View Full Version : We need a legit center...Undisclosed team out west thinking of signing Larry Sanders
Unnamed West Team Internally Discussing Signing Larry Sanders
Oct 12, 2015 8:00 PM
http://basketball.realgm.com/images/nba/4.2/wiretap/photos/2006/Sanders_Larry_mil_130727.jpg
A Western Conference team has had internal talks about signing Larry Sanders, according to a source.
Maybe this is just agent speak. But Boban Sucks. He's just not quick enough to play defense in the NBA. He can't guard a pick n' roll. Yes, Sanders is a head case, but he can play defense if he doesn't go crazy. If you can get Larry Sanders on the cheap, he's worth it. And judging from last night, the last 5 guys are easily worth cutting to add a legit big.
Mikeanaro
10-13-2015, 03:32 PM
Good centers are extinct so we dont really need one, tbh.
TrainOfThought5
10-13-2015, 03:35 PM
Wasnt lary sanders only issue was that he said basketball wasnt fun anymore (on a losing milwaukee team), and he wanted to smoke weed (which half the players in the league do)
SpursFan86
10-13-2015, 03:36 PM
1) The Spurs aren't going after Larry Sanders.
2) The Spurs aren't giving up on Boban after 2 preseason games.
Boban best case scenario is not as good as Larry Sanders pre-going crazy.
Good centers are extinct so we dont really need one, tbh.
Did you see Paul pick and roll us to death in the playoffs? Yes, we need a mobile big to guard the pick and roll. We don't have Splitter anymore.
Robz4000
10-13-2015, 03:46 PM
Not the Spurs tbh. Prolly Dallas.
Egad...it's a Texas team:Mavs denying for what it's worth.
http://www.vavel.com/en-us/nba/553005-dallas-mavericks-expressing-interest-in-c-larry-sanders.html
UNT Eagles 2016
10-13-2015, 03:54 PM
Egad...it's a Texas team:Mavs denying for what it's worth.
http://www.vavel.com/en-us/nba/553005-dallas-mavericks-expressing-interest-in-c-larry-sanders.html
I don't think it'd be the Rockets because he'd be a lousy fit with Dwert. We're dealing with a guy on a bought-out contract, so he'd cost us only the vet min. This thread has potential, tbh
TheGreatYacht
10-13-2015, 03:56 PM
Would take him, especially for the min. Tim needs rest and LMA doesn't want to play Center
Spurtacular
10-13-2015, 03:58 PM
Good centers are extinct so we dont really need one, tbh.
1) The Spurs aren't going after Larry Sanders.
2) The Spurs aren't giving up on Boban after 2 preseason games.
UNT Eagles 2016
10-13-2015, 04:00 PM
Would take him, especially for the min. Tim needs rest and LMA doesn't want to play Center
This. Would even consider starting him at center alongside LMA so he'd be happier.
Mel_13
10-13-2015, 04:13 PM
Egad...it's a Texas team:Mavs denying for what it's worth.
http://www.vavel.com/en-us/nba/553005-dallas-mavericks-expressing-interest-in-c-larry-sanders.html
1. The writer appears to be about 12.
http://www.vavel.com/liam-o-brien/
2. Boban won't be in the rotation. Are you suggesting that Spurs sign Sanders to replace Diaw or West in the rotation? Even if we set all the obvious issues with Sanders aside, and assume he would be willing to sign a minimum deal, it seems likely that he will want to sign somewhere with an available spot in the rotation. The Spurs top 4 bigs are set in stone, even if they don't have a mobile center in that group.
hater
10-13-2015, 04:17 PM
1) The Spurs aren't going after Larry Sanders.
2) The Spurs aren't giving up on Boban after 2 preseason games.
/thread
Beaverfuzz
10-13-2015, 04:18 PM
It's Austin.
1. The writer appears to be about 12.
http://www.vavel.com/liam-o-brien/
2. Boban won't be in the rotation. Are you suggesting that Spurs sign Sanders to replace Diaw or West in the rotation? Even if we set all the obvious issues with Sanders aside, and assume he would be willing to sign a minimum deal, it seems likely that he will want to sign somewhere with an available spot in the rotation. The Spurs top 4 bigs are set in stone, even if they don't have a mobile center in that group.
Well, Duncan won’t play every game in the regular season. Diaw might be able to bang with 5s, but he can’t rim protect. Neither can West. And none of them can guard Chris Paul in a pick and roll, though Duncan came closest. We need a big that can handle the pick and roll defense. In the past, that was a younger Duncan and then Splitter. This roster doesn’t have that one, unless LMA can do it, which I doubt given everything I’ve read about his defense.
Hoops Czar
10-13-2015, 04:37 PM
1. The writer appears to be about 12.
http://www.vavel.com/liam-o-brien/
2. Boban won't be in the rotation. Are you suggesting that Spurs sign Sanders to replace Diaw or West in the rotation? Even if we set all the obvious issues with Sanders aside, and assume he would be willing to sign a minimum deal, it seems likely that he will want to sign somewhere with an available spot in the rotation. The Spurs top 4 bigs are set in stone, even if they don't have a mobile center in that group.
I think he'd have to prove he's a rotation player first. With that said, Houston might be the best possible destination with the loss of Josh Smith and Capela being Howard's only true back up at center. I hope it's the Spurs though.
Yes, and he won't get more than a min offer until he proves he's stable enough. So he'll play for the league min, I do not doubt.
Mel_13
10-13-2015, 04:39 PM
Well, Duncan won’t play every game in the regular season. Diaw might be able to bang with 5s, but he can’t rim protect. Neither can West. And none of them can guard Chris Paul in a pick and roll, though Duncan came closest. We need a big that can handle the pick and roll defense. In the past, that was a younger Duncan and then Splitter. This roster doesn’t have that one, unless LMA can do it, which I doubt given everything I’ve read about his defense.
All true, but there is an almost zero chance that the Spurs sign a big to displace West and/or Diaw in the playoff rotation. Which is what this is all about. If they get to January and the concerns you list become real problems, then a trade like the Malik/Nazr deal becomes possible. For now, they've committed to Duncan, LMA, and one of Diaw/West to play all the meaningful playoff minutes.
Mel_13
10-13-2015, 04:46 PM
I think he'd have to prove he's a rotation player first.
A task infinitely more achievable on a team with less than four established NBA veteran bigs.
I'm okay with him replacing Boban and then let's see where he can go with some development in limited minutes. If he's ready to play by the playoffs, then he's a steal. If he flakes out, then no big deal. But the Boban experiment is bound to fail. And while we can survive without a mobile big that can rim protect (we didn't have one last year other than Duncan), we will get killed in pick and roll. Boban can't help there. Neither can Diaw. I hope West can, but I just don't know. And Duncan couldn't get to Paul's shot last year. LMA? I don't know. I'd take a low cost with possible upside in signing Sanders to the min.
Boban best case scenario is not as good as Larry Sanders pre-going crazy.
Larry Sanders was not available before he went crazy and commanded $45 million or something to stay with the Bucks.
random21
10-13-2015, 05:00 PM
I would sign him.... Not much to get yourself into trouble here in SA... This is a guy that can rebound and block shots....
Mel_13
10-13-2015, 05:00 PM
I'm okay with him replacing Boban and then let's see where he can go with some development in limited minutes. If he's ready to play by the playoffs, then he's a steal. If he flakes out, then no big deal. But the Boban experiment is bound to fail. And while we can survive without a mobile big that can rim protect (we didn't have one last year other than Duncan), we will get killed in pick and roll. Boban can't help there. Neither can Diaw. I hope West can, but I just don't know. And Duncan couldn't get to Paul's shot last year. LMA? I don't know. I'd take a low cost with possible upside in signing Sanders to the min.
The Boban experiment is the one that PATFO have chosen to pursue this season. They won't be ready to declare it a failure anytime soon. Certainly not to take on a player with Sanders' issues.
nickdaquick
10-13-2015, 05:10 PM
I'm okay with him replacing Boban and then let's see where he can go with some development in limited minutes. If he's ready to play by the playoffs, then he's a steal. If he flakes out, then no big deal. But the Boban experiment is bound to fail. And while we can survive without a mobile big that can rim protect (we didn't have one last year other than Duncan), we will get killed in pick and roll. Boban can't help there. Neither can Diaw. I hope West can, but I just don't know. And Duncan couldn't get to Paul's shot last year. LMA? I don't know. I'd take a low cost with possible upside in signing Sanders to the min.
Are you saying just because Paul makes a miracle floater over a 7 footer to beat the spurs in a hard fought series last year that we should sign a proven team cancer like Larry Sanders just because he's mobile? I'm glad your not the GM of this team. That is extremely short sided and a terrible over reaction. That's like saying we should have cut Manu and signed a longer and better defender to replace him because Fisher hit that miracle heave. Boban just got here and is learning right now. Give him some time to adjust to the competition level and the system. I've been encouraged by some of his defense so far (I think he's had like 3 blocks already) and he is much more mobile then I thought he would be. Let's not forget how bad Splitter looked when he first got here. Sanders doesn't even like basketball, there is no way Pop will rub him the right way.
Are you saying just because Paul makes a miracle floater over a 7 footer to beat the spurs in a hard fought series last year that we should sign a proven team cancer like Larry Sanders just because he's mobile? I'm glad your not the GM of this team. That is extremely short sided and a terrible over reaction. That's like saying we should have cut Manu and signed a longer and better defender to replace him because Fisher hit that miracle heave. Boban just got here and is learning right now. Give him some time to adjust to the competition level and the system. I've been encouraged by some of his defense so far (I think he's had like 3 blocks already) and he is much more mobile then I thought he would be. Let's not forget how bad Splitter looked when he first got here. Sanders doesn't even like basketball, there is no way Pop will rub him the right way.
You may have missed the whole first round series with Chris Paul. The Clippers ran the pick and roll nonstop. They were hugely successful with it. That's why we lost that series. We couldn't stop Paul's pick and roll. And Paul, who played great that series, could shoot over all the bigs on the switch. In years past, Duncan would've got there to disrupt. Spitter did it in 2014. But no one did it last year. And I don't think our roster has that guy this year.
JeffDuncan
10-13-2015, 06:24 PM
The OP is as crazy as Sanders is.
TrainOfThought5
10-13-2015, 06:28 PM
Would take him, especially for the min. Tim needs rest and LMA doesn't want to play Center
This x100. you can schedule Duncan to sit out about 20 -30 games between DNP- olds and 2nd half blowouts. LMAlpha needs to be focused on offense and Diaw and West arent gonna cut the mustard at the 5 for long stretches. Sanders would instantly be more valuable than Boban, Bonner, Thomas, Ndoye, and whatever other scrub we've got. Remember, even if the only thing he does is provide real 5 insurance for the season in case of injury its money well spent. Sign him and start plannin the parade.
Maddog
10-13-2015, 06:32 PM
Doubt it will happen.
Only one slot available and nothing to say he has worked out all his problems. Plus with the issues he had, even if sincere, it's just not been enough time.
Would I consider it? Maybe. But only if he came across well in an interview and his doctors gave an OK (I presume he has been under medical care?)
playbonner15
10-13-2015, 06:55 PM
Doubt it would be the Spurs. But why wouldnt his agent reveal the team. They usually do to command more money
Brian Williams. He was a center that went a little crazy and quit basketball to sail. A few years later, he decided he wanted to play basketball and the Bulls signed him. He was a key player on their championship run. So it may be far fetched or unlikely, but it's not beyond possible that it could work out. He's not out of the league because he lacks talent.
exstatic
10-13-2015, 08:15 PM
The OP is as crazy as Sanders is.
As is anyone who thinks PATFO would EVER sign a nutjob like Sanders. This isn't fantasy ball. You don't just get his stats, your players have to live and interact with him for 9 months with a Finals run. He clashed with pretty much everyone in MIL and basically got Neal traded.
exstatic
10-13-2015, 08:21 PM
Brian Williams. He was a center that went a little crazy and quit basketball to sail. A few years later, he decided he wanted to play basketball and the Bulls signed him. He was a key player on their championship run. So it may be far fetched or unlikely, but it's not beyond possible that it could work out. He's not out of the league because he lacks talent.
He never quit basketball to sail. That was after he quit at 29. Not sure how he was a key player for Chicago, since he played 9 games for them in one season, 96-97, and in 19 playoff games, he scored 6.1p/3.7r. Dele was also a very talented and well rounded 2 way player, something Sanders never has been.
Kawhitstorm
10-13-2015, 08:44 PM
Definitely a Cuban signing ala the Rondo trade. They lost out on Chandler/DeAndre & let Monta walk to trade for Deron Williams contract.....they already hit rock bottom so they have nothing to lose.
Kawhitstorm
10-13-2015, 08:47 PM
Brian Williams. He was a center that went a little crazy and quit basketball to sail. A few years later, he decided he wanted to play basketball and the Bulls signed him. He was a key player on their championship run. So it may be far fetched or unlikely, but it's not beyond possible that it could work out. He's not out of the league because he lacks talent.
They already had Rodman on the roster so Dele was the least of their concerns esp. w/ Pippen/Jordan around.
He never quit basketball to sail. That was after he quit at 29. Not sure how he was a key player for Chicago, since he played 9 games for them in one season, 96-97, and in 19 playoff games, he scored 6.1p/3.7r. Dele was also a very talented and well rounded 2 way player, something Sanders never has been.
Actually, he did. I have the Sports Illustrated article. He was dealing with depression and quit basketball. He came back and played for the Bulls. He played big minutes and PJ said he was a key to them winning the title. And while Sanders doesn't have the offense, he does have the defense. I doubt Spurs sign him, but not because he lacks talent. Someone will give him a shot and we'll see if he can deliver on the promise he showed early in his career.
Biggems
10-13-2015, 09:31 PM
In defense of Larry Sanders and even Alvin Robertson......living in Milwaukee will probably drive a man to become bat shit crazy.
At least in SA, he would structure, a defined role, a group of players who have been there and done that and can tell him to shut the fuck up and sit down if he tries to get out of line. Plus, if you sign him to a low risk contract, it could be a win win for both sides.
There is nothing that says you have to cut Boban if you sign Sanders.
look_at_g_shred
10-13-2015, 09:42 PM
Can't deny the talent he possesses. I doubt it's the Spurs though. Seems
more like a Cuban move. Low risk/high reward. Dallas is a mess though, not sure how much different than MIL it would be.
exstatic
10-13-2015, 10:47 PM
Actually, he did. I have the Sports Illustrated article. He was dealing with depression and quit basketball. He came back and played for the Bulls. He played big minutes and PJ said he was a key to them winning the title. And while Sanders doesn't have the offense, he does have the defense. I doubt Spurs sign him, but not because he lacks talent. Someone will give him a shot and we'll see if he can deliver on the promise he showed early in his career.
I know he sailed, but that was AFTER his whole career, and he never made it back home. His half brother murdered him and his GF at sea. He never played big minutes for the Bulls in his one season. Regular season, he clocked 13.7 and playoffs, at 17.7. You might actually try looking at basketball reference before telling these tall tales. Phil Jackson is full of shit, too. His playoff numbers for CHI were the worst of his career, almost across the board.
outmap
10-13-2015, 10:50 PM
I think it's Houston. Dallas already have McGee, Dalembert, Pachulia and Powell at center (and at times they put Villanueva at 5), they need back-up wings.
ismael-robert
10-13-2015, 10:58 PM
Emeka okafor? Andrew bynum? The ugly guy who was dancing with miamis trophy? All worth camp invites but too late
cd021
10-14-2015, 04:16 AM
Would take him, especially for the min. Tim needs rest and LMA doesn't want to play Center
I assume that Aldridge will play around 5 mpg at center playing alongside West. He didn't want to meet with NY because they exclusively wanted him at center
cd021
10-14-2015, 04:49 AM
I think it's Houston. Dallas already have McGee, Dalembert, Pachulia and Powell at center (and at times they put Villanueva at 5), they need back-up wings.
They need a backup PF behind Dirk, someone could have slipped my mind but only Villanueva is back there.
Fireball
10-14-2015, 05:03 AM
has anybody read the interview with Pop discussed in the other thread? its all about character and Larry Sanders is a no-go in that regard ...
szkorhetz
10-14-2015, 05:38 AM
I assume that Aldridge will play around 5 mpg at center playing alongside West. He didn't want to meet with NY because they exclusively wanted him at center
The Spurs have three positions, not five, so doesn't matter.
exstatic
10-14-2015, 06:15 AM
The Spurs have three positions, not five, so doesn't matter.
Exactly. The post and wing positions are considered interchangeable.
cd021
10-14-2015, 07:59 AM
The Spurs have three positions, not five, so doesn't matter.
?
UNT Eagles 2016
10-14-2015, 09:22 AM
The Spurs have three positions, not five, so doesn't matter.
if they want to give up 110 ppg...
I know he sailed, but that was AFTER his whole career, and he never made it back home. His half brother murdered him and his GF at sea. He never played big minutes for the Bulls in his one season. Regular season, he clocked 13.7 and playoffs, at 17.7. You might actually try looking at basketball reference before telling these tall tales. Phil Jackson is full of shit, too. His playoff numbers for CHI were the worst of his career, almost across the board.
In 1997 he sat out almost the whole year. He couldn’t get the contract he wanted, so he was quitting for the year and traveling around the world. Towards the end of the season, he signed with the Bulls and was a big factor in their playoff run. He joined them at the very end of that season and he gave them big minutes in the playoffs. He was a key cog. I’m not making anything up and these aren’t tall tales. If anything, you are missing my point in even bringing up Brian Williams. My point is that a player well-known for having mental illness quit the league after a promising career, and came back and was able to contribute big in a playoff run. Despite everything you are saying or trying to say, that doesn’t diminish my point.
The Spurs have three positions, not five, so doesn't matter.
Again, missing the point. It's not what position Sanders plays, it's that he is a shot blocker. Our roster does not have a rim protector other than Timmy or a mobile big that can effectively guard the pick and roll. I don't know that West can do it, but Diaw can't and Duncan couldn't handle the pick and roll last year either.
tmtcsc
10-14-2015, 10:35 AM
I would sign him.... Not much to get yourself into trouble here in SA... This is a guy that can rebound and block shots....
And would smoke a cat if he could catch it. No thanks.
NameLess Scrub
10-14-2015, 10:47 AM
I'm right there with the OP on the concern. Don't think the Spurs will take a look at Sanders.. but the concern is legit.
IMO, the reality here is that the Spurs didn't need West more than a mobile, rim protector big.
We hate to admit it, because we love the guy. He's a great player that left a lot of money on the table because he wanted to play for the Spurs.
The Spurs had to take it. But at the end of the day, it's not what they needed most.
And we all really hope it works out for everybody.
Ice009
10-14-2015, 11:16 AM
I'm right there with the OP on the concern. Don't think the Spurs will take a look at Sanders.. but the concern is legit.
IMO, the reality here is that the Spurs didn't need West more than a mobile, rim protector big.
We hate to admit it, because we love the guy. He's a great player that left a lot of money on the table because he wanted to play for the Spurs.
The Spurs had to take it. But at the end of the day, it's not what they needed most.
And we all really hope it works out for everybody.
There is no way that you turn down David West if he wants to leave that much money on the table and come play for you for the minimum. I don't care what anyone says about 'fit'. That doesn't come into the equation.
Who could the Spurs have gotten that is better for the minimum?
NameLess Scrub
10-14-2015, 11:35 AM
There is no way that you turn down David West if he wants to leave that much money on the table and come play for you for the minimum. I don't care what anyone says about 'fit'. That doesn't come into the equation.
Who could the Spurs have gotten that is better for the minimum?
Exactly
HarlemHeat37
10-14-2015, 11:41 AM
The concern about the bench defense is valid, many people here have acknowledged it, but realistically, I can't remember a team that lost in the playoffs because of their bench defense:lol..
ceperez
10-14-2015, 11:43 AM
I'm right there with the OP on the concern. Don't think the Spurs will take a look at Sanders.. but the concern is legit.
IMO, the reality here is that the Spurs didn't need West more than a mobile, rim protector big.
We hate to admit it, because we love the guy. He's a great player that left a lot of money on the table because he wanted to play for the Spurs.
The Spurs had to take it. But at the end of the day, it's not what they needed most.
And we all really hope it works out for everybody.
I agree here. Spurs needed a backup center and guard after Splitter and CoJo left. The went across the world to find Boban and the lucked out and traded nothing for McCallum. I don't know who replaces Belinelli though.
The concern about the bench defense is valid, many people here have acknowledged it, but realistically, I can't remember a team that lost in the playoffs because of their bench defense:lol..
Yes, many of games have been lost because a bench got out scored. The 2014 title had a second unit that obliterated other teams. But I think your point may be something more to bench defense the last 5 minutes of a quarter when your starters may be in. In a game 7, last two minutes, yes I agree it would be hard for Pop to bench Duncan and play Sanders for defense. That said, Pop did use Splitter in those situations and it's not far fetched that he would do it with someone like Sanders if he earned Pop's trust. None of this will happen, I'm just saying we do have a need and Sanders would be a below the radar, low risk add.
HarlemHeat37
10-14-2015, 02:28 PM
Yes, many of games have been lost because a bench got out scored. The 2014 title had a second unit that obliterated other teams. But I think your point may be something more to bench defense the last 5 minutes of a quarter when your starters may be in. In a game 7, last two minutes, yes I agree it would be hard for Pop to bench Duncan and play Sanders for defense. That said, Pop did use Splitter in those situations and it's not far fetched that he would do it with someone like Sanders if he earned Pop's trust. None of this will happen, I'm just saying we do have a need and Sanders would be a below the radar, low risk add.
Having a good/bad bench certainly has an effect on the outcome of games, but bench defense in isolation, specifically, doesn't IMO, unless it's at the extreme of either good/bad..even then, the playoffs are rarely decided by the bench(Spurs lost to a Clippers team with arguably the worst bench in the NBA, for example)..
The Spurs bench is going to struggle on defense, but they're going to be great offensively, too..that's easily sufficient for a title run, there's no question IMO..they're going to outscore the opposition on most nights..
I agree with you that it would have been ideal to get a Splitter type, I would have preferred keeping Splitter over Boris(although Diaw probably has no value outside of SA anymore), and if not a defensive C, then at least a 3rd defensive wing(which the Spurs haven't had in this current era of Spurs basketball and still won a title/made it to 2 Finals), but you can't build a perfect team, unfortunately..
In a perfect world, a nigga like Larry Sanders would straighten his head and get his shit together, but those types of situations rarely work out..
td4mvp2k
10-14-2015, 02:32 PM
pop lol @ thread tbh
The Spurs were close to signing Oden a couple of seasons ago so I wouldn't completely rule Sanders out from consideration. But it seems unlikely that the Spurs cut Bonner or Boban (they won't carry more than 6 bigs) just to take a chance on him.
Spurs9
10-14-2015, 03:38 PM
We got LMA
SAGirl
10-14-2015, 04:28 PM
has anybody read the interview with Pop discussed in the other thread? its all about character and Larry Sanders is a no-go in that regard ...
Fit and character are the most important thing to Pop, talent be damned. These are guys that just think like its a videogame.
8FOR!3
10-14-2015, 04:42 PM
Shame he's a nut case, he'd be crazy good on the pick and roll with Manu coming off the bench. But then again if he wasn't a nut case he probably would still be on a team. Solid rebounder, solid defender, solid athlete.
Fit and character are the most important thing to Pop, talent be damned. These are guys that just think like its a videogame.
Well, Pop added Stephen Jackson a second time. He had talent, but was obviously a basket case and eventually had to be kicked off the team for causing team turmoil. I don’t know if “character” is what is harming Sanders’s value. Maybe. Or maybe he has a mental illness. No doubt Pop looks at certain aspects of character, but I think we paint it broad. He’ll take on a head case so long as the head case practices hard and tries to function within the context of a team. I don’t know that I’ve seen that Sanders couldn’t do that on a team laden with veterans. I think that Bucks team had the inmates running the asylum.
Leetonidas
10-14-2015, 04:44 PM
Only a retard would think the spurs are interested in a dumbass like Sanders. Probably Dallas imo
dbestpro
10-14-2015, 05:35 PM
The Spurs were close to signing Oden a couple of seasons ago so I wouldn't completely rule Sanders out from consideration. But it seems unlikely that the Spurs cut Bonner or Boban (they won't carry more than 6 bigs) just to take a chance on him.
Maybe Boban is getting home sick, and does not see the NBA to be what he wanted it to be.
monkeypunk
10-14-2015, 05:48 PM
Well, Pop added Stephen Jackson a second time. He had talent, but was obviously a basket case and eventually had to be kicked off the team for causing team turmoil.
To be fair, trading for SJax was less about getting him and almost all about getting rid of RJ. They even saved about 10 Mil doing it. Pop knew that SJax might work but really knew that he could cut him and still have saved moolah. Plus the ultimate bonus of getting out from under the albatross contract of HWSNBN.
exstatic
10-14-2015, 06:01 PM
To be fair, trading for SJax was less about getting him and almost all about getting rid of RJ. They even saved about 10 Mil doing it. Pop knew that SJax might work but really knew that he could cut him and still have saved moolah. Plus the ultimate bonus of getting out from under the albatross contract of HWSNBN.
This. They didn't do it to get jack back, they did it to save money, and a goodly amount. Saving $11m only cost them a very late first rounder. The normal price for those picks was the maximum trade cash of $3m.
Obstructed_View
10-14-2015, 06:14 PM
Having Jack ultimately crash and burn turned that trade from the greatest of all time to simply the second best in franchise history. Jack was the best player on the Spurs in his last playoff series with the team.
This. They didn't do it to get jack back, they did it to save money, and a goodly amount. Saving $11m only cost them a very late first rounder. The normal price for those picks was the maximum trade cash of $3m.
Yes, but there might have been other trades that could've worked to accomplish the same goal. Pop was still willing to take on a head case regardless. Pop could've waived him earlier too, but kept him sround. Again, my point is that you guys are acting like Pop won't take on a head case based on his character policy. I'm telling you Pop doesn't have that narrow a definition of character issue that you guys are suggesting. Jackson was a prime example. Do you think Detroit or Indiana would've traded for Jackson to save money?
outmap
10-14-2015, 08:31 PM
I Feel sorry for the Larry Sanders, he's the reverse Hassan Whiteside.
exstatic
10-14-2015, 10:49 PM
Yes, but there might have been other trades that could've worked to accomplish the same goal. Pop was still willing to take on a head case regardless. Pop could've waived him earlier too, but kept him sround. Again, my point is that you guys are acting like Pop won't take on a head case based on his character policy. I'm telling you Pop doesn't have that narrow a definition of character issue that you guys are suggesting. Jackson was a prime example. Do you think Detroit or Indiana would've traded for Jackson to save money?
I think any team in the league would take any shorter contract to save $11M, at the cost of only a late 20s draft pick.. Pop showed that if it goes south, you cut the bait loose. Jack proved useful for 2 months, plus playoffs, only to be completely useless the following year. He had a history here, but Detroit or Indy could have simply cut him quicker than Pop did, like immediately, and still saved that $11M.
You won't convince me that SA did it for any other than financial reasons. Pop, talking to Jack while rerouting him during the trade from his SFO flight to SAT flat out said "We won't be talking about an extension." Do you do that to a player that you want and value? Nope. You do it with a guy you have every intention of rolling off in a year and a half.
Kawhi 5-0
10-14-2015, 11:40 PM
Wasnt lary sanders only issue was that he said basketball wasnt fun anymore (on a losing milwaukee team), and he wanted to smoke weed (which half the players in the league do)
Maybe it's Denver. At least he can smoke weed there legally.
Kawhi 5-0
10-14-2015, 11:45 PM
Are you saying just because Paul makes a miracle floater over a 7 footer to beat the spurs in a hard fought series last year that we should sign a proven team cancer like Larry Sanders just because he's mobile? I'm glad your not the GM of this team. That is extremely short sided and a terrible over reaction. That's like saying we should have cut Manu and signed a longer and better defender to replace him because Fisher hit that miracle heave. Boban just got here and is learning right now. Give him some time to adjust to the competition level and the system. I've been encouraged by some of his defense so far (I think he's had like 3 blocks already) and he is much more mobile then I thought he would be. Let's not forget how bad Splitter looked when he first got here. Sanders doesn't even like basketball, there is no way Pop will rub him the right way.
I haven't seen any of the Spurs preseason games yet, but it seems that people are saying Boban is fairly (or surprisingly) mobile.
kobyz
10-14-2015, 11:51 PM
The concern about the bench defense is valid, many people here have acknowledged it, but realistically, I can't remember a team that lost in the playoffs because of their bench defense:lol..
Spurs last year being one team, you fucking shitty poster...
I think any team in the league would take any shorter contract to save $11M, at the cost of only a late 20s draft pick.. Pop showed that if it goes south, you cut the bait loose. Jack proved useful for 2 months, plus playoffs, only to be completely useless the following year. He had a history here, but Detroit or Indy could have simply cut him quicker than Pop did, like immediately, and still saved that $11M.
You won't convince me that SA did it for any other than financial reasons. Pop, talking to Jack while rerouting him during the trade from his SFO flight to SAT flat out said "We won't be talking about an extension." Do you do that to a player that you want and value? Nope. You do it with a guy you have every intention of rolling off in a year and a half.
You're just looking to argue rather than address my point. My point is that Jackson is a head case that defies "character guy" test that everyone haphazardly throws around here. Sure Pop has standards, but he'll bring some knuckle head if he meets a minimum test. It doesn't matter if it's for basketball or financial reasons. If it makes sense and passes Pop's standard, which is lower than most people think, he'll bring that player in. I don't know that Sanders is any more of a head case than Jackson was. I do know you are kidding yourself if you think Indiana or Detroit would ever bring Jackson back regardless of the money saved after Malice at the Palice. Their standards are higher, at least as it pertains to Jackson.
I haven't seen any of the Spurs preseason games yet, but it seems that people are saying Boban is fairly (or surprisingly) mobile.
No, he's not. If he can camp in the lane, he'd be a decent rim protector purely bc of his size. But he isn't quick enough to guard anyone in space.
TD 21
10-15-2015, 12:32 AM
The only reasons Splitter is a center and Aldridge isn't, is because the latter can shoot and because he's one of the best players in the league, which gives him the clout to make demands. Realistically, even though his game is better suited to primarily playing power forward, if he was okay with primarily playing center, he'd have been playing it for years, since it's more difficult to find a high quality center than power forward and because it would be extremely difficult for the opposition to defend.
When the masses were lost in the hysteria of the West signing, I immediately pointed out the fact that he and Diaw are a poor fit together, but that doesn't mean the firepower of the bench can't outdo their defensive/rebounding shortcomings. If it can't, then Aldridge would essentially have to double as the backup center, leaving spot minutes for one of Diaw/West. They probably wouldn't resort to this until the playoffs, but either way, that's the fall back, not any external option.
Hoops Czar
10-15-2015, 12:59 AM
Spurs last year being one team, you fucking shitty poster...
:lol
Ice009
10-15-2015, 01:04 AM
I know a lot of you guys keep citing that recent Pop interview with Chad Hennings, but I recall that Pop was interested in Ron Artest at one point.
BatManu20
10-15-2015, 01:08 AM
653702606196371456
BatManu20
10-15-2015, 01:09 AM
He won't be a Spur. Almost certain it'll be Dallas if anyone. Have the $ and a starting spot available.
T Park
10-15-2015, 01:31 AM
I know a lot of you guys keep citing that recent Pop interview with Chad Hennings, but I recall that Pop was interested in Ron Artest at one point.
Had a trade done but couldn't get it into the league in time. Friend of mine who used to be in the media in SA said he saw the paper on RC's desk.
ceperez
10-15-2015, 04:09 AM
Having Jack ultimately crash and burn turned that trade from the greatest of all time to simply the second best in franchise history. Jack was the best player on the Spurs in his last playoff series with the team.
If Jack was still on the team, the Spurs may have beaten the Heat in 2013.
NameLess Scrub
10-15-2015, 08:37 AM
Having a good/bad bench certainly has an effect on the outcome of games, but bench defense in isolation, specifically, doesn't IMO, unless it's at the extreme of either good/bad..even then, the playoffs are rarely decided by the bench(Spurs lost to a Clippers team with arguably the worst bench in the NBA, for example)..
The Spurs bench is going to struggle on defense, but they're going to be great offensively, too..that's easily sufficient for a title run, there's no question IMO..they're going to outscore the opposition on most nights..
I agree with you that it would have been ideal to get a Splitter type, I would have preferred keeping Splitter over Boris(although Diaw probably has no value outside of SA anymore), and if not a defensive C, then at least a 3rd defensive wing(which the Spurs haven't had in this current era of Spurs basketball and still won a title/made it to 2 Finals), but you can't build a perfect team, unfortunately..
In a perfect world, a nigga like Larry Sanders would straighten his head and get his shit together, but those types of situations rarely work out..
I guess the biggest concern then is that, since Timmy will need his rest, the team might need backup rim protection even if it's only to keep the machine running throughout the regular season. We all know rest is a priority, and I'd say HCA is 2nd priority, along with getting the team to peak timely.
At this point I just want the season to start so we can see how the team functions and how good the bench actually is.
UNT Eagles 2016
10-15-2015, 09:49 AM
I guess the biggest concern then is that, since Timmy will need his rest, the team might need backup rim protection even if it's only to keep the machine running throughout the regular season. We all know rest is a priority, and I'd say HCA is 2nd priority, along with getting the team to peak timely.
At this point I just want the season to start so we can see how the team functions and how good the bench actually is.
HCA is 1st priority. If we end up with a shitty seed again like last year we get the same result as last year. If we're #2 and win both our rounds and the #1 seed wins both their rounds, we'll lose to the #1 seed in the WCF. And if we somehow make it to the Finals and the Lebrons have a better record and HCA over us, the Lebrons will win ala 2013. Simple enough. Spurs are 3–0 (100%) at winning championships as the #1 overall seed, but only 2–30 (6%) all-time when we make the playoffs but don't get the #1 overall seed. Also, we win the championship 100% of the time when we reach the Finals with HCA, and 0% of the time reaching the Finals without HCA. Simply enough already?
NameLess Scrub
10-15-2015, 12:40 PM
HCA is 1st priority. If we end up with a shitty seed again like last year we get the same result as last year. If we're #2 and win both our rounds and the #1 seed wins both their rounds, we'll lose to the #1 seed in the WCF. And if we somehow make it to the Finals and the Lebrons have a better record and HCA over us, the Lebrons will win ala 2013. Simple enough. Spurs are 3–0 (100%) at winning championships as the #1 overall seed, but only 2–30 (6%) all-time when we make the playoffs but don't get the #1 overall seed. Also, we win the championship 100% of the time when we reach the Finals with HCA, and 0% of the time reaching the Finals without HCA. Simply enough already?
Which is why they need a good bench.. they'll have to put health first to decrease the risk of having broken down veterans, as we know.
TheGreatYacht
10-15-2015, 12:41 PM
Now we need a PF...
654711233854070784
Chinook
10-15-2015, 12:53 PM
HCA is 1st priority. If we end up with a shitty seed again like last year we get the same result as last year. If we're #2 and win both our rounds and the #1 seed wins both their rounds, we'll lose to the #1 seed in the WCF. And if we somehow make it to the Finals and the Lebrons have a better record and HCA over us, the Lebrons will win ala 2013. Simple enough. Spurs are 3–0 (100%) at winning championships as the #1 overall seed, but only 2–30 (6%) all-time when we make the playoffs but don't get the #1 overall seed. Also, we win the championship 100% of the time when we reach the Finals with HCA, and 0% of the time reaching the Finals without HCA. Simply enough already?
We've gotta get tholdren in here to talk about these stats.
UNT Eagles 2016
10-15-2015, 12:59 PM
Which is why they need a good bench.. they'll have to put health first to decrease the risk of having broken down veterans, as we know.
broken down veterans or no HCA, both => no championship
We need the bench to win us a good handful of games ala 2014
SpurSwag
10-15-2015, 01:12 PM
I'd love if we could get him honestly
NameLess Scrub
10-15-2015, 01:16 PM
broken down veterans or no HCA, both => no championship
We need the bench to win us a good handful of games ala 2014
Not sure that it's just impossible with no HCA, but I agree with the idea.
UNT Eagles 2016
10-15-2015, 01:24 PM
Not sure that it's just impossible with no HCA, but I agree with the idea.
We need HCA to win the championship, particularly in the WCF and Finals. The Warriors and OKC home stadiums are extremely hostile compared to the indifference of the crowd in the arena in Phoenix of the Nash era Suns, e.g. the only team we ever had to beat without HCA in championship years.
exstatic
10-15-2015, 08:33 PM
HCA is 1st priority. If we end up with a shitty seed again like last year we get the same result as last year. If we're #2 and win both our rounds and the #1 seed wins both their rounds, we'll lose to the #1 seed in the WCF. And if we somehow make it to the Finals and the Lebrons have a better record and HCA over us, the Lebrons will win ala 2013. Simple enough. Spurs are 3–0 (100%) at winning championships as the #1 overall seed, but only 2–30 (6%) all-time when we make the playoffs but don't get the #1 overall seed. Also, we win the championship 100% of the time when we reach the Finals with HCA, and 0% of the time reaching the Finals without HCA. Simply enough already?
We were the 1 seed in 11-12, and lost in the second round. If you throw out Eastern records as tainted with so many shit teams this millenia, and you should, we had the best in the West at least 3 other times and flamed out.
#1 overall record means shit. Health means all.
Kawhi 5-0
10-16-2015, 12:08 AM
No, he's not. If he can camp in the lane, he'd be a decent rim protector purely bc of his size. But he isn't quick enough to guard anyone in space.
That sounds more realistic. It would be almost impossible for someone of his size to move like Larry Sanders.
Ice009
10-16-2015, 03:39 AM
Had a trade done but couldn't get it into the league in time. Friend of mine who used to be in the media in SA said he saw the paper on RC's desk.
I heard about a trade, but I wasn't sure if they were just discussing one or if it was a rumor. I didn't realize that they actually filled out the papers and were going to go through with it. That was before he got traded to the Rockets, wasn't it?
HarlemHeat37
10-16-2015, 07:43 AM
Spurs last year being one team, you fucking shitty poster...
Ya, Parker playing the worst basketball of his career, Splitter being unable to move, Green missing the shots he usually makes in the playoffs. Kawhi missing shots late in the series and Pop's questionable coaching weren't the reason the Spurs lost, it was because of their bench defense:lol..
kobyz
10-16-2015, 08:36 AM
Ya, Parker playing the worst basketball of his career, Splitter being unable to move, Green missing the shots he usually makes in the playoffs. Kawhi missing shots late in the series and Pop's questionable coaching weren't the reason the Spurs lost, it was because of their bench defense:lol..
Are you moron or just act like that? How those reasons take away from the bad bench defense reason, you lost the series by one possession so you could have many things that are the different between win and lose, so bad bench defens when you don't have backup for splitter, when big baby shitting on bynes, rivers jr on patty and etc must be assume also a reason...
ceperez
10-16-2015, 08:42 AM
Are you moron or just act like that? How those reasons take away from the bad bench defense reason, you lost the series by one possession so you could have many things that are the different between win and lose, so bad bench defens when you don't have backup for splitter, when big baby shitting on bynes, rivers jr on patty and etc must be assume also a reason...
Spurs could have one, ball just didn't bounce the right way. However, like Pop said, Spurs were mentally spent. I would say that even Clippers were mentally spent after that series and that's why they lost against an inferior team like the Rockets.
NBA Western conference playoffs are grueling. You need an element of luck like the Warriors got. If the Warriors met the Spurs in the first round, you could make the argument that the Spurs could have won it all. Beating Warriors, Griz, Rockets and Cavs. Never ever meeting the team (Clippers) that knocked them off.
HarlemHeat37
10-16-2015, 09:02 AM
Are you moron or just act like that? How those reasons take away from the bad bench defense reason, you lost the series by one possession so you could have many things that are the different between win and lose, so bad bench defens when you don't have backup for splitter, when big baby shitting on bynes, rivers jr on patty and etc must be assume also a reason...
Spurs bench outscored the Clippers bench by like 40 points in the series:lol..the bench wasn't even one of the top 5 reasons the Spurs lost the series..shut your ass up and stop trying to be edgy, tbh, I get it, you've been quoting all my posts since I sent you those PMs..
UNT Eagles 2016
10-16-2015, 09:40 AM
We were the 1 seed in 11-12, and lost in the second round. If you throw out Eastern records as tainted with so many shit teams this millenia, and you should, we had the best in the West at least 3 other times and flamed out.
#1 overall record means shit. Health means all.
Incorrect, the Bulls had the #1 overall seed over us in both 10-11 AND 11-12 due to tiebreaker.
kobyz
10-16-2015, 09:53 AM
Spurs bench outscored the Clippers bench by like 40 points in the series:lol..the bench wasn't even one of the top 5 reasons the Spurs lost the series..shut your ass up and stop trying to be edgy, tbh, I get it, you've been quoting all my posts since I sent you those PMs..
such shitty bench defense of patty, manu, boris and bynes, it was a reason period! lol trying to make it seems like that scoring bench different saying much, and that clippers bench uses rate is close to what pop does and that clippers bench didn't overachieve against us... me trying to be edgy? lol "the pot calling the kettle black" !
D_Admiral
10-16-2015, 10:03 AM
Health over HCA, id take my chances with this team having to close out on the road over injuries. Gotta remember spurs have some big time postseason wins and closeouts on the road
HarlemHeat37
10-16-2015, 11:13 AM
such shitty bench defense of patty, manu, boris and bynes, it was a reason period! lol trying to make it seems like that scoring bench different saying much, and that clippers bench uses rate is close to what pop does and that clippers bench didn't overachieve against us... me trying to be edgy? lol "the pot calling the kettle black" !
You just admitted the Clippers bench isn't important to their success:lol..overachieving is irrelevant in this argument..when ranking the reasons the Spurs lost, the bench that outscored the opposing bench by 40 isn't even close to the reason they lost..
EDIT: I was actually way off, the Spurs bench outscored LA's by far more than I thought:lol..also, the Clippers bench didn't overachieve, they actually played worse than their regular season averages..I guess the perception was different because one of the worst players in the league(Rivers) had a good series..
kobyz
10-16-2015, 11:55 AM
You just admitted the Clippers bench isn't important to their success:lol..overachieving is irrelevant in this argument..when ranking the reasons the Spurs lost, the bench that outscored the opposing bench by 40 isn't even close to the reason they lost..
EDIT: I was actually way off, the Spurs bench outscored LA's by far more than I thought:lol..also, the Clippers bench didn't overachieve, they actually played worse than their regular season averages..I guess the perception was different because one of the worst players in the league(Rivers) had a good series..
You way all over the place and not on point, but keep trying...
HarlemHeat37
10-16-2015, 11:56 AM
You way all over the place and not on point, but keep trying...
:( my point was completely wrong, Spurs outscored the Clippers bench by a ton of points, so I'm going to divert :(
Hoops Czar
10-16-2015, 12:21 PM
You just admitted the Clippers bench isn't important to their success:lol..overachieving is irrelevant in this argument..when ranking the reasons the Spurs lost, the bench that outscored the opposing bench by 40 isn't even close to the reason they lost..
EDIT: I was actually way off, the Spurs bench outscored LA's by far more than I thought:lol..also, the Clippers bench didn't overachieve, they actually played worse than their regular season averages..I guess the perception was different because one of the worst players in the league(Rivers) had a good series..
That's not apples to apples But, more like apples to watermelons.. The Spurs bench played for 669 minutes compared to LAC's 421 minutes. Based on that alone, one would stand to assume the Spurs would outscore the Clippers bench. Did you actually have to look that up:lol? I would also venture to bet that the Clips didn't go more than 15 minutes in the entire series where all 5 starters were on the bench at the same time. The Spurs had plenty of chances to win the series however, to Kobys point, the Spurs bench got torched in the 4th quarter of game 4, and that could have easily gone down as the turning point in the series (Spurs up 3-1 to tied 2-2).
HarlemHeat37
10-16-2015, 12:25 PM
That's not apples to apples But, more like apples to watermelons.. The Spurs bench played for 669 minutes compared to LAC's 421 minutes. Based on that alone, one would stand to assume the Spurs would outscore the Clippers bench. Did you actually have to look that up:lol? I would also venture to bet that the Clips didn't go more than 15 minutes in the entire series where all 5 starters were on the bench at the same time. The Spurs had plenty of chances to win the series however, to Kobys point, the Spurs bench got torched in the 4th quarter of game 4, and that could have easily gone down as the turning point in the series (Spurs up 3-1 to tied 2-2).
You guys are arguing against your own point:lol..
The Clippers bench was largely irrelevant in the series, as you've both essentially admitted by citing their lack of usage and minutes..they weren't even one of the top 5 reasons for the Spurs losing the series..claiming a bench that was severely outscored by the Spurs' bench was a primary reason the Clippers won the series is extremely stupid, tbh..
Even if they did outplay the Spurs bench on a per minute basis, which they absolutely didn't, it still goes against the point that the Spurs bench was a major factor for why they lost the series..it wasn't, and there's no absolutely no argument that it was..
Hoops Czar
10-16-2015, 12:38 PM
You guys are arguing against your own point:lol(as you did the other day)..
The Clippers bench was largely irrelevant in the series, as you've both essentially admitted by citing their lack of usage and minutes..they weren't even in the top 5 reasons for the Spurs losing the series..claiming a bench that was severely outscored by the Spurs' bench was a primary reason the Clippers won the series is extremely stupid, tbh..
Even if they did outplay the Spurs bench on a per minute basis, which they absolutely didn't, it still goes against the point that the Spurs bench was a major factor for why they lost the series..it wasn't, and there's no absolutely no argument that it was..
Sure they were. That's why the Clippers bench only played for 421 minutes in the series. You don't have to tell me how shitty their bench was. If they would have gone on to lose the series, bench depth would have been a contributing cause. I thought the argument was how bad the Spurs bench defense was and that bad bench D doesn't cost teams championships? The Spurs bench certainly had more time on the court to affect the outcome of games than the Clippers bench did.
HarlemHeat37
10-16-2015, 12:41 PM
Sure they were. That's why the Clippers bench only played for 421 minutes in the series. You don't have to tell me how shitty their bench was. If they would have gone on to lose the series, bench depth would have been a contributing cause. I thought the argument was how bad the Spurs bench defense was and that bad bench D doesn't cost teams championships? The Spurs bench certainly had more time on the court to affect the outcome of games than the Clippers bench did.
Ok..so you believe the Spurs' bench defense was a major factor for why they lost the Clippers series and potentially costed them a title?(the exact same bench as 2014)
I honestly can't remember a team in NBA history that didn't win a title because of their bench defense:lol..
Hoops Czar
10-16-2015, 01:08 PM
Ok..so you believe the Spurs' bench defense was a major factor for why they lost the Clippers series and potentially costed them a title?(the exact same bench as 2014)
I honestly can't remember a team in NBA history that didn't win a title because of their bench defense:lol..
Lack of bench depth is the same as poor bench D though. It's one of the biggest reasons why the Clippers can't get out of the 2nd round. It's why Miami couldn't keep up with the Spurs in 2014. Not always the case but, you can't have a bunch of one way players that can't stop the opponent from scoring. Yeah, the Spurs bench obliterated the Miami heat primarily because the Spurs were well rested and the Heat were running on fumes heading into the finals. It was matchup made in hell from a Miami perspective. The lack of depth killed them in that series. If the Spurs had to play their starters 38-40 minutes a game, I'm pretty sure they'd be pretty screwed in more ways than one.
And no, the Spurs didn't lose to the Clippers because of their bench per se. However, they did get torched in the 4th quarter of a pivotal game 4 when the Spurs could have put a stranglehold on the series. That was the only point I was trying to make.
D_Admiral
10-16-2015, 01:21 PM
Spurs lost series cuz belli got benched :(
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2026 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.