timvp]

I would not resign Tim to the salary he's getting now. That would cripple us through infinity and beyond.Tbh, re-signing Duncan to a deal he'd want would "cripple" the Spurs until that contract is over. Two years most likely.


Our light at the end of the tunnel is Duncan's expiring contract. That will free up cap space to bring in youth and talent.Eh not really. It's not like the Spurs can use the Duncan money and make themselves surefire title contenders. It'll remain a longshot with or without the Duncan money on the books.

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

Timvp, what do you think the Spurs plans would be for this summer? Assuming RJ gets amnestied, the 1st round pick traded away and Blair or CJ salary dumped that could create more than $17 million in cap space.

Obviously a lot depends on what Duncan decides to do and how much he re-signs for, but do you think they'd go all out for a player like Hibbert, who'd probably demand close to max ( starting at 13M? ) or, since most players of this ilk are restricted and the offer likely matched, they could re-sign Duncan to something like 2 years and 15M, add Lorbek for something like 3 and 10M, target a MLE type of roleplayer with the rest of the cap space and then maybe sign De Colo with the new exception for teams under the cap. Any thoughts about the summer plans and potential targets?

[GSH]

The system is designed such that there is a constant talent drain that has to be replinished through the draft. It's a combination of escalating salaries, the salary cap, and the aging process. The Spurs organization has done a fantastic job of finding good players. Aging but still serviceable vets, talented and hungry castoffs, overachieving late draft picks, etc. And all of those things have allowed them to extend the lifespan of this team. But that's not the same thing as re-building.

There are a few big market teams that might be able to re-build through acquisition. But even the Lakers are going to much the same thing as the Spurs, in terms of talent drain due to an extended period of high draft picks. It's hard to over-estimate what it meant to the Lakers to get No.1 pick Magic Johnson, followed by No.1 pick James Worthy three years later. Even Miami wouldn't have been able to put together their team without already having a lottery pick (Dwayne Wade) in his prime.

Anything short of getting a talent infusion from the draft is delaying the inevitible. The Spurs FO is better at delaying than any other in the league. And if all the matchups all fell just right, they might actually squeeze out another Finals appearance. (And once you get there, anything can happen.) But that's not re-building. To do that, they Spurs will need a talent infusion from the draft. Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili were draft miracles. But you have to ask the question: Even with those two draft steals, how many trophies would the Spurs have without the No.1 pick of Tim Duncan?

I think the Spurs can remain a perinneal playoff team by doing what you suggest. But to become legitimate playoff contenders in the future, it's going to take a lottery pick.



The Jazz landed Carlos Boozer and Memo Okur shortly after the Stockton/Malone era.

If the Spurs had Parker, Splitter, Leonard, Boozer-esque player and Okur-esque player ..... that ain't bad.



I could point out that the best player on the Jazz was still Deron Williams - a No.3 draft pick. But Tony Parker is as good as a lottery pick, even if he went later in the draft. Yes, that lineup ain't bad.

But then again - that Jazz team got their asses kicked pretty soundly by the Spurs. I still think it takes draft picks to legitimately re-build.

[timvp]

Duncan can stick around, but not for that money.So if Duncan asks for $40 million over two years or he's going to walk, how many of you are going to let him walk?

Personally, I would give him the $40 million over two years.

1. He's earned it.

2. If he would have come out of school one year earlier, he probably earns $100 million more in his career. Why punish him for waiting for the Spurs to suck enough to draft him?

3. Do you really want to push him into a Raptors Hakeem scenario? That was just embarrassing for Hakeem and the Rockets. And it didn't help them in their rebuilding efforts at all.

4. Internet Spur Fan was willing to throw David Robinson away in the summer of 2002. How stupid does that look in retrospect? If the Spurs would have actually landed Chris Webber that summer, the Spurs don't win championships 2, 3 or 4.

5. David Robinson being able to retire a Spur and unquestionably always being tied to the Spurs was worth every penny. Compare that to the Hakeem/Rockets embarrassment and does anyone really want to look back 20 years from now and be like, "Good thing we kicked Tim Duncan to the curb so that we could throw money at JaVale McGee! We didn't win anything anyways but it was worth it!"

6. If the Spurs are ever going to attract a max free agent, they have to sell the "Spurs family" aspect. If a player can look and see that the Spurs took care of David Robinson and Tim Duncan their whole careers, that'd be worth something. On the other hand, it could hurt future negotiations if a player realizes this team gets rid of you the moment you might not be worth your contract any longer even if you bring four championships to the city.

7. The 2012 free agent market sucks anyways so even if it takes $20 million per year to get Duncan to eventually retire as a Spur, it's not like the Spurs will be missing out on someone awesome this summer.

[timvp]

Our greatest gains, ever, were to have two shitty seasons and acquire 1st overall picks on years that two of the greatest players of all time would go 1st. Almost any years between those two and we could still be ringless. Pretending we can re-manufacture that with sentiment and scouting is wishful thinking.

Those were two huge flukes though. Tim Duncan and David Robinson are the last two number one overall picks to win a championship with the team that drafted them. It's not like tanking and landing a top pick is a surefire way to rebuild. It looks that way to Spurs fans because it happened so easily but other teams have wasted hundreds of combined years by simply banking on the draft's magical powers.

[DPG21920]

So by that logic why would you be against trading for Okafor if he potentially helps upfront and is better than who the Spurs will get in free agency anyways?

[timvp]

If the team is worn to ground by mid-April again, I trade Tony and Manu on draft day and try to stockpile picks like Presti did in Seattle. Then I hope I can draft the next Durant reasonably soon. I put it in RC's hands to find the next Westbrook and Ibaka. I don't hold onto Ray Allen to the bitter end.

Does San Antonio really survive a scorched earth scenario, though? Spurs fans have become so spoiled that if you go from championship contender today to 15-win team tomorrow, you could disenfranchise the fanbase. Spurs fans wouldn't understand and the AT&T Center would be empty until the Spurs are a playoff team again ... and that could take a long, long time.

The Bulls could survive scorched earth because of their market size and huge fanbase. If you scorch earth the Spurs, you could inadvertently start a chain of events that has the team leaving the city in the next 10-15 years, tbh.



P.S.

And Presti ended up trading Ray Allen for what turned out to be Kendrick Perkins. Not exactly a model I'd want the FO to follow if they are going to trade TP...

[DPG21920]

I also don't get why, considering you just changed your mind, you seem to be bashing the draft strategy by saying things like "drafts magical powers...". I don't disagree entirely with your new premise, but with how great the Spurs draft, you'd have to imagine they'll do well with high picks.

[5in10]

I think we should make an offer at batum. The guys has turned it on recently and has the effiency required for the spurs system. If Tiago develops a jumpshot this summer he will be one of the best big men in the league.

[GSH]

So if Duncan asks for $40 million over two years or he's going to walk, how many of you are going to let him walk?

Personally, I would give him the $40 million over two years.




Duncan and Splitter together are a pretty damned good big man tandem. They haven't been dominating on the floor together, but I think a training camp could fix that. The Spurs won a Championship with Avery Johnson, who was nearing the end of his career. Nobody, as far as I can remember, wins it all without top notch bigs. If you're not going to blow the team up, you pay Tim until he decides it's over.

[vander]

spurs should have started rebuilding 3 years ago and been done and contending again now

back then TP and manu had great trade value, TP has resurrected his value somewhat, but he's still got a ton of miles on him.

:wakeup

and for TD, he's been getting paid for past performance already for 2 years now, if he wants to keep playing for the spurs it's 10 mill a year TOPS, if you can't get out of bed and play some BBall for 10 million, then bye bye

[timvp]

Timvp, what do you think the Spurs plans would be for this summer? Assuming RJ gets amnestied, the 1st round pick traded away and Blair or CJ salary dumped that could create more than $17 million in cap space.

I think their first step should be to hand Duncan a blank contract and tell him to fill it out. Then go from there.

As far as specific free agents, tbh, I haven't put much thought into it yet.

[timvp]

Anything short of getting a talent infusion from the draft is delaying the inevitible.

Most likely true. For the Spurs to rebuild into a championship contender, chances are high that it will have to be via the draft.

But what are you willing to get to that point? Without a scorched earth scenario in which the Spurs sell off all their assets, they could be quite a bit away from a point in which they naturally get a high lottery pick.

[mountainballer]

I agree the Spurs should try to re sign either Tim and Manu for 2 more seasons, but (like other posters) I don't agree to the "at any cost" policy. Tim will have crossed the 200 M mark this season and manu will be close to 100 M, when his contract is over. the "underpayed" tag is getting a bit old, Tim has always been payed max, or close to the max and Manu, who was kind of underpayed in the first years got a very generous extension in 2010. I think, at the end of the day, the business part of the realtionship of both players with the Spurs can be called "fair" on both sides.
that said, reasonable contract extensions for Tim and Manu are crucial for the franchise near and longer term future. reasonable IMHO means 8 M per for Tim and 6 for Manu. this would allow the Spurs to work the FA market in 2012 and 2014. if Spurs give Tim more than the mentioned 8M, they won't be a player 2012. simple maths.

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

spurs should have started rebuilding 3 years ago and been done and contending again now


lol which was the last small market team to blow it all up and contend within 3 years? Or even 5 years? Or even 10 years?

[letmk]

All good points, LJ. Hypothetically, however, if Holt is wealthy enough or is willing to spend (big if), I think stacking "bad" contracts might be a good way to keep the Spurs good.

When was the last time an established or quasi-all-star player came to the Spurs? We got Bowen and Jackson cheap, Finley too. The biggest contract was Barry at mid-level exception, whom you don't need to have a cap space to sign.

All in all, free agents chose not coming to the Spurs not because Spurs can't pay more, but because they don't want to play in a small market, and/or partly because of the reputation of Pop being strict and tough.

But if Holt can spend like Cuban, besides franchise player like Dirk, you keep other fat contracts with various years left, like some in 1-year, some in 2-year, some in 3-year, etc. left. Then you can always flip one into another as long as you would like to pay. Look at what Cuban did all these years. They even got Chandler with Dampier.

We literally hit the lottery once with Tim, then twice with Manu and Tony. But lightning can't strike twice, can it? And since Holt would/could not spend as Cuban, to be honest, after Tim/Manu really go down, we have no chance at all. I'm that pessimistic.

So what we say here are all moot point. Prepare for the down time for a long time. And things happened in Sacramento might happen in SA in 10 years, although they got a happy ending yesterday.

[timvp]

So by that logic why would you be against trading for Okafor if he potentially helps upfront and is better than who the Spurs will get in free agency anyways?
Okafor trade isn't happening for a variety of reasons, tbh. Him not being worth his contract is one such reason.


I also don't get why, considering you just changed your mind, you seem to be bashing the draft strategy by saying things like "drafts magical powers...". I don't disagree entirely with your new premise, but with how great the Spurs draft, you'd have to imagine they'll do well with high picks.I've always thought that Spurs fans overrate how easy it is to rebuild through the draft. Over the years, even in the championship years, Spurs fans have had the attitude of "we should tank this year so we can get the next Tim Duncan and then we'll be set for the future" as if it's a birthright to land David Robinsons and Tim Duncans whenever your willing to tank.

It's not quite as simple as saying "BRB playoffs, getting a Tim Duncan this year, see you next year :toast".

Spurs fans underrate the ugliness and lengthiness of rebuilding, tbh.

[timvp]

Spurs fans underrate the ugliness and lengthiness of rebuilding, tbh.


spurs should have started rebuilding 3 years ago and been done and contending again now

[Dex]

spurs should have started rebuilding 3 years ago and been done and contending again now


Yes, because a year separated from a championship and coming fresh off a Western Conference Finals run that got partially derailed by injuries and a fluke airplane malfunction is definitely the time to blow things up and start rebuilding.

[timvp]

reasonable IMHO means 8 M per for Tim

So you let Duncan walk if he wants more than $8M to stay?

Just curious.

[K-State Spur]

I also don't get why, considering you just changed your mind, you seem to be bashing the draft strategy by saying things like "drafts magical powers...". I don't disagree entirely with your new premise, but with how great the Spurs draft, you'd have to imagine they'll do well with high picks.

i'd argue that the Spurs drafting strength is in finding guys later in the draft who are as good as players being drafted in the latter half of the lottery.

i don't think that means they could draft in the middle of the lottery and find guys who are worthy of being #1 or #2 overall picks. The magic doesn't translate there as there just aren't many of those guys available.

for tanking to be worthwhile from a draft perspective, your pingpong ball needs to come up #1 or #2 AND it needs to happen in the right year.

You could make an argument that the 2 best careers drafted, regardless of slot, from 1999-2002 were Tony Parker & Manu Ginobili. Pau Gasol and Amare Stoudemire (whose knee will explode any minute now) offer the only legit arguments against.

[vander]

Yes, because a year separated from a championship and coming fresh off a Western Conference Finals run that got partially derailed by injuries and a fluke airplane malfunction is definitely the time to blow things up and start rebuilding.

and have the spurs won anything since?

[vander]

Spurs fans underrate the ugliness and lengthiness of rebuilding, tbh.

yes, when you wait until your team has no tradeable assets left, it's long and ugly.

that's a big part of why I wanted to start 3 years ago

[GSH]

Most likely true. For the Spurs to rebuild into a championship contender, chances are high that it will have to be via the draft.

But what are you willing to get to that point? Without a scorched earth scenario in which the Spurs sell off all their assets, they could be quite a bit away from a point in which they naturally get a high lottery pick.


Well, one thing is for certain. The Spurs have provided a small market (us) with first rate entertainment, at a budget price. If they go the route you're talking about (and they likely will), they will continue to do that for a lot more years. And if they go the scorched earth route, they do run the risk of years of disappointment. God forbid they should draft another Len Bias, for instance. And to get one of the obvious draft picks, you have to be lucky as well as bad. It's possible to do everything right, and still wind up with mediocre results.

As usual when I disagree with you, I definitely see your logic and could almost swing the other way. Honestly, the two biggest problems this team has are R.J., and the unavoidable fact that Manu spends a lot of time injured. As much as I love Manu, if we could spend that $22 million (from him and RJ) some other way right now? We could contend with anyone for another trophy. When I think about it that way I get, like, optimistic and stuff.

[letmk]

When the Bulls stunk for more than 10 years (Chicago!!), you know we should try to be good as along as Tim and Manu can still play.

[timvp]

yes, when you wait until your team has no tradeable assets left, it's long and ugly.

that's a big part of why I wanted to start 3 years ago

If they traded Manu and Tony three years ago, it's highly unlikely they would have gotten a return that was even equal to what Manu and Tony have been worth over the last three years ... much less exceeding that level of play.

And either way, the Spurs would still be dealing with a declining Tim Duncan, which is 99% of the reason why a rebuild is necessary.

[Cant_Be_Faded]

6. If the Spurs are ever going to attract a max free agent, they have to sell the "Spurs family" aspect. If a player can look and see that the Spurs took care of David Robinson and Tim Duncan their whole careers, that'd be worth something. On the other hand, it could hurt future negotiations if a player realizes this team gets rid of you the moment you might not be worth your contract any longer even if you bring four championships to the city.


Bingo. I have thought about this subject a lot lately. Because I'm a pessimist at heart, I sincerely worry about the actual existence of the franchise once the big three are retired or gone, and spurs are potentially only winning twenty games a season. How long does this franchise stay in San Antonio?

Baseline bum has an excellent point about both free agents and over paying for role players that we draft. However, our only real shot at keeping those role players and landing any free agents could friend on the spurs one characteristic that separates us from most franchises: the family and loyalty cultivated by the Robinson era and continued by the Duncan era. If we blow the team up, the support for that mentality goes down the drain, and the franchise is near dead bottom in terms of overall viability. It will be more difficult to keep draft picks and snag free agents. The family mentality is our only advantage and by getting rid of the big three e will have given up our only advantage in acquisitions.

[Dex]

and have the spurs won anything since?

The day a GM is able to obtain the services of a psychic will be the start of the first ten-peat.

[mountainballer]

So you let Duncan walk if he wants more than $8M to stay?

Just curious.

tough question. likely not.
but then we can stop talk about rebuilding for another 2 years. 8M is just the magic number. more means that Spurs can only work with the MLE or similar numbers. but maybe it's the best to not overrate 2012 free agency and focus on what can be done with the MLE. (which means no run at Batum for example)

but do you see a team offer Tim 10 or more?

[vander]

If they traded Manu and Tony three years ago, it's highly unlikely they would have gotten a return that was even equal to what Manu and Tony have been worth over the last three years ... much less exceeding that level of play.

And either way, the Spurs would still be dealing with a declining Tim Duncan, which is 99% of the reason why a rebuild is necessary.

if we had traded them for picks and bad contracts, then tanked, we'd have had around 5 lottery picks in 2 years, and money for a big FA when we wanted one.

and my perspective is championship or bust, manu and TP have kept the Spurs good for the last 3 years, but not contenders for a championship, they were just years down the drain.

[vander]

The day a GM is able to obtain the services of a psychic will be the start of the first ten-peat.

so, are you trying to say that I'm psychic?

[timvp]

if we had traded them for picks and bad contracts, then tanked, we'd have had around 5 lottery picks in 2 years, and money for a big FA when we wanted one. You can't tank with Tim Duncan on your team. Doesn't work. Unless, of course, in your masterplan three years ago you also traded away Duncan.

And three years ago after Manu's leg exploded in the Olympics, you'd have be lucky to salary dump him ... much less get something back for him.

[Muser]

At this point in their careers I agree about Manu and Duncan because you're really not going to get anything great in a trade for them anyway. Disagree with the Splitter/Parker tandem, once Duncan and Manu go then you have to blow the team up or we turn into the past few seasons Detroit Pistons. Not good enough for the playoffs but not bad enough for a high draft pick.

[Paranoid Pop]

if we had traded them for picks and bad contracts, then tanked, we'd have had around 5 lottery picks in 2 years, and money for a big FA when we wanted one.

and my perspective is championship or bust, manu and TP have kept the Spurs good for the last 3 years, but not contenders for a championship, they were just years down the drain.

How many lottery picks does Minnesota have? They're still barely .500...

If anyone should have been traded it was manu because he's so injury prone but the fans veto'd it.

[Muser]

Minnesota have David Kahn as their GM, so that's a really bad example tbh.

[5in10]

Resign Duncan
Amnesty RJ
Go after Batum
Sign Lorbek

Call it an offseason. Having 2 perimeter defenders like Batum and Leonard would be sick.

[K-State Spur]

and my perspective is championship or bust, manu and TP have kept the Spurs good for the last 3 years, but not contenders for a championship, they were just years down the drain.

i'd say best record in the west is "contenders". arguably so is beating out a Mavs team the year before that would win it the next year.

unfortunately, bad match-ups, injuries, and just not playing well in key moments led to earlier knock outs that we wanted to see. but that doesn't mean they didn't have a puncher's chance heading into the playoffs. if the Mavs could win it all last year, so could the Spurs if the stars could align. sometimes, that's all you can ask for.

now, if you mean building a team that is championship FAVORITES? well, that takes a hell of a lot longer than 3 years and there hasn't been one player drafted in the past 3 years (even if we had gotten #1 overall pick by tanking) that would have altered that. In fact, Blake Griffin's all-star appearance this year represents the cumulative total of all-star appearances from the past 3 drafts.

[Dex]

so, are you trying to say that I'm psychic?

I'm saying that three years ago, you had no idea what position the Spurs would be in at this point in time either, and even if you had your suspicions, nobody would've paid them any attention anyways.

Not a single team in the league would blow up a championship / borderline-dynasty core on "premonitions".

But if you want to go on pretending that hindsight isn't 20/20, nothing I am going to say will likely change that.

[DesignatedT]

DROB got around 10mil/yr in his twilight years and that's probably about what Duncan is worth going forward. One can hope he takes even less but 10mil isn't overpaying him IMO.

Now assuming TD signes for that, RJ is amnestied, McDyess, TJ, JA come off the books and we resign Neal and Green to 2-4mil contracts what does that leave us to spend during the off-season?

[mountainballer]

just thought about it.
we won't get Batum via FA.
Blazers have tons of available money this summer, even if Wallace does not opt out.
considering Batum has been playing at all-star level lately, they will match any offer for Batum the Spurs might be willing, or are able to hand out.
if we want Batum, it will take a trade at deadline and then re sign him this summer.
the price will be Leonard plus 1st round pick 2012. maybe even plus Blair.

[TimmehC]

Resign Duncan
Amnesty RJ
Go after Batum
Sign Lorbek

Call it an offseason. Having 2 perimeter defenders like Batum and Leonard would be sick.

Not bad. That doesn't really address defense in the frontcourt, but at least Lorbek is a versatile offensive threat.

[vander]

You can't tank with Tim Duncan on your team. Doesn't work. Unless, of course, in your masterplan three years ago you also traded away Duncan.


he could have had an "injury"

and even without an "injury", duncan without any help would still have been a bottom 10 team these last 3 years

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

he could have had an "injury"

and even without an "injury", duncan without any help would still have been a bottom 10 team these last 3 years

So you have 3 picks in the 8th - 14th range from the last 3 drafts. Which players do you choose to contend with?

[vander]

I'm saying that three years ago, you had no idea what position the Spurs would be in at this point in time either, and even if you had your suspicions, nobody would've paid them any attention anyways.

Not a single team in the league would blow up a championship / borderline-dynasty core on "premonitions".

But if you want to go on pretending that hindsight isn't 20/20, nothing I am going to say will likely change that.

well, I knew they wouldn't contend for a championship, and I was rabble rabbling that they should trade Manu and TP while they still had value

[timvp]

well, I knew they wouldn't contend for a championship, and I was rabble rabbling that they should trade Manu and TP while they still had value

Tbh, your first post on SpursTalk was ....


i think the spurs need to blow it up



Good call ... well, except for the fact that the Spurs won the championship five months later.

[z0sa]

Great thread timvp and some awesome ideas. This is actually great timing for one of these threads - things are going well right now, and it seems as if the championship fire continues to be kindled. You just can't count the Spurs out.

However, I doubt Splitter's ability to be a 35MPG kind of guy with close/playoff games in the high 30s and 40s - at least, at the moment. Being 1B/2 in the NBA's long, tortuous season and playoffs is just a totally different animal than carrying a high level Euro team. That's really the main problem with the TP/Splitter combo leading things in 2-3 years, Splitter's viability. I've always wondered if his lack of playing time was attributed to a general unease about his health, so I guess we'll just have to wait that one out.

That said, I'd put the Spurs FO right at the top when it comes to shrewd decision making. If a big enough player was landed or traded for, and if they did not overpay guys like Leonard, and if another couple draft steals might be acquired, then there's no way you can give up on this team's aspirations, however slim they could appear at times.

I know I won't. Here's to a great season thus far and a still bright Spurs future. :flag:

[vander]

Tbh, your first post on SpursTalk was ....





Good call ... well, except for the fact that the Spurs won the championship five months later.

hmm, well I did say keep Duncan and Parker, so not exactly rebuilding, putting new and younger pieces around TD and TP in 07 probably would have netted more than just one more championship.

[Mal]

So you let Duncan walk if he wants more than $8M to stay?

Just curious.

Just talk to Duncan. He`s already took less salary to help Spurs getting better team.

I would ask you this question.

Buford - Look Timmy, we have a deal with Batum/Hibbert. He is willing to sign
here, PTB/IND wont matchup it. We send them 2 1st round picks as compensation. But to make it work , we could sign you only for 8 mil.

What would Duncan do ?
Go and search for more money elsewhere, retire, take the offer, take the offer but something like Dice (8mil,9mil, 5 of 10 mil guaranteed in 3 year).

Really dont think that Duncan would play more then 2 years from now. If so, there is still 10 mil on the table. Not bad.

It is still possible.

[baseline bum]

The Jazz landed Carlos Boozer and Memo Okur shortly after the Stockton/Malone era.

If the Spurs had Parker, Splitter, Leonard, Boozer-esque player and Okur-esque player ..... that ain't bad.

And the Jazz almost landed Corey Maggette after signing him to that offersheet. If the Jazz can land Boozer/Okur/Maggette types in free agency, there's no excuse for the Spurs FO.

Getting a player like Boozer or Okur to be my #1 wouldn't excite me at all. I don't see how the team ever gets anywhere without landing some kind of franchise player, and those are few and far between drafting 15 every year in a Rockets scenario like I see your plan becoming. If the team flames out again like last year, getting completely dominated by a borderline contender, I don't see what's the point of hanging onto the past.


So if Duncan asks for $40 million over two years or he's going to walk, how many of you are going to let him walk?

Personally, I would give him the $40 million over two years.

1. He's earned it.

2. If he would have come out of school one year earlier, he probably earns $100 million more in his career. Why punish him for waiting for the Spurs to suck enough to draft him?

3. Do you really want to push him into a Raptors Hakeem scenario? That was just embarrassing for Hakeem and the Rockets. And it didn't help them in their rebuilding efforts at all.


This is the only thing that could make me endorse your plan: ensuring we never see Tim playing for the Hawks, Sixers, Blazers, or some other pseudocontender. If Tim says you can't rebuild with me on the roster, then you do what he says. And yeah, 2 years, $40 million? I sign that contract in a second if I'm Holt. I really hope we get a strong playoff showing this season so it would make sense to keep the team together another year though.

[benefactor]

Vander with the "I Believe I Can Fly" GM goods, per his usual, tbh, imo, fwiw.

[justinandimcool]

I know realistically Duncan won't ask for less than 10 million to resign, but in theory could the Spurs miraculously convince him to say a 3 year 12 mill contract? I understand that's a humungous pay cut, but one can dream right?

[z0sa]

I really hope we get a strong playoff showing this season so it would make sense to keep the team together another year though.

IMHO, I don't see any way the Spurs get bounced early this year. Yeah, call me a homer and bring up last season, and I honestly don't have an answer to either. But this team just has that feel to it, at least, thus far and if healthy, that says "We can compete against anybody." That was distinctly lacking vs MEM, especially from Tony Parker.

And Spurs have only gotten better since last season anyway, considering Tiago's insurgence, Kawhi's obvious skill and potential, Green's sudden impact on both ends which helped soothe the GHill transition, and Neal's continuing expansion of his game.

Additionally, if by some miracle Ginobili is 95% healthy ...

[Fabbs]

OP is basing too much on sentimentality. Also do we need to post your quotes on Pop going senile? Yet you'd continue to hand him the keys? You take the keys away from senile/obstinate Gramps, not hand them to him.
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=153965&highlight=Celtics

Another Spurs championship without one of the Big 3 would have/would now go over just fine.
Prolly much too late now to trade any of them for much, excepting Parker.

Would OKC have gone for a GNob or Parker for 2nd overall pick (turned out to be Durant)? OKCs front office is so much smarter then Spurs 2008-current front office but still, i think they would have considered it.

[BanditHiro]

is dwight howard a FA this year?

[TeKu]

So you let Duncan walk if he wants more than $8M to stay?.

So he's worth DRob money ($10m/2yrs) and we can only afford $8m in order to still have capspace for some RFA. Isn't this the Dice/Bowen scenario where you agree the total $$$'s and give it over 3 years with a partial guarantee. So $8m per for 3 years with the last year 50% guaranteed. No need to shortchange Timmy.

[Fabbs]

If they traded Manu and Tony three years ago, it's highly unlikely they would have gotten a return that was even equal to what Manu and Tony have been worth over the last three years ... much less exceeding that level of play.

And either way, the Spurs would still be dealing with a declining Tim Duncan, which is 99% of the reason why a rebuild is necessary.
Says who?
Parker or GNob for #2 overall (Durant) in summer 2007?

Would historically greedy-dumbass Clippers have gone for Parker for Blake Griffin in summer 2010?

Lots of possibilities.....

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

Says who?
Parker or GNob for #2 overall (Durant) in summer 2007?

Would historically greedy-dumbass Clippers have gone for Parker for Blake Griffin in summer 2010?

Lots of possibilities.....

Really? I mean REALLY?

You're prob trolling, cause no one who's got enough brains to turn on a computer could be that dumb... but then you have your posting history, so yea...

[timvp]

Parker or Ginobili for Kevin Durant or Blake Griffin? I've heard it all now, tbh.





Some Spurs fans are in for a painful reality when it's time for actual rebuilding. No, other teams don't hand over superstars. No, you don't simply tank and two or three later magically reappear ready to take on the world.

[ChumpDumper]

If the Spurs trade away Manu for equal or lesser likely value, the Spurs will lose the money people want them to spend in the future. Gotta pay him and Duncan until they don't want to play in the NBA anymore. Try to end their careers with unguaranteed deals for the years they retire so they could take on some contracts in trade.

Parker? I guess if you can find a great small for big trade he could be dealt -- or maybe some deal with multiple picks. But again you have the problem of cash flow in the meantime. After Manu and Duncan are gone, Parker is the only marquee player you can count on, and to some extent that means revenue. Fickle ass spurfan won't pay to see a struggling team of nobodies; they'll probably pay a little more to watch a struggling team of nobodies with at least one connection to the glory days.

[Fabbs]

Parker or Ginobili for Kevin Durant or Blake Griffin? I've heard it all now, tbh.





Some Spurs fans are in for a painful reality when it's time for actual rebuilding. No, other teams don't hand over superstars. No, you don't simply tank and two or three later magically reappear ready to take on the world.
You can both keep hiding and twisting what i actually posted but in summer 2007 i am saying OKC might have went for Finals MVP Parker for #2. Which turned out to be Durant.

You clowns are saying no way would OKC have considered Finals MVP Parker for the #2 yet-as-chosen pick. I'm calling bullshit.

2010 Parker or GNob for the Clips pick. Even Parker and GNob. Yeah that's a hard sell for even the Clips, who seemed to have wised up by 2010.

[ChumpDumper]

You can both keep hiding and twisting what i actually posted but in summer 2007 i am saying OKC might have went for Finals MVP Parker for #2. Which turned out to be Durant.

You clowns are saying no way would OKC have considered Finals MVP Parker for the #2 yet-as-chosen pick. I'm calling bullshit.Seeing as the top two choices in that draft were projected solidly as franchise players, it's difficult to believe they would give up that opportunity for Parker.

Cue nicknames.

[baseline bum]

IMHO, I don't see any way the Spurs get bounced early this year. Yeah, call me a homer and bring up last season, and I honestly don't have an answer to either. But this team just has that feel to it, at least, thus far and if healthy, that says "We can compete against anybody." That was distinctly lacking vs MEM, especially from Tony Parker.

And Spurs have only gotten better since last season anyway, considering Tiago's insurgence, Kawhi's obvious skill and potential, Green's sudden impact on both ends which helped soothe the GHill transition, and Neal's continuing expansion of his game.

Additionally, if by some miracle Ginobili is 95% healthy ...

The Spurs had that same feel this time last season. I don't care at all how this team starts; how it finishes is what matters.

[The ADMIRAL 50]

So you have 3 picks in the 8th - 14th range from the last 3 drafts. Which players do you choose to contend with?

Vander I would still like you to answer this excellent question from BG Spurs Fan

[The ADMIRAL 50]

Seeing as the top two choices in that draft were projected solidly as franchise players, it's difficult to believe they would give up that opportunity for Parker.

Cue nicknames.

Yea Oden and Durant were both considered cant miss franchise guys, didnt work out that way but I dont see how, at the time, a team gives up the guarantee of adding one of those two for Parker

[baseline bum]

Does San Antonio really survive a scorched earth scenario, though? Spurs fans have become so spoiled that if you go from championship contender today to 15-win team tomorrow, you could disenfranchise the fanbase. Spurs fans wouldn't understand and the AT&T Center would be empty until the Spurs are a playoff team again ... and that could take a long, long time.

The Bulls could survive scorched earth because of their market size and huge fanbase. If you scorch earth the Spurs, you could inadvertently start a chain of events that has the team leaving the city in the next 10-15 years, tbh.



P.S.

And Presti ended up trading Ray Allen for what turned out to be Kendrick Perkins. Not exactly a model I'd want the FO to follow if they are going to trade TP...

No guarantee on draft picks, as Green was a bust. Still, Presti has done really well with picks outside of the obvious Durant choice. When you look at RC's track record in the draft, I think it's a huge competitive advantage for the Spurs to build a good team again in the same mold.

There's no doubt the fans will stop coming for a 20 win team. But I think they'll also stop coming for a 38-42 win team too.

[Fabbs]

Yea Oden and Durant were both considered cant miss franchise guys, didnt work out that way but I dont see how, at the time, a team gives up the guarantee of adding one of those two for Parker
Were I OKC i would not have either.
Was just giving those as for-instance possibilities.

Got to believe some team would have given some good-great young potential for Parker in summer 2007.

Or a solid big. Would the Lakers have gone Bynum for Parker in summer 2007? Probably not as they always know a scam is forthcoming and indeed rode the Kwame for Gasol WWE move. Still, just saying they may well have considered Parker for Bynum in summer 2007.

[ChumpDumper]

Were I OKC i would not have either.:lol

[baseline bum]

:rollin

Parker for Bynum would have been an awful trade in 2007.

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

At the rate he's going he'll soon be at 2007 Parker for the corpse of Darius Miles :)

[baseline bum]

Parker for Eddie Griffin?

[Mel_13]

Fabbs just posting what we expect him to post...

[The ADMIRAL 50]

Were I OKC i would not have either.
Was just giving those as for-instance possibilities.

Got to believe some team would have given some good-great young potential for Parker in summer 2007.

Or a solid big. Would the Lakers have gone Bynum for Parker in summer 2007? Probably not as they always know a scam is forthcoming and indeed rode the Kwame for Gasol WWE move. Still, just saying they may well have considered Parker for Bynum in summer 2007.

Yea it is interesting to think about. Parker is proving to be invaluable on our squad this year though, and I'm glad we have kept him thus far and hope we always do. His scoring and playmaking has been essential, even more so with Manu's absence.


Honestly I like Timvp's ideas and think this is the route the FO both should and will take. I reeeally like Splitter's upside if he ever gets the minutes and role he should, even at his age, and I think Parker will transition into old age better than similar players in the past, largely because he has always been an unbelievable below the rim talent, and that bag of tricks wont dry up just because he loses some of his speed and quickness. His playmaking and passing also appears to be getting better with age.

Personally I wanna go all out after Hibbert; young, first time all star this season who I believe is going to continue to improve a whole lot. Just look at how much he has since he was a rookie already. With Hibbert coming in as the young Duncan to Timmy's wise D-Rob I really think he could excel. That would leave us with a starting unit of Hibbert-Splitter-Kawhi-Green-Parker and Neal as the sixth man going forward along with Blair and maybe CJ. The role most needed after that would be an athletic young starting two guard with upside in lieu of Green who can D up some and score a good deal. Anderson was supposed to be that guy, looks like the FO will have to take another shot in the draft at one...if we solve our big man problems in FA with Hibbert.

Batum could be a good Plan B; I like his game a lot but the presence of Kawhi makes him somewhat redundant. Kawhi can play the 2 as we have seen though..

[Fabbs]

:rollin

Parker for Bynum would have been an awful trade in 2007.
yeah Timmy Dunks around a frontline cast of Michelle Finley, Bonner and Soft Dick has been soo much better. :lmao

[Fabbs]

Fabbs just posting what we expect him to post...
Formulas for continued championships, thank you.

The PollyAnna Poppers just respondin like 'washed Talibans as expected. :lol

[ChumpDumper]

Formulas for continued championships, thank you.True, the Lakers would still be riding an unbroken string of championships with Parker.

[benefactor]

Fabbs just posting what we expect him to post...
If TJastal starts with his takes and we get all three(vander) in the same thread the forum might crash.

[baseline bum]

yeah Timmy Dunks around a frontline cast of Michelle Finley, Bonner and Soft Dick has been soo much better. :lmao

With glass-knee Bynum that would have still been the frontline, except now you also wouldn't have a point guard.

[Fabbs]

Yea it is interesting to think about. Parker is proving to be invaluable on our squad this year though, and I'm glad we have kept him thus far and hope we always do. His scoring and playmaking has been essential, even more so with Manu's absence.



Personally I wanna go all out after Hibbert; young, first time all star this season who I believe is going to continue to improve a whole lot. Just look at how much he has since he was a rookie already.
Good point(s). While i know you are thinking of Hibbert now there is a good example of what one could assume Indiana would have jumped at. GNob for Hibbert and ???? (more) in 09 or 10. Hate losing GNob but with his injuries etc we are 6-14 in the playoffs since 2008.
Now matter how the Dumpsters slice it.

[jjktkk]

OP is basing too much on sentimentality. Also do we need to post your quotes on Pop going senile? Yet you'd continue to hand him the keys? You take the keys away from senile/obstinate Gramps, not hand them to him.
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=153965&highlight=Celtics

Another Spurs championship without one of the Big 3 would have/would now go over just fine.
Prolly much too late now to trade any of them for much, excepting Parker.

Would OKC have gone for a GNob or Parker for 2nd overall pick (turned out to be Durant)? OKCs front office is so much smarter then Spurs 2008-current front office but still, i think they would have considered it.

Speaking of senile...

[ChumpDumper]

Ah, a thread about the future has turned into a another fapping session for alternative timelines in the past.

Good job, retropsychic time-traveleing spurfan. :tu

[Mel_13]

It's amazing how he can get so much wrong even with the benefit of hindsight..

[K-State Spur]

The Spurs had that same feel this time last season. I don't care at all how this team starts; how it finishes is what matters.

As badly as the team played against Memphis - they likely get past the Grizz with a healthy Manu.

There are no teams in the West going past the first round, and no teams in the East going past the second round without their best player near 100%.

Health matters, unfortunately you have to roll the dice that the guys won't get hurt.

[Muser]

lol Parker for Bynum

Why not do Parker for Greg Oden while we're at it.

[jjktkk]

You can both keep hiding and twisting what i actually posted but in summer 2007 i am saying OKC might have went for Finals MVP Parker for #2. Which turned out to be Durant.

You clowns are saying no way would OKC have considered Finals MVP Parker for the #2 yet-as-chosen pick. I'm calling bullshit.

2010 Parker or GNob for the Clips pick. Even Parker and GNob. Yeah that's a hard sell for even the Clips, who seemed to have wised up by 2010.

Highly entertaining when you isolate yourself as the ,1% vs. the 99% of the forum, that knows what hes talking about, regarding the Spurs. Keep digging your hole. :tu

[timvp]

Ah, a thread about the future has turned into a another fapping session for alternative timelines in the past.

Good job, retropsychic time-traveleing spurfan. :tu

Yeah, seriously, let's keep this a rebuilding thread and not a revisionist history thread about how the Spurs should have rebuilt via trades that never made any sense.









I'm surprised Coach Bud hasn't been given some sort of "head coach in waiting" tag. It'd suck to lose him and have to turn to someone like Don Newman.

That said, as much as Pop always talks about walking away when Duncan walks away, I get the feeling that he enjoys everything too much. Add in his love for TP and he might stay on until TP eventually retires/leaves.

[timvp]

If the Spurs trade away Manu for equal or lesser likely value, the Spurs will lose the money people want them to spend in the future. Gotta pay him and Duncan until they don't want to play in the NBA anymore. Try to end their careers with unguaranteed deals for the years they retire so they could take on some contracts in trade.Yeah, I agree with that. You give away Ginobili, the cost in actual money is huge. Fans would abandon the Spurs left and right.

It's difficult to quantify that sort of potential loss but it definitely should be part of the equation.

[jjktkk]

If TJastal starts with his takes and we get all three(vander) in the same thread the forum might crash.

http://img805.imageshack.us/img805/3945/thumbnailaspxq162221549.jpg

[baseline bum]

As badly as the team played against Memphis - they likely get past the Grizz with a healthy Manu.

There are no teams in the West going past the first round, and no teams in the East going past the second round without their best player near 100%.

Health matters, unfortunately you have to roll the dice that the guys won't get hurt.

I don't see it; they came two lucky shots from dropping the series in 5.

[timvp]

There's no doubt the fans will stop coming for a 20 win team. But I think they'll also stop coming for a 38-42 win team too.That's a fair take. Although I think there's a difference between a mediocre team that the fans can still connect with and a mediocre team that is the creation of a scorched earth scenario.

The one thing I can't get passed is the fact that you can always go scorched earth but you can't always try the "gentle transition" approach. Say the Spurs transition to Parker/Splitter/Leonard and it fails ... you'd basically be at the same spot then than if you burn everything to the ground after this season.

And really, you might be better off because if you tear everything down, the assets you'd get in trades would probably ripen before the Spurs are ready to compete again.

It'll be difficult no matter the rebuilding plan but I no longer see enough upside to a total dismantling when there is a slight glimmer of hope in another route.

[Fabbs]

Yeah, seriously, let's keep this a rebuilding thread and not a revisionist history thread about how the Spurs should have rebuilt via trades that never made any sense.
What a cop out. Ok 6-14 crew, carry on.....

timvp
In the past, I thought that the best way to rebuild would be to tear everything down completely once the run is over and then rebuild through the draft. More specifically, I believed the smartest thing to do would be to trade Tony Parker and any other asset once Tim Duncan and Manu Ginobili's time was over. I also was against the idea of holding on for as long as possible because I didn't see the value of wasting years in no man's land.

[ChumpDumper]

What a cop out. Ok 6-14 crew, carry on.....I'm sure your retro fantasy Bynum trade has the Spurs at 48-0 so far.

Congratulations.

Nickname.

[timvp]

one characteristic that separates us from most franchises: the family and loyalty cultivated by the Robinson era and continued by the Duncan era. If we blow the team up, the support for that mentality goes down the drain, and the franchise is near dead bottom in terms of overall viability. It will be more difficult to keep draft picks and snag free agents. The family mentality is our only advantage and by getting rid of the big three e will have given up our only advantage in acquisitions.This is something that I'm starting to believe in. Yeah, it sounds corny. Spurs = Class blah blah. But ... some players seem to buy it. Especially European players looking at the NBA from the outside. Many Euro players who don't even like the NBA would consider playing for the Spurs due to their image of being a first class organization that takes care of its players.

By doing a gentle transition, you keep that image intact and maybe that's enough to sway a free agent or two to sign in San Antonio when everything else is equal. Or in the future, a franchise player on the Spurs could want to follow in the footsteps of Robinson and Duncan by sticking around for their whole career.

It's another difficult thing to quantify but I truly think that perception exists.

If you go scorched earth, you'd basically be undoing any goodwill and the Spurs would like like just another franchise.

[baseline bum]

That's a fair take. Although I think there's a difference between a mediocre team that the fans can still connect with and a mediocre team that is the creation of a scorched earth scenario.


I went to lots of games in the 80s, and the fan support (outside of the the bums) was pretty awful the year they won 35 and made the playoffs even with Gilmore and Mitchell (but no Ice) still there. I'd see people with bags on their heads in the upper deck that season.



The one thing I can't get passed is the fact that you can always go scorched earth but you can't always try the "gentle transition" approach. Say the Spurs transition to Parker/Splitter/Leonard and it fails ... you'd basically be at the same spot then than if you burn everything to the ground after this season.


I don't think you would. Parker would be untradeable by then and the Spurs would be down a high lottery pick they could have gotten for him.

[The Truth #6]

It's too late to go scorched earth and hope to get something back. That train left years ago. And realistically, they could never trade Duncan because he's the foundation nor Manu because he's the most popular player. That leaves Parker and trading draft picks - which sounds more like rebuilding on the fly then scorched earth start over.

[ChumpDumper]

It's true that Splitter changes the rebuilding equation if he can prove to be a reliable full time starter in the NBA. It will be interesting to see if makes that move alongside Duncan or simply replaces Duncan in the starting lineup.

[Fabbs]

Ah, a thread about the future has turned into a another fapping session for alternative timelines in the past.

Good job, retropsychic time-traveleing spurfan.


True, the Lakers would still be riding an unbroken string of championships with Parker.
Like talking to yourself don't you. A lot.:lol

[ChumpDumper]

Like talking to yourself don't you. A lot.:lolBoth were directed at you.

For the unwarranted attention I gave you, you're welcome.

[ChumpDumper]

It's too late to go scorched earth and hope to get something back. That train left years ago. And realistically, they could never trade Duncan because he's the foundation nor Manu because he's the most popular player. That leaves Parker and trading draft picks - which sounds more like rebuilding on the fly then scorched earth start over.If you time the contracts right, a team can always be blown up.

[Fabbs]

This is something that I'm starting to believe in. Yeah, it sounds corny. Spurs = Class blah blah. But ... some players seem to buy it. Especially European players looking at the NBA from the outside. Many Euro players who don't even like the NBA would consider playing for the Spurs due to their image of being a first class organization that takes care of its players.

By doing a gentle transition, you keep that image intact and maybe that's enough to sway a free agent or two to sign in San Antonio when everything else is equal. Or in the future, a franchise player on the Spurs could want to follow in the footsteps of Robinson and Duncan by sticking around for their whole career.

It's another difficult thing to quantify but I truly think that perception exists.

If you go scorched earth, you'd basically be undoing any goodwill and the Spurs would like like just another franchise.
Can you give some specific examples?

In addition to Scola for Spanoulis.

[The Truth #6]

Timvp, you've mentioned your support for Bud as the heir apparent. What strengths do you see in him?

I assume he has good basketball knowledge but I don't see him as someone who instantly commands respect of people in the way Pop does. Obviously, Pop earned that through winning. Maybe I'm downgrading Bud because of his former country club mullet, but he seems like a sidekick. One reason the Spurs' System works is because Pop has all the power and commands respect and his word is the final word. And because of that players recognize the pecking order and fall in line (and obviously Duncan helps in that dynamic.) Would that respect still exist with Bud?

[The Truth #6]

If you time the contracts right, a team can always be blown up.

Yes in theory, but how realistic is that? I'm assuming the Spurs don't let any of their Big 3 just walk after a contract ends...or are you implying something else?

[Amuseddaysleeper]

I think Bud is a good choice, but how do you guys feel about Sean Elliott? He seems incredibly knowledgeable during the telecasts plus he oftens says what a lot of Spur fans are thinking in regards to Splitter deserving more minutes :lol

I don't know if he's ready to go straight into head coach mode, but at least a spot with the coaching staff in general would be great.

I also wouldn't mind Alvin Gentry down the line.

[ChumpDumper]

Yes in theory, but how realistic is that? I'm assuming the Spurs don't let any of their Big 3 just walk after a contract ends...or are you implying something else?If the big three are kept, the next blow up date could be summer of 2014. Everyone assumes Duncan will have a two year deal and Manu could be overpaid for one year to see how things go.

Of course that goes against my keeping Manu forevah argument, but it's for illustrative purposes.

[Fabbs]

I think Bud is a good choice, but how do you guys feel about Sean Elliott? He seems incredibly knowledgeable during the telecasts plus he oftens says what a lot of Spur fans are thinking in regards to Splitter deserving more minutes :lol

I don't know if he's ready to go straight into head coach mode, but at least a spot with the coaching staff in general would be great.

I also wouldn't mind Alvin Gentry down the line.
Bud no!
Sean yes.

[TimmehC]

I think Timmy and Manu will probably help the franchise's future by retiring at the same time. At that point, you're likely going to have a ton of cap space to help the team find what it needs to stay competitive. And those new signings might help keep the fans coming back. People like it when the team can offer something new and exciting.

[GSH]

I think Timmy and Manu will probably help the franchise's future by retiring at the same time. At that point, you're likely going to have a ton of cap space to help the team find what it needs to stay competitive. And those new signings might help keep the fans coming back. People like it when the team can offer something new and exciting.

That's why I wanted them to sign Gustavo Ayon so badly. Besides needing another big body, it would have been worth a small fortune to have a center from Mexico on the team. He was the biggest bargain around, because of what he would have done for fan interest.



I think Bud is a good choice, but how do you guys feel about Sean Elliott? He seems incredibly knowledgeable during the telecasts plus he oftens says what a lot of Spur fans are thinking in regards to Splitter deserving more minutes.

Spokesman, yes. Consultant, yes. Full-time head coach? I don't think he's interested in the incredible grind of head coaching. It's not a matter of knowledge, it's being able to take a day or two off to play. I think he's got his dream job right now.

[timvp]

Can you give some specific examples?

In addition to Scola for Spanoulis.Genuine question that appears to be not.


Timvp, you've mentioned your support for Bud as the heir apparent. What strengths do you see in him?

I assume he has good basketball knowledge but I don't see him as someone who instantly commands respect of people in the way Pop does. Obviously, Pop earned that through winning. Maybe I'm downgrading Bud because of his former country club mullet, but he seems like a sidekick. One reason the Spurs' System works is because Pop has all the power and commands respect and his word is the final word. And because of that players recognize the pecking order and fall in line (and obviously Duncan helps in that dynamic.) Would that respect still exist with Bud?That's a good observation and was probably true of Bud a while ago. But he's grown into the role as the head assistant coach, especially after PJ left.

He's actually now really straightforward with the players in a Pop manner the days. He doesn't beat around the bush and isn't afraid to offer harsh critiques ... which is a main reason why I like him. He's like Pop in being brutally honest yet fair across the board.

On top of that he's really sharp. He basically knows the offensive sets and defensive sets of every team around the league and is the master and guessing the out-of-timeout plays other teams are going to use.

I've seen Bud coach in summer league and games when Pop has gotten ejected and his substitution patterns always make a lot of sense ... and the players seemed to respond to him.

I'm really high on Bud's potential as a future head coach, especially if it's in San Antonio because he wouldn't have to worry about any sort of power struggle or anything else of the sort. He's never going to be quite Larry Brown or Pop when it comes to be a demanding, combustible head coach but he's come a long ways since his cream puff days.


I think Bud is a good choice, but how do you guys feel about Sean Elliott? He seems incredibly knowledgeable during the telecasts plus he oftens says what a lot of Spur fans are thinking in regards to Splitter deserving more minutes :lol

I don't know if he's ready to go straight into head coach mode, but at least a spot with the coaching staff in general would be great.

I'm a huge Sean Elliott fan but he's about the last person who could be a head coach in the NBA. During his playing days, he was the player who'd be sitting in the back of the room cracking jokes. I don't want to call him lazy but he wasn't exactly the most mentally engaged player in Spurs history.

On top of that, his fatal flaw is he's just not obsessed enough. He was notorious for always being late to practice and even to this day, he's always the last person to board the charter plane. The running joke is that if the Spurs are due to leave at 2 PM, Sean Elliott won't start strolling the runway until 2:15.

Elliott knows his basketball. Knows what the Spurs are doing inside and out. He's a student of the game, especially when it comes to footwork. But he has zero coaching potential. And he'd be the first person to tell you that.

[TD 21]

This has been my stance for a long time, so I completely agree. This is definitely your best work in some time. A lot of really good points throughout the thread.

Anybody concerned that Duncan would be greedy doesn't know much about Duncan, obviously. Once they lay out their plan, there's no question in my mind that he'll be reasonable, like he was when he signed his last contract. He took $11 million over 2 years less than he could have (and should have) gotten. I've said for the longest time that I think he'll take it a year at a time at this point and that he'll sign for $10-12 million, which he's still worth. He's a top three player, at a highly important position, that's scarce with anything resembling high end talent. And the only reason he's not worth well above that isn't performance related; it's minutes related.

Given the lack of quality options in free agency (Arthur is probably the best potential long term fit at PF) and on the trade front (Millsap is probably the best option likely to be available, given that he'll be entering the final season of his contract and the fact that they have Favors and Kanter waiting in the wings), I don't think the Spurs are necessarily planning on finding a long term solution at PF. Yet.

The best option I see available to take advantage of the final 1-2 years Duncan and Ginobili likely will play and who I believe will be the Spurs primary target, is Garnett. He's more than likely done with the Celtics. There's only two teams I could see him holding off retirement for: The Lakers (if/when they trade Gasol) and Spurs. The Lakers because he lives in L.A. in the off season and is a long time friend of Bryant's. The Spurs because he's made it abundantly clear in recent years that he has a high level of respect and admiration for them and Duncan in particular. Though they were never close, I think the idea of playing with Duncan and going for one final ring together would be appeal to him, as would the fact that he could go back to exclusively playing PF.

[timvp]

I went to lots of games in the 80s, and the fan support (outside of the the bums) was pretty awful the year they won 35 and made the playoffs even with Gilmore and Mitchell (but no Ice) still there. I'd see people with bags on their heads in the upper deck that season.

That's actually a good example of why the Spurs should hang on to the Big 3 as long as possible. That season you're speaking of, IRRC 1986, was the season after they traded away George Gervin. Spurs fans hated that trade and they basically stopped coming to games.

Even though Gervin ended up being done and it made sense on paper to move on from the Gervin era, in hindsight it was a dumb trade. The original version of Raptors Hakeem was Bulls Gervin. That's an embarrassing footnote in Spurs history that didn't have to happen ... and nearly played a big role in the team leaving San Antonio.

Spurs fans don't need much of an excuse to be fickle. By trading away an icon, like Gervin in the summer of 1985, you're just asking for trouble.

The ironic thing is the Gervin trade sounds a lot like Ginobili trades fans talk about these days. Aging shooting guard for a bigman doesn't sound too bad at the time ... but looks ridiculously stupid in retrospect.


I don't think you would. Parker would be untradeable by then and the Spurs would be down a high lottery pick they could have gotten for him.

True. But then you have to factor in how Parker might be able to increase Splitter's (and other players') value in a few years. Plus, one middle of the pack lottery pick doesn't make much of a difference in the grand scheme of rebuilding. No one is going to give the Spurs a top five pick for Parker ... and that's the type of pick you need to truly rebuild.

[baseline bum]

If Garnett leaves Boston, I see him taking the remainder of Dallas' capspace after they sign Deron Williams this summer. Still, the Spurs might be able to beat that offer if Tim signs for $10-12 million or so and they amnesty The Dick.

[baseline bum]

That's actually a good example of why the Spurs should hang on to the Big 3 as long as possible. That season you're speaking of, IRRC 1986, was the season after they traded away George Gervin. Spurs fans hated that trade and they basically stopped coming to games.

Even though Gervin ended up being done and it made sense on paper to move on from the Gervin era, in hindsight it was a dumb trade. The original version of Raptors Hakeem was Bulls Gervin. That's an embarrassing footnote in Spurs history that didn't have to happen ... and nearly played a big role in the team leaving San Antonio.

Spurs fans don't need much of an excuse to be fickle. By trading away an icon, like Gervin in the summer of 1985, you're just asking for trouble.

The ironic thing is the Gervin trade sounds a lot like Ginobili trades fans talk about these days. Aging shooting guard for a bigman doesn't sound too bad at the time ... but looks ridiculously stupid in retrospect.

Wasn't Ice heavily into the coke at the time though? You can't have that in the locker room. I can't imagine Gervin for Greenwood was anything other than dumping a problem.

[Amuseddaysleeper]

I'm a huge Sean Elliott fan but he's about the last person who could be a head coach in the NBA. During his playing days, he was the player who'd be sitting in the back of the room cracking jokes. I don't want to call him lazy but he wasn't exactly the most mentally engaged player in Spurs history.

On top of that, his fatal flaw is he's just not obsessed enough. He was notorious for always being late to practice and even to this day, he's always the last person to board the charter plane. The running joke is that if the Spurs are due to leave at 2 PM, Sean Elliott won't start strolling the runway until 2:15.

Elliott knows his basketball. Knows what the Spurs are doing inside and out. He's a student of the game, especially when it comes to footwork. But he has zero coaching potential. And he'd be the first person to tell you that.

:wow

Didn't realize all that stuff about Sean, very interesting to say the least.

[Fabbs]

Genuine question that appears to be not.
Genuine question.

[timvp]

Wasn't Ice heavily into the coke at the time though? You can't have that in the locker room. I can't imagine Gervin for Greenwood was anything other than dumping a problem.

That was the rumor but it didn't make Spurs fans hate it any less. Fast forward to today and the Spurs could frame a Ginobili trade however they want but your average Spurs fan will be tempted to disown the Spurs.

[baseline bum]

That's actually a good example of why the Spurs should hang on to the Big 3 as long as possible. That season you're speaking of, IRRC 1986, was the season after they traded away George Gervin. Spurs fans hated that trade and they basically stopped coming to games.


They didn't come in 87, 88, or 89 either though, even after Ice was out of the league.


Plus, one middle of the pack lottery pick doesn't make much of a difference in the grand scheme of rebuilding. No one is going to give the Spurs a top five pick for Parker ... and that's the type of pick you need to truly rebuild.

Wow, you think Parker would only pull an 8-10 level pick this summer? I wouldn't trade him either if that's all I could get. That seems really low to me though.

[timvp]

They didn't come in 87, 88, or 89 either though, even after Ice was out of the league.Spurs fans have a long memory. We'll all be dead before the Luis Scola trade isn't brought up at least once a week :toast


Wow, you think Parker would only pull an 8-10 level pick this summer? I wouldn't trade him either if that's all I could get. That seems really low to me though.Smallish point guard on the wrong side of 30 with a non-expiring contract? Even if he keeps up his level of play, I don't think you get more than the 7th or 8th overall pick in this upcoming draft.

I could be wrong but I just don't see it.

[The Truth #6]

That was the rumor but it didn't make Spurs fans hate it any less. Fast forward to today and the Spurs could frame a Ginobili trade however they want but your average Spurs fan will be tempted to disown the Spurs.

I think that's a good comparison in situations. Fans would react similarly now as then. The only difference in terms of actual basketball was that then the Spurs had at the time what they thought to be a budding star player in Alvin Robertson and they wanted to get more time for him on the court. And if I remember, Ice wasn't happy about coming off the bench.

Obviously, Manu doesn't have a problem coming off the bench, even in his prime, otherwise he would be gone a while ago, most likely on his own accord. So it's safe to say that Manu would be cool with staying with the Spurs in his twilight as a veteran presence, which pretty much describes his current situation.

[baseline bum]

Smallish point guard on the wrong side of 30 with a non-expiring contract? Even if he keeps up his level of play, I don't think you get more than the 7th or 8th overall pick in this upcoming draft.

I could be wrong but I just don't see it.

If that's it then might as well go down with the ship then. Unless this team just completely flames out like last season.

[TD 21]

If Garnett leaves Boston, I see him taking the remainder of Dallas' capspace after they sign Deron Williams this summer. Still, the Spurs might be able to beat that offer if Tim signs for $10-12 million or so and they amnesty The Dick.

I'd be surprised. He'd either have to start and play even more center than he already does or come off the bench, neither of which I could see appealing to him. He detests playing and being thought of as a center to the extent that he insists on being listed at 6-11, even though it's well known he's 7-1. When this is brought to his attention, his go to response is that he's 6-foot-13 and he's only half joking when he says it.

Also, I don't think he'd make this decision based on money, unless the gap was massive and I don't see how it could be in this case. If the Lakers trade Gasol AND acquire Howard, then he'd probably sign with them. Short of that, I think the Spurs would have the inside track. It would probably take some convincing though, because I could easily see his first option being retirement.

[The Truth #6]

If the big three are kept, the next blow up date could be summer of 2014. Everyone assumes Duncan will have a two year deal and Manu could be overpaid for one year to see how things go.

Of course that goes against my keeping Manu forevah argument, but it's for illustrative purposes.

Fair enough. As a plan that sounds like what could easily happen. Though by waiting until 2014 that blow up wouldn't be very explosive, in fact it's sort of the opposite of a "blow up", but as a fan I hope that's the way it happens.

[baseline bum]

I'd be surprised. He'd either have to start and play even more center than he already does or come off the bench, neither of which I could see appealing to him. He detests playing and being thought of as a center to the extent that he insists on being listed at 6-11, even though it's well known he's 7-1. When this is brought to his attention, his go to response is that he's 6-foot-13 and he's only half joking when he says it.

Also, I don't think he'd make this decision based on money, unless the gap was massive and I don't see how it could be in this case. If the Lakers trade Gasol AND acquire Howard, then he'd probably sign with them. Short of that, I think the Spurs would have the inside track. It would probably take some convincing though, because I could easily see his first option being retirement.

I don't see Orlando making a Howard for Gasol trade, and I really don't see Garnett signing for the mini-MLE. I think he would take it as an insult to play for less than $7 million. I think he'll end up back in a Celtics uniform for something like 2 years, $15 million.

[TD 21]

I don't see Orlando making a Howard for Gasol trade, and I really don't see Garnett signing for the mini-MLE. I think he would take it as an insult to play for less than $7 million. I think he'll end up back in a Celtics uniform for something like 2 years, $15 million.

I didn't say they would, because obviously the Magic wouldn't consider it. What I said was, "if the Lakers trade Gasol AND acquire Howard", not "if the Lakers trade Gasol straight up for Howard".

It is difficult to envision him signing for the mini-MLE though; you're right. On second thought, the Spurs would probably have the inside track, because they could offer potentially up to triple that. I'd be surprised if he's back with the Celtics and stunned if he signed for 2 years anywhere.

[eric365]

So you let Duncan walk if he wants more than $8M to stay?

Just curious.

Would you sign Duncan if he ask for a 3 years / $90M ala Kobe? Just curious since we know he won't ask that.

If no, what is your limit? $15M a year?

[timvp]

Would you sign Duncan if he ask for a 3 years / $90M ala Kobe? Just curious since we know he won't ask that.

If the alternative is a Raptors Hakeem ending for Duncan's career, I'd gladly sign off on spending Holt's money to give Duncan his farewell contract (even at a huge number like that). And then I'd want the Spurs to align all the contracts to expire when that comes off the books.

[RodNIc91]

@Timvp

What about Vaughn? Pop seems to dig him as a great coach in the making? While we're still at it, I've got to say I'm curious about our rebuilding process, nostalgic yet curious. One aspect though I'd like to hear your opinion on. Do you sign a free agent prime big and rebuild through a perimeter player in the draft, or the other way around?

[Proxy]

If the alternative is a Raptors Hakeem ending for Duncan's career, I'd gladly sign off on spending Holt's money to give Duncan his farewell contract (even at a huge number like that). And then I'd want the Spurs to align all the contracts to expire when that comes off the books.

That'll be a sad day. Not to say it isn't a smart thing to do having all the player's contracts end together, but the finality of it all would be overwhelming.

[angelbelow]

Wow this thread really blew up since I posted last night. Cool to see some interesting perspectives and while I see a lot of people are against giving Duncan whatever he wants, I want to say thats its imperative that we give him what he wants.

But there are limitation, I would happily give him whatever he wants for the next 2 years.. beyond that we have to reevaluate. I would say the same with Ginobili when his contract is up next year.
-First of all, there are no franchise/game changing free agents that would come here anyway. We'll likely have to split a "max money" into several pieces for a few allstar caliber players.
-Duncan will sell tickets and keep the Spurs' playoff hopes alive for the next 2 years - even if his role changes dramatically.
-If we can't compete for a championship, the next best thing is to make the playoffs, sell tickets, sell merchandise, and stay above our ROI. Duncan and Ginobili would easily do that even if their age is advanced.

To me, its not even about respecting what Duncan has done for the Spurs organization, but strictly from a management's perspective, it makes sense financially.

Remember, its not always realistic to contend for championships year in and year out.. if we're not in a position to, we shouldn't force it. Therefore, until we have the opportunity to put together a championship caliber roster, we need to focus on keeping the team financially viable. That's why I really appreciate every point Timvp has made in this thread: keep our superstars happy, don't overpay role players, draft with caution (which the spurs arguably are the best in the NBA at doing), approach FA and trades with caution, and plan ahead.

[8FOR!3]

That was the rumor but it didn't make Spurs fans hate it any less. Fast forward to today and the Spurs could frame a Ginobili trade however they want but your average Spurs fan will be tempted to disown the Spurs.

I'd be pissed if we traded Duncan or Ginobili. And at this point, wouldn't be too thrilled with the idea of trading Parker.

[benefactor]

Great discussion with lots of good thoughts. Sometime last year I converted to this same line of thinking. I used to loathe the idea of watching aging players try to do something we all know they can't do and holding on to them while a new team could be being built. Now I am much more at peace and I've decided to sit back and enjoy what we have left of the championship core. Getting to see glimpses of those vintage moments from time to time is worth not being a contender anymore...because once they are gone they are gone. The solid infusion of youth has made the transition even easier. As you said...they won't have enough to contend but they will remain a solid team...which is fine with me as someone that has walked the road of Houston pro football.

[GSH]

@Timvp

What about Vaughn? Pop seems to dig him as a great coach in the making?

Vaughn and McDyess will both likely wind up on somebody's coaching staff soon. I had always held out hope that they might hire Robert Horry, but it hasn't happened.

Terry Porter only spent one season as an assistant, before getting a head coaching job. I think any of those three guys could become head coaches in fairly short order.

[ElNono]

Wish I could make a much longer post, but that's gonna only happen when I get back home a week from now and this thread will likely be buried by then.

Basically I'm somewhere in the middle between timvp and baseline. As I said many times before, I'm fine with the farewell tour for Tim and Manu, as long as they want to make it. However, when they're gone, i'm all for scorched earth. Frankly, even if TP and Tiago works, the bar will always be the magic years of the big 4, so I don't really know that wasting time running a bluff will seat as many people for long.

This new CBA also brings some new wrinkles as far as hiring quality FA's is concerned. Take the Clippers. Without looking a their contract situation, I would adventure that eventually they're going to have to pick who to keep, Griffin or a bunch of the surrounding talent (ie: DJ). If the Spurs can position themselves with low enough cap, they could have a shot at some of that talet (I doubt Sterling will willingly pay an oppressive luxury tax)

So the landscape will change in the next few years. Having plenty of cap space will be a valuable asset, and building only through the draft might not be the only possibility.

I wish I could touch on other aspects, but this is as far as I'm gonna go with my cell, seeing I expect a few responses :)

[Brazil]

Some random thoughts.

- I understand timvp's arguments regarding Tim but sounds odd to me to pay even a legendary figure like Duncan $20M 2 years. Good news I think / hope he won't ask for that much of money.

- I'm in the boat of keeping the big 3 together till the end. Regarding Parker, I think the best thing is to keep him, he is paying IMO a very reasonable amount of money. Of course if a good opportunity is here to trade him, I'm not against. Unlike Manu or Tim I don't think spurs fans will be too emotive (unfortunately) to a parker trade.

- I agree with Elnono on his point on the new cba. Normally, more FAs should be available to pick vs. the current situation. Some big names could be interested to go a team like spurs stable, well organized and respectful of the players.

- The rebuilding will also depend on Pop's future. Pop is maybe more fundamental to the spurs house than even Tim. His departure if not well prepared could be a nightmare for the franchise IMHO.

[baseline bum]

Some random thoughts.

- I understand timvp's arguments regarding Tim but sounds odd to me to pay even a legendary figure like Duncan $20M 2 years. Good news I think / hope he won't ask for that much of money.


They were able to pay Duncan $10 million for years when he was worth $25-$30 million easily, thanks to an owner-friendly 1999 CBA. I wouldn't have any problem whatsoever with him wanting $40 million over 2 years this summer.

[DPG21920]

I would, that would be ridiculous. Good thing is he won't do that.

[Brazil]

They were able to pay Duncan $10 million for years when he was worth $25-$30 million easily, thanks to an owner-friendly 1999 CBA. I wouldn't have any problem whatsoever with him wanting $40 million over 2 years this summer.

I wouldn't have any problem either because it's not my money and as already discussed it's maybe the good decision for the franchise but still $40M 2 years would be a huge financial burden.

[timvp]

I don't understand the hesitancy regarding Duncan's next contract. I mean, Kwame freakin' Brown got a one-year, $7 million this offseason. Kwame. Brown. And there are Spurs fans who would refuse to give Duncan more than $8 million? Ten years from now Duncan would still be better than Kwame Brown.

A fair market value for Duncan going into the offseason, as long as he avoids injury or a major meltdown, could EASILY be $30 million over two years. That's basically equivalent to two Kwame Browns or the final couple years of a typical above average bigman's contract.

If you want to look at it from a statistical angle, Duncan is going to finish this year with around a 9 or 10 WARP (wins above average player). Last summer, players received approximately $2 million per WARP on the open market. So from a purely statistical viewpoint, giving Duncan a two-year, $30 million could very well end up a bargain.

How much has Duncan been worth to the Spurs over the years? $500 million? More? I have absolutely zero problem with writing his next contract.

I understand that Spurs fans hope that the Spurs will have salary cap space to maneuver this summer but to act like Duncan deserves a take-it-or-leave offer from the Spurs is ridiculous, IMO.

[DPG21920]

I don't care what a dumb GM pays Kwame, it makes no sense to pay Tim so much to not contend. If they aren't going to rebuild, at least do enough to give fans some hope of being better than just a first round and done team.

So basically, because it's hard to rebuild you would really be cool going into the next few seasons with no new players because they're capped out and no good picks to aide in a rebuild on the fly? What would be the point of ST if you know it's 1&done with nothing to really get excited about?

[crc21209]

No way in hell the Spurs low-ball Timmy and offer him a "take it or leave it offer." Anybody who would think that is completely nuts. Without Tim, the Spurs may have 0 championships, and hell, maybe the Spurs arent even in San Antonio right now. Give the man what he wants, what he deserves...

[The Truth #6]

Tim deserves a lot, I agree. I will say the FO has been very good over the years at getting players to take below market value. Perhaps they'll try to offer three years, with the last year being an obvious retirement year where they try to use his expiring contract and Tim gets some sort of buyout to make up the difference from the other two years on the contract...

[DPG21920]

Luckily, Tim likely won't want to play for a team with no hope since I'm sure he wants to win. I guess I disagree that a guy that's top 6 in all-time salaries is really owed that much. I have no issues paying him 10-12, but 20+? That's just a money grab by the franchise to keep fans in the seat and I'm shocked you're ok with that considering your stance on that very concept earlier.

[timvp]

I don't care what a dumb GM pays Kwame, it makes no sense to pay Tim so much to not contend.So you only pay players if that player pushes you over some arbitrary "contend" threshold? If the Spurs let Duncan walk and replace him with let's say Batum, they'd be paying him not to contend, by that logic.

You can pay Duncan and still build toward contending via draft day trades, smart free agent signings, stockpiling assets, etc. It's not mutually exclusive, tbh.


If they aren't going to rebuild, at least do enough to give fans some hope of being better than just a first round and done team. 1. The size of Duncan's contract will have little to do with whether the Spurs will advance past the first round in future seasons.

2. The "fans" you speak of would all rather have Duncan stay than leave. Only hardcore Spurs fans that frequent places like ST would possibly be down with the idea of letting TD walk to throw money at a non-elite player.


So basically, because it's hard to rebuild you would really be cool going into the next few seasons with no new players because they're capped out and no good picks to aide in a rebuild on the fly?Giving Duncan $20 million instead of $10 million doesn't change much of anything in the big picture.


What would be the point of ST if you know it's 1&done with nothing to really get excited about?
:lol So there's no point to being a Spurs fan during their rebuilding years? Newsflash: More than half of NBA fans deal with that scenario each season.

Even in a scorched earth scenario, what is the average time span before becoming a legit championship contender again? 10 years? 15 years? Probably longer.

Putting that on hold for a few seasons to attempt a more gentle transition barely changes anything in the big picture. Who really cares if the rebuilding window goes from 10-15 years to 12-17 years?

[benefactor]

Championship contender or not I'm always excited.

It's my religion.

[timvp]

I have no issues paying him 10-12, but 20+? That's just a money grab by the franchise to keep fans in the seat and I'm shocked you're ok with that considering your stance on that very concept earlier.

I can't imagine I would have ever said that Holt paying Duncan $20 million is wrong because that's a money grab by Holt. In fact, I've never been for offering Duncan an ultimatum. A "take Kwame Brown money or GTFO" idea was never part of a rebuilding plan that originated from this keyboard, tbh.

We'll see what Duncan wants to do this summer. He's been generous with regards to opening up cap space to sign others so he very well may be generous again. But if he wants to be paid fair market value, which very well could be north of $15 million annually, I would be in agreement with the FO accepting such terms.

In 20 years, do you really want to be on the side of the argument that agreed with the idea of letting Tim Duncan walk so the team could throw an offersheet at a Nic Batum or JaVale McGee? That will sound even dumber than the Spurs fans who wanted to let David Robinson walk to throw money at Eddie Robinson or Ron Mercer.

[DPG21920]

That's a strawman. I never said there's no point in being a fan if they're not contending. It's about what I call "The Known". Giving Tim 20M knowing the Spurs are done (another playoff flameout would likely signify that) comes off as an obvious money grab (something you adamantly were against tbh..).

Rebuilding, although not a contender by definition, is different because of the known. I (maybe I'm the minority) would be ok knowing every team has to rebuild because I know they are trying to do something. Im not ok with money grabs knowing full well you're caught in the middle and have nothing to really grasp onto.

Saying the difference in 8-10M and 20M is silly to me because one scenario allows you to add players to the big 3; which then your plan makes sense. What doesn't make sense (to me) is hamstringing yourself with a 2 year, 40 million contract over the next two years just to keep fans in the seats.

How if you sign Tim to a 20M contract do you make trades (with what assets) or stockpile assets or sign FA's with limited money (full MLE brought no one this year).

Letting Tim walk and starting a rebuild isn't as terrible as you make it out to be IMO ( as evidenced by you feeling similar until recently) if you are talking about having very little assets to improve with over the next two years.

How would Tim's 20M not impact how far they go next year? With that 20M, the Spurs are sitting at ~59M in salaries next year (with RJ amnestied)? With a reasonable 8-10, that can be used to add to the team.

[DPG21920]

So you only pay players if that player pushes you over some arbitrary "contend" threshold?

When you are a team that isn't a contender and that player isn't a young building piece for your future, yes I don't believe in that scenario you pay someone 20M a year.

[DPG21920]

I can't imagine I would have ever said that Holt paying Duncan $20 million is wrong because that's a money grab by Holt. In fact, I've never been for offering Duncan an ultimatum. A "take Kwame Brown money or GTFO" idea was never part of a rebuilding plan that originated from this keyboard, tbh.

You said something to the effect of "I hope the FO is trying to contend vs going for a money grab. That's not fair to anyone...)



In 20 years, do you really want to be on the side of the argument that agreed with the idea of letting Tim Duncan walk so the team could throw an offersheet at a Nic Batum or JaVale McGee? That will sound even dumber than the Spurs fans who wanted to let David Robinson walk to throw money at Eddie Robinson or Ron Mercer.

Why is that the only option? If they let Tim walk, I don't see them abandoning their principles and throwing huge cash at guys they aren't high on for the future just to stay mediocre. I think they would go into rebuild mode if Tim walks, not break the bank for McGee.

Would I be furious if they pay Tim 20M a year? No, but I'd be disappointed in all parties for the money grab when they could have pushed to win. To be clear, if the Spurs are going to err, I absolutely want them to err on the side of what i perceive to be over paying Tim. In the end, it would only likely be 2 years and seeing the big 3 play, even with no chance is pretty special. Im saying though I would be disappointed if they didn't do what they could to legitimately work with their limited opportunities to win.

[DPG21920]

You said something to the effect of "I hope the FO is trying to contend vs going for a money grab. That's not fair to anyone


That's a sub-plot that I think isn't being mentioned enough. Duncan likes the Spurs and San Antonio.

But Duncan loves winning.



:lol Yeah, the Spurs are making me creep toward the rebuild-now way of thinking.

Previously, my stance was that as long as you have the Big Three and surround them with somewhat adequate talent, it'd be a mistake to throw that away and rebuild. It's rare that a small market franchise can put together a trio as talented as TD, Manu and TP -- even at this stage of their careers. To blow up the Big Three when there is still a chance at a championship, even if we are talking about a less than 10% chance, would be a mistake and it would be underestimating just how difficult it is for a San Antonio franchise to get as close as they are.

But if the front office and ownership group aren't going to do enough to even surround the Big Three with adequate talent, it doesn't make sense to just go through the motions. Even though the franchise can still make money by selling memories, it's unfair to the Big Three and it makes it more difficult to rebuild going forward.

Don't get me wrong, I'll still enjoy the hell out of watching the Big Three this year no matter what but I can't support the front office's motives since it would basically just be a money grab.

[Cant_Be_Faded]

Duncan gets nearly whatever sum he asks for. The front office would be dumb, and I pissed if we lost Duncan over money issues. I don't know if I would be able to forgive the franchise if that happened.

[letmk]

FYI, Jason Kidd signed $24M/3 years in 2009 at the same age of what Tim will be this summer. And some Spurs fans think paying more than $8M a year to Tim is unacceptable?

[024]

spurs can't really attract a big name free agent to save them. if they just wallow in mediocrity as a borderline playoff team for the next five years, it would really delay the rebuilding process. they'll just keep suffering playoff exits and get worse and worse until finally getting a high lottery pick.

they should just have a fire sale, keep only duncan untouchable, and stock up on lottery picks. then, tank a few years, stock up on talent, and follow the thunder model. the spurs have proven they are adept at drafting good players, imagine what they can do with a high lottery pick.

[timvp]

What doesn't make sense (to me) is hamstringing yourself with a 2 year, 40 million contract over the next two years just to keep fans in the seats. What I don't understand is why you think a re-signed Duncan doesn't make a contender but a re-signed Duncan + slightly above MLE money makes the Spurs a contender. What is out there that can be had for that money that is that huge of a difference maker?


How if you sign Tim to a 20M contract do you make trades (with what assets) or stockpile assets or sign FA's with limited money (full MLE brought no one this year). Oddly enough, this FO has done their best work when they didn't have flexibility. It was the cap space that usually ended up in dumb moves (signing Rasho, for example).

Nearly every quality move throughout the last ten years was done without the use of cap space. You are acting like the Spurs won't be able to do anything unless they have $6 million or whatever it is if Duncan takes a discount when just about every good move the Spurs have done over the years used less than that amount of money. From their work in the draft to signing the Bowens and Neals.


as evidenced by you feeling similar until recentlyUsing my past quotes against me doesn't make much sense when so much has changed since then:

-Parker regained All-Star status even though it's possible that his athleticism is starting to decline. That in itself is huge.

-Splitter went from unknown to putting up Duncan-esque per-minute numbers. Again, a big difference.

-Parker and Splitter have been nearly unstoppable at times when paired together.

-The Spurs drafted a player who is by many accounts a top five rookie in the league.

-Duncan isn't showing much decline from last season.

-Ginobili didn't show much decline prior to injury.

-The Spurs have a couple interesting Euro prospects that could be added to the mix.

Those are some huge plot shifts, tbh.


When you are a team that isn't a contender and that player isn't a young building piece for your future, yes I don't believe in that scenario you pay someone 20M a year.

Even you admit that Duncan + ~MLE could yield a contender. Thus I don't get how if the equation is just Duncan by himself you just throw your hands up and quit.

The Spurs FO has made their rep by plucking MLE level talent out of the trash heap.

[baseline bum]

I'd rather see Tim offered the max extension than end his career in Philadelphia or Denver. PERIOD.

[DPG21920]

I don't know if Duncan + ~MLE player makes them a contender. I know that as constructed its hard to say they currently are. In that case, you know they have to do something & ~MLE player at least offers potential and would signify an acknowledgement and effort to try and contend (It's a strange argument to me to say "the Spurs FO is great, unless you give them more money to work with).

I'm not using your quotes "against you", I'm just referencing that you seem to be somewhat bashing an opinion you just held not too long ago when I disagree on how much the variables have changed. It's not paying Tim that would bother me; it's the principles you once held that I still do. Dont put a product on the court that you aren't legitimately trying to improve with.

If the Spurs in a similar situation could pay Tim 30M a year for two more years and still have ~MLE type money to add to the roster I'm cool with that but that's not the reality right now.

[DPG21920]

Again, I'm not going to hate them if that happens, I'll be disappointed for the reasons I mentioned from a fans perspective. But I'll also be comforted knowing I get to watch them because in the end it's not all bad.

[Spursfanfromafar]

Thoughts -

1) Duncan *will not* ask for $20mil per year for two years. He wants a championship and he believes in getting a great core around him to compete. He knows that signing RJ to an extension hamstrung the team badly in the years when he was due his best payment days.

2) The Spurs *will not* lowball Duncan. They will not offer a low contract for the heck of it. I don't know what numbers are ideal, but anything between $8mil to $12mil and partial guarantees for last years should be on play.

3) Kawhi's emergence, Lorbek's availability and one or two vets on the market give the Spurs a lot of wiggle room in getting a decent free agent without having to overpay him. And that gives the Spurs as much wiggle room to pay Duncan duly for his efforts and his status as the franchise player.

I therefore feel that it is not an extreme polarised set of cases - wherein the options are: either let Duncan go if he demands too much or "overpay" him and risk not getting any decent help for him. I think the possibilities that are there somewhere in between are pretty good enough and pretty optimal enough.

[SequSpur]

who gives a shit..this team is moving in two years and going to another city. The arena will be empty next year, Duncan will be a 100. They can pay him whatever they want, it's not money, I don't give a shit.

Go Anaheim Spurs!

[Solid D]

this team is moving in two years and going to another city....Go Anaheim Spurs!

rofl guffaw

Go trade your Spurs calendar in on a Mayan one.

[Fabbs]

This is something that I'm starting to believe in. Yeah, it sounds corny. Spurs = Class blah blah. But ... some players seem to buy it. Especially European players looking at the NBA from the outside. Many Euro players who don't even like the NBA would consider playing for the Spurs due to their image of being a first class organization that takes care of its players.

By doing a gentle transition, you keep that image intact and maybe that's enough to sway a free agent or two to sign in San Antonio when everything else is equal. Or in the future, a franchise player on the Spurs could want to follow in the footsteps of Robinson and Duncan by sticking around for their whole career.

It's another difficult thing to quantify but I truly think that perception exists.

If you go scorched earth, you'd basically be undoing any goodwill and the Spurs would like like just another franchise.
Any specific examples?

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

Any specific examples?

Lorbek.

[ElNono]

I particularly think the Euro argument is pretty weak. As a matter of fact, I would say its the complete opposite. Not only they have to mostly leave money on the table for a rookie deal. Under the Spurs they have to endure what's likely a full year of what amounts to not playing. I don't think that's enticing to Euros at all. Especially when there are other NBA teams without such policies.

[Cane]

Tbh agreed with timvp's OP. Ride out Duncan and Manu for as long as you can

But what really sucks when it comes to relying on Parker/Manu/Splitter is that they're all going to be playing basketball year-round when you take into account their national teams.


I particularly think the Euro argument is pretty weak. As a matter of fact, I would say its the complete opposite. Not only they have to mostly leave money on the table for a rookie deal. Under the Spurs they have to endure what's likely a full year of what amounts to not playing. I don't think that's enticing to Euros at all. Especially when there are other NBA teams without such policies.

Can't say I fully agree. Euro-bound Gary Neal averaged 20+ mins in his rookie season. But I agree about the rookie deals. The big problem is the $$$, however few NBA organizations can compare to the appeal that the Spurs have overseas.

[ElNono]

Can't say I fully agree. Euro-bound Gary Neal averaged 20+ mins in his rookie season. But I agree about the rookie deals. The big problem is the $$$, however few NBA organizations can compare to the appeal that the Spurs have overseas.

That's because Neal got an extended look thanks to Anderson's injury. Basically, the team didn't have anyone else to play. When it comes to bigmen especially, the situation isn't that rosy at all (Oberto, Splitter, Mahinmi, up to an extent Scola). I think teams like Memphis or Toronto who have played their euros right away might be more enticing destinations.

[Fabbs]

Lorbek.
2004 NBA Draft withdrew his name from consideration.
2005 NBA Draft by the Indiana Pacers. But the Pacers did not sign him and Lorbek continued to play in Europe.
2011 NBA Draft the Indiana Pacers traded the rights to Lorbek to the San Antonio Spurs.

Real impact.

[K-State Spur]

That's because Neal got an extended look thanks to Anderson's injury. Basically, the team didn't have anyone else to play. When it comes to bigmen especially, the situation isn't that rosy at all (Oberto, Splitter, Mahinmi, up to an extent Scola). I think teams like Memphis or Toronto who have played their euros right away might be more enticing destinations.

extenuating circumstances.

Splitter got hurt at a bad time.
Ian clearly wasn't ready off the bat.
Oberto joined a frontcourt that already had some depth - each of whom (except Rasho) had played a major role in a previous championship.

[timvp]

I particularly think the Euro argument is pretty weak

Tbh, I don't even think it's arguable. The Spurs have a great rep among Euro players. Lorbek, for example, was on record as saying he wasn't interested in playing in the NBA. But after getting traded to the Spurs, he now changed his tune.

Even Spanoulis said that the Spurs were the only team he'd play for. If you polled Euro players the coach they'd most like to play for, Pop would win hands down. Playing with Parker and Ginobili are also draws.

And as far as Euro players not wanting to come to S.A. because Pop doesn't play them in their first year, that really doesn't factor in at all. When a player comes from Europe, their goal is to cash in after their first contract. Parker, Ginobili, Oberto and eventually Splitter will be successful examples.

Splitter not playing last season was much more painful for Spurs fans than it was for Splitter himself. He got a year to get adjusted to everything before making his push for his big contract. Two full years of playing is more than enough time to earn a huge deal.

Comparing the standing of the Spurs in the eyes of American prospects and European prospects is no contest. The European prospects would be much more likely to sign if everything else were equal. And that's an advantage I think the Spurs should try to milk.

[timvp]

2004 NBA Draft withdrew his name from consideration.
2005 NBA Draft by the Indiana Pacers. But the Pacers did not sign him and Lorbek continued to play in Europe.
2011 NBA Draft the Indiana Pacers traded the rights to Lorbek to the San Antonio Spurs.

Real impact.

This upcoming summer the Spurs will have a chance to sign him. He never really considered signing with the Pacers.

[DPG21920]

You've changed :lol

[Cant_Be_Faded]

You've changed :lol

It's like that time Manny stopped being liberal (before he became REALLY liberal)

[Mal]

Lorbek

Go and play or not, for team like Pacers, who are in rebuild since brawl. This isnt good oportunity for one of the best european players

Spurs on the other hand , are contender. Duncan is half of fame, playing and training with him is an honour and great expierence.

Also there are many europlayers like Parker, Manu, Tiago even Neal, who was a teammate for Lorbek, who can help you adapt to NBA.

Pop is great coach. These are aspect, beside money, you consider, when you`re taking huge risk, and decide to go overseas.

[ElNono]

extenuating circumstances.

Splitter got hurt at a bad time.

Training camp?


Ian clearly wasn't ready off the bat.

Apparently, he was never ready.


Oberto joined a frontcourt that already had some depth - each of whom (except Rasho) had played a major role in a previous championship.

Don't necessarily disagree. But that's an integral part of the enticing/not enticing part.

[LongtimeSpursFan]

That's because Neal got an extended look thanks to Anderson's injury. Basically, the team didn't have anyone else to play. When it comes to bigmen especially, the situation isn't that rosy at all (Oberto, Splitter, Mahinmi, up to an extent Scola). I think teams like Memphis or Toronto who have played their euros right away might be more enticing destinations.

I almost choked when I saw this! Memphis and Toronto as more enticing? Memphis is .500 ball club with one good year in the playoffs that beat a team without their best player. Toronto has been a bottom dweller for years. How could anyone call them enticing?
I vaguely recall reading an argument on how some people were hoping for the Pistons to beat the Spurs in 2005 championship because of the number of foreign players the Spurs had on the team. Isnt it widely viewed that San Antonio has been a destination for foreign players due to Pop and the front office?

[ElNono]

Tbh, I don't even think it's arguable. The Spurs have a great rep among Euro players. Lorbek, for example, was on record as saying he wasn't interested in playing in the NBA. But after getting traded to the Spurs, he now changed his tune.

I would argue they used to be due to them leaning heavily on foreign players in the past (and mostly with good results). That's not necessarily the case anymore. These days there's at least one foreigner on almost every NBA team, with some teams having two or three. While the FO should get the credit for mining for talent there early and often, hiring Euro talent these days isn't the taboo it was 10 years ago.


Even Spanoulis said that the Spurs were the only team he'd play for. If you polled Euro players the coach they'd most like to play for, Pop would win hands down. Playing with Parker and Ginobili are also draws.

It's the $$$$... I'm sure there's the case here and there (like Manu), who wants to prove themselves against the top talent or the top coach. Players that are skipping a large contract from Real Madrid to prove something in the NBA are largely a rarity.


And as far as Euro players not wanting to come to S.A. because Pop doesn't play them in their first year, that really doesn't factor in at all. When a player comes from Europe, their goal is to cash in after their first contract. Parker, Ginobili, Oberto and eventually Splitter will be successful examples.

I think it matters. In the case of Splitter or Scola (or Parker and Manu) its different because the Spurs held their rights. For players that are free agents, are going to get paid the same rookie scale in whatever team they sign for, having a better shot at showing yourself for that large contract down the road matters.

Frankly, warming up the bench is why VSpan headed back to Europe. If he wanted to be Tony's backup now, he would be (and the FO wouldn't have needed to go after TJ Ford or draft Joseph). He's not in the NBA because he doesn't want to be here.


Splitter not playing last season was much more painful for Spurs fans than it was for Splitter himself. He got a year to get adjusted to everything before making his push for his big contract. Two full years of playing is more than enough time to earn a huge deal.

I agree, but as I pointed out above, for Splitter was either signing with the Spurs or staying in Europe (or going through a Scola-like ordeal to get his rights traded).


Comparing the standing of the Spurs in the eyes of American prospects and European prospects is no contest. The European prospects would be much more likely to sign if everything else were equal. And that's an advantage I think the Spurs should try to milk.

I think most Euros would like to have at least a shot at the NBA of they're young enough. I don't think the Spurs is as much of a preferred destination as you think it is. For players drafted by the Spurs, I agree that changes, because they're basically tied to the Spurs or nothing. But I don't necessarily agree that extends to Euro players in general.

[GSH]

I started a thread about blowing the team up, at the beginning of the season. (Actually breaking up the Big 3, but that's a "blow up" in my mind.) After taking a day to think about Timvp's ideas about riding it out, I realized that I was being totally inconsistent with some of my other thoughts and posts, and that Timvp is right.

I get kind of irritated with people who act like Peter Holt should just open his checkbook and throw money at the team. It's a business. It's entertainment, but it's still a business. If the team can't make money, we don't get to have the NBA in San Antonio. It's as simple as that. Before we lucked into the No.1 pick that brought David Robinson here (and lucked David being a good guy), there was a real possibility of losing the Spurs.

The "scorched earth" route ignores that fact completely. If I had been thinking of it like a businessman, and not a fan, there's no way in hell I would choose the "blow it up" route, when there was any other reasonable alternative. And Timvp's roadmap, which is probably very similar to what Holt and the FO are planning, is definitely a reasonable alternative. I've been doing the same thing I complain about others doing - calling for Holt to ignore the money and the risk and think about nothing but the next championship in the shortest amount of time.

The one big thing that the scorched earth approach ignores is that if you had a bottomless bank account, and no salary cap, you could put together a team of All-Stars and STILL be far from a 100% lock to win a championship. Especially in the first couple of years, but even in the long run when you account for egos, injuries, etc. A few years back, the sportswriters boasted that Portland had two starting 5's. Ten players that were all good enough to be starting on most teams in the league. They didn't even sniff a championship.

With the players the Spurs have, and the fan base, it would be irresponsible from a business perspective to blow this team up. If it was my money on the line, I sure as hell wouldn't do it. There are some well-stated arguments on both sides, but reason wins out. I'd rather take my chances on the best team they can field, than take a chance on no team at all.

[ElNono]

I almost choked when I saw this! Memphis and Toronto as more enticing? Memphis is .500 ball club with one good year in the playoffs that beat a team without their best player. Toronto has been a bottom dweller for years. How could anyone call them enticing?
I vaguely recall reading an argument on how some people were hoping for the Pistons to beat the Spurs in 2005 championship because of the number of foreign players the Spurs had on the team. Isnt it widely viewed that San Antonio has been a destination for foreign players due to Pop and the front office?

This isn't 2005 anymore, and frankly, since 2005 there has been an amazing influx of foreign players into every team in the NBA. If anything, 2005 opened the eyes of a lot of GMs in the NBA.

Memphis and their .500 ball kicked our asses about 6 months ago. They received and made both Gasol into key players of their teams right away. They both cashed in. IIRC, at some point they also had La Bomba Navarro.

Toronto has also been foreign friendly. Calderon, Garbajosa, Bustnami, etc.

When push come to shove, it's all about the $$$. All those guys already are leaving sure thing situations to have a shot at showing themselves and landing the big bucks.

[timvp]

You've changed :lol

Circumstances change, tbh. If one doesn't adapt, they run the risk of saying something like they won't be a fan any longer if Tim Duncan is paid market value.

[ElNono]

Talking about change, I walked into a Kmart today afte years of not visiting one, and on the shoe aisle there was a poster of RMJ promoting $30 shoes. The poster read "Roger Mason Jr, professional basketball player". I almost can't contain the laughs, tbh

[timvp]

I don't think the Spurs is as much of a preferred destination as you think it is.

It's pretty much impossible to argue that "as much" amount ... which appears to be the heart of where we disagree. But as long as the Spurs are a preferred destination at all on any level, that by definition gives them a market advantage they will hopefully exploit going forward.

[ElNono]

It's pretty much impossible to argue that "as much" amount ... which appears to be the heart of where we disagree. But as long as the Spurs are a preferred destination at all on any level, that by definition gives them a market advantage they will hopefully exploit going forward.

I think the Spurs were heavily dependent on that in the past because of their draft situation and the financials. I think getting some cap space and the new rules on the new CBA should make them less reliant on that. That said, this is contingent on this CBA lasting more than 6 years.

[K-State Spur]

Training camp?

For a new player - yep.



Apparently, he was never ready.

Talking first years only. But hell, despite the solid game 6, even Rick Carlisle didn't give him a ton of PT his first year in Dallas.

[Amuseddaysleeper]

Toronto is probably the most euro-centric city in the entire league. Turkoglu bolted Portland for Toronto at the last minute mostly because his wife kept bugging him to take her to a city with a stronger Turkish community. While this city is freezing most of the year, I don't doubt that many European players would select Toronto as a top 5 NBA destination.


As for blowing it up, I just hate the word "rebuilding". I know it's something we're going to have to face, and that common sense says you shouldn't hang on to players past their prime, but with the Spurs I want all 3 of them to retire in their current jerseys.

I loathe the Celtics, but the fact that they are even considering trading Pierce makes me sick. Ainge has already fucked that team enough with the Perkins trade, Pierce has earned the right to retire in Boston, the same way the Spurs should do everything to ensure Duncan and Manu retire as Spurs. (Parker as well, but I don't know if he'll stick around for a rebuilding phase, hopefully he does).

The rebuilding process shouldn't start till after TD retires. As long as he still suits up the Spurs owe it to him to make a legit effort at remaining a playoff time. And with the Big 3 intact that should happen for the rest of his career. The Spurs do draft wonderfully, and while it's frustrating to see how often we lose out on free agents, I'm sure Duncan and RJ's contracts coming off the books should help that situation.

I hope Duncan is willing to take $20-$25 million for 2 years, but whatever he wants, you just give it to him. The guy is going to have statues built of him all over the SBC Center. He owns the city.

As for the fanbase, look at Indiana, they finally have a strong playoff team (#3 in the East right now) yet they are in the bottom 5 in attendance. Granted, the Palace brawl may have forced the team to take an image hit with their fans, it also feels like once the team goes lottery, it takes years just to re-connect/win with the fans.

The Spurs had problems selling out games in the WCF of a championship year (2007), so yeah, you can blow it up, but seeing as how Holt is one of the least wealthy owners in the league, bottoming out before they have to wouldn't be a great idea and would arguably hurt his pocketbook more than people realize.

Anyways, I held off as long as I could before posting in this thread because this team, and this core means so much to me. I haven't watched anything from my 16 DVD championship boxset because I'm not ready to concede that it's truly over as long as the big 3 are in uniform.

[therealtruth]

I don't think players are lining up to play for Pop. They've seen how good players like RJ have become garbage in the Spurs system and probably don't want any of it.

[Amuseddaysleeper]

Toronto is probably the most euro-centric city in the entire league. Turkoglu bolted Portland for Toronto at the last minute mostly because his wife kept bugging him to take her to a city with a stronger Turkish community. While this city is freezing most of the year, I don't doubt that many European players would select Toronto as a top 5 NBA destination.


As for blowing it up, I just hate the word "rebuilding". I know it's something we're going to have to face, and that common sense says you shouldn't hang on to players past their prime, but with the Spurs I want all 3 of them to retire in their current jerseys.

I loathe the Celtics, but the fact that they are even considering trading Pierce makes me sick. Ainge has already fucked that team enough with the Perkins trade, Pierce has earned the right to retire in Boston, the same way the Spurs should do everything to ensure Duncan and Manu retire as Spurs. (Parker as well, but I don't know if he'll stick around for a rebuilding phase, hopefully he does).

The rebuilding process shouldn't start till after TD retires. As long as he still suits up the Spurs owe it to him to make a legit effort at remaining a playoff time. And with the Big 3 intact that should happen for the rest of his career. The Spurs do draft wonderfully, and while it's frustrating to see how often we lose out on free agents, I'm sure Duncan and RJ's contracts coming off the books should help that situation.

I hope Duncan is willing to take $20-$25 million for 2 years, but whatever he wants, you just give it to him. The guy is going to have statues built of him all over the SBC Center. He owns the city.

As for the fanbase, look at Indiana, they finally have a strong playoff team (#3 in the East right now) yet they are in the bottom 5 in attendance. Granted, the Palace brawl may have forced the team to take an image hit with their fans, it also feels like once the team goes lottery, it takes years just to re-connect/win with the fans.

The Spurs had problems selling out games in the WCF of a championship year (2007), so yeah, you can blow it up, but seeing as how Holt is one of the least wealthy owners in the league, bottoming out before they have to wouldn't be a great idea and would arguably hurt his pocketbook more than people realize.

Anyways, I held off as long as I could before posting in this thread because this team, and this core means so much to me. I haven't watched anything from my 16 DVD championship boxset because I'm not ready to concede that it's truly over as long as the big 3 are in uniform.

[ElNono]

For a new player - yep.

I don't think it quite works that way in other teams. Whether that's good or bad, it's debatable. I do think it's a factor that's taken into consideration.


Talking first years only. But hell, despite the solid game 6, even Rick Carlisle didn't give him a ton of PT his first year in Dallas.

He played more than he ever did in the Spurs, IIRC. I personally was never sold.
That said, I can't think he would describe his experience with the Spurs/Toros as anything but frustrating. Just the feeling I get, take it for what is worth.

[DPG21920]

Circumstances change, tbh. If one doesn't adapt, they run the risk of saying something like they won't be a fan any longer if Tim Duncan is paid market value.

Who said that?

[TD 21]

That's a strawman. I never said there's no point in being a fan if they're not contending. It's about what I call "The Known". Giving Tim 20M knowing the Spurs are done (another playoff flameout would likely signify that) comes off as an obvious money grab (something you adamantly were against tbh..)

I completely disagree. Another playoff flame out wouldn't at all signal that they're "done", it would signal that they once again failed to address their primary weakness from last season and that is starting power forward. Because they made strides to address other weaknesses, by inserting Splitter into the rotation and acquiring Leonard and because they'll have cap space and there's at least a decent chance they address said primary weakness, they should have an outside shot again next season. The day I'll consider them "done" is the day that Duncan and Ginobili no longer produce at an All-Star caliber level.

I know all this talk is just hypothetical, but Duncan isn't going to make anywhere near $20 million annually again. They probably will basically allow him to name his price, but they'll only do so because they know he's reasonable and won't ask for an obscene amount. I've been saying $10-12 million for a while, but considering the going rate for mediocre, let alone high end, centers and looking at comparable examples, $14-15 million might be more likely. Nowitzki is making roughly $19 million this season and Pierce is making roughly $15 million this season.

[DPG21920]

Agreed. I understand the economics, but it would be disappointing if they didn't address obvious needs.

[therealtruth]

Tbh, I don't even think it's arguable. The Spurs have a great rep among Euro players. Lorbek, for example, was on record as saying he wasn't interested in playing in the NBA. But after getting traded to the Spurs, he now changed his tune.

Even Spanoulis said that the Spurs were the only team he'd play for. If you polled Euro players the coach they'd most like to play for, Pop would win hands down. Playing with Parker and Ginobili are also draws.

And as far as Euro players not wanting to come to S.A. because Pop doesn't play them in their first year, that really doesn't factor in at all. When a player comes from Europe, their goal is to cash in after their first contract. Parker, Ginobili, Oberto and eventually Splitter will be successful examples.

Splitter not playing last season was much more painful for Spurs fans than it was for Splitter himself. He got a year to get adjusted to everything before making his push for his big contract. Two full years of playing is more than enough time to earn a huge deal.

Comparing the standing of the Spurs in the eyes of American prospects and European prospects is no contest. The European prospects would be much more likely to sign if everything else were equal. And that's an advantage I think the Spurs should try to milk.

I am pretty sure Splitter was not fine with sitting last year. There was an article at Express News where they quoted him saying he even questioned whether he had made the right decision to come over. I don't blame him. He says guys like Bonner/Blair getting minutes over him who were definitely not better than him.

[armynick23]

So would it be worth going after a batum, Lopez, or Hibbert this summer, or would you see them as over paid role players?

:wakeup

Batum would be a nice pickup, but is inconsistant at this moment
Lopez would be a project under tim and would get quality minutes
Hibbert would be our best and safest bet:flag:

[Manufan909]

I am pretty sure Splitter was not fine with sitting last year. There was an article at Express News where they quoted him saying he even questioned whether he had made the right decision to come over. I don't blame him. He says guys like Bonner/Blair getting minutes over him who were definitely not better than him.

Link?

Even after just reading all ten pages of this thread, I have to question the specifics. Assuming Lorbek comes over, how does the rebuilding Spurs big rotation work next year? Assuming Splitter averages 25+ mpg over his last 20-30 games (counting POs no matter how far the Spurs get), how would Lorbek and a PF/C FA fit? Hopefully Splitter and a non-ginger would lead the rotation, with Duncan and one of the new guys being the primary bench bigs. Just realized I didn't factor in Blair, but it's whatever. We'll have to wait for the trade deadline before we even know who will definitely still be on the team next year anyways.


I'd mention the wings/SFs, but I think Manu, Tony, Neal, Leonard, Green, and 2 of Joseph/Anderson/vet SF have that covered.

Concerning the thread itself, I would be okay with keeping Tim for 30-40 mil over the next couple years, but I hope he is on the low end of the spectrum. I can see a Splitter/TP/Leonard Big 3, backed by Timmy and Manu of course, go far in 2013-2014. But that is if Pop gives no more than 15 min to players who are useless on D, regardless of whether or not they're great at spacing or what have you. If they have multiple qualities like Neal, who has uber clutchness, sneaky driving ability, and 3pt shooting I'm okay with them getting around 20 min.

Also, I'm not, nor have I ever been, a backer of the "scorched Earth" route. I really hope that doesn't mean the Spurs can't get Hibbert this summer.

P.S. Did this thread make anyone else so excited that they almost wanted next season to hurry up and start already? There's a 13% chance that RJ will be gone, Lorbek will be primed to absorb Bonner's minutes, one of Splitter or Leonard will be in the starting lineup, Manu will have become accustomed to the steel in his shooting hand, AND both Bonner and Blair will have one less year on their contracts!!!
:jekka

[therealtruth]

Link?

Even after just reading all ten pages of this thread, I have to question the specifics. Assuming Lorbek comes over, how does the rebuilding Spurs big rotation work next year? Assuming Splitter averages 25+ mpg over his last 20-30 games (counting POs no matter how far the Spurs get), how would Lorbek and a PF/C FA fit? Hopefully Splitter and a non-ginger would lead the rotation, with Duncan and one of the new guys being the primary bench bigs. Just realized I didn't factor in Blair, but it's whatever. We'll have to wait for the trade deadline before we even know who will definitely still be on the team next year anyways.


I'd mention the wings/SFs, but I think Manu, Tony, Neal, Leonard, Green, and 2 of Joseph/Anderson/vet SF have that covered.

Concerning the thread itself, I would be okay with keeping Tim for 30-40 mil over the next couple years, but I hope he is on the low end of the spectrum. I can see a Splitter/TP/Leonard Big 3, backed by Timmy and Manu of course, go far in 2013-2014. But that is if Pop gives no more than 15 min to players who are useless on D, regardless of whether or not they're great at spacing or what have you. If they have multiple qualities like Neal, who has uber clutchness, sneaky driving ability, and 3pt shooting I'm okay with them getting around 20 min.

Also, I'm not, nor have I ever been, a backer of the "scorched Earth" route. I really hope that doesn't mean the Spurs can't get Hibbert this summer.

P.S. Did this thread make anyone else so excited that they almost wanted next season to hurry up and start already? There's a 13% chance that RJ will be gone, Lorbek will be primed to absorb Bonner's minutes, one of Splitter or Leonard will be in the starting lineup, Manu will have become accustomed to the steel in his shooting hand, AND both Bonner and Blair will have one less year on their contracts!!!
:jekka

I always support playing the best players. It shouldn't matter how long you've been here or what your contract is like or how nice of a guy you are. Ideally our big rotation would be TD and Splitter/Lorbek with really small amount of Bonner/Blair.