Are the Spurs on the decline?

[GrandeDavid]

I don't think so, as I'm sure most of you do not. But interestingly I caught a segment of the Jim Rome show with Jim Lampley as host. He posed the question that with the rash of nagging foot injuries to Duncan and Ginobili coupled with some aging pieces to their championship puzzle, that perhaps the Spurs are starting to slowly decline.

In all fairness, if you look at how much ball Manu has been playing in his twenties, now fast approaching 30, not to mention Duncan, who will turn 30 in a couple of months, you tend to get more concerned with each ankle sprain and sudden case of plantar fascitis (which I had, recently, as a runner and triathlete. It starts appearing in men's thirties most commonly).

Anyway, Lampley obviously is unschooled in recent Spurs history since he obviously based most of his judgment on the Spurs' recent pathetic loss at Detroit. Obviously the Spurs are missing Ginobili, but the Spurs traditionally start the marathon NBA season slowly, then come early March, they decide to kick it in high gear, have their rotation set and start rocking the larger market teams' worlds.

I, personally, do not think that the Spurs are in decline. In fact, I'm banking on Ginobili and Duncan going into this season's playoffs healthy and I'm looking at the Spurs winning their fourth championship. I'm looking for more of the same in 2006-07.

Basically, I hope Lampley's assumption catches fire and the Spurs are, once again (yawn), discarded among real contenders. Let them fly under the radar, give them reason to fight. We all know that the Spurs are a much better team when they sneak up on teams. Let's hope the national media takes Lampley's cue and tones down its Spurs hype, which hasn't exactly been roaring of late. Meanwhile, the Spurs will clinch another #1 seed, tighten up their defense, and dance all the way to June.

But, Lampley did pose a legitimate question. Could injuries, age, wear-and-tear, what have you, be catching up on the Spurs, namely Ginobili and Duncan?

[1Parker1]

^That's true of any player on any team.

[JamesR]

late 20's to early 30's are usually when players peak. No, the Spurs are not on the decline, especially with the young Euros the Spurs have rights to.

[Oh, Gee!!]

especially with the young Euros the Spurs have rights to.


please tell me you're not referring to Beno. please.

[JamesR]

please tell me you're not referring to Beno. please.

The Spurs don't have rights to him, he's under contract.

Do you even know what you are talking about?

[Oh, Gee!!]

Do you even know what you are talking about?

yes, I do. Beno sucks BTW

[JamesR]

yes, I do. Beno sucks BTW

He certainly didn't do a bad job through the regular season and most of the playoffs (not the Finals).

--What I was talking about was that the Spurs have a lot of youth in Europe at this time.

[Oh, Gee!!]

one in the hand is better than two in the bush

[BigVee]

The Spurs are absolutely NOT in decline. They are doing what they have always done, prepare for the post season. Many times this year I have seen NVE or Horry start to get on a little roll, only to be taken out. I have often seen a quizzical look on NVE face when this happens. Pop is being careful with the minutes early, as is usual. Once Manu is back and they get this Manu/Finley/Barry thing figured out, play 20 or 30 games with a set rotation, then we'll see about this decline bullshit. Not to worry.

[MI21]

I can not believe how many people have little to no confidence in the Spurs. I'll wait it out, by the end of the season, the Spurs will be one of the 2 best teams in it.

[JamStone]

The Spurs started out last year 20-5. They were 38-10 at the all star break. How is that a slow start to the season? Where is this tradition of slow starts? In the 2002-2003 championship season, the Spurs were 33-16 at the all star break. Not as good as last year, but hardly a "slow start." Again, where is this tradition of slow starts? If it's any other year you are talking about, well then it's a season in which the Spurs did not win a championship. The 1999 season was a shortened 50 game regular season.

Manu definitely makes a difference for this Spurs team. When healthy, he makes them infinitely better.

The most glaring thing about the Spurs with respect to showing decline is their age. Bruce Bowen is 34 years old. And, with the exception of Nazr Mohammed, the main bench players are all well into their 30s. While Manu and Duncan are still in their primes and Parker is still very young, there are not many complimentary players who are young and still have potential and room to improve. Some Spurs faithful may mention the few prospects in Europe like Scola, Javotkas, and Mahinmi. That's fine, but they're not learning the Spurs system. How easily are they going to come over and be able to contribute immediately? Beno did not quite deliver to the point the Spurs felt the need to bring in Van Exel. Fabricio Oberto has not been an immediate contributor and he's an experienced veteran, despite Rasho being average or below-average and Nazr Mohammed not yet in contributing game shape.

Marcus Bryant made mention to this in the pre-season. There are no young prospects on this Spurs team that are developing for the future Spurs. As soon as next year, some of these players like Robert Horry and Brent Barry, may not even be factors on this Spurs team. Spurs don't even have a first round draft pick this year. They gave away Devin Brown for nothing. They didn't look into signing a young wing player like Mo Evans or Matt Barnes. They kept Sean Marks over Sharrod Ford. And, they still have no heir-apparent to Bruce Bowen. And, the Spurs are already over the salary cap for the next three years, and ever so close to the luxury tax threshhold in the following two seasons. And, in four years, the Spurs are ONLY a few million dollars short of the salary cap with ONLY FOUR contracts (TD, Manu, Parker, and Rasho), with NO OTHER CONTRACT, just those four.

Yes, I'm a Pistons fan. And, sure, I cheer for my team more than any other team in the league. But, I have great respect for the NBA champion Spurs. But, if you try your hardest to not be so biased for a moment, you might see that the Spurs are old, the bench especially. The international prospects may turn out fine, but that doesn't change the fact that the Spurs currently lack young prospects to develop for the future.

Spurs may not be in decline this year ... maybe not even next year. But, the Spurs future is not so bright if you really take a good, long look at the roster and the salary cap situation.

[Kori Ellis]

The Spurs bench is a little old this season, but overall the team's future is not on the decline. Like JamesR said, they have a good crop of prospects including Mahinmi, Sanikidze, Javtokas .. and I guess Scola if he can ever get out of that contract. I would have liked to have one young, long swingman on the bench this season, but I'm certainly not disappointed or worried about the Spurs' future.

[Solid D]

In the sense that the Spurs and Pistons are both JV teams now, I'd say yes they are both in decline.

[Vashner]

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO...

OMG people fly off the bandwagon with a road loss...

We have ONLY 1 HOME Loss!!

This kind of post is so premature the poster needs a kleenex to wipe up...

[Supergirl]

Spurs lost to the Pistons because of 3 reasons:
1) Pistons wanted it more - who lost game 7, again? Oh yeah, them.
2) Spurs were without the one player who I predicted would be their X-factor during last year's Finals - Manu.
3) Duncan wasn't 100% and too many other players struggled to find the basket (Finley, Horry, Barry)

That's it. It's one loss. Pistons, let's remember, have been the luckiest team in the NBA in not having ONE SINGLE INJURY this season. But it would be unheard of if that continued throughout the season. Let's see what happens if Big Ben or Chauncey goes out with an injury. or McDyess, who's never gone a whole season without some sort of injury.

[jochhejaam]

That's it. It's one loss. Pistons, let's remember, have been the luckiest team in the NBA in not having ONE SINGLE INJURY this season.
:spin You're correct in that we haven't had "ONE" single injury; Ben Wallace has had two sore ankles (since recovered), Rip had a sore back and jammed 3 fingers on his shooting hand, Lindsay Hunter has missed the entire season so far due to surgery...what's lucky about that?

[tlongII]

As Tim Duncan goes, so go the Spurs.

[Sportman]

Spurs is still in the top, without a doubt, but they need from the manu´s energy NOW .

[GrandeDavid]

[QUOTE=JamStone]The Spurs started out last year 20-5. They were 38-10 at the all star break. How is that a slow start to the season? Where is this tradition of slow starts?[\QUOTE]

I see your point, and that was neat of you to dig up some historical standings, but generally speaking the Spurs in the Tim Duncan-era have been strong finishers. I guess that "slow" is a relative term. "Slow" as applied to earlier season losses to teams like the Hawks and Bulls over the past couple of seasons compared to their like 9-1 "rodeo road trip" in late February 2003 make my point. Over the past few years the Spurs have been challenged in the standings by the Mavs, too, for example, thanks to several early season losses which seemed to be "gimmes" on paper.

But thanks to consistently strong finishes from March onward, the Spurs have usually roared into the playoffs.

So when I apply the term "slow", it is not my intention that one conjures up images of the Hawks or Raptors, but it seems that up until about early March or so, there are plenty of naysayers. Last season was different, granted, and so far this season, not too many people are off the wagon...yet.

The Pistons look damn good. You gotta consider them to be the almost clear favorite right now.

[GrandeDavid]

Guys, I certainly do NOT think the Spurs are on the decline, but I thought since it was suggested on a major media outlet that it'd be worth debating. Looks like most of you agree with me, as I presumed.

[Solid D]

How many close games did the Spurs have @ The Palace of Auburn Hills Detroit City in the Finals? By my count, 1, thanks to Horry. The Pistons played with lots of emotion and energy and they held serve.

Give the Spurs time to grow together as a team with the new ingredients. They have added 3 bench players who need to learn what it takes to win a championship and they haven't gotten there yet. It's not like they added another Horry or Kerr with rings on their fingers, already. PATIENCE.

[thispego]

The Spurs started out last year 20-5. They were 38-10 at the all star break. How is that a slow start to the season? Where is this tradition of slow starts? In the 2002-2003 championship season, the Spurs were 33-16 at the all star break. Not as good as last year, but hardly a "slow start." Again, where is this tradition of slow starts? If it's any other year you are talking about, well then it's a season in which the Spurs did not win a championship. The 1999 season was a shortened 50 game regular season.

Manu definitely makes a difference for this Spurs team. When healthy, he makes them infinitely better.

The most glaring thing about the Spurs with respect to showing decline is their age. Bruce Bowen is 34 years old. And, with the exception of Nazr Mohammed, the main bench players are all well into their 30s. While Manu and Duncan are still in their primes and Parker is still very young, there are not many complimentary players who are young and still have potential and room to improve. Some Spurs faithful may mention the few prospects in Europe like Scola, Javotkas, and Mahinmi. That's fine, but they're not learning the Spurs system. How easily are they going to come over and be able to contribute immediately? Beno did not quite deliver to the point the Spurs felt the need to bring in Van Exel. Fabricio Oberto has not been an immediate contributor and he's an experienced veteran, despite Rasho being average or below-average and Nazr Mohammed not yet in contributing game shape.

Marcus Bryant made mention to this in the pre-season. There are no young prospects on this Spurs team that are developing for the future Spurs. As soon as next year, some of these players like Robert Horry and Brent Barry, may not even be factors on this Spurs team. Spurs don't even have a first round draft pick this year. They gave away Devin Brown for nothing. They didn't look into signing a young wing player like Mo Evans or Matt Barnes. They kept Sean Marks over Sharrod Ford. And, they still have no heir-apparent to Bruce Bowen. And, the Spurs are already over the salary cap for the next three years, and ever so close to the luxury tax threshhold in the following two seasons. And, in four years, the Spurs are ONLY a few million dollars short of the salary cap with ONLY FOUR contracts (TD, Manu, Parker, and Rasho), with NO OTHER CONTRACT, just those four.

Yes, I'm a Pistons fan. And, sure, I cheer for my team more than any other team in the league. But, I have great respect for the NBA champion Spurs. But, if you try your hardest to not be so biased for a moment, you might see that the Spurs are old, the bench especially. The international prospects may turn out fine, but that doesn't change the fact that the Spurs currently lack young prospects to develop for the future.

Spurs may not be in decline this year ... maybe not even next year. But, the Spurs future is not so bright if you really take a good, long look at the roster and the salary cap situation.
the thing that sucks for you and your team, jamstone, is that the spurs are going to be better than your team every year that you have a legitimate shot at a title.....until your team gets too old itself or is broken up and retooled.

In your eyes the Spurs future may not be so bright but it's sure a hell of alot brighter than the pistins....

[Solid D]

response coming in 3....2.....1 :lol

[GrandeDavid]

Solid D, I'll give you a response:

How have you been, old friend (whom I've not yet had the pleasure of actually meeting)?

[bdubya]

3) Duncan wasn't 100% and too many other players struggled to find the basket (Finley, Horry, Barry)

Yeah, Pistons get so lucky, the way great players have these freak shooting slumps just when they play the Pistons. What are the odds?

As for the decline, no, the Spurs are NOT on the decline. Going from '05 champs to '06 runners-up will only mean that the Pistons got that much better, not that the Spurs have slipped in any way. :lol

[Man In Black]

Personally, it's much easier for the major market media to portray the Spurs as on the decline. They just don't want us to be portrayed as a glamour team. So they do their part in holding the Spurs down.

So in essence, Jim is part of the reason as to why the Spurs are mis-perceived as boring.

WINNING BASKETBALL IS ALL THAT MATTERS.

[Solid D]

Excellent, GrandeDavid. Thanks!

BTW, I was referring to thispego's comments about the Spurs future being brighter than the "pistins". That ought to stir it up.

[DisgruntledLionFan#54,927]

Spurs lost to the Pistons because of 3 reasons:
1) Pistons wanted it more - who lost game 7, again? Oh yeah, them.
2) Spurs were without the one player who I predicted would be their X-factor during last year's Finals - Manu.
3) Duncan wasn't 100% and too many other players struggled to find the basket (Finley, Horry, Barry)

That's it. It's one loss. Pistons, let's remember, have been the luckiest team in the NBA in not having ONE SINGLE INJURY this season. But it would be unheard of if that continued throughout the season. Let's see what happens if Big Ben or Chauncey goes out with an injury. or McDyess, who's never gone a whole season without some sort of injury.


There are so many things wrong with this post it's rather funny...

McDyess played in 102 games last year for the Pistons...

[boutons_]

The Spurs have clearly declined into a nasty hole over the last 2+ weeks of really shitty, lazy basketball. The embarrassment @DET is only one instance.

A strong season and a strong playoffs being mutually exclusive is part of the Spurs lore so perversely loved by Spurs fans.

The Spurs are to be compared to only one team this season, and the Spurs are losing that comparison. All other Spurs seasons and all other 22-3 starts are meaningless.

Pistons 3L
Spus 7L
Mavs 7L

[JamStone]

the thing that sucks for you and your team, jamstone, is that the spurs are going to be better than your team every year that you have a legitimate shot at a title.....until your team gets too old itself or is broken up and retooled.

In your eyes the Spurs future may not be so bright but it's sure a hell of alot brighter than the pistins....


thispego,

That's great that you support your team and that you have great faith in their ability to remain the best team in the league. I did not write my post to start a smack talking war or to cause a controvery. I was just sharing an opinion from a less subjective and biased point of view. The Spurs are still one of the best teams in the NBA and will remain one of the best teams over the next few years. If you want to believe that the Spurs' future is brighter than the Pistons' future, that's great. I just said try to look at it objectively.

Bruce Bowen is 34. Nick Van Exel is 34. Brent Barry is almost 34. Robert Horry is 35. Michael Finley is almost 33. Those are your top four reserves and your starting small forward. Your franchise has some young talent overseas. Are any of those players GUARANTEED to be steady contributors as soon as two years into the future? The Spurs are hovering around the luxury tax threshhold for next year and the following year. And, in the 2008-2009 season, Tim Duncan, Manu Ginobili, Tony Parker, and Rasho Nesterovic will make $50 million ... just those four players. The salary cap is around $52-53 million currently. It will maybe be around $54-55 million by then, maybe. Those four players will be just a few million dollars away from the salary cap by themselves ... just those four players. The Spurs first round draft pick next summer belongs to the New York Knicks.

You don't have any problems with the Spurs' collective age, salary cap, and roster situation over the next three years? Seriously?

The Pistons have younger bench players who are maturing, developing, and learning from a championship core of players. Carlos Arroyo is 26. Maurice Evans is 27. Carlos Delfino is 23. Darko Milicic is 20. Jason Maxiell is 22. And, the Pistons have two projects in Alex Acker (22) and Amir Johnson (18) to develop over the next few seasons. Over the next two seasons, the Pistons will be over the salary cap but not in the luxury tax. And, in the 2008-09 season, even with Tayshaun Prince and Ben Wallace re-signed, the Pistons will still be just under the salary cap.

You can argue all you want about how the Spurs will be better every year. That's fine. But, to outright say the Spurs have a brighter future than the Pistons is a naive and not very well-thought-out contention.

Take some perspective and some constructive criticism. The Spurs are the defending champions, and they are a great, great team. So were the LA Lakers in 2002, the Chicago Bulls in 1997, the Boston Celtics in 1986. All good things eventually come to an end. And, when Tim Duncan starts to decline, the Spurs' franchise will suffer a down era where they will have to rebuild, despite over-paying three of its current stars on a team with untested, unproven European players.

Again, I didn't post to merely smack talk. Look at the situation rationally and you'll see there are some disheartening facts about the Spurs roster and salary cap situation over the next few years. Really be unbiased about it, and you'll see that my points have definite merit.

[Cant_Be_Faded]

i hope DARKO and Ian battle it out for the 2010 finals MVP award

[FromWayDowntown]

The Spurs started out last year 20-5. They were 38-10 at the all star break. How is that a slow start to the season? Where is this tradition of slow starts? In the 2002-2003 championship season, the Spurs were 33-16 at the all star break. Not as good as last year, but hardly a "slow start." Again, where is this tradition of slow starts? If it's any other year you are talking about, well then it's a season in which the Spurs did not win a championship. The 1999 season was a shortened 50 game regular season.

I think you discount the start the Spurs had in 2002-03 in an effort to make a point. At the end of December of that season, the Spurs were 19-13; hardly a stellar start for a team expected to win a title. In mid-December of that season, the Spurs lost in LA to the Clippers and fell to 14-10. Obviously, between the end of December and the All-Star Break, the Spurs went on a tear, winning 14 of 17 to build the record that you cite, but games #33-49 are hardly the start of the season.

And that sort of slow start is the historical trend for the Duncan-Popovich Spurs -- 2004-05 and this season are basically anomalies in that time. Here are the Spurs end of December records during the Duncan-Popovich era:

2004-05: 25-6
2003-04: 22-10 (after 9-10 start)
2002-03: 19-13 (after 14-10 start)
2001-02: 21-7 (after 10-4 start)
2000-01: 19-11 (after 13-9 start)
1999-00: 21-10 (after 14-3 start)
1998-99: 6-8 (end of first month of shortened season)
1997-98: 18-11 (after 10-10 start)

The numbers at the end of December every year are good enough, but hardly what has been expected of the Spurs and nothing at all like what they've been at the end of those seasons. In that time, the Spurs are 151-76 in the opening months of their seasons (.665). Carried over a full season, the Spurs would average 54.5 wins (33 wins in a 50 game season). But in reality, they've only had one season where they were below that number (1999-2000, where the Spurs won 53 games)

Given those starts, here are the Spurs' finishes (Jan-Apr.) in each year:

2004-05: 34-17
2003-04: 35-15
2002-03: 41-9
2001-02: 37-17
2000-01: 39-13
1999-00: 32-19
1998-99: 31-5
1997-98: 38-15

That's 287-110 (.723), in those months -- a 59 win pace. Even if the Spurs' starts haven't been "slow" in an objective sense (I think the starts have been relatively slow given what's been expected and what the final results have been), they've certainly shown marked improvement over the last months (50 or so games) of almost every season.

In that same era, the Spurs are 164-63 after the All-Star break (.722). That mark was even better before last season's 18-11 -- a number fueled by Duncan's absence. Take that out, and the Spurs win almost 75% of their games from mid-February to mid-April.

[spurs_fan_in_exile]

I think "decline" is an inaccurate way of describing it. Yes, Manu and Tim are hurt, but Tim, despite his troubles in recent weeks, he looked like the MVP Tim out of the gate. Not only that but I think the growth of Tony Parker can't be discounted at all. I'm concerned about Manu's injuries, because he's one of those guys who will never slow down until everything breaks down.

As for the bench, yes there are some age issues, but everyone was wondering who would replace Steve Kerr, and we found Horry. Someday Horry will retire but the Spurs will likely find someone new. Some might call it homerism, but I call it recent history. Vets are willing to take pay cuts to get here. As long as Duncan is around the Spurs will be legit contenders and as such are going to be able to get solid ring chasers around him.

At the end of the day I'm comfortable putting my faith in a management team that has pulled off a few incredible draft and free agent steals in the last few years. If one of the many Euros they have signed translates into the a player of Manu or Tony's caliber then they are going to remain very dangerous in the next few years. And hell, if all of them somehow do (unlikely, I know, but I can dream can't I?) then look out.

I think the worst that could be said is that the Spurs could be on the verge of decline if they aren't careful.

[JamStone]

Well put, spurs fan in exile. That was an excellent retort. I can't argue with how you put that. I definitely can appreciate that type of post over one that basically says: "My team's better than your team ... na-na, na-na-na."

[Bruno]

Bruce Bowen is 34. Nick Van Exel is 34. Brent Barry is almost 34. Robert Horry is 35. Michael Finley is almost 33. Those are your top four reserves and your starting small forward. Your franchise has some young talent overseas. Are any of those players GUARANTEED to be steady contributors as soon as two years into the future? The Spurs are hovering around the luxury tax threshhold for next year and the following year. And, in the 2008-2009 season, Tim Duncan, Manu Ginobili, Tony Parker, and Rasho Nesterovic will make $50 million ... just those four players. The salary cap is around $52-53 million currently. It will maybe be around $54-55 million by then, maybe. Those four players will be just a few million dollars away from the salary cap by themselves ... just those four players. The Spurs first round draft pick next summer belongs to the New York Knicks.

You don't have any problems with the Spurs' collective age, salary cap, and roster situation over the next three years? Seriously?

The Pistons have younger bench players who are maturing, developing, and learning from a championship core of players. Carlos Arroyo is 26. Maurice Evans is 27. Carlos Delfino is 23. Darko Milicic is 20. Jason Maxiell is 22. And, the Pistons have two projects in Alex Acker (22) and Amir Johnson (18) to develop over the next few seasons. Over the next two seasons, the Pistons will be over the salary cap but not in the luxury tax. And, in the 2008-09 season, even with Tayshaun Prince and Ben Wallace re-signed, the Pistons will still be just under the salary cap.


Spurs and Pistons future are very similar.
For 2008-2009 : Sheed + Rip + Prince = $35M if you add the Big Ben you reach $45M for four players, not that far from $50M
The pistons first round draft pick next summer belong to Utah too.
Arroyo and Evans are bench player, they're not strating material.
There are every year guys like Evans in FA. It's not something difficult to find.
For Delfino and Maxiell, I don't know them very well but they don't look that great.
For Darko, I don't see Pistons signing him and Billups in 2007 and he looks like a bust.
Johnson is a long term project but Acker not, Pistons even though of cuting him instead of Dupree (his trade for a second round was a good move).
For 2008-2009 season, Pistons will be under the cap if they don't re-sign Billups. Don't tell me you want that ?

Spurs and Pistons are in a very similar situation, none is brighter.

[ChumpDumper]

Would the Spurs' future look so much brighter if we had a couple of scrubs sitting on the end of the bench as long as they were young?

[ducks]

tp improving should say they are not on the decline

[JamStone]

Bruno,

Those young players on the Pistons--Darko, Delfino, Maxiell, Amir Johnson, and Acker--are exactly why the Pistons have a brighter future than the Spurs', in my opinion. They are ALREADY ON THE TEAM instead of overseas, and they're learning what it's like being in a winning situation on a championship caliber team. And, you might not think very highly of Delfino, Darko, or Maxiell, but at the very least, they can be pieces used to trade for a better player or draft picks. There is always a market on young, cheap talent with great potential. And, the best case scenerio is that they turn out to become real players in this league. Van Exel, Barry, Bowen, and Horry are on their last legs, and I don't see how the Spurs could use them in a trade scenerio.

As for the salary cap situation, it's a little similar with the Spurs, but not exactly. For the 2008-09 season, even if the Pistons re-sign Ben and plan to re-sign Chauncey, they'll just be over the salary cap, but not into luxury tax territory with those five players. But, that is all FIVE STARTERS IN TACT. The Spurs will have ONLY THREE players who make roughly $43-45 million of the payroll. There's a difference between a quality starting five and a great starting three.

While neither team has a first round draft pick next summer, the Pistons drafted THREE last year WHO ACTUALLY MADE THE TEAM. The Pistons contemplated drafting AMIR JOHNSON with their first round pick last year, so in essence, they feel like they have another draft pick for next year, he just came in a year early. Not to mention, they still have Darko to develop. Whether he does or not is another question. The Spurs have stashed a few players over in Europe and maybe they can be solid players. That's not guaranteed. And, the major difference is that the Spurs are not "developing" those players in their own system. Those players are learning different systems under different coaches. Beno Udrih hasn't exactly adjusted well. Fabricio Oberto is an experienced veteran and he hasn't really earned many minutes. Mahinmi is only 18 or 19 years old ... he's years away. Scola may never get out of his contract. Will Javtokas ever become the player he was before his motorcycle accident? Does Viktor Sanikidze even weight 200 lbs yet?

Scola has contract problems. Javtokas is not the player he was when the Spurs drafted him. And, Mahinmi and Sanikidze are still unproven teenagers years away. How are those two different from Maciej Lampe, Nikoloz Tskitishvili, Zarko Cabarkapa, and Darko Milicic? Still sold on the Spurs' talent overseas? If you haven't noticed, the fad of getting the next "Dirk" or next "Pau" has worn off with some of the more recent international talents. Manu Ginobili is a once in a lifetime find. I would be willing to agree with the guess that one of those four international Spurs' players overseas may turn out to be an NBA player, but not all of them, not even three of them.

There are clear differences in the situations between Detroit and San Antonio.

[MannyIsGod]

Bruno,

Those young players on the Pistons--Darko, Delfino, Maxiell, Amir Johnson, and Acker--are exactly why the Pistons have a brighter future than the Spurs', in my opinion. They are ALREADY ON THE TEAM instead of overseas, and they're learning what it's like being in a winning situation on a championship caliber team. And, you might not think very highly of Delfino, Darko, or Maxiell, but at the very least, they can be pieces used to trade for a better player or draft picks. There is always a market on young, cheap talent with great potential. And, the best case scenerio is that they turn out to become real players in this league. Van Exel, Barry, Bowen, and Horry are on their last legs, and I don't see how the Spurs could use them in a trade scenerio.

As for the salary cap situation, it's a little similar with the Spurs, but not exactly. For the 2008-09 season, even if the Pistons re-sign Ben and plan to re-sign Chauncey, they'll just be over the salary cap, but not into luxury tax territory with those five players. But, that is all FIVE STARTERS IN TACT. The Spurs will have ONLY THREE players who make roughly $43-45 million of the payroll. There's a difference between a quality starting five and a great starting three.

While neither team has a first round draft pick next summer, the Pistons drafted THREE last year WHO ACTUALLY MADE THE TEAM. The Pistons contemplated drafting AMIR JOHNSON with their first round pick last year, so in essence, they feel like they have another draft pick for next year, he just came in a year early. Not to mention, they still have Darko to develop. Whether he does or not is another question. The Spurs have stashed a few players over in Europe and maybe they can be solid players. That's not guaranteed. And, the major difference is that the Spurs are not "developing" those players in their own system. Those players are learning different systems under different coaches. Beno Udrih hasn't exactly adjusted well. Fabricio Oberto is an experienced veteran and he hasn't really earned many minutes. Mahinmi is only 18 or 19 years old ... he's years away. Scola may never get out of his contract. Will Javtokas ever become the player he was before his motorcycle accident? Does Viktor Sanikidze even weight 200 lbs yet?

Scola has contract problems. Javtokas is not the player he was when the Spurs drafted him. And, Mahinmi and Sanikidze are still unproven teenagers years away. How are those two different from Maciej Lampe, Nikoloz Tskitishvili, Zarko Cabarkapa, and Darko Milicic? Still sold on the Spurs' talent overseas? If you haven't noticed, the fad of getting the next "Dirk" or next "Pau" has worn off with some of the more recent international talents. Manu Ginobili is a once in a lifetime find. I would be willing to agree with the guess that one of those four international Spurs' players overseas may turn out to be an NBA player, but not all of them, not even three of them.

There are clear differences in the situations between Detroit and San Antonio.

Would the Spurs' future look so much brighter if we had a couple of scrubs sitting on the end of the bench as long as they were young?

[ChumpDumper]

I don't see how the Spurs could use them in a trade scenerio.Players in the final year of their contracts are valuable in many trade scenarios.
For the 2008-09 season, even if the Pistons re-sign Ben and plan to re-sign Chauncey, they'll just be over the salary cap.Wait a second. How much do you think Ben and Chauncey will take to sign and what do you think the cap will be?
How are those two different from Maciej Lampe, Nikoloz Tskitishvili, Zarko Cabarkapa, and Darko Milicic?Either pimp Darko or don't.

Really, just one trade would change everything for either team - so this is rather academic right now.

[Cant_Be_Faded]

Thus the name, ChumpDumper.

[Supergirl]

Pistons have a solid core of starters, but other than them and McDyess I'd say no one else's future is guaranteed. Darko will not be re-signed. Brown didn't play him, Flip's not playing him, he's obviously not as good as people hoped. Arroyo sucks. He always has. He's going to bolt because he'll want more money and a starting job, because he thinks he's worth it. But he's not. Evans could turn out to be a good pick up, but he's only going to be around for a couple years, and he's a role player. Certainly not more valuable than Van Exel or Finley, that's for sure.

Pistons and Spurs have both put together very good teams in affordable ways. The only advantage the Pistons have is LUCK - their players seem to get hurt a lot less.

[JamStone]

Would the Spurs' future look so much brighter if we had a couple of scrubs sitting on the end of the bench as long as they were young?


I could understand this statement if the Spurs' quality "veteran" bench players were completely outplaying the Pistons' young, inexperience bench players. But, is that the case?

Michael Finley
28.2 mpg
10.7 ppg
3.7 rpg
.409 FG%
.352 3PT%

Maurice Evans
16.2 mpg
6.0 ppg
2.8 rpg
.462 FG%
.356 3PT%

When Finley was strictly a back-up and not starting, his numbers were not even that good. Look at the minutes per game played and the shooting percentages.

Nick Van Exel
16.3 mpg
5.8 ppg
2.0 apg
.400 FG%
.283 3PT%

Carlos Arroyo
14.2 mpg
3.9 ppg
3.4 apg
.380 FG%
0.0 3PT%

Arroyo does not shoot 3-pointers, so Nick has him there. But, wasn't the Van Exel acquisition supposed to be beneficial in large part because of his 3-pt shooting? .28% from the 3-pt line? Aren't point guards supposed to be playmakers that get assists? Arroyo plays fewer minutes and gets more assists.

Brent Barry
18.8 mpg
5.3 ppg
2.0 rpg
.408 FG%
.418 3PT%

Carlos Delfino
10.0 mpg
3.0 ppg
1.6 rpg
.441 FG%
.083 3PT%

Delfino has struggled with his 3 pt shooting, but he shoots much better from the field than Barry.

Fabricio Oberto
8.3 mpg
2.0 ppg
2.1 rpg
.11 blks per game
.529 FG%

Darko Milicic
6.5 mpg
1.4 ppg
1.2 rpg
.82 blks per game
.400 FG%

Darko is looking more and more like a bust. He blocks shots when he gets playing time, but everything else is pretty weak. Weren't there a lot of Spurs fans who thought Fabricio was going to get some quality minutes with his wealth of experience? His numbers aren't that much more impressive than Darko's.


Would you rather have Sean Marks or Jason Maxiell as your sixth big man? Would you rather have projects like Amir Johnson and Alex Acker or ... ummm ... no projects at all?

The Spurs bench players with all of their experience and "talent" are barely outplaying the Pistons' "scrubs." And, if you prorate the statistics, they aren't better at all. The only thing that makes them better are Michael Finley's numbers, and that's only been since he's played as a starter, and still his shooting percentages are not better than Evans'.

So, the better question rephrased, CHUMPDUMPER, is would you rather have what you call "scrubs" at the end of your bench who are young and have the potential to improve or "veteran" SCRUBS who have already peaked and are over-the-hill?

[ChumpDumper]

That wasn't the question I asked.

And I can't believe you tried to discount three point shooting on a team with Duncan on it.
Weren't there a lot of Spurs fans who thought Fabricio was going to get some quality minutes with his wealth of experience?I wasn't among them.
Would you rather have Sean Marks or Jason Maxiell as your sixth big man?

Would you rather have projects like Amir Johnson and Alex Acker or ... ummm ... no projects at all?On a team competeing for championships, it matters much less who's bringing donuts to practice. The Spurs' championship window closes when Duncan leaves, period. In the meantime, it's more important to find players who can contribute now -- in the words of the immortal Casper: "Win now, worry later."

So, you've won the Scrubs with Potential Derby as well as the December championship. Congrats.

[Bruno]

JamStone,
Is it better for a young prospect to be on the bench in nba without playing or to be overseas and play consistent minutes ?
You seems to be that being with the team is better but it's not sure.
Has Darko relly improved during 2 years on Pistons bench ?
Pistons don't use the NBDL but other teams does to give playtime to their young prospects.
You don't learn whats's like being on a winning situation beiing on the bench or on the IL. You have too winning situation in Europe and the level of intensity.basketball in euroleague is higher than what you seem to think.
Among Darko, Delfino, Maxiell, Amir Johnson, only Delfino will play no-garbage minutes in the playoff. Johnson and Darko or Maxiel won't even be on the playoff roster.
For our prospect in Europe, Scola contract is not a life long contract, Javtokas play great this year and Mahinmi continues to grow in France.

For the 2008-2009 year, Pistons will spend around $53m for their five starters.
Spurs $50.5M for four starters.
Spurs won't have a SF, but it's the easier spot to fill in nba.
You should realize too that for the 2008-2009 playoff, Sheed and Ben will be almost 35 and Billups almost 33. (they are born in september)
Duncan and Rasho will be 33 and Manu 31.

[JamStone]

Players in the final year of their contracts are valuable in many trade scenarios.


In ROBERT HORRY's last year of his contract, in the summer of 2007, he'll be 37 years old and will be making $3.6 million.

In MICHAEL FINLEY'S last year of his contract, in the summer of 2007, Finley will be 34 years old and will be making $3.1 million.

In BRUCE BOWEN'S last year of his contract (not counting the team option year), next summer, Bruce will be 35 years old and will be making $3.7 million.

NICK VAN EXEL is on a ONE-YEAR contract and he cannot be traded.

Finaly year contracts are valuable to dump salary. If the Spurs trade ALL THREE (Finley, Horry, and Bowen) they might get something back worth something. But, none make very much to garner much interest and they'll ALL BE OLD.





Wait a second. How much do you think Ben and Chauncey will take to sign and what do you think the cap will be?

In the 2008-09 season, Rasheed will be making $13.7 million, Rip will be making $10.6 million, Tayshaun will be making roughly $10-11 million. So the three of them will be making about $35 million. If Ben Wallace is re-signed this summer, I expect him to get approximately $12 million a year. When Chauncey is re-signed, I expect he'll negotiate a contract worth approximately $10 million a year.

The Pistons' starting five's cumulative salaries would total roughly $55-59 million for that season. That's over the salary cap, but not yet into luxury tax territy.



Either pimp Darko or don't.

Really, just one trade would change everything for either team - so this is rather academic right now.

I don't pimp Darko. He has not lived up even remotely to expectations. But, he still has worth because he is so young. Look at Primoz Brezec and what he did last year when he was acquired by the Bobcats in the expansion draft. Look at Jermaine O'Neal's first four years in Portland. Kwame Brown had been a huge disappointment in Washington but still got a $25 million + contract from the Lakers. Darko will be worth something to someone because he still is so young and still has the dreaded "potential" to be an NBA player.

Spurs don't have any pieces for a real upgrade trade, except maybe Nazr Mohammed and Rasho Nesterovic. Nazr won't help them if he doesn't re-sign. And Rasho is grossly overpaid. Good luck in finding that "one trade" that will change everything to the Spurs. I'm sure there are plenty of NBA teams that want to do favors for a team that has won 3 championships in 7 years.

Pistons don't really have great pieces for a trade either, but hey have more pieces than the Spurs. And, that's why the YOUTH of the bench is an advantage when looking towards the future of the two franchises.

[JamStone]

That wasn't the question I asked.

And I can't believe you tried to discount three point shooting on a team with Duncan on it.I wasn't among them.On a team competeing for championships, it matters much less who's bringing donuts to practice. The Spurs' championship window closes when Duncan leaves, period. In the meantime, it's more important to find players who can contribute now -- in the words of the immortal Casper: "Win now, worry later."

So, you've won the Scrubs with Potential Derby as well as the December championship. Congrats.


Who's discounting three point shooting???

Mo Evans is shooting better from the arc than Finley. And, Nick Van Exel has a horrible 3PT percentage for someone who is on a team with Tim Duncan.

The discussion was turned to the topic of the "FUTURES" of the Spurs and the Pistons. I even stated in an earlier post that the San Antonio Spurs were fine for the next couple of years. The thread was whether the Spurs were on the decline. I made mention to the fact that the Spurs' bench is old and it will hurt them in a few years. That's all. I didn't say it will hurt them this year or next year. Stay on topic, ChumpDumper.

[FromWayDowntown]

In the 2008-09 season, Rasheed will be making $13.7 million, Rip will be making $10.6 million, Tayshaun will be making roughly $10-11 million. So the three of them will be making about $35 million. If Ben Wallace is re-signed this summer, I expect him to get approximately $12 million a year. When Chauncey is re-signed, I expect he'll negotiate a contract worth approximately $10 million a year.

The notion that Billups will re-sign for anything resembling $10M per strikes me as fancy, unless Billups has publicly said that he'll take less than his market value to stay in Detroit. As a free agent, Billups will command the max, even if you could argue that he's not truly a max-type player.


The Pistons' starting five's cumulative salaries would total roughly $55-59 million for that season. That's over the salary cap, but not yet into luxury tax territy.

In the 2008-09 season, how exactly does that make the Pistons better off than the Spurs?

What makes you think that any or all of those kids -- if they truly can play to the level you say they can -- are going to stay in Detroit? Why wouldn't they go elsewhere, seeking more minutes and money? Young players tend to be less altruistic than veterans who are reaching the end of the road. I'd expect that some of the Pistons' bench strength will have evaporated by 2008-09.

At the same time, just as the Spurs have done twice since Duncan came to San Antonio, I'd expect the Spurs to have found a fresh group of players to fill roles off the bench and provide a means for this team to succeed for a few years more. After the 1999 team won, Pop had to replace a bench that looked much like the current bench does. After the 2003 team won, Pop had to deal with bench losses from retirement and free agency. In both instances, the Spurs were able to identify players and develop a bench that fits the Spurs system. That savvy has kept them the lone team to be considered a true title contender in every season since 1999.


Spurs don't have any pieces for a real upgrade trade, except maybe Nazr Mohammed and Rasho Nesterovic. Nazr won't help them if he doesn't re-sign. And Rasho is grossly overpaid. Good luck in finding that "one trade" that will change everything to the Spurs. I'm sure there are plenty of NBA teams that want to do favors for a team that has won 3 championships in 7 years.

You could have made this same point, in principle, last season. The moveable pieces the Spurs had were Rasho and Malik Rose, both of whom were "grossly overpaid." What the Spurs learned, though, is that sweetners -- Luis Scola, anyone -- can make all of the difference in the world in making deals in the NBA. As much as anything else, that's how the stockpiling of young, foreign players may be helpful to the Spurs' future.

[JamStone]

JamStone,
Is it better for a young prospect to be on the bench in nba without playing or to be overseas and play consistent minutes ?
You seems to be that being with the team is better but it's not sure.
Has Darko relly improved during 2 years on Pistons bench ?
Pistons don't use the NBDL but other teams does to give playtime to their young prospects.
You don't learn whats's like being on a winning situation beiing on the bench or on the IL. You have too winning situation in Europe and the level of intensity.basketball in euroleague is higher than what you seem to think.
Among Darko, Delfino, Maxiell, Amir Johnson, only Delfino will play no-garbage minutes in the playoff. Johnson and Darko or Maxiel won't even be on the playoff roster.
For our prospect in Europe, Scola contract is not a life long contract, Javtokas play great this year and Mahinmi continues to grow in France.


I guess it depends, Bruno.

If the young players are learning a lot from the coaches even though they aren't getting a lot of in-game experience, it might be better to be on the team instead of overseas or the NBDL. If those young players are learning by playing against Rasheed, Ben, Dice, and Dale Davis in practice, it might be just as good as getting more minutes in Europe with coaching the NBA team has no control over. I think if the players stashed away in Europe are getting very good coaching and getting consistent minutes and learning from their mistakes, sure it's good to be over there. Are the Spurs' players who are overseas getting just that? Who knows.

What do you mean you don't learn what it's like to win from the bench??? You learn how to be a team player, how to handle yourselves in a winning environment, the attitude, approach, and hard work it takes to win. It takes some young players a few years to grow into their bodies and learn from veteran mentors to know how to play, to lead, and to win. Jermaine O'Neal took four years in Portland learning from Rasheed Wallace and he became a very good player. Amir Johnson is 18 years old. He is getting taught by Rasheed, Tayshaun, and Dice how to play in the league. Give him four years like Jermaine, he may have a similar development. Darko is competing against Ben and Rasheed and Dice and Dale Davis everyday in practice. He is still immature and pouts about playing time, but he also has beefed up his body and has become a better shot-blocker. If he can just become mentally tougher, he can be adequate and look at his experience as something that made him better. Delfino will play in the playoffs. Jason Maxiell is learning likewise from the Pistons big men. He doesn't have as far to go as Darko, but he can still get better.

Nick Van Exel and Brent Barry, with all their starter and playing time and playoff experience, have SUCKED for the Spurs so far. So, really, which is better? Fabricio Oberto, with his European success and Olympic experience, can't even compete with a very pedetrian Rasho Nesterovic or a less-than-impressive Nazr Mohammed to make a push for more playing time. Where is that playing time experience advantage there?

By the time Scola gets out of his contract, will he even be worth adding to the Spurs roster? Javtokas had a great year? Link please. News reports I've seen say he's still NO WHERE CLOSE to the player he was before his motorcycle accident.

It really depends on the player as to what is more beneficial for his development.

[ChumpDumper]

Finaly year contracts are valuable to dump salary. If the Spurs trade ALL THREE (Finley, Horry, and Bowen) they might get something back worth something. But, none make very much to garner much interest and they'll ALL BE OLD.Catch a clue, nobody cares how old a guy is if they are trying to get his expiring contract. ALL THREE? Give me a break -- yeah the Spurs might be able to pull in a single $13 million contract, but considering how many players were/are let go because of fear of going a few million over the tax threshold, it's no stretch to think a team might find one of those deals useful.
When Chauncey is re-signed, I expect he'll negotiate a contract worth approximately $10 million a year. Since he's being touted as the top point guard in the league I would expect him to be paid accordingly.
The Pistons' starting five's cumulative salaries would total roughly $55-59 million for that season. That's over the salary cap, but not yet into luxury tax territy.So, to sign ANYONE else, they would go into the tax, to say nothing of any other 1st rounders or the fact you haven't proven the cap will remain static for the next seven years.
Darko will be worth something to someone because he still is so young and still has the dreaded "potential" to be an NBA player.Worth what? To whom? The Pistons? Are you going to sign him to a Jonathan Bender deal based on that potential?
Good luck in finding that "one trade" that will change everything to the Spurs.What needs changing? This isn't a lottery team we're talking about.
Pistons don't really have great pieces for a trade either, but hey have more pieces than the Spurs. And, that's why the YOUTH of the bench is an advantage when looking towards the future of the two franchises.So you're answer to the question "Would the Spurs' future look so much brighter if we had a couple of scrubs sitting on the end of the bench as long as they were young?" is a resounding YES.

Thanks.

[JamStone]

FromWayDownTown,

I think Chauncey Billups is a realist. He's outperformed his contract. But, all three starters so far (Rip, Rasheed, and Tayshaun) took less than market value to re-up with the Pistons. I think if the Pistons give Chauncey a five year commitment, he'll sign for roughly $10 million a year.

Those young players are precisely the reason I think the Pistons are in better position in a few years. Of course there is no guarantee the Pistons will be able to keep all of them, but it's reasonable to think they will be able to keep some of them. Spurs will have to not only look for a new starting small forward and possibly a new starting center, but they'll have to look for an entirely NEW BENCH. That's why I think the Pistons are positioned better than the Spurs for the future.

I don't think Spurs were true title contenders in 2000 or 2001. Even Portland and Sacramento were better bets as true contenders. And, even if the Spurs WERE considered the only true title contenders since 1999, I don't believe it was due to the "savvy" of the Spurs scouts to identify talents. I think it was due to TIM DUNCAN, and TIM DUNCAN only.

I udnerstand your faith in the Spurs' organization. But, you talk like the Spurs will be title contenders for the next decade. I don't see that happening. As some Spurs fan already mentioned, the Spurs' title hopes will end when Tim Duncan is gone, and maybe even sooner, when he starts to decline in his level of play.

The Pistons will probably not be title contenders in a few years either. But, I think they will have better building blocks when they try to form another contending roster, whereas I feel the Spurs will have a very long way to go in getting back to that level.

[JamStone]

Really, just one trade would change everything for either team - so this is rather academic right now.

The "one trade" comment I made was in response to the above.

[ChumpDumper]

The "one trade" comment I made was in response to the above.And? If "changing everything" just means getting a couple of scrubs young enough for you to like, that would have to be true.

[jochhejaam]

FromWayDownTown,

I think Chauncey Billups is a realist. He's outperformed his contract. But, all three starters so far (Rip, Rasheed, and Tayshaun) took less than market value to re-up with the Pistons. I think if the Pistons give Chauncey a five year commitment, he'll sign for roughly $10 million a year.

The problem with that is there'll be teams out there willing to give him the max contract so we'll be lucky IMO to sign him for closer to $65-70 mil for 5 years.

[Oh, Gee!!]

Maybe the spurs can get billups. How many years does TP have on his deal?

[JamStone]

ChumpDumper,

What kind of quality guy are you going to get for about $3 million a year to replace a starting small forward? Even if you combine Bowen's contract with Horry's or Finley's, you get an MLE type talent for two of your core players. Expiring contracts are valuable sure, but a team is not going to just give you a Ron Artest (worth more than his contract) value type player just to get an expiring contract.

Pistons will have to deal with salary cap and luxury tax issues also. I didn't say they wouldn't have to deal with those problems. I said they are in a better position than the Spurs are in the future. The Pistons will have a better financial situation and have young players to develop. But, sure, if the Pistons re-sign Ben and Chauncey, they'll also have financial issues to deal with. I don't disagree. I merely believe their situation is better than the Spurs' situation.

Darko does not have the value he had when he was drafted, but there will be teams that are interested in an athletic and talented 7-footer in his early twenties. There's value in that kind of player, whether you want to believe it or not. We're not talking about a Sean Marks talent or a Peter John Ramos talent. As bad as their careers have been, Steven Hunter and DeSagana Diop were able to secure multiple year contracts. Darko will still have "some" value, albeit not as high as a #2 draft pick should have.

Having Devin Brown rather than Michael Finley I think would be better for the Spurs' future. Sharrod Ford would be a better 13th man than Sean Marks, yes. I'd take Maurice Evans over Brent Barry, absolutely. If you just had young scrubs at the end of the bench, would it be a brighter future? No. But, if the Spurs had younger players who were almost as good as the veterans the Spurs have, they'd have a brighter future in my opinion.


Chauncey Billups appreciates his situation in Detroit. If he seeks max money, I don't think the Pistons give it to him. If he can accept about $10 million a year, I think he'll be a Piston for the next 6-7 years. As I said before, Rip, Rasheed, and Tayshaun all negotiated contracts LESS than their market value at the time.

[Bruno]

I guess it depends, Bruno.
If the young players are learning a lot from the coaches even though they aren't getting a lot of in-game experience, it might be better to be on the team instead of overseas or the NBDL. If those young players are learning by playing against Rasheed, Ben, Dice, and Dale Davis in practice, it might be just as good as getting more minutes in Europe with coaching the NBA team has no control over. I think if the players stashed away in Europe are getting very good coaching and getting consistent minutes and learning from their mistakes, sure it's good to be over there. Are the Spurs' players who are overseas getting just that? Who knows.

With the 82 games season, there are few practice during the regular season.
Between a nba practice and an euro games. Coaching in europe is very good. I agree that you learn a lot with great nba players during practice but I don't think it's enough.
Mahinmi, Javtokas and Scola are starters in their teams.



What do you mean you don't learn what it's like to win from the bench??? You learn how to be a team player, how to handle yourselves in a winning environment, the attitude, approach, and hard work it takes to win. It takes some young players a few years to grow into their bodies and learn from veteran mentors to know how to play, to lead, and to win. Jermaine O'Neal took four years in Portland learning from Rasheed Wallace and he became a very good player. Amir Johnson is 18 years old. He is getting taught by Rasheed, Tayshaun, and Dice how to play in the league. Give him four years like Jermaine, he may have a similar development. Darko is competing against Ben and Rasheed and Dice and Dale Davis everyday in practice. He is still immature and pouts about playing time, but he also has beefed up his body and has become a better shot-blocker. If he can just become mentally tougher, he can be adequate and look at his experience as something that made him better. Delfino will play in the playoffs. Jason Maxiell is learning likewise from the Pistons big men. He doesn't have as far to go as Darko, but he can still get better.


Tou learn the same thing if you stay in Europe and more since you play. The BB in Europe is even more a team BB than in nba. Darko hasn't really improved in two years.
In Europe, there are fewer games but more practice. i don't know haw it is with Pistons but there is practice everyday with Spurs.




Nick Van Exel and Brent Barry, with all their starter and playing time and playoff experience, have SUCKED for the Spurs so far. So, really, which is better? Fabricio Oberto, with his European success and Olympic experience, can't even compete with a very pedetrian Rasho Nesterovic or a less-than-impressive Nazr Mohammed to make a push for more playing time. Where is that playing time experience advantage there?

By the time Scola gets out of his contract, will he even be worth adding to the Spurs roster? Javtokas had a great year? Link please. News reports I've seen say he's still NO WHERE CLOSE to the player he was before his motorcycle accident.

It really depends on the player as to what is more beneficial for his development.

Oberto isn't enough athletic to be more than a role player in nba. he wasn't Spurs first choice this summer (it was Scola).
Scola will be a FA in 2007 or 2008 (I'm not sure). Spurs can find an agreement with his team before.
For Javtokas :Stats (http://www.euroleague.net/plantillas/jugador.jsp?id=BVE) Scouting report (http://www.nbadraft.net/velkavrh001.asp) He looks like he has fully recover.

I don't say they are starting material but Pistons's prospect aren't too.
Spurs have less SG/SF propsect than pistons but I'm not worried about that. You can sign each year via FA, young SG/SF with less the MLE : Bell, james Jones, Maurice Evans or Devin Brown this year.

[Bruno]

Having Devin Brown rather than Michael Finley I think would be better for the Spurs' future. Sharrod Ford would be a better 13th man than Sean Marks, yes. I'd take Maurice Evans over Brent Barry, absolutely. If you just had young scrubs at the end of the bench, would it be a brighter future? No. But, if the Spurs had younger players who were almost as good as the veterans the Spurs have, they'd have a brighter future in my opinion.


I'd take Maurice Evans over barry but not over Finley.
The only guy, I think Spurs should trade is Barry.
Sharrod Ford is so good that Suns waived him 5 days ago.
The truth is that, If Spurs need a guy like Evans/Brown they will sign him via FA, you have tons of guys like that each year.

[ChumpDumper]

What kind of quality guy are you going to get for about $3 million a year to replace a starting small forward?How much do you need?
Having Devin Brown rather than Michael Finley I think would be better for the Spurs' future.So you're saying if we just pick up Ime Udoka or Erik Daniels we'll be fine as far as youth goes. It's not like there aren't alot of young available guys out there.
Sharrod Ford would be a better 13th man than Sean MarksNot in a million years once you actually figure out what Sean Marks does for this team. Maybe if Ford tried to learn the system as completely as Sean already knew it, you might have a point.
If you just had young scrubs at the end of the bench, would it be a brighter future? No. But, if the Spurs had younger players who were almost as good as the veterans the Spurs have, they'd have a brighter future in my opinion.Yes, it would be great if we had a high schooler as good as Duncan.

[5ToolMan]

:spin You're correct in that we haven't had "ONE" single injury; Ben Wallace has had two sore ankles (since recovered), Rip had a sore back and jammed 3 fingers on his shooting hand, Lindsay Hunter has missed the entire season so far due to surgery...what's lucky about that?

The Pistons starters have missed less games to injury than any team in the NBA for the last three years. When you have the same core of startes for most of that time, that leads to great consistancy.

By the way, I don't consider the Pistons as lucky in avoiding injury. Rather than luck, I would say the Pistons are proven to be durable and tough as nails.

Although I also think Pop, if he were Detroit's coach, would have made the Pistons' starters miss more games during this time when they did have nagging or minor injury, just to evalate and develop the bench, with a focus only on the playoffs.

[picnroll]

I sure am worried that the Spurs don't have their young players dveloping in their system. Afterall look at what a bust Manu turned out to be since he didn't develop with the Spurs.

[Solid D]

Rip had a sore back and jammed 3 fingers on his shooting hand...

Rip went 4-15....so maybe Flip should have sat him and protected him if he wasn't going to be effective. Pop did with Manu.

[jochhejaam]

Rip went 4-15....so maybe Flip should have sat him and protected him if he wasn't going to be effective. Pop did with Manu.
I think the 4-15 was due to Bruce, the fingers were jammed about a week ago and weren't injured badly enough to bench him.

[ChumpDumper]

I didn't see too much of Javtokas before the wreck, but I have seen him after as recently as two weeks ago. He does have NBA game though he won't be a star here. He was MVP of the second most prestigious international competition in Europe last season and his team is tied for second this year in the most prestigious international competition. You can judge whether these are good years.

[FromWayDowntown]

FromWayDownTown,

I think Chauncey Billups is a realist. He's outperformed his contract. But, all three starters so far (Rip, Rasheed, and Tayshaun) took less than market value to re-up with the Pistons. I think if the Pistons give Chauncey a five year commitment, he'll sign for roughly $10 million a year.

Chauncey is also going to be available to an open market. He could give the Pistons a discount, I suppose, but the idea that Chauncey would be willing to take $2 M less per year than Ben Wallace seems to assume a lot of altruism to me, particularly with a guy who is looking at his last big contract.


Those young players are precisely the reason I think the Pistons are in better position in a few years. Of course there is no guarantee the Pistons will be able to keep all of them, but it's reasonable to think they will be able to keep some of them. Spurs will have to not only look for a new starting small forward and possibly a new starting center, but they'll have to look for an entirely NEW BENCH. That's why I think the Pistons are positioned better than the Spurs for the future.

But my point is that in the Duncan era, the Spurs have accomplished those things -- not once, but twice. And throughout that time, the Spurs have been one of 2 or 3 legitimate title contenders.


I don't think Spurs were true title contenders in 2000 or 2001. Even Portland and Sacramento were better bets as true contenders.

That's an interesting assertion, particularly with regard to 2001, since the Spurs had the league's best record that season, reached the West Finals, and were picked by many, many experts to knock off the Lakers in that series. Obviously, they didn't get it done, but they were viewed as the only team with any real chance to beat LA in 2001.

In 2000, the Spurs didn't advance past Round 1, but then again, Tim Duncan didn't play any playoff games. There was a great deal of speculation at that time, however, that had Duncan been able to play, the Spurs would have been good enough to hang with both Portland and LA in the West. We'll never know, but to say that those Spurs weren't true title contenders strikes me as a bit of selective memory.


And, even if the Spurs WERE considered the only true title contenders since 1999, I don't believe it was due to the "savvy" of the Spurs scouts to identify talents. I think it was due to TIM DUNCAN, and TIM DUNCAN only.

Look, you'll never get me to discount the importance of Tim Duncan to this franchise. In the last several years, I've maintained in this and other Spurs forums that the Spurs fate is directly related to Tim Duncan's play. But with that said, the organization has done an amazing job of identifying and developing young and talented players. Steven Jackson, Speedy Claxton, Devin Brown, Antonio Daniels, Jason Hart, Ira Newble, and Malik Rose immediately come to mind as projects that have come to the Spurs and turned into NBA players. The Spurs have also found guys like Raja Bell, who didn't make the team in 2000-01, but who has certainly gone on to have a nice career. The point is that the Spurs have, in the Duncan era, consistently found young players with skills and found ways to develop them into NBA-quality players. I don't see why that is suddenly unlikely to continue.


I udnerstand your faith in the Spurs' organization. But, you talk like the Spurs will be title contenders for the next decade. I don't see that happening. As some Spurs fan already mentioned, the Spurs' title hopes will end when Tim Duncan is gone, and maybe even sooner, when he starts to decline in his level of play.

I haven't ever said that I expect the Spurs to be true contenders past the Duncan era (absent extenuating circumstances). Where I differ from you, however, is in my belief that the Spurs will continue to be a legitimate contender for a number of years, until the Duncan era ends. You seem to suggest that the end of that era is coming sooner than the end of the Pistons' purported reign.


The Pistons will probably not be title contenders in a few years either. But, I think they will have better building blocks when they try to form another contending roster, whereas I feel the Spurs will have a very long way to go in getting back to that level.

After they lose Tim Duncan and Manu Ginobili, yes, the Spurs will be a ways from a title. But in a salary cap and free agency era, that happens to most teams that maintain a championship level for a decade or so, as the Spurs have. I'm not exactly sure what your point is, given this last paragraph -- obviously, both teams are going to be competitive for a few more years; at that point, each will decline because the stalwarts of their title teams will be at the end of the road. If you're trying to say that guys like Jason Maxiell, Darko Milicic, Maurice Evans, and Carlos Delfino are going to combine with Tayshaun Prince to be the guts of a second generation title contender, I'll politely say that you're entitled to your opinion.

[naveah27]

thispego,

That's great that you support your team and that you have great faith in their ability to remain the best team in the league. I did not write my post to start a smack talking war or to cause a controvery. I was just sharing an opinion from a less subjective and biased point of view. The Spurs are still one of the best teams in the NBA and will remain one of the best teams over the next few years. If you want to believe that the Spurs' future is brighter than the Pistons' future, that's great. I just said try to look at it objectively.

Bruce Bowen is 34. Nick Van Exel is 34. Brent Barry is almost 34. Robert Horry is 35. Michael Finley is almost 33. Those are your top four reserves and your starting small forward. Your franchise has some young talent overseas. Are any of those players GUARANTEED to be steady contributors as soon as two years into the future? The Spurs are hovering around the luxury tax threshhold for next year and the following year. And, in the 2008-2009 season, Tim Duncan, Manu Ginobili, Tony Parker, and Rasho Nesterovic will make $50 million ... just those four players. The salary cap is around $52-53 million currently. It will maybe be around $54-55 million by then, maybe. Those four players will be just a few million dollars away from the salary cap by themselves ... just those four players. The Spurs first round draft pick next summer belongs to the New York Knicks.

You don't have any problems with the Spurs' collective age, salary cap, and roster situation over the next three years? Seriously?

The Pistons have younger bench players who are maturing, developing, and learning from a championship core of players. Carlos Arroyo is 26. Maurice Evans is 27. Carlos Delfino is 23. Darko Milicic is 20. Jason Maxiell is 22. And, the Pistons have two projects in Alex Acker (22) and Amir Johnson (18) to develop over the next few seasons. Over the next two seasons, the Pistons will be over the salary cap but not in the luxury tax. And, in the 2008-09 season, even with Tayshaun Prince and Ben Wallace re-signed, the Pistons will still be just under the salary cap.

You can argue all you want about how the Spurs will be better every year. That's fine. But, to outright say the Spurs have a brighter future than the Pistons is a naive and not very well-thought-out contention.

Take some perspective and some constructive criticism. The Spurs are the defending champions, and they are a great, great team. So were the LA Lakers in 2002, the Chicago Bulls in 1997, the Boston Celtics in 1986. All good things eventually come to an end. And, when Tim Duncan starts to decline, the Spurs' franchise will suffer a down era where they will have to rebuild, despite over-paying three of its current stars on a team with untested, unproven European players.

Again, I didn't post to merely smack talk. Look at the situation rationally and you'll see there are some disheartening facts about the Spurs roster and salary cap situation over the next few years. Really be unbiased about it, and you'll see that my points have definite merit.


Look, I understand where you're coming from with regards to the Spurs bench. No one can argue that these veterans are on the decline in terms of age if not experience and intangibles and however much you ask a Spurs fan for there take without the homer glasses please be sure you follow your own stellar advice.

You’ve taken a lot of time to talk about the merits of Detroit’s younger (and presumably?) better bench.

You start by referring to the maturing development of such young players as Carlos Arroyo (26) and Maurice Evans (27)

I'm sorry but HUH?

How much more "maturing" do you want from two players who are already heading dangerously into that 'over the peak' age?? (If you subscribe to the Tim Duncan School of Decline at age TWENTY-NINE)

I'm sorry but the inconsistent and underachieving play of Carlos Arroyo doesn't worry me and honestly, as a Piston fan, I'd have to wonder if he wasn't able to "develop" any new skills under the legendary Larry Brown..how much more can you realistically (homer glasses off please) expect?

Maurice Evans? At 27, the most complimentary term applied to Evans is STILL the word potential. Not encouraging for a 27 year old. Yet, in my book, he still gets the edge over Arroyo.

Carlos Delfino and Darko Milicic are the only two young and developing players who are currently on your bench. I think Delfino will develop into quite a good player, not as well as Manu of course, but I have my doubts as to whether Detroit can keep him long term. As he improves he will demand more playing time and a bigger contract. I can’t see him breaking into the starting line up or accepting a 6th man role. Darko has so much ground to catch up it's ridiculous. I don't know if he can ever live down (or up to) the expectations of his going #2 in the draft. I don't know. He's a big fat question mark a lot like Kwame Brown. And that's not to be insulting. A lot of people expected Kwame to be worlds better than what he is. It happens. It could happen to Darko, too.

So really from what I can see, Detroit doesn't have a whole lot to brag about. And in the end it’s really a matter of perceptions; a different point of view.

Van Excel, Barry, Finley, Horry. You know what you're going to get with these guys and it's not that they are going to get any younger. The only difference between our bench and your bench more than simply AGE is the Spurs aren't counting on our guys to develop and mature. There done. Cooked to perfection. We are playing guys who want to feast at the banquet NOW, not later.

HOWEVER

That doesn't mean the Spurs are blind to the future. As much as you'd like to discount our young prospects with our history..YOU CAN'T.

Luis Scola..I'm sure you've heard of him. I don't know if he'll ever wear the silver and black but he sure gives me a lot of confidence in the Spurs ability to pick outstanding foreign players (as if I needed more proof!).

We've got quite a few developing--not on our BENCH or in the NBDL but where I would argue is better. Playing on their Euro teams competing, improving defense and getting better on offense.

This is what the Spurs understand. You can have all the talent in the world riding your bench but if the guy never gets an opportunity to play it doesn't matter. You can't develop a contributing player in practice. He needs minutes.

None of our young player would get those minutes. Sean Marks doesn't need those minutes. Ford would have and it wouldn't have been fair to sign him. Sean is well liked and is a great team mate, well worth his $1million salary for what he does off the court.

As for salary cap and luxury taxes and such. You're right. The Spurs will be over the cap and MIGHT go into luxury territory. There are things that could change that and when you are a team as fiscally responsible as the Spurs you have to expect that they'll make moves for that reason.

The Pistons will be in the same position. Soon. No great team with plans to keep their core in tact can escape that. It's inevitable. Like a Spurs/Pistons final in 2006!

[clubalien]

keep in mmind what makes SPurs great recently has been big man

we have had David then tim and next we will have david reborn and one of the best buig man ever in ian mahmi

so once tim is in declin which he is. he isn;t as good as he used to be. he cannot even hit a bank shot to save hise life anymore. we soon will have ian to save us once again

[boutons_]

"makes SPurs great"

... has been defense. and What makes the Spurs so ordinary now is lack of defense, esp in the paint, and defensive rebounding.

[ducks]

better fix the spur problems now then in june

[JamStone]

There have been a lot of great posts on this subject by many of you Spurs fans. Look, I was just stating an opinion. None of us can predict what's going to happen this summer, much less in a few years, so a lot of things can change. I was just expressing an opinion.

For the record, I didn't even bring up the Detroit Pistons. It was one of the less civil Spurs fans who had to make a snide remark about the Spurs having a brighter future that even spurred on the involvement and comparison of the Detroit Pistons' bench.

Spurs fans should have a lot of confidence in the management, scouting, and financial supervision of the Spurs basketball team. But, you can't ignore that there are some future problems this team will face, especially financially with respect to the salary cap. And, maybe all of the Spurs' international prospects will turn out to be studs. It wouldn't be completely surprising. But, there is no guarantee of that either.

My initial post was not intended to be a smack talking articulation of why I think "my team is better than your team." I don't even believe that to be true. I think the two teams are comparable if not equal. My initial post simply was pointing at some future problems the Spurs will face as soon as two seasons from now with respect to assembling a competitive team with the salary cap restrictions the organization will face, prior to the 2008-09 season. And, I was definitely pointing out the unenviable task of replacing key players to this current Spurs' team who may be past their prime, retired, or not good enough to continue to contribute by then.

Hey, if the Spurs somehow find a way to stay one of the elite teams in the NBA for the rest of Tim Duncan's career, more power to them and to you Spurs fans. I think it will be more difficult than some of you believe.

Any way we can archive this thread so that in the summer of 2008 we can revisit this? It will be very interesting to see how accurate all of our forecasts are by then.

[ChumpDumper]

Well, if you look at the rosters for each of the championship teams, there's only one constant. I think the Spurs have been blessed to have a player who might be the easiest to build a team around ever. I used to get scared shitless by the holes in our roster every summer, but every summer they get filled by quality players.

Here's hoping a Pistons/Spurs rivalry will bore the rest of the country for years to come.

[Vashner]

NUKE ALL DOUBTERS

BOOM..... incoming shockwave you BEEEPers!!! (insert scene of Lt Dan on boat)..

[Marcus Bryant]

The Spurs' Big 3 are all under 30 yrs old. Decline?

PS...Championships are not won in December.

[SequSpur]

Eastern Conference > San Antonio Spurs.

[5ToolMan]

Anyone who thinks the Spurs are in decline is seriously uninformed or in denial. I can understand the press wishfull thinking, as it would allow them to throw more ink the way of their media sweathearts and big market teams.

But lets get real.

The Spurs core of Duncan, Manu and Tony are the core of the team. They as a group are very young, very healthy in terms of serious injury, and they are simply the three best combination of players on any one team in the NBA.

The press, at least those many who don't really follow or understand the game in general or the Spurs in particular, and the clueless fans who parrot trash that is spewed are way off base here. Yes, Tim and Manu have had some nagging injuries. And yes, these "injuries" have combined to slow down the assimulation of three new regulars into the Spurs rotation since last years playoffs. But if you know the Spurs, you also know that Pop is more interested in working his system into the entire team, all of who may contribute in the playoffs, than he is in squeezing out a single victory in November or December.

Once Pop has his system working, his rotation set and the players he wants healthy, the Spurs will again be the cream rising to the top of the NBA when it counts.

Pop and RC are also light years ahead of the rest of the NBA is locating and stashing future NBA level players. They have 2 stars and a solid young future point on their current roster. In addition, they have drafted or recuited other talent into the league such as Bell, Giriceck and Barbosa. And, they have four potential future players developing in Europe, at least three of whom would be lottery picks in past and/or future drafts if the Spurs did not have them tied up.

They can bring them in for peanuts if they want them and need them, like they did with Parker and Manu. Or they can trade them for more established players with expiring contracts, or future picks like they did with Giriceck and Barbosa. A core of Duncan, Manu and Parker will make it easy to plug in 2 - 4 new players per year over the next few years and still be ready to compete after an 82+ game warmup as Pop will have.

The question to the Spurs championship level future will only come after seeing what is on the table after Duncan and Manu have left the building for good.

[5ToolMan]

Eastern Conference > San Antonio Spurs.

Chicken Little is braver than SequSpur. :smokin

[SequSpur]

Chicken Little is braver than SequSpur. :smokin

SequSpur > Yo Momma.

[Man In Black]

From what I understand, Chicken Little is TALLER than SequSpur.

[5ToolMan]

SequSpur > Yo Momma.


Your momma is so fat; When she goes for a swim in the ocean, the wales blow "We are family". :elephant

[SequSpur]

From what I understand, Chicken Little is TALLER than SequSpur.

blow me

[Parkersgirl9]

No. I think we are just getting started. I have a good feeling we are repeating this year, and we still will win a few more c-ships in the future. This team is way to good. Tim isn't old and Manu isn't old yet, Tony is very young, and he is picking it up for Manu and Duncan for now. But when all 3 are healthy and going strong, I don't thimk anyone can beat us.

[Mr. Defense]

the pistons are very strong. they won't go down easy. as a matter of fact...it went down to the 4th quarter last year and it will be EVEN TOUGHER this year. thw Spurs need to get stronger on D and win some games. It's early, but the pistons are hungry for home court.

[Walton Buys Off Me]

Duncan's a bitch and often goes down like he's been shot because someone tapped his elbow or something- everyone knows that. Ginobili, however is the furthest thing from the Vince Carter-Chris Webber-Tim Duncan type player. Duncan isn't injured at all, it's just Pop's way of protecting his dying horse. Manu will be fine come playoff time and lead us to another title- like he did last year.

[ChumpDumper]

Duncan isn't injured at all
http://www.walpoletimes.com/images/archive%20pics/Welch.jpg
You've done enough. Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?

[Rummpd]

All the talk about the Spurs age somewhat negates the fact that both Wallace's - still the heart and soul of that team, are over 30.

[JamStone]

All the talk about the Spurs age somewhat negates the fact that both Wallace's - still the heart and soul of that team, are over 30.


Why?

[naveah27]

Why?


Cause players get better over 30? :angel

[Rummpd]

There is nothing wrong with having a mature team - the league is filled with losing teams filled with young athletic players with "potential".

[angel_luv]

No!