Screw 2008.

[Marcus Bryant]

You have perhaps 4 seasons left in the career of the greatest player ever to don the Silver & Black. Why must we settle for a less than optimal supporting cast until then? Surely the Spurs don't believe that TD would leave in '08?

You keep TD by showing a commitment to winning. Now.

[T Park]

Get out the scratch fixing fluid.

The record is still skipping.

[Marcus Bryant]

Why am I not surprised that TPark still plays vinyl?

[T Park]

Why am I not suprised youd keep saying the same things over and over.

For some reason you feel the need to pick up where Ghostwriter has retired and left off.

[Marcus Bryant]

Wax on, wax off, Danielson.

[Das Texan]

wtf?


he is back?


this team could use a mark bryant on it.

[timvp]

You have perhaps 4 seasons left in the career of the greatest player ever to don the Silver & Black. Why must we settle for a less than optimal supporting cast until then? Surely the Spurs don't believe that TD would leave in '08?

You keep TD by showing a commitment to winning. Now.

That's what I don't get, also. The Spurs are making moves to create cap room in the summer of 2009 or whatever it is ... but why?

The Big Three is in its prime right now. Duncan and Manu have nowhere to go but down. Now is the time you try to win. Not three seasons from now.

And it'd be different if cap room ever did anything for this team. The Spurs always strike out and settle for giving too much money to a player who doesn't deserve it. And nowadays, it's a lot harder to sign free-agents and there are many more restrictions.

The Spurs need to worry about winning today. If that means taking on a contract that extends past Duncan's playing time, so be it. You have maybe two more prime seasons for the Big Three. Don't waste that planning for 2011.

[Marco]

Agree with Marcus and LJ.

[Fillmoe]

in 08 timmy wont even be much of a factor anymore..... he wearing down faster than a aging hooker

[TDMVPDPOY]

i rather win now, then later, who knows what heppens down teh road....

[Bruno]

The trouble with the 08 plan is that I don't see who Spurs can sign. When I look at 08' FAs either :
- They aren't good enough to get more than the MLE (no need to be under the cap in this case).
- They are bad fit for Spurs.
- They will be too expensive for the few cap space available for SPurs.
- They are restricted.
- They are old.

The only good FA I've found is Trevor Ariza and it's not even sure he will get more than the MLE. If there aren't good FAs, the 08 plan sucks.

[VaSpursFan]

And it'd be different if cap room ever did anything for this team. The Spurs always strike out and settle for giving too much money to a player who doesn't deserve it. And nowadays, it's a lot harder to sign free-agents and there are many more restrictions.

The Spurs need to worry about winning today. If that means taking on a contract that extends past Duncan's playing time, so be it. You have maybe two more prime seasons for the Big Three. Don't waste that planning for 2011.

fantastic insight. i feel the same way. i cringe every time i hear about the spurs clearing cap room because it's fool's gold. they never get the player they target. which means most FA have a problem with coming to SA when they're in their prime. We tend to end up with the old farts in the twilight of their career chasing a championship.

RC/pop need to change their operating model, be innovative and forward thinking. the only way this team gets top players in their prime is through trades. we have to start targeting talent and trading for it. otherwise, we're gonna have a shitload of cap room and nothing to do with it.

[SenorSpur]

Great thread. I have thought the very same thing.

In the immortal words of one Mike Tyson "It's Ludicrous"

[nkdlunch]

I really think Spurs office either overestimated our big 3 or underestimated the rest of the league especially the Mavs or both. They basically fell asleep and listened too much to Charles Barkley who's been saying for 3 years in a row that we are almost a lock to win it all.

Guess what, our big 3 are still that good, but the supporting cast has actually gotten greatly worse and the rest of the league has gotten much better. Not to mention the way the officiating has changed which doesn't help the Spurs.

Well there is really nothing anybody can do at this point. We all must just hope our big 3 can carry us all the way, and if they do, they will be superheroes in my book. because it's looking very tough.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

It's not a dumb idea to be stuck on 2008 if you're thinking about selling the team.

But if you're not, then it's fucking stupid.

[AFBlue]

Because the front office doesn't want their organization to go in the dumpster after 2010. You know there IS going to be life after TD and Manu, right? It's called a long-term plan. Vision.

With the cap money in '08 the Spurs can afford to go after a big-name free agent or get two or three complimentary players to work alongside Parker, who will be the franchise cornerstone in two or three years.

[Mr. Body]

I'm not sure how much cap room they can clear in 2008. Looking at hoops hype it's not much. What, like $8M?

Oh, and PHAT TONY, I don't think Tony Parker will ever be a franchise cornerstone. He's not a franchise player, never will be.

[T Park]

It's not a dumb idea to be stuck on 2008 if you're thinking about selling the team.


As cool as that would be, I just don't know of anyone of worth in SA, that would want to heap tons of money into em, and keep em here.

[T Park]

He's not a franchise player, never will be.

I can see how at 23 you can make that distinction.

[wildbill2u]

All of this talk presupposes there is a plan for 2008. But suppose there isn't a plan at all?

Perhaps the plan was that with the addition of Finley Barry and the usual (suspect) supporting cast, the Big three would be good enough to win it all or be in serious contention for the next few years without major additions.

At this point it looks like a miscalculation because Dallas and Phoenix appear to have gotten better. But the current team will have to play out the year(s) because we really don't have much to offer anyone in trade.

And all our young players are serious projects rather than 'can't miss' talents--including those guys in Europe.

[SequSpur]

I am not sure the Spurs will be here in 2008.

[timvp]

Because the front office doesn't want their organization to go in the dumpster after 2010. You know there IS going to be life after TD and Manu, right? It's called a long-term plan. Vision.

It's called it's time to tank until the Spurs can land another franchise bigman. When Tim and Manu are done, they aren't going to pull some magical free agents out of the ocean, plug them next to Tony and continue to win championships.

I don't know if Spurs fans realize how hard it is to win an NBA championship. Hell, I don't even know if the Spurs realize that themselves. The time is now. In 2008 or 2011 or whatever, the ship will have sailed. It will be time to trade TP for younger prospects and draft picks and start over. Sad but true.

Spurs fans have between 2 and 5 good years left. After that, get used to mediocrity for a few decades. And no cap room would change that.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Because the front office doesn't want their organization to go in the dumpster after 2010. You know there IS going to be life after TD and Manu, right? It's called a long-term plan. Vision.



So, the long-term plan is to say fuck it for the rest of the Tim Duncan era so you can have a quality team in 2010?

Bullshit. I don't think our management is that stupid, though it's evident at least one person is.

[Marcus Bryant]

Why are we worried about 2010?

[Mr. Body]

Spurs fans have between 2 and 5 good years left. After that, get used to mediocrity for a few decades. And no cap room would change that.

Do they have more than 1 year left? If they lose to the Mavericks in the postseason, do you really see them beating them a year from now?

[ShoogarBear]

You have perhaps 4 seasons left in the career of the greatest player ever to don the Silver & Black. Why must we settle for a less than optimal supporting cast until then? Surely the Spurs don't believe that TD would leave in '08?

You keep TD by showing a commitment to winning. Now.Who are you?

[SequSpur]

Who are they going to get now? They have no money, they have no assets to trade... WTF? Maggette blows. Who the hell were they supposed to sign? Bonzi Wells? They obviously did what they could... Signed 2 shitty 3rd string centers from lottery teams, picked up an shitty backup pg from Kansas, traded Rasho for a redhead and a has been... Shit, that might be the best thing they have done in years... Got damn, what are they supposed to do? The talent pool is so watered down, players like Beno getting a fukkin extension... WTF? over.

[Mr. Body]

Wow, I've never been annoyed by SequSpur before. I feel like I've moved up a notch.

[MannyIsGod]

All of this talk presupposes there is a plan for 2008. But suppose there isn't a plan at all?

Perhaps the plan was that with the addition of Finley Barry and the usual (suspect) supporting cast, the Big three would be good enough to win it all or be in serious contention for the next few years without major additions.

At this point it looks like a miscalculation because Dallas and Phoenix appear to have gotten better. But the current team will have to play out the year(s) because we really don't have much to offer anyone in trade.

And all our young players are serious projects rather than 'can't miss' talents--including those guys in Europe.I think you're right.

[ShoogarBear]

The plan is a business plan, not a winning plan.

In 2008, the Spurs will probably have their highest book value ever. With low salaries on the books, that would be the time for Holt to sell his shares for maximum profit.

[baseline bum]

The plan is a business plan, not a winning plan.

In 2008, the Spurs will probably have their highest book value ever. With low salaries on the books, that would be the time for Holt to sell his shares for maximum profit.

Great... so the plan is to piss away the end of Duncan's prime so that we can have the Anaheim Spurs in 2008-09.

[adidas11]

Free agency in this day and age is fool's gold, in my opinion. When was the last time a team catupulted themselves into championship contention via free agency? The last one that I can think of is Shaq back in 1996. Any of the big FA's in the 2000's almost always re-sign with their current team. (Webber, Kidd, Duncan, etc).

The only way to do it otherwise is through the draft, or through trades.

The Spurs tried the FA route a few years back, with Jason Kidd. If they were EVER going to land a superstar FA to come to San Antonio, that was the year. And it didn't happen, because financially, Kidd was still better off staying with New Jersey. Thank that to the current CBA.

And a player like Duncan comes only once or twice in a generation. Very players in the league, and in the foreseeable future, can literally move a team into championship contention on their own.

[ShoogarBear]

Great... so the plan is to piss away the end of Duncan's prime so that we can have the Anaheim Spurs in 2008-09.That would work out well for you.

[ShoogarBear]

From a business standpoint, would the owners make any more money if they win another championship with Tim?

Perhaps incrementally, but not as much as they could make by selling a still-successful team with a low payroll, even if they never see the Finals again.

[baseline bum]

That would work out well for you.

Fuck that. I would drop the Spurs if they ever left San Antonio. I'd become Clipper fan or something. :(

[timvp]

The plan is a business plan, not a winning plan.

In 2008, the Spurs will probably have their highest book value ever. With low salaries on the books, that would be the time for Holt to sell his shares for maximum profit.

That was my theory after the Rasho trade when the 2008 plan really began. Holt is going to sell for like 10 times profit while the basktball in the next two years pays the price.

The Spurs trade for Maggette and the value of the franchice probably takes a 10% hit.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

It's not a dumb idea to be stuck on 2008 if you're thinking about selling the team.

But if you're not, then it's fucking stupid.

:lol I was trying to be at least a little bit cryptic back on page 1 with this.

It's the only thing that makes sense though, sad to say. And to that, I say fuck you, Peter Holt.

[Das Texan]

That was my theory after the Rasho trade when the 2008 plan really began. Holt is going to sell for like 10 times profit while the basktball in the next two years pays the price.

The Spurs trade for Maggette and the value of the franchice probably takes a 10% hit.


Holt sells with this team remaining here (which they should)

and at least we can hopefully end this fucking Holt-ing pattern.

[ShoogarBear]

Holt sells with this team remaining here (which they should)

and at least we can hopefully end this fucking Holt-ing pattern.Problem is, like everyone's been saying, once Duncan leaves it won't really matter who owns or runs the team.

Unless lightening hits a third time.

[Das Texan]

Problem is, like everyone's been saying, once Duncan leaves it won't really matter who owns or runs the team.

Unless lightening hits a third time.



Stranger things have happened.

[ShoogarBear]

Maybe newly-named Commissioner Sean Elliott will help us out.

[Amuseddaysleeper]

This is a fantastic thread and I never gave this scenario much consideration until now.


But, as some of you also may see it, I think the team is looking for longetivity and being a top 10 team for the next 10 years as oppose to a top 3/championship lock team for the next 2 years.

I'm assuming though, as mentioned earlier, that SA's front office didn't expect the Mavs and Suns to blossom the way they have, and didn't expect us to age as quickly as we have almost playing catch up to the other NBA's elite.....or West Elite anyway (is there such thing as an eastern elite this year or is that an oxymoron?).

However, as a fan, I completely agree with LJ and Marcus

Fuck 2008 onward, our time is now

[slayermin]

Fuck that. I would drop the Spurs if they ever left San Antonio. I'd become Clipper fan or something. :(

Me too. Maybe you, Russ, and I could get tickets together. But if we do, we need to kick that dudes ass who yells "Let's go Clippers! Let's Go!"

That fucker is irritating as hell.

[T Park]

As I sit here updating the IPOD I realized something Marcus and others "demanded" during the summer, if ownership wasn't going to go into the red for the roster.

"Sell the team"

If they do that, they satisfy their wishes.

So lets say Holt is doing so, so now, satisfying what you wanted in the first place back in July, is now not what to do?


I see.

[JPB]

Because the front office doesn't want their organization to go in the dumpster after 2010. You know there IS going to be life after TD and Manu, right? It's called a long-term plan. Vision.

With the cap money in '08 the Spurs can afford to go after a big-name free agent or get two or three complimentary players to work alongside Parker, who will be the franchise cornerstone in two or three years.

Agree.
That's part of the FO job : long term vision, anticipating the future. Sure it ain't easy to be successfull now and secure the future but it doesn't mean sacrify the next decade to try to win maybe one more title wich is always uncertain, unpredictable (one rebound, one foul...)

People wants eveything now but they'd be happy in few years if spurs could still be an elite team.
Besides, I don't see why, like many people seem to think, Spurs would necessarilly had to go down and become a 0.500 team or worth after duncan retires. you don't know what can happen (who knew about TP and Manu before they came and change the Spurs).

It's up to the FO to plan that.

[Gummi]

What's the problem guys? Some guys post like we're a damn lottery team with no history of winning. We've only won three titles in the last 8 seasons. Give the front office some props.

There's no '08 plan. We have our "big three" under contract until 2010. The front office will surround Tim, Tony, and Manu with solid role players like they've always done. The current team is good enough to win the title this year. Our record is great and we're on course to finish in the top 3 in the West and we'll be the team to beat along with Dallas, just like last season.

Please fans. Don't act like we're the Charlotte Bobcats. We're a great team with one of the best players to have played the game, great supporting cast and a great coach. Our front office will find a way to keep the Spurs a winning team, at least until Duncan retires. That's a fact.

[Amuseddaysleeper]

What's the problem guys? Some guys post like we're a damn lottery team with no history of winning. We've only won three titles in the last 8 seasons. Give the front office some props.

There's no '08 plan. We have our "big three" under contract until 2010. The front office will surround Tim, Tony, and Manu with solid role players like they've always done. The current team is good enough to win the title this year. Our record is great and we're on course to finish in the top 3 in the West and we'll be the team to beat along with Dallas, just like last season.

Please fans. Don't act like we're the Charlotte Bobcats. We're a great team with one of the best players to have played the game, great supporting cast and a great coach. Our front office will find a way to keep the Spurs a winning team, at least until Duncan retires. That's a fact.

No, they aren't at all

Hence all the worry

[T Park]

In your opinion.

Wich is typically wild and panicky and totally full of it.

[AFBlue]

I'm not sure how much cap room they can clear in 2008. Looking at hoops hype it's not much. What, like $8M?

Oh, and PHAT TONY, I don't think Tony Parker will ever be a franchise cornerstone. He's not a franchise player, never will be.

By franchise player I mean key offensive weapon and point of emphasis for opponents' defense. It doesn't mean I think he can get it done on his own, but if he has one solid big to play off of, he'll be great. You also can't deny that this kid has not only stayed consistent, but also IMPROVED his game every year that he's been in this league. There's hardly an answer for him defensively right now, and at this pace in a year or two their won't be one at all.

I'm not sure what you judge to be a "franchise" player, but if it's not what I just listed above, then I don't know what it is...

[Marcus Bryant]

There is going to be a significant drop off once TD is gone. Once he is the team will be in rebuilding mode so there will be more than enough time to endure a couple of bad contracts or whatever. The Spurs do have some tradeable assets outside of their big 3, especially if they are willing to take back a deal with 3+ years left on it.

[AFBlue]

It's called it's time to tank until the Spurs can land another franchise bigman. When Tim and Manu are done, they aren't going to pull some magical free agents out of the ocean, plug them next to Tony and continue to win championships.

I don't know if Spurs fans realize how hard it is to win an NBA championship. Hell, I don't even know if the Spurs realize that themselves. The time is now. In 2008 or 2011 or whatever, the ship will have sailed. It will be time to trade TP for younger prospects and draft picks and start over. Sad but true.

Spurs fans have between 2 and 5 good years left. After that, get used to mediocrity for a few decades. And no cap room would change that.

That's a pretty cynical take on the future of the Spurs. One that I disagree with, mainly because Tony Parker is still here and young.

There will be no need to trade him for prospects if some of the prospects work out. I'm not saying the Spurs FO will strike gold every time, but they have a decent record of judging talent. Of Scola, Butler, Mahinmi, Javtokas, White, and whomever the Spurs get in 07/08 drafts, some of those prospects have to work out, right? You're not that pessimistic about the Spurs drafts are you? Then there's the cap space. Relax man, the Spurs may not be champions every year, but if the Spurs play it right, they can be in the conversation even AFTER Tim and Manu's decline.

[AFBlue]

There is going to be a significant drop off once TD is gone. Once he is the team will be in rebuilding mode so there will be more than enough time to endure a couple of bad contracts or whatever. The Spurs do have some tradeable assets outside of their big 3, especially if they are willing to take back a deal with 3+ years left on it.

Why? Why does there have to be a significant drop-off? Why do fans consistenly doubt Tony's ability to take his game to the next level, to lead a team, to be the focus of defenses? He's 24 yrs old and has improved every year in this league.

[AFBlue]

All of this talk presupposes there is a plan for 2008. But suppose there isn't a plan at all?

Perhaps the plan was that with the addition of Finley Barry and the usual (suspect) supporting cast, the Big three would be good enough to win it all or be in serious contention for the next few years without major additions.

At this point it looks like a miscalculation because Dallas and Phoenix appear to have gotten better. But the current team will have to play out the year(s) because we really don't have much to offer anyone in trade.

And all our young players are serious projects rather than 'can't miss' talents--including those guys in Europe.

The Spurs can make a minor/short-term trade to shore up one of their problems w/o sacraficing the future cap space and prospects. Williams' contract can net a rebounder (Ely?) or backup PG (Boykins?). If neither deal gets done, Pop is just going to have to motivate guys like Horry, Finley, Barry, and Bowen to give it one last push before they start to collect social security and let the chips fall where they will. The Spurs are capable of playing lockdown defense and shooting lights-out from 3pt. They just have to have a fire lit under their asses. Not saying they're gonna win as presently constructed, but it IS possible.

EDIT: On the topic of "projects". I'd hardly call Scola a project. That kid could come over next year and start alongside Duncan. With him, Butler, and Mahinmi as potential bigs for the future, one of them should work out for the long term. On the wing there's White, and then the matter of four potential picks in what might be the deepest draft of this century....I wouldn't count the Spurs out just yet.

[AFBlue]

So, the long-term plan is to say fuck it for the rest of the Tim Duncan era so you can have a quality team in 2010?

Bullshit. I don't think our management is that stupid, though it's evident at least one person is.

Dude did you take the sig out on purpose? That's just wrong! :lol

I think you missed the point. The Spurs shouldn't just "stand pat", but they also shouldn't make rash decisions based on a half-season of less-than-stellar play against top echelon teams. Those rash decisions could condemn any chance of a future post-Duncan.

I see you're point, and TIMVPs and a bunch of others on this thread. You don't want the Spurs to remain idle because of the possibility to contend 5 years down the road when the opportunity to win is staring them in the face. But getting (insert name here) doesn't guarantee anything.

Basically, my point of view is that we could be sitting here in summer of '08 saying "Damn, I can't believe we took on ______ contract, blew our chances of getting ______ this summer, and STILL didn't win a championship the past two years."

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

I think you missed the point. The Spurs shouldn't just "stand pat", but they also shouldn't make rash decisions based on a half-season of less-than-stellar play against top echelon teams. Those rash decisions could condemn any chance of a future post-Duncan.

There's nothing rash about adding Maggette. He's a better player than either Barry or Beno, he'd be our #2 rebounder the moment he stepped foot on the court, and his contract is up at the same time as Brent and Beno's would have been.

We have nine (9) players on our team over the age of 30. We need to get younger. I think it's fairly evident that the youth in Dallas and Phoenix is our achilles heel.

In the past, it typically took a playoff beat down for Pop to get the picture and make changes. And yet that happened, and we did little this off-season outside of signing some project bigs.

Cap space in '08 is fool's gold, the Spurs should have already figured that out from past failed pursuits of Kidd, O'Neal, Webber, etc. They need to make moves through the draft and/or trades.

You've got a team willing to send us a younger perimeter player that is actually pretty good at rebounding and FT shooting in exchange for arguably two of our worst rotation players (come playoff time).

What's the hold up?

It's ridiculous, and a downright insult to the city of SA, Spurs fans, and everyone currently on the team if they are going to sit on their hands for the rest of the Tim Duncan era. That's pathetic.

I agree that getting (insert name here) doesn't guarantee anything, but I can guarantee that us standing pat with this current squad guarantees no ring. Not this year, not the rest of Tim's career, unless some changes are made.

As much as Pop talks about Tim being his guy and all that crap, Pop is doing nothing but selling Duncan out if they are going to go down this road of cap space in '08 (which is probably to sell the team).

[AFBlue]

No, they aren't at all

Hence all the worry

Fans worry.

The front office is "concerned." But the reason the Spurs are hesitant to make rash moves is because they understand that the Spurs are still in the discussion. I'm not saying the Spurs won't make a move, just that you're "at all" is a bit of an overreaction.

[Gummi]

Aggie Hoopsfan! Dallas's youth is killing us so much that we've lost two games against them by a combined 8 points. We lost a series against them last season which could've gone either way, esp. that Game 7. If that's killing us, then I'm clueless.

And Phoenix, we've played them once this season and we won. Last time we played them in the playoffs we nearly swept them and their killer youth.

Remember folks, experience beats youth in sports, that's a proven fact. Although, too old is never a good thing in sports.

This current Spurs team is good enough to eliminate both Dallas and Phoenix in a playoff series. No need to panic in January. Let's panic if the Spurs are 44-38 after 82 games.

[AFBlue]

There's nothing rash about adding Maggette. He's a better player than either Barry or Beno, he'd be our #2 rebounder the moment he stepped foot on the court, and his contract is up at the same time as Brent and Beno's would have been.

We have nine (9) players on our team over the age of 30. We need to get younger. I think it's fairly evident that the youth in Dallas and Phoenix is our achilles heel.

In the past, it typically took a playoff beat down for Pop to get the picture and make changes. And yet that happened, and we did little this off-season outside of signing some project bigs.

Cap space in '08 is fool's gold, the Spurs should have already figured that out from past failed pursuits of Kidd, O'Neal, Webber, etc. They need to make moves through the draft and/or trades.

You've got a team willing to send us a younger perimeter player that is actually pretty good at rebounding and FT shooting in exchange for arguably two of our worst rotation players (come playoff time).

What's the hold up?

It's ridiculous, and a downright insult to the city of SA, Spurs fans, and everyone currently on the team if they are going to sit on their hands for the rest of the Tim Duncan era. That's pathetic.

I agree that getting (insert name here) doesn't guarantee anything, but I can guarantee that us standing pat with this current squad guarantees no ring. Not this year, not the rest of Tim's career, unless some changes are made.

As much as Pop talks about Tim being his guy and all that crap, Pop is doing nothing but selling Duncan out if they are going to go down this road of cap space in '08 (which is probably to sell the team).

I'm actually a proponent of the Maggette trade, because of his reasonable contract and potential short-term meaning to this team offensively. But you're making two assumptions:

1. The Clips will pull the trigger on Barry + Beno OR Bonner with no draft picks included.

2. Maggette will opt out of his $7M+ contract in summer '08.

Those are two big assumptions.

On the first assumption, my hesitation, and I think the Spurs share it, is giving up a different prospect and/or '07 draft picks.

On the second assumption, if he comes in and plays spectacularly then he'll opt out for sure. But, if he's a dissapointment and injury-prone, he could take the guaranteed $7M+ and chill on the bench at which point his contract becomes an Eric Williams-type deal (much less valuable) and the Spurs miss out on significant cap space.

Not sure if those things happen, but they could. And it's worth taking the time to evaluate the risks...

BTW, there's no need to call me stupid, just because I've got a different point of view.

[Mr. Body]

I'm actually a proponent of the Maggette trade, because of his reasonable contract and potential short-term meaning to this team offensively. But you're making two assumptions:

1. The Clips will pull the trigger on Barry + Beno OR Bonner with no draft picks included.

2. Maggette will opt out of his $7M+ contract in summer '08.

Those are two big assumptions.


The smartest post on the Maggette situation. There is absolutely no indication the Clippers would have done the Barry/Udrih trade without a first round pick. That pick could have been a future first, but by all accounts the Clippers were asking for THREE things.

And insisting that Maggette will opt out of his contract in the summer of '08 is ludicrous.

[rascal]

Agree with Marcus Bryant. I've been saying this for a couple years now. The spurs cannot just stand pat because they won a couple years back or lost a close series to Dallas. The other teams won't stay the same and will improve and pass them out with more talent.

Many here did not want many changes and felt the spurs would be good enough to keep the roster basically the same with the exception of a minor change or two but now you are seeing how that thinking was not smart.

Duncan Parker and Manu with not much else around them will not be enough and it will be like the Gervin years all over again for Duncan, good regular season records but not good enough to get to another championship. Then spurs need to try to win as many as they can while duncan is in his prime because the opportunity will close fast after he is no longer a top player in the league.

[wildbill2u]

Tim is not "in his prime" as his numbers have steadily declined over the past few years. He is no longer the dominant PF in the league. Good, but not dominant.

You could say his stats are down because he now has two stalwart sidekicks who take up the slack, but anyone looking at his play knows it has deteriorated. We wouldn't be even a playoff team without their play.

He can still have great moments, and I pray he does so in the playoffs, but he's clearly not the Duncan of 1999 or 2003.

[z0sa]

uh, I beg to differ. Tim is still in his prime, hes just bored of the regular season. Big men have their prime in their 30's.

[MannyIsGod]

God damn. Marcus might as well walk around Times Square with a sandwich board that says the world ends in 2008. Its the same old story with the bitching about it.

In a perfect world, the only goals the Spurs had would revolve around doing what it takes to win a championship. But the reality is that this is a small market with a limited source of incoming funds. And don't forget that Holt is not the sole owner in this franchise. It is an ownership group. That we've had a 3 championships to date and that we're still in the hunt for more is a damn good thing. But when you're dealing with a business of this nature then I can't really fault the ownership for trying to maintain flexibility in the long term.

You don't have to like it. Most of us don't. But it is what it is. The fact is that this franchise will never be run on a strictly basketball basis and money will always play a factor. We're not the NYK, and that self control is probably a good thing with more positive results than negative results. If you think about it, its a lot harder to get out of the mistakes you make when you sign a bad contract, than it is to fix the mistakes you make when you pass on a player.

[Marcus Bryant]

Fuck settling.

[Amuseddaysleeper]

In your opinion.

Wich is typically wild and panicky and totally full of it.


T Park, this current roster isn't getting it done


We don't need to blow up the team or do any sort of major overhaul, but a trade is definitely in order.

Granted, it's still January, this team is still a step or two behind Dallas


and unless you're satisfied with a 2nd round exit, we'll need to add another piece

[ShoogarBear]

You are given two options:

1. The San Antonio Spurs will be an elite (top 5) team over the next decade, but never win a championship.

2. The San Antonio Spurs will have a 33% chance of winning at least one championship over the next three years, and then will be mediocre for the next seven.

Assume these are the only options available. Which one would you take?

[Amuseddaysleeper]

You are given two options:

1. The San Antonio Spurs will be an elite (top 5) team over the next decade, but never win a championship.

2. The San Antonio Spurs will have a 33% chance of winning at least one championship over the next three years, and then will be mediocre for the next seven.

Assume these are the only options available. Which one would you take?


That's exactly what I was saying in my 2nd from last post

I go for 1 championship in the next 3 years, and tur to mediocrity as oppose to 10 seasons of being a top 5 team that always comes up short after strong expectations

[Mr. Body]

You are given two options:

1. The San Antonio Spurs will be an elite (top 5) team over the next decade, but never win a championship.

2. The San Antonio Spurs will have a 33% chance of winning at least one championship over the next three years, and then will be mediocre for the next seven.

Assume these are the only options available. Which one would you take?

The front office may see it more this way:

1. The San Antonio Spurs will be a top team (top 5-10) over the next decade, maybe or maybe not competing for a championship but likely competing for playoffs.

2. The San Antonio Spurs bankroll a fairly risky run for the championship in the next 2 years while sacrificing long-term flexibility, risking a big fall and lottery teams in the next 3-5 years, therefore raising the specter of decreased fan interest and the need to sell or move the team.

Not that I see it that way, but that the front office perhaps does. They are thinking of operations down the road. Would you risk the team having to relocate for a slightly better chance at a championship this year?

[Ed Helicopter Jones]

The front office may see it more this way:

1. The San Antonio Spurs will be a top team (top 5-10) over the next decade, maybe or maybe not competing for a championship but likely competing for playoffs.

2. The San Antonio Spurs bankroll a fairly risky run for the championship in the next 2 years while sacrificing long-term flexibility, risking a big fall and lottery teams in the next 3-5 years, therefore raising the specter of decreased fan interest and the need to sell or move the team.

Not that I see it that way, but that the front office perhaps does. They are thinking of operations down the road. Would you risk the team having to relocate for a slightly better chance at a championship this year?


I agree with this. The only thing with the Spurs, call it luck, good management, or both, is that when this team has been down it's never lasted too long. The lag between the George Gervin era and the David Robinson era is the only down time in the franchise's history.

I don't see 7 years of frustration in the Spurs future even if they decided to go for it now.

[BeerIsGood!]

The question for the fan is:

Do you really want to watch a team that doesn't have the chance to win a championship? Do Spurs fans really want to become Texas Rangers fans - cheering for a team that is decent but never great year in and year out? I'd rather the Spurs strive for greatness now, then tank about 3 or 4 years in a row and see what hotshot HS or college kids come along to rebuild off of. Or we could become the Boston Celtics...

[rascal]

The spurs have done nothing in acquiring good talent through a trade in years. The couple of trades they managed to pull off, the players lasted not more than a year or so. And forget about waiting on getting top free agents. The spurs don't have a good track record there either.

They have drafted well and are living solely on their drafts and the lottery luck to get the 1'st pick when Duncan was available. There have been many good players that have been traded the last few years and the spurs haven't managed to get anyone other then over the hill types or unproven projects or players they give up on after one year.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Gummi

Aggie Hoopsfan! Dallas's youth is killing us so much that we've lost two games against them by a combined 8 points. We lost a series against them last season which could've gone either way, esp. that Game 7. If that's killing us, then I'm clueless.

Are we playing horseshoes, or basketball? A loss is a loss. Saying we're close is fool's gold. It's the same stupid ass fool's gold logic that our front office used this past summer.

Dallas is *improving*. Avery is in Pop's head. And they've got the confidence of knowing they can come into the SBC and win games that matter.

Maybe it'll take us getting our asses handed to us three times, kinda like the Lakers did, for some folks (including the front office) to get a fucking clue...



And Phoenix, we've played them once this season and we won. Last time we played them in the playoffs we nearly swept them and their killer youth.


Same thing, they've improved, and in the playoffs they'd be peaking. Amare is still just getting back.



Remember folks, experience beats youth in sports, that's a proven fact. Although, too old is never a good thing in sports.


Experience beats youth? Sure didn't help us out when Terry Porter was falling on his ass and we were getting beat by a bunch of young Lakers surrounding Shaq...

Experience beats youth? That's why Dallas won out against us last year, right?



No need to panic in January. Let's panic if the Spurs are 44-38 after 82 games.


No one's panicking. We are recognizing the pretty damn obvious shortcoming in this squad at a time in the season (prior to the trade deadline) when the front office can do something about it.

After 82 games it's too late to panic. By then we'll be fucked with no way of remedying the problem before going into the playoffs (or the players will already be making tee time reservations at that point).




The front office may see it more this way:

1. The San Antonio Spurs will be a top team (top 5-10) over the next decade, maybe or maybe not competing for a championship but likely competing for playoffs.

2. The San Antonio Spurs bankroll a fairly risky run for the championship in the next 2 years while sacrificing long-term flexibility, risking a big fall and lottery teams in the next 3-5 years, therefore raising the specter of decreased fan interest and the need to sell or move the team

1. They make a lot more winning a title than 'competing for the playoffs'.

2. This is such bullshit. Tim is 30. Duncan's got arguably 4-5 more years of great-good ball left in him.

Even looking 2-3 years down the road is dumb. You've got the best PF of all time, and one of the top players of all time. You don't fucking pack it in and worry about 2012. Fuck that. And fuck anyone who thinks that.

Being in position to win a championship is a rarity. Hell, look how many years it took for the Spurs to win one, and that was with guys like Gervin and Robinson coming along.

It took a lot of luck for the Spurs to land Tim Duncan. There's no guarantee that the Spurs will get another transcendent, first ballot HOFer and bonafide MVP ever again in their franchise's future.

But they've got one now, and should be trying to do everything possible to win in the rest of the Tim Duncan era.

If they're going to pack it in, may as well just trade Tim, Manu, and Parker now and start building for 2016.

Fuck, I hate the content fuckers on this forum. I want people like you competing with my company for business, not being content fans of my sports team that defend a piss poor front office that can't (or won't) step up to do what it takes to try to win a couple more rings before #21 retires.

[MannyIsGod]

You are given two options:

1. The San Antonio Spurs will be an elite (top 5) team over the next decade, but never win a championship.

2. The San Antonio Spurs will have a 33% chance of winning at least one championship over the next three years, and then will be mediocre for the next seven.

Assume these are the only options available. Which one would you take?I disagree #1 is a feasible option. There is no way for the front office to say that they want to be an elite team but that they know that they won't have a shot to win a title. That just doesn't add up.

You know, the Spurs are one Dirk knee injury from once again being the front runners for the title. As it stands, they aren't very far behind being the front runners right now, and they do have a decent chance to win the title this year with the current roster as it is.

Theres no such thing as making a move that makes you a lock to win the title. You can only give yourself a better chance. And while I agree certain moves right now might give them a better chance to win in the next 2 years, I can't fault them for trying to keep long term flexibility in the plan as well. For one, I'm not sure what moves they could have made other than sign a few players like Devin Brown and pay a bit more by keeping a Malik Rose. What moves are they passing up that somehow give us a much better chance to win the title?

Anyhow, I'm moving off my original point that the way you phrased your question was flawed because the front office hasn't choosen to not win championships.

The truth is that the NBA isn't run like a fantasy league and there are considerations outside of basketball. While Marcus and other may disagree, I don't see as accepting that and still being happy that the Spurs are in a position to compete for a title as settling. This is not mediocrity. Have Spurs fans forgotten what it was like before Tim Duncan got here? That was mediocrity.

[MannyIsGod]

1. They make a lot more winning a title than 'competing for the playoffs'.
Prove that statement. That right there is a huge part of your argument and I'd love to see you prove it.

[MannyIsGod]

I have a question for you all:

Do you think the Spurs have made more money than the Knicks over the past decade?

[samikeyp]

The truth is that the NBA isn't run like a fantasy league and there are considerations outside of basketball. While Marcus and other may disagree, I don't see as accepting that and still being happy that the Spurs are in a position to compete for a title as settling. This is not mediocrity. Have Spurs fans forgotten what it was like before Tim Duncan got here? That was mediocrity.

It depends on how far before Duncan you go. In the 8 years before his arrival, the Spurs averaged 50 wins a year, 55 if you take out the year before TD when half the team was hurt. The six years prior to David Robinson's arrival, they averaged 32 including 5 of the 6 losing seasons in franchise history. There is your mediocrity....it happened once...it can happen again. Enjoy this era of Spurs basketball while you can.

[samikeyp]

Do you think the Spurs have made more money than the Knicks over the past decade?

Probably not given NY's regional and local broadcast contracts. I don't know.

[timvp]

I have a question for you all:

Do you think the Spurs have made more money than the Knicks over the past decade?

Depends what you include. Are you including the rise in the value of the franchises or strictly cash flow?

[Mr. Body]

Fuck, I hate the content fuckers on this forum. I want people like you competing with my company for business, not being content fans of my sports team that defend a piss poor front office that can't (or won't) step up to do what it takes to try to win a couple more rings before #21 retires.

What the hell is a content fucker? I was simply saying what the FO's thoughts may be. Thay may see this franchise as a few losing years away from having to find new digs. Man are you incoherent sometimes.

[MannyIsGod]

I don't see what you guys mean by being "content" or "settling" either.

Just what the fuck are you going to do? Vote Holt out of office? :lol Stop watching? :lmao Stop going to the games? :lol

I guess in Marcus' case the answer is to bitch from now until the end of time, but if thats the only thing keeping him from "settling" then I'll be happy to "settle".

[ChumpDumper]

I hate years.

[MannyIsGod]

Depends what you include. Are you including the rise in the value of the franchises or strictly cash flow?TBH, I didn't think about a rise of value being factored in, but if you want to go that route I guess we'd have to factor in the total value of a franchise as opposed to just the rise in value.

Also, the rise in value for the Spurs would probably have occured largely after the first championship because thats when they got the new areana and the new practice facility. Other than that I'm not sure the last 2 championships had a great impact on the value of the franchise.

[ducks]

I think rings help value of the team
Why
because players want to go to teams that have a chance at a title when they get older

[Marcus Bryant]

I'm a basketball fan, not an investor in Spurs Sports & Entertainment LLC or whatever. I could give a fuck less what their distributions look like for this year and beyond.

As for the vehemence of my opinions, I'm sorry that it has made some here blush. Might as well shut down this forum and set up a redirect to spurs.com if stringent views are too tough for some of you to take.

[Mr. Body]

I'm a basketball fan, not an investor in Spurs Sports & Entertainment LLC or whatever. I could give a fuck less what their distributions look like for this year and beyond.

As for the vehemence of my opinions, I'm sorry that it has made some here blush. Might as well shut down this forum and set up a redirect to spurs.com if stringent views are too tough for some of you to take.

You're a real tough guy, alright. Everybody's pretty impressed with you.

[Marcus Bryant]

http://www.spurs.com if it's not in your bookmarks.

[remingtonbo2001]

THIS IS THE FUNNIEST SHIT I HAVE EVER READ.....ALL 4 PAGES......You guys worry too much about the future....A true sports fan roots for his team win or loose....Like Aggies.....Yeah, you know what, we stink it up sometimes....but I'll still be standing....That right there that's a fan....Root for this team as it is now, not for what is going to be. If not then what is the point of truely enjoying a championship season if you can't have the highs and lows. Every championship year we have had a low point, but yet we prevailed. It was when everyone was taking notice of San Antonio did we faulter.....But looky looky NOW....The BITCHES have turned their heads.....And you know what we're gonna do...WIN....We can worry after we've finished polluting our Crusty, Nasty Ass, but sitll OUR FUCKING RIVER, with confetti from the BIGGEST, BADEST, FUCKIN CELEBRATION to have ever occured in the great state of Texas......And you know what....MARK CUBAN....you're not INVITED.

[BeerIsGood!]

THIS IS THE FUNNIEST SHIT I HAVE EVER READ.....ALL 4 PAGES......You guys worry too much about the future....A true sports fan roots for his team win or loose....Like Aggies.....Yeah, you know what, we stink it up sometimes....

You should have stopped right there.

[MannyIsGod]

I'm a basketball fan, not an investor in Spurs Sports & Entertainment LLC or whatever. I could give a fuck less what their distributions look like for this year and beyond.
Well thats great. But it doesn't change reality one bit.



As for the vehemence of my opinions, I'm sorry that it has made some here blush. Might as well shut down this forum and set up a redirect to spurs.com if stringent views are too tough for some of you to take.Too tough? :lol What the hell is "tough" about your view? If you believe so damn hardcore that the Spurs are doing the wrong thing and you're not going to put up with it, then stop watching the Spurs. Boycott them. Of course you won't, so there goes your "toughness".

Dude, you're not tough. You're a whiny bitch who has been repeating the same lame take for the past 2 years while ignoring reality. Tough. HA.

[Marcus Bryant]

Who's been whining about my "whining" lately? Hmmm....

[MannyIsGod]

Deflection.

Anyone, since I'm bored, list me the moves that the Spurs passed on that would have made this team much better but were not made due to money.

[Marcus Bryant]

You're right. I guess I need to fill up this space with clubby gibberish about God knows what.

[MannyIsGod]

You're right. I guess I need to fill up this space with clubby gibberish about God knows what.Thats not what you're doing?

:lol You think your posts are so great and profound, its funny. You're becoming the Spreewell of the Spurs forum.



Anyone, since I'm bored, list me the moves that the Spurs passed on that would have made this team much better but were not made due to money.

[Marcus Bryant]

Nah, I think my posts are voicing my opinion, which apparently is not alone in this forum.

If you are looking for "profound" statements in this forum, well, stand back from the laptop.

[MannyIsGod]

Anyone, since I'm bored, list me the moves that the Spurs passed on that would have made this team much better but were not made due to money.

[BeerIsGood!]

Fuck it - trade whoever you have to and get high enough to draft kevin durant

[Marcus Bryant]

Howard, Josh. For starters. The Spurs have opportunities to improve this team if they are willing to take back a contract.

In addition, my complaint is specifically about avoiding contracts for players in the supporting cast that extend past the 2007-08 season. Hence the subject of this thread, "Screw 2008".

[MannyIsGod]

Howard had to do with Kidd and nothing to do with 2008. Next.

Which contract would you have wanted extended past 2008? Who would have come here had they been offered a long term contract which they weren't offered?

[Mr. Body]

Spurs might've had Pietrus if they took on Adonal Foyle's contract.

[timvp]

There are players out there you can have for expiring contracts (like say a Troy Murphy) that only make sense for championship contending teams who don't care if they are paying too much money for someone in 2012.

The Spurs should feel like that, but they don't. Is it because they want to win after Tim is gone ... or is it because they are on orders to keep the value of the franchise as high as possible?

[MannyIsGod]

Spurs might've had Pietrus if they took on Adonal Foyle's contract.Can you link me to documentation of that? I'm not saying it doesn't exsist or it didn't happen, I've just never heard about it.

[Marcus Bryant]

Howard had to do with Kidd and nothing to do with 2008. Next.

Howard had to do with targeting an offseason to have substantial cap space and make a big move in free agency.




Which contract would you have wanted extended past 2008? Who would have come here had they been offered a long term contract which they weren't offered?

Not extensions. Trades. The Spurs have expiring contracts, which are rather valuable in today's NBA.

[Mr. Body]

Can you link me to documentation of that? I'm not saying it doesn't exsist or it didn't happen, I've just never heard about it.

I'm not sure I ever saw this one exactly, but there's been a lot of talk of GSW dumping large contracts by coupling them with inexpensive talented younger players.

[MannyIsGod]

There are players out there you can have for expiring contracts (like say a Troy Murphy) that only make sense for championship contending teams who don't care if they are paying too much money for someone in 2012.

The Spurs should feel like that, but they don't. Is it because they want to win after Tim is gone ... or is it because they are on orders to keep the value of the franchise as high as possible?Ok, but thats all speculation. Why aren't other teams trading for a guy like Troy Murphy? And as much as I liked what I saw from him in a few games, he's not looking all that great and Troy Murphy here doesn't give the Spurs a HUGE increase in their title chances.

[Marcus Bryant]

Ok, but thats all speculation. Why aren't other teams trading for a guy like Troy Murphy? And as much as I liked what I saw from him in a few games, he's not looking all that great and Troy Murphy here doesn't give the Spurs a HUGE increase in their title chances.


The Spurs don't need a huge boost.

[MannyIsGod]

The Spurs don't need a huge boost.I didn't say they needed a huge boost. I said adding Troy Murphy doesn't significantly increase their chances at winning a title.

[timvp]

Ok, but thats all speculation. Why aren't other teams trading for a guy like Troy Murphy? And as much as I liked what I saw from him in a few games, he's not looking all that great and Troy Murphy here doesn't give the Spurs a HUGE increase in their title chances.

What championship team needs a center who shoots jumpers to make room for a post bigman? Miami and Detroit has that covered. Dallas and Phoenix don't need him. He makes perfect sense for the Spurs because he'd be the rebounding bigman who could space the floor.

And I'd say Murphy >>>>> Elson or Oberto.

[timvp]

Golden State would do Barry and Williams for Murphy in half a second. But the Spurs wouldn't do it because it doesn't jive with 2008.

[timvp]

Another example is Derek Fisher. Golden State salary dumped him to Utah. Imagine if the Spurs had a real backup point guard.

[BeerIsGood!]

The Los Angeles Spurs of Anaheim. Get used to it.

[MannyIsGod]

What do you think the chances would be of a Spurs championship with Troy Murphy as opposed to without him. Quantify them. The same with Fisher.

I just don't see how trading for an injured not very athletic big man is going to significantly improve the Spurs for this year much less down the line for 2 or 3. Fisher would have made more sense to me, however. I've liked what I've seen from Troy Murphy in the past, but he's lost his starting job in GS and has not played well this year. I'm not sure the Warriors would just give him away either. In a league where even decent big men usually bring back something decent, I'm not sure they're not willing to try to get a better deal than Williams and Barry. Spurs fans can speculate all they want about what a franchise would or wouldn't accept, but the vast majority of the time that speculation is wrong.

[timvp]

What do you think the chances would be of a Spurs championship with Troy Murphy as opposed to without him. Quantify them. The same with Fisher.

I just don't see how trading for an injured not very athletic big man is going to significantly improve the Spurs for this year much less down the line for 2 or 3. Fisher would have made more sense to me, however. I've liked what I've seen from Troy Murphy in the past, but he's lost his starting job in GS and has not played well this year. I'm not sure the Warriors would just give him away either. In a league where even decent big men usually bring back something decent, I'm not sure they're not willing to try to get a better deal than Williams and Barry. Spurs fans can speculate all they want about what a franchise would or wouldn't accept, but the vast majority of the time that speculation is wrong.

I could point you to articles saying that GS would give away Murphy for expiring contract, but Fisher is probably the better example anyways.

There's no speculating about whether they would have given him away for expiring contracts, because they did. You don't think going from the worst backup point guard in the league to the best wouldn't help this team? I think the Spurs' chances would be much, much better ... especially considering that their main competition likes to run a two point guard set.

A Tony and Fisher backcourt would end any advantage the Mavs have by running Terry and Harris together.

[AFBlue]

And I'd say Murphy >>>>> Elson or Oberto.

Maybe, but Murphy = Bonner!

Ok maybe they're not equal, but Bonner and Horry have the same offensive strength with their outside shooting as Murphy, AND they get paid much less for a shorter time.

Besides, the "other" big that creates space in the low post by clearing out to the perimeter is overrated, mostly because Tim Duncan can be the "other" big!

[ShoogarBear]

I disagree #1 is a feasible option. There is no way for the front office to say that they want to be an elite team but that they know that they won't have a shot to win a title. That just doesn't add up."Top 5" was a bad way to put in on my part. Say "Top 10", there are lots of entertaining teams out there that we all know have no realistic shot at the title.

a) In the past ten years, only 11 different teams have gone to the Finals (and two new ones were last year).

b) Only five different teams have won the title. Detroit was the only team without Tim Duncan or Shaquille O'Neal.

c) The last time there was an NBA Final without either Tim Duncan or Shaquille O'Neal was 1998.

This isn't MLB or the NFL.



Anyhow, I'm moving off my original point that the way you phrased your question was flawed because the front office hasn't choosen to not win championships.That's not what I said. Nobody "chooses to not win championships". What they choose is to not maximize their short-term chances in place of long-term success.




The truth is that the NBA isn't run like a fantasy league and there are considerations outside of basketball. While Marcus and other may disagree, I don't see as accepting that and still being happy that the Spurs are in a position to compete for a title as settling. This is not mediocrity. Have Spurs fans forgotten what it was like before Tim Duncan got here? That was mediocrity.Um, you realize with your last statements you just underscored the entire point of our argument.

When Tim Duncan leaves, it'll be back to mediocrity and it won't matter how much cap room we have.

Let me restate my questions in a declarative fashion:

The only time the San Antonio Spurs will win an NBA championship between now and 2017 is in the next three years.

Agree or not? And if you agree, then why not try to maximize those short-term chances?

[ShoogarBear]

And OMG I would kill for Derek Fisher at backup, are you kidding?

[ShoogarBear]

After I finished puking, of course.

[timvp]

Why didn't the Spurs get Fisher? He's going to make $7M in 2010.

Only reason. Yeah, it's a pretty bad contract ... but sadly enough, Fisher would be an amazing fit on this team.

[Amuseddaysleeper]

Why didn't the Spurs get Fisher? He's going to make $7M in 2010.

Only reason. Yeah, it's a pretty bad contract ... but sadly enough, Fisher would be an amazing fit on this team.

I still can't get over us missing out on Trevor Ariza
:pctoss :pctoss

He woulda been a stud on this team

[AFBlue]

Why didn't the Spurs get Fisher? He's going to make $7M in 2010.

Only reason. Yeah, it's a pretty bad contract ... but sadly enough, Fisher would be an amazing fit on this team.

Hustle defender, not offensively inept, long-term contract....think I'd rather have another PG that fits that description. His name is Earl Watson.

[ShoogarBear]

Earl Watson would work for the Spurs too, and he is younger, but Fish is a proven playoff performer and more reliable shooter. Plus, it's not clear Watson would be happy with a backup role.

[Mr. Body]

Earl Watson costs nearly as much as Derek Fisher, without all the, you know, accomplishments.

[MannyIsGod]

The only time the San Antonio Spurs will win an NBA championship between now and 2017 is in the next three years.

Agree or not? And if you agree, then why not try to maximize those short-term chances?I flat out don't agree. I don't believe Duncan is nessecarily done in 3 years. In fact I doubt he's done in 3 years. And while Duncan looks like he's on the decline, I'm far more a believer in LJ's theory that the man is simply sleepwalking through the season again.

In addition with that, I truely believe that Parker has the potential to become a dominating player in the game. I think that the Spurs could very well add a good player and still have a very solid shot at a title with Parker leading the team and Duncan playing as the 2nd star on offense and the first on defense.

Now, I'm not saying our chaces extened until 2017, but I do believe that they extend further out than 2008.

[ShoogarBear]

Tim may or may not be done in 3 years, but he will certainly be past his peak. So will Manu.


I think that the Spurs could very well add a good player and still have a very solid shot at a title with Parker leading the team and Duncan playing as the 2nd star on offense and the first on defense.

If the Spurs had a track record of making the big Free Agent scores, maybe this would make sense, but they don't.

Parker could become a dominating point guard. I don't think so, but for the sake of argument let's say he becomes the best point guard in the game.

Dominating point guards don't win you championships. Not unless Mark Cuban still has some more left to his improvement plan.

The Spurs may be a good, entertaining team with Tony Parker as a first-team All-NBA, I just don't see them winning titles past this three-year window.

[MannyIsGod]

Tim may or may not be done in 3 years, but he will certainly be past his peak. So will Manu.



If the Spurs had a track record of making the big Free Agent scores, maybe this would make sense, but they don't.

Parker could become a dominating point guard. I don't think so, but for the sake of argument let's say he becomes the best point guard in the game.

Dominating point guards don't win you championships. Not unless Mark Cuban still has some more left to his improvement plan.

The Spurs may be a good, entertaining team with Tony Parker as a first-team All-NBA, I just don't see them winning titles past this three-year window.I guess Isiah Thomas disagrees with you.

[MannyIsGod]

Anyhow, I've gotten sidetracked from my original point to begin with. In all honestly, I would love it if the Spurs would be willing to make moves. But its ironic that the people that are now calling for moves are the ones that argued long ago not to make moves for the sake of making moves. If there were a move out there to make that gave this team significantly larger chances to win, then regardless of bad contracts I have a feeling they would make it. All speculation, but of course thats all anyone has in this thread.

In the end, if they are passing on trades or deals due to a 2008 plan, then it is what it is. These are the San Antonio Spurs and not the New York Spurs. The NBA is what it is. I'll just sit back and wait for the next MB thread on the subject.

[Marcus Bryant]

Why didn't the Spurs get Fisher? He's going to make $7M in 2010.

Only reason. Yeah, it's a pretty bad contract ... but sadly enough, Fisher would be an amazing fit on this team.


$7 mil will probably be the average player salary then.

[Marcus Bryant]

Tim may or may not be done in 3 years, but he will certainly be past his peak. So will Manu.



If the Spurs had a track record of making the big Free Agent scores, maybe this would make sense, but they don't.

Parker could become a dominating point guard. I don't think so, but for the sake of argument let's say he becomes the best point guard in the game.

Dominating point guards don't win you championships. Not unless Mark Cuban still has some more left to his improvement plan.

The Spurs may be a good, entertaining team with Tony Parker as a first-team All-NBA, I just don't see them winning titles past this three-year window.


It took TD and Manu in their primes to win the last two titles. History only records championships. No one gives a shit about when you had a great regular season record and lost in the Finals, unless you live in Salt Lake City or DFW.

Take your best shot now. Fuck 2010.

[MannyIsGod]

It took TD and Manu in their primes to win the last two titles. History only records championships. No one gives a shit about when you had a great regular season record and lost in the Finals, unless you live in Salt Lake City or DFW.

Take your best shot now. Fuck 2010.History doesn't pay the bills.

[Marcus Bryant]

Once TD's gone that's a $20 mil bill off the books.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Hustle defender, not offensively inept, long-term contract....think I'd rather have another PG that fits that description. His name is Earl Watson.

Fisher has forgotten more about being clutch than Watson will ever know.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

I guess Isiah Thomas disagrees with you.

Manny, citing the guy who thought putting Marbury and Francis on the same team was a great idea probably isn't the best way to win an argument :lol

[MannyIsGod]

I was refering to his playing days AHF.

[ShoogarBear]

Isaish had Joe Dumars, Bill Laimbeer, Dennis Rodman, and Vinnie Johnson. Zeke was the leader but he had a lot of help.

So all the Spurs have to do is find a Hall of Famer and the leagues best defender/rebounder to play along Parker. (Not to mention it's unlikely that Tony Parker will ever be another Isaiah Thomas.) If they do that, then yeah, I'll agree they should have a pretty good team. It still won't be as good as what they could have over the next three years.

Oh, and don't forget that Pop won't be around to coach them.

[MannyIsGod]

:lol

Thats not nessecarily a bad thing depending on who you ask.

[timvp]

I'm going to bump this thread in 2010 when the Spurs finish 15-67.

[ShoogarBear]

Sweet, maybe we can talk Greg Oden into staying in school for four years?

[baseline bum]

I'm going to bump this thread in 2010 when the Spurs finish 15-67.

I hope the Spurs do finish 15-67 once Tim retires. The only way to get good in this league is to draft talent.

[ShoogarBear]

I hope the Spurs do finish 15-67 once Tim retires. Games in Anaheim will be so convenient.

[baseline bum]

I hope the Spurs do finish 15-67 once Tim retires. Games in Anaheim will be so convenient.

:lol

The team might as well be in Phoenix. Getting to Anaheim from West LA (during rush hour) to make a 7:30 tipoff can take as long as a drive from San Antonio to Houston.

[AFBlue]

The only way to get good in this league is to draft talent.

Yeah that's really helped the Hawks these past few years.... :rolleyes

Great players can be found later on in drafts just as easily as lottery picks can be busts. Drafting high doesn't guarantee anything. Making smart draft-day decisions no matter where you stand improves the possibility of building a solid foundation around great players. The Spurs already have one great player to build around. They have Scola, Butler, and Mahinmi as possible good/great players. AND, they have 3 or 4 picks in the upcoming '07 draft that if used wisely can address immediate needs (long athletic SF, backup PG) and get potential stars for the future.

Bottom Line: Great franchises are about more than drafting a "player of the century"

[baseline bum]

Yeah that's really helped the Hawks these past few years.... :rolleyes


What great players have the Hawks drafted? There has never been a Duncan, James, Shaq, Jordan, etc available when the Hawks had a pick high enough to take them.


Great players can be found later on in drafts just as easily as lottery picks can be busts.

I can think of two franchise players to get drafted later than #5. Dirk Nowitzki, who was picked at 7 because no one thought Euros could play in the NBA, and Kobe Bryant at 13 because no one wanted to waste picks on high school kids. Both of those backdoors to landing top talent are long since closed.


Drafting high doesn't guarantee anything.
If a Greg Oden is coming out, drafting #1 guarantees you get him. Building your team is all about getting lucky enough to have a truly great player come out the year you really stink and have a draft pick high enough to get him.


The Spurs already have one great player to build around.

Yeah.. the guy they drafted at #1 after tanking the season.


They have Scola, Butler, and Mahinmi as possible good/great players.

Great players? :lmao

So Luis Scola and Ian Mahinmi have any chance of being the next Shaq, Duncan, Jordan, Bird, Magic,...?



AND, they have 3 or 4 picks in the upcoming '07 draft that if used wisely can address immediate needs (long athletic SF, backup PG) and get potential stars for the future.


You can get lucky and get a Parker or an Arenas there, but you ain't getting Shaq or Jordan, or anyone else who is going to be someone you build a title team around.



Bottom Line: Great franchises are about more than drafting a "player of the century"

Jerry Krause had a similar philosophy.


So how many banners would be up in New Orleans Arena for the Spurs had they not landed the #1 pick in '97?


Exactly two teams since 1980 have won a title without a 'player of the century' first-ballot hall of famer who did not go #1-5 in the draft. I don't count the Celtics with Bird, since he went 7 because of a loophole (since closed) allowing the Celtics to draft a sure #1 or #2 (only because Magic was coming out) a year early. Still, McHale went #2

The two teams? The 1983 Sixers, led by two legends who joined the ABA because they were too young to be allowed into the NBA... and the 2004 Pistons... so really, one team in 27 years that backs up your argument.

1980 Lakers: Kareem (#1), Magic (#1)
1981 Celtics: Bird (#7), McHale (#2)
1982 Lakers: Kareem (#1), Magic (#1)
1983 Sixers: Dr. J (ABA), Moses Malone (ABA)
1984 Celtics: Bird(#7*), McHale (#2)
1985 Lakers: Kareem (#1), Magic (#1), Worthy (#1)
1986 Celtics: Bird (#7*), McHale (#2)
1987 Lakers: Kareem (#1), Magic (#1), Worthy (#1)
1988 Lakers: Kareem (#1), Magic (#1), Worthy (#1)
1989 Pistons: Thomas (#2)
1990 Pistons: Thomas (#2)
1991 Bulls: Jordan (#3)
1992 Bulls: Jordan (#3)
1993 Bulls: Jordan (#3)
1994 Rockets: Olajuwon (#1)
1995 Rockets: Olajuwon (#1)
1996 Bulls: Jordan (#3)
1997 Bulls: Jordan (#3)
1998 Bulls: Jordan (#3)
1999 Spurs: Duncan (#1)
2000 Lakers: Shaq (#1)
2001 Lakers: Shaq (#1)
2002 Lakers: Shaq (#1)
2003 Spurs: Duncan (#1)
2005 Spurs: Duncan (#1)
2006 Heat: Wade (#4), Shaq (#1)

The teams to win without drafting their 'players of the century'?

The 1983 Philadelphia 76ers, who stole Dr. J from a Nets team that had to sell him to be able to make the merger to the NBA... never gonna happen again, and not even allowed anymore.

The 1980s Lakers, who still drafted their best player #1 and had their second best force a trade to LA because he wanted to be in a large market.

The 00s Lakers, who enticed Shaq as a free agent with a large market. Now the rules make getting free agents impossible.

04 Pistons
06 Heat

[smeagol]

Was Phat Tony owned?

I think so . . .

[spurschick]

I miss battle blogs

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

http://members.aol.com/softwrsimp/pipe1.jpg

[wildbill2u]

The plan is a business plan, not a winning plan.

In 2008, the Spurs will probably have their highest book value ever. With low salaries on the books, that would be the time for Holt to sell his shares for maximum profit.
I disagree. You have the highest book value while you have the most dominating team and/or have just won a championship--and there are prospects for more.

If Tim's play continues to decline (along with the Spurs fortunes) and he retires in a year or so, then a prospective buyer would be picking up a franchise in a very small market with their salad days behind them. No fan interest= no income from sales of tickets and accessories.

If Holt wanted to sell, the time was after the last championship. He may have mis-timed the moment, thinking that the team would continue its success without interruption.

Our most dangerous period will come in the next few years if the Spurs go into a decline and no longer even make the playoffs. Then the revenues will plummet like they did before and we will be in danger of losing the team to another city like before. Except the price will be higher and the possibility of obtaining SA investors will be harder.

[AFBlue]

Fair points all-around, though your most convincing was the titles won, or lack theirof, by teams w/o a top 10 pick. Still I have to clear a few things up....


There has never been a Duncan, James, Shaq, Jordan, etc available when the Hawks had a pick high enough to take them.

Exactly my point! Even if the Spurs tank a season, it's not a "given" that they end up in a position to draft a "franchise" big. So why not attempt to stay in the Championship conversation?




I can think of two franchise players to get drafted later than #5. Dirk Nowitzki, who was picked at 7 because no one thought Euros could play in the NBA, and Kobe Bryant at 13 because no one wanted to waste picks on high school kids. Both of those backdoors to landing top talent are long since closed.

Amare Stoudemire?



Yeah.. the guy they drafted at #1 after tanking the season.

I was talking about Tony Parker. He may not be a "franchise big", but he's dominant and young enough to keep this team in the conversation provided the Spurs can keep him surrounded by a decent low-post presence.




Great players? :lmao

So Luis Scola and Ian Mahinmi have any chance of being the next Shaq, Duncan, Jordan, Bird, Magic,...?

Speaking of decent low-post players.....I wasn't suggesting that those players could be SUPERSTARS, just that they could compliment Tony's game. Scola has been dominant overseas for years and Butler has shown promise at this level....so they could fit that "good" or "decent" level.




You can get lucky and get a Parker or an Arenas there, but you ain't getting Shaq or Jordan, or anyone else who is going to be someone you build a title team around.

What about two or three Parkers? The way I see it, the Spurs already have one Parker and with the load of prospects/draft picks, it's not inconceivable that they could keep themselves in the Championship conversation.

Again, good point about the Franchise big, but I'm not giving up on the Spurs chances not to suck in the future....call me an optimist.

[ShoogarBear]

I disagree. You have the highest book value while you have the most dominating team and/or have just won a championship--and there are prospects for more. The team with the highest book value in professional sports is the Washington Redskins.

Third is the Houston Texans. (The Cowboys are second.)

In the NBA, the top three are the Lakers, Knicks, and Bulls, then Mavs, Sixers, and Celtics.

Book value has nothing directly to do with championships. Championshps are nice, but not necessary if people are buying the tickets anyway.

It has to do with the fan base how many season tickets and boxes you are selling (and for how much), how much you are getting from concessions and paying in stadium rights, how much you are getting from local broadcast rights.

And how much you are paying out in salaries.

If the Spurs can maintain their strong current inflows and get away with keeping the payroll at a just-less-than-championship level, they'll make more money.

If Peter Holt in 2008 wants to sell a 55-win team with only a $30 million payroll on the books, he'll make more money than selling a 55-win team with $60 million on the books.

[MannyIsGod]

It also has to do with team assets. The Redskins are number one because of Fed Ex Field, which they own.

[MannyIsGod]

The Warriors definetly got a better deal for Murphy than anything the Spurs could offer. The question is will the Spurs go after Jax now?

[cheguevara]

I'm going to bump this thread in 2010 when the Spurs finish 15-67.

too bad the internet as we know it won't be around by then

[ArgSpursFan]

get rid of Fucking Old man Finley,Barry,Horry and beno,And finally bring Luis Scola over here to play along with Timmy.
See ?it was easy.
End of the problem.Spurs win it all again

[BeerIsGood!]

get rid of Fucking Old man Finley,Barry,Horry and beno,And finally bring Luis Scola over here to play along with Timmy.
See ?it was easy.
End of the problem.Spurs win it all again
hard to win with 1 pg and no depth. Who do they replace them with?

[Mr. Body]

hard to win with 1 pg and no depth. Who do they replace them with?

Acie Law IV in the draft!!

or

Mustafa Shakur in the draft!!

[BeerIsGood!]

So you want to keep this team as is and use the 1st rounder on a back up pg? Who do they get to fill the front court?

[Mr. Body]

I'm betting you can find one of those two guys in the early 2nd round, if not both.

[BeerIsGood!]

I'm betting you can find one of those two guys in the early 2nd round, if not both.
Doubt we'll have an early 2nd round unless we trade the 1st rounder for a second and future considerations. More than likely one late 1st and late 2nds. Unless you know something about the Spurs tanking the season that I don't know.

[Mr. Body]

We have an early second. Milwaukee's.

[ChumpDumper]

#42 isn't very early.

[Mr. Body]

#42 isn't very early.

Was #47 a week ago, wasn't it? You may be aware that Michael Redd and Mo Williams are both out with injuries. Ever heard of them?

[BeerIsGood!]

Hopefully that pick gets low enough to grab a good backup PG, but it's still early and the Eastern Conference is just shitty enough for the Bucks to win enough games to screw us.

[ChumpDumper]

So when Redd and Williams come back in a couple of weeks the pick will get worse again?

Brilliant.

[Mr. Body]

So when they come back in a couple of weeks the pick will get worse again?

Brilliant.

It'll end up in the late 30s. Maybe not Shakur/Law territory, but pretty nice.

[ChumpDumper]

They aren't out for the season.

[Mr. Body]

No shit.

Anyway, look at the teams in the 2nd round ahead of the Spurs/Milwaukee right now. How many will be picking PGs at that pick? Only Atlanta. Maybe. Who knows with them. All the rest already have young point guard prospects.

[ChumpDumper]

No shit. Why are you always such a twat?Becuase you aren't making any sense. You are predicting the Milwaukee continue to lose at the same rate they are now when Redd and Williams come back.

You are putting way too much faith in mid to late 2nd round picks.

[Mr. Body]

It's not a 'mid' pick. It's early. I never said 'very early'.

Redd and Williams will stabilize the team, but they were barely .500 as it was.

Again, not many teams are looking at a PG in the first 10 spots there, anyway. What precludes SAS from trading up 5, 8, 10 spots to grab their backup point? Nothing's impossible. And that Milwaukee pick is pretty nice.

[ChumpDumper]

What precludes SAS from trading up 5, 8, 10 spots to grab their backup point?The same things that keep us from trading up every year: other teams.
Nothing's impossible.Nope.
And that Milwaukee pick is pretty nice.It's an early-mid-late-early second rounder. It is what it is.

[Mr. Body]

It's an early-mid-late-early second rounder. It is what it is.

:lol :lol Okay. We'll leave it at that.