time to refuel the gm

[ducks]

calling sam as soon as sonics move :lol:lol:lol:lol:lol:lol:flag::lobt2::lobt:

[bigdog]

It would be amazing. At least we'd have a GM who knew what the hell he was doing.

Too bad Sam got the chance to prove he's a badass and took a better job. Now he gets the chance to build a great team by himself, without having to hide behind the mask known as RC Buford.

[MoSpur]

I too have always thought RC was overrated.

[SenorSpur]

I always thought RC was overrated. Finding Manu and TP was shrewd and he deserves all the kudos because they both are a HUGE cogs in the Spurs machine. But has any GM continued to live off accolades and accomplishments of 7 years ago more than Buford? Only one other guy - Cowboys Owner, Jerry Jones. This is a "what have you done for me lately" kind-of-league. Truth is, RC hasn't done shit lately.

[tav1]

Pop and Buford are fine. No one has been better over the last decade and only a few have been better in the last couple years. Get a sense of proportion here.

[Bruno]

Get a sense of proportion here.

QFT

[mrspurs]

I always thought RC was overrated. Finding Manu and TP was shrewd and he deserves all the kudos because they both are a HUGE cogs in the Spurs machine. But has any GM continued to live off accolades and accomplishments of 7 years ago more than Buford? Only one other guy - Cowboys Owner, Jerry Jones. This is a "what have you done for me lately" kind-of-league. Truth is, RC hasn't done shit lately.

just for the sake of arguement id like to add something to rattle somes cages....but mrsenor sir.....i am a true believer of the statement, what have you done for me lately?........and you sir are 100% correct....im not sure who has been running this team for the last 3 seasons, but some of the bonehead moves theses guys have made within the last 2 yrs have been complete, god i hope this works kinda moves.....in short they went from being great to not even solid.......reminds me of some of the boneheads move bob bass used to make

[rascal]

Pop and Buford are fine. No one has been better over the last decade and only a few have been better in the last couple years. Get a sense of proportion here.

They have not been good. They have made more bad moves than good moves. A big part of the spurs success was landing Duncan and that was on a lucky lottery ball.

List all the good moves and there are twice as many bad moves. Or worse yet non moves of doing nothing, especially with trades.

[tav1]

just for the sake of arguement id like to add something to rattle somes cages....but mrsenor sir.....i am a true believer of the statement, what have you done for me lately?........and you sir are 100% correct....im not sure who has been running this team for the last 3 seasons, but some of the bonehead moves theses guys have made within the last 2 yrs have been complete, god i hope this works kinda moves.....in short they went from being great to not even solid.......reminds me of some of the boneheads move bob bass used to make

Bonehead moves? Which?

The Spurs won the NBA title a year ago and were in the WCF this season. That's a small margin of error. Pop and Buford are at the core of, perhaps, the most competent organization in all of sports. What else do you want from these guys? Every season for the last decade they've either won, or have been pretty damn close to winning, the title. Is there another team in the NBA you can say that about?

Step away from the cliff. Stop being so fickle.

[tav1]

They have not been good. They have made more bad moves than good moves. A big part of the spurs success was landing Duncan and that was on a lucky lottery ball.

List all the good moves and there are twice as many bad moves. Or worse yet non moves of doing nothing, especially with trades.

You're beyond reason. They get paid to put championship teams together. They do that. They're earning their keep. This shouldn't be a conversation.

[rascal]

Bad moves.
Steve Smith(HITA), Rasho, S Jackson, Going after Kidd, Splitter, Elson, Scola
Hedon't, trading Barbosa, not recognizing to draft J Howard, resigning Bonner, not making any big moves that help the team with all star talent with trades in over 10 years.

[Marcus Bryant]

Pop and Buford are fine. No one has been better over the last decade and only a few have been better in the last couple years. Get a sense of proportion here.

Indeed. With a low 1st round pick the Spurs took a bet on a lottery pick talent being available in a year. At worst, that talent never comes over. Maybe it comes over in 2 years.

It's amusing that Spurs fans are holding RC to the standard of being able to pull All-Star level talent out of low 1st and 2nd round picks every year. Of course, Mahinmi may be yet another.

Spurs fans are some spoiled motherfuckers.

[tav1]

Bad moves.
Steve Smith(HITA), Rasho, S Jackson, Going after Kidd, Splitter, Elson, Scola
Hedon't, trading Barbosa, not recognizing to draft J Howard, resigning Bonner, not making any big moves that help the team with all star talent with trades in over 10 years.


Relative, my friend. Over the last decade, which GMs have been better? If Buford was dismissed we do you expect to replace him and be his better? In the last two years, which GMs have been better? Dumars? Pritchard? Presti?

Buford recently drafted a kid, who looks pretty good, that wasn't in the league media guy. He does his due diligence. He's found two superstars with low draft picks.

You're insane.

[Marcus Bryant]

Bad moves.
Steve Smith(HITA), Rasho, S Jackson, Going after Kidd, Splitter, Elson, Scola
Hedon't, trading Barbosa, not recognizing to draft J Howard, resigning Bonner, not making any big moves that help the team with all star talent with trades in over 10 years.

That's a pretty fucking stupid criticism.

[ducks]

J howard is not that great
he is overrated by many spurs fans

[rascal]

You're beyond reason. They get paid to put championship teams together. They do that. They're earning their keep. This shouldn't be a conversation.

They have won despite the lack of good moves. Theyt have made two great draft picks and the lucky lottry balls that landed duncan and Robinson and that is the key to the teams success. No lucky lottery balls and no championships.

What boston has done this year and LA has done to acquire players thrumps anything the spurs front office has done. Boston has turned their team around in one year with trades. The lakers have acquired all star talent through trades that led to titles without the benefit of landing franchise players with lucky lottery picks.

I hate to think what the spurs would be if they solely relied only on their front office moves to acquire talent.

[Marcus Bryant]

Ah yes, it's all Duncan.

[Marcus Bryant]

RC is limited by the ownership group which sets his budget and Pop who pretty much demands that his players be ready to play championship basketball.

So RC made a run at Kidd. So what? Spurs fans want a GM who makes big splashy trades and tries to land superstars, yet when he does they bitch about it.

[tav1]

Boston and LA? You refer to two clear cases of collusion (McHale and West) as an example of better managment. Those are two examples of incompetence and betrayal.

[rascal]

RC is limited by the ownership group which sets his budget and Pop who pretty much demands that his players be ready to play championship basketball.

So RC made a run at Kidd. So what? Spurs fans want a GM who makes big splashy trades and tries to land superstars, yet when he does they bitch about it.


Kidd was a dumb move when they already had parker and a team that was not built to run the break.

[Marcus Bryant]

Kidd was a dumb move when they already had parker and a team that was not built to run the break.

Hindsight is always 20/20. Going after '03 Kidd wasn't a bad move. Anyways, how'd they land Parker? Did Duncan make that pick?

[rascal]

Hindsight is always 20/20. Going after '03 Kidd wasn't a bad move. Anyways, how'd they land Parker? Did Duncan make that pick?



Yes it was a bad move targeting Kidd and making all their moves to perserve cap space for 3 years and ending up with Rasho. They already had a young future star point guard in parker. These type of decisions have left the spurs with no young stars at this time outside of parker.

[Marcus Bryant]

So they shouldn't attempt to acquire stars, but they are shit because they don't attempt to land them. Got it.

[Marcus Bryant]

And I guess Mahinmi doesn't exist.

Spurs fans are some whiny spoiled motherfuckers.

[ducks]

Mahinmi jury is still out

it has been 8 years
since tp and manu
I know picks are late but move up or trade down

I would have went hard after oneal instead of kidd
but that is a blessing because j oneal is always hurt

[Mr. Body]

J howard is not that great
he is overrated by many spurs fans

Having Josh Howard is far better than not having Josh Howard. Don't like Josh Howard? Trade Josh Howard for a Josh Howard size basket of equivalent assets. Voila.

Meanwhile we're trying to trade Matt Bonner for a tub full of kitchen grease.

[Mr. Body]

The mistake the Kidd-attracting summer was not using the draft pick anyway. If Kidd was too much of a goon not to let them pick a good young talent and not take slightly less than max money, screw him.

[Twisted_Dawg]

Look, RC & Pop should be given proper credit for finding Tony & Manu as well as plugging in affordable older players as compliments such as Mario Ellie, Kersey, Kevin Willis, Steve Kerr, Robery Horry, etc. That has delivered 4 titles and we should have had a 5th in 2006.

That said, they should also be held accoutnable for the many bad decisions that they have made since the summer of 2003. Had we drafted Josh Howard we may well have won a title in 2006, and had we added Scola last summer we may have been playing in the 2008 Championship round. Plus we would not have traded for Thomas and still have that #1 pick in 2009. Having Howard and Scola may have made us competive for the rest of Tim's career.

This team is dangerously thin on talent with limited options to reload. We have effectively lost our 2007 #1 pick, traded our 2009 #1 pick (which could be a mid-level paick) and no assests to trade. Two of our big three are ageing and slowing down. We have no young blood to step up. If any of you think we are a player or two away from challenging for the title again, I think you are fooling yourself.

The Buford/Pop team remind me of the Cowboy's Schramm/Brandt team. Schramm and Brandt had a nice run, but then lost their magic and ran the Cowboys in the ground with bad decisions.

It is nice to have success, but you cannot rest on those laurels for the future.

[Marcus Bryant]

Mahinmi jury is still out

it has been 8 years
since tp and manu
I know picks are late but move up or trade down

I would have went hard after oneal instead of kidd
but that is a blessing because j oneal is always hurt

In the meantime the Spurs have put together a supporting cast to win 3 titles. Pop demands players who are ready to help win championships and frowns on handholding players and letting them learn on the job. Udrih was yet another great pick who Pop didn't want to babysit. So RC finds someone Pop loves in Jacque Vaughn. Now is it RC's failure because he brought in a very talented scoring point guard who needed some grooming or is it Pop's?

Maybe one of you armchair GMs can explain that.

[Marcus Bryant]

Having Howard and Scola may have made us competive for the rest of Tim's career.



Having Parker and Ginobili make the Spurs competitive for the rest of Duncan's career.

Sheesh.

[Twisted_Dawg]

Having Parker and Ginobili make the Spurs competitive for the rest of Duncan's career.

Sheesh.

We just got beat by LA 4-1 with Parker, Manu & Tim. Had we also had, Howard and Scola.....might that have been enough to have beaten a good (not great) Laker team?

We are competitive with Parker, Manu & Tim...but no longer have the overall talent to win a Championship. My point is having Scola and Howard, we would have had the talent to win the Championship.

[Marcus Bryant]

Eh, the Spurs were a healthy Manu away from playing last night.

[SenorSpur]

It's amazing how some of you keep giving RC a pass. Especially when the cupboard of supposed stockpiled talent, that should now be coming to fruition, is virtually bare. Other than Ian, and the jury is still out on him, this team has not added a significant player via the draft since drafting TP in '01. For a GM that's inexcusable. If this supposed Euro farm system would've yielded some fruit, the supporting cast (or lack thereof) wouldn't necessarily be in its current state.

My problem with RC has been his continued "sellout" strategy of drafting "All Euros, All the time." All along, I've questioned why a more balanced drafting strategy was not utilized. Europe has not been able to single-handedly, corner the market on talented, mature ball players that fit the Spurs style and culture.

All I'm saying is that RC is supposed to be smarter than all of us. He does this for a living. Sure he's allowed to make a mistake here and there. However, you do not buy car insurance when you have an accident. His job as GM, is to prepare and setup this team so that it can remain in championship contention during the era of the Big Three.

The situation is, by no means, disastrous and can certainly be rectified - provided the right moves are made this summer. If Ian turns into a rotation player next season, if they acquire the much-needed swingman either via FA and/or draft, and can identify a backup PG, and maybe a reserve big, they should be fine.

[ducks]

well he might not be the player he is today if pop had him instead of the great overrated aj

but howard never has wanted ball in 4

[Marcus Bryant]

He drafts Beno and Pop balks at playing him because he needs grooming.

He drafts Scola and Holt balks at paying the Lux Tax to bring him in.

But it's all RC's fault.

[MaNu4Tres]

Giving Rasho and Malik Rose 90 million dollars was a joke. Kudos for RC for covering up his mistakes by trading 2 first round picks to get rid of Malik's contract and kudos for him adding the Red Rocket to our injured reserved list. RC really hasn't done much lately, whether it be through free agency or the draft. What I don't understand is how we resign bonner so fast for 9 million last year and Obertom], when 3 years before that we are reluctant on giving Stephen Jackson a couple million more. It's pretty sad when our hopes are in the hands of a D-league player.

[Mr. Body]

Look, RC & Pop should be given proper credit for finding Tony & Manu as well as plugging in affordable older players as compliments such as Mario Ellie, Kersey, Kevin Willis, Steve Kerr, Robery Horry, etc. That has delivered 4 titles and we should have had a 5th in 2006.

That said, they should also be held accoutnable for the many bad decisions that they have made since the summer of 2003. Had we drafted Josh Howard we may well have won a title in 2006, and had we added Scola last summer we may have been playing in the 2008 Championship round. Plus we would not have traded for Thomas and still have that #1 pick in 2009. Having Howard and Scola may have made us competive for the rest of Tim's career.

This team is dangerously thin on talent with limited options to reload. We have effectively lost our 2007 #1 pick, traded our 2009 #1 pick (which could be a mid-level paick) and no assests to trade. Two of our big three are ageing and slowing down. We have no young blood to step up. If any of you think we are a player or two away from challenging for the title again, I think you are fooling yourself.

The Buford/Pop team remind me of the Cowboy's Schramm/Brandt team. Schramm and Brandt had a nice run, but then lost their magic and ran the Cowboys in the ground with bad decisions.

It is nice to have success, but you cannot rest on those laurels for the future.

Well said. On the money, etc...

If we had Scola and Howard this year or, not liking Howard whatever young players we could get for him, we'd be working on championship in a row number 4. Dallas minus Howard doesn't beat us in 2006. Scola and a better bench allows Ginobili to stay fresher for the playoffs. Even limiting it to Game 1, there is no collapse from a 20 point lead and the series is completely different.

[Mr. Body]

Giving Rasho and Malik Rose 90 million dollars was a joke. Kudos for RC for covering up his mistakes by trading 2 first round picks to get rid of Malik's contract and kudos for him adding the Red Rocket to our injured reserved list. RC really hasn't done much lately, whether it be through free agency or the draft. What I don't understand is how we resign bonner so fast for 9 million last year and Obertom], when 3 years before that we are reluctant on giving Stephen Jackson a couple million more. It's pretty sad when our hopes are in the hands of a D-league player.

The price of being chintzy is you often have to pay for it in the end. There are smart ways to be frugal and truly stupid ways to be frugal. They almost lost Parker because they were trying to squeeze the extra nickels.

[MaNu4Tres]

He drafts Scola and Holt balks at paying the Lux Tax to bring him in.


It wasn't Holt.

R.C chose an injured reserve player ( Matt Bonner) over the FIBA MVP in Scola.

That one was on Pop and R.C not Holt.

[Marcus Bryant]

RC is expected to work miracles with low draft picks and little in the way of cap flexibility most offseasons, with an ownership group scared to death of the Lux Tax and a very finicky coach to find players for. He has worked miracles before with many of those low round draft picks. Not to mention that he has to try to attract free agents to play fourth fiddle in one of the NBA's smallest media markets.

[Twisted_Dawg]

He drafts Beno and Pop balks at playing him because he needs grooming.

He drafts Scola and Holt balks at paying the Lux Tax to bring him in.

But it's all RC's fault.

Summer 2007:
Bonner $3 million per year (Spurs)
Scola $3 million per year (Rockets)

Now what were you saying about the luxury tax? I guess you are right....we could not have had signed Bonner and Scola. The Spurs made the right decision by signing bench riding Bonner and giving Scola to a Divisional rival.

[Marcus Bryant]

It wasn't Holt.

R.C chose an injured reserve player ( Matt Bonner) over the FIBA MVP in Scola.

That one was on Pop and R.C not Holt.

Uh, it was on Holt. That deal only went down because ownership didn't want the Lux Tax liability.

[Twisted_Dawg]

It wasn't Holt.

R.C chose an injured reserve player ( Matt Bonner) over the FIBA MVP in Scola.

That one was on R.C not Holt.

.....Fixed

[SenorSpur]

Look, RC & Pop should be given proper credit for finding Tony & Manu as well as plugging in affordable older players as compliments such as Mario Ellie, Kersey, Kevin Willis, Steve Kerr, Robery Horry, etc. That has delivered 4 titles and we should have had a 5th in 2006.

That said, they should also be held accoutnable for the many bad decisions that they have made since the summer of 2003. Had we drafted Josh Howard we may well have won a title in 2006, and had we added Scola last summer we may have been playing in the 2008 Championship round. Plus we would not have traded for Thomas and still have that #1 pick in 2009. Having Howard and Scola may have made us competive for the rest of Tim's career.

This team is dangerously thin on talent with limited options to reload. We have effectively lost our 2007 #1 pick, traded our 2009 #1 pick (which could be a mid-level paick) and no assests to trade. Two of our big three are ageing and slowing down. We have no young blood to step up. If any of you think we are a player or two away from challenging for the title again, I think you are fooling yourself.

The Buford/Pop team remind me of the Cowboy's Schramm/Brandt team. Schramm and Brandt had a nice run, but then lost their magic and ran the Cowboys in the ground with bad decisions.

It is nice to have success, but you cannot rest on those laurels for the future.

:toast

That's exactly what has been going on here the last 4-5 years. Championship-level arrogance. And yes, this is exactly what happened to the Cowboys in the mid-80's. They went 10 years without adding a significant player to their core. As a result, they got old FAST.

[MaNu4Tres]

Uh, it was on Holt. That deal only went down because ownership didn't want the Lux Tax liability.


The deal went down because they chose to give Bonner a 9 million dollar contract instead of Scola. Therefore they didn't want to pay the lux after the signing of The Great Red Rocket.

Therefore R.C and Pop chose Bonner over Scola which was yet another bonehead move.

[rascal]

In the meantime the Spurs have put together a supporting cast to win 3 titles. Pop demands players who are ready to help win championships and frowns on handholding players and letting them learn on the job. Udrih was yet another great pick who Pop didn't want to babysit. So RC finds someone Pop loves in Jacque Vaughn. Now is it RC's failure because he brought in a very talented scoring point guard who needed some grooming or is it Pop's?

Maybe one of you armchair GMs can explain that.


Both. They need to work together. If they can't then one of them must go.

[Marcus Bryant]

They didn't want to pay the Lux Tax for Jackie Butler. And of course, this fixation on the Lux Tax was not created by RC.

[Extra Stout]

RC is expected to work miracles with low draft picks and little in the way of cap flexibility most offseasons, with an ownership group scared to death of the Lux Tax and a very finicky coach to find players for. He has worked miracles before with many of those low round draft picks. Not to mention that he has to try to attract free agents to play fourth fiddle in one of the NBA's smallest media markets.
I guess given those constraints, it's expected that a mediocre GM would come back down to earth. Nevertheless, excuses about how hard it is to be a GM aren't going to reload this roster, and as things stand, this season was the last shot for the team as constructed, with no feasible strategy to rebuild around an aging Big 3 until 2010.

[purist]

you're talking about the spurs, not the Clippers...right? a team with four rings, right?

I thought so.

[rascal]

RC is expected to work miracles with low draft picks and little in the way of cap flexibility most offseasons, with an ownership group scared to death of the Lux Tax and a very finicky coach to find players for. He has worked miracles before with many of those low round draft picks. Not to mention that he has to try to attract free agents to play fourth fiddle in one of the NBA's smallest media markets.


Quit whining about how hard it is for RC. We are the spurs. We cannot make good moves because we work for cheap owners and are in a small market and have a finicky coach.

[tav1]

They didn't want to pay the Lux Tax for Jackie Butler. And of course, this fixation on the Lux Tax was not created by RC.

Marcus, it's a lost cause with these guys. They're thick. Move on.

[Mr. Body]

They didn't want to pay the Lux Tax for Jackie Butler. And of course, this fixation on the Lux Tax was not created by RC.

You're missing the point, it seems. The question is not Butler. Butler is a separate issue. The issue is Bonner. They paid Bonner the money they could have paid Scola, thinking Bonner could play for them. He had already been on the team for a year, so how they got that impression is beyond me, but the point you're missing is that Scola's money went to Bonner.

[MaNu4Tres]

You're missing the point, it seems. The question is not Butler. Butler is a separate issue. The issue is Bonner. They paid Bonner the money they could have paid Scola, thinking Bonner could play for them. He had already been on the team for a year, so how they got that impression is beyond me, but the point you're missing is that Scola's money went to Bonner.


Thank you Mr. Body!! Finally someone with sense.

[Harry Callahan]

Let's not forget that the Spurs have had VERY few #1 picks in the Duncan era as well - all of which were at the very bottom of the round.

SA traded for Nazr M., Steve Kerr, Speedy Claxton, Kurt Thomas - That accounts for 5 #1 picks for those four players. I think most of these guys played a hand in SA championships, No?

It is very difficult to stay on top given the lousy drafting position they've had. I think every team in the NBA has had at least one lottery pick in the last ten years outside of the Spurs. It is realistic to think that this can continue indefinitely? Don't think so.

SA has done a good job of rebuilding on the run several times where the roster appeared to be too old ten years ago (1999) outside of Duncan, and yet they did it.

Unfortunately, without any opportunity to draft premium players, the FO has tried to swing for the fences for foreign guys in the last five years with limited success. I hope Ian can help next year. He has to.

[Marcus Bryant]

I guess given those constraints, it's expected that a mediocre GM would come back down to earth. Nevertheless, excuses about how hard it is to be a GM aren't going to reload this roster, and as things stand, this season was the last shot for the team as constructed, with no feasible strategy to rebuild around an aging Big 3 until 2010.

Let's see, they have an athletic young big coming in next season. They can draft a couple of perimeter talents at #26 and 45 in this year's draft. They have their MLE (~$5.5 mil) and LLE (~$1.9 mil) to use in free agency. And this is to add to a team which was one healthy Manu from being back in the Finals. The situation is not as dire as you portray.

[ducks]

no gm thought scola would rebound like he did
had ming been more healthy scola would not have seen as many minutes and not put up as good as stats

[ducks]

Let's see, they have an athletic young big coming in next season. They can draft a couple of perimeter talents at #26 and 45 in this year's draft. They have their MLE (~$5.5 mil) and LLE (~$1.9 mil) to use in free agency. And this is to add to a team which was one healthy Manu from being back in the Finals. The situation is not as dire as you portray.

if rc can get smith this time
it would help because manu can only play half the game and gets paid like a superstar

[ducks]

WHY in pop's helm have the spurs never been able to move up in the draft?

[Mr. Body]

Thank you Mr. Body!! Finally someone with sense.

The alterna-view is that only by taking Butler off the books was signing Bonner even possible, which is kind of sad. That signing Scola was never even an option.

[Marcus Bryant]

You're missing the point, it seems. The question is not Butler. Butler is a separate issue. The issue is Bonner. They paid Bonner the money they could have paid Scola, thinking Bonner could play for them. He had already been on the team for a year, so how they got that impression is beyond me, but the point you're missing is that Scola's money went to Bonner.

They couldn't trade Bonner's rights to move Butler.

[ducks]

The alterna-view is that only by taking Butler off the books was signing Bonner even possible, which is kind of sad. That signing Scola was never even an option.

spurs were counting on splitter to play along side duncan
they thought he and splitter would be better then scola nd duncan

[Mr. Body]

WHY in pop's helm have the spurs never been able to move up in the draft?

They acquired a dizzying reputation for savvy, visionary drafting. This hurt in deals because teams were afraid of getting the short end of the stick. Ironic, as the Spurs actually weren't very good at savvy, visionary drafting.

[Mr. Body]

They couldn't trade Bonner's rights to move Butler.

Yes. I know.

They shouldn't have signed Bonner at all.

[Marcus Bryant]

SA has done a good job of rebuilding on the run several times where the roster appeared to be too old ten years ago (1999) outside of Duncan, and yet they did it.

Exactly. When forced to do so, they've managed to do it.




Unfortunately, without any opportunity to draft premium players, the FO has tried to swing for the fences for foreign guys in the last five years with limited success. I hope Ian can help next year. He has to.

Right. Somehow Spurs fans have take it at a given that they can just shake out international stars out of low draft picks. Mahinmi has the best shot of any in a while.

[Marcus Bryant]

Yes. I know.

They shouldn't have signed Bonner at all.

Then they would have been stuck with Butler instead of Bonner.

[Mr. Body]

spurs were counting on splitter to play along side duncan
they thought he and splitter would be better then scola nd duncan

I know.

They were wrong.

Never trade away talent, especially experienced talent, and especially when you are an aging dynastic team.

Never trade away talent just to save a buck, especially experience talent, and especially when you are an aging dynastic team.

If Scola proves not to fit, you can shop him around after a year.

[ducks]

I think spurs shopped scola

[MaNu4Tres]

I think spurs shopped scola

The problem with that is R.C has a knack for trading players when their stock is at their lowest.

[Extra Stout]

Let's see, they have an athletic young big coming in next season. They can draft a couple of perimeter talents at #26 and 45 in this year's draft. They have their MLE (~$5.5 mil) and LLE (~$1.9 mil) to use in free agency. And this is to add to a team which was one healthy Manu from being back in the Finals. The situation is not as dire as you portray.
The athletic big coming in is young, green, and unproven. You have to assume he is better than expected, and has a flat learning curve. That is just blind hope.

Given the Spurs draft history in the past five years, assuming that the #26 and #45 picks will amount to anything is likewise blind hope.

Given the players available in the free agent class, assuming the Spurs will acquire anything more than a fringe contributor is blind hope.

Meanwhile, there still will be four players over the age of 35 expected to play major roles, and the member of the Big 3 who was completely gassed in the playoffs, and whose effectiveness is most tied to his energy level, is going to log heavy Olympic minutes for Argentina. Oh, and the E-N reporter in charge of relaying official Spurs spin already shared with us that the Spurs expect big things from the corpse of Michael Finley to spell said Big 3 exhausted player.

Really, thoughts of contention next season rely almost exclusively on blind hope.

Best-case scenario is that my guess of 48 wins is too optimistic, and they fall further down the standings and get a better draft pick in '09... oh, wait, they already gave away that pick.

Really, the best chances at championships are already past. The window may get pried back open a little bit for the '10-'11 season, but for the next two years the Spurs are just playoff fodder.

[SenorSpur]

Let's not forget that the Spurs have had VERY few #1 picks in the Duncan era as well - all of which were at the very bottom of the round.

SA traded for Nazr M., Steve Kerr, Speedy Claxton, Kurt Thomas - That accounts for 5 #1 picks for those four players. I think most of these guys played a hand in SA championships, No?

It is very difficult to stay on top given the lousy drafting position they've had. I think every team in the NBA has had at least one lottery pick in the last ten years outside of the Spurs. It is realistic to think that this can continue indefinitely? Don't think so.

SA has done a good job of rebuilding on the run several times where the roster appeared to be too old ten years ago (1999) outside of Duncan, and yet they did it.

Unfortunately, without any opportunity to draft premium players, the FO has tried to swing for the fences for foreign guys in the last five years with limited success. I hope Ian can help next year. He has to.


That's a cop out and an excuse. Other perennial playoff teams like Detroit and Houston seem to routinely find talent, despite their less-than-favorable drafting position. Detroit has literally transformed their bench overnight into one of the better benches in this league. That can only happen if you do not "throw away" draft picks, invest in scouting and make the right decisions.

We all know the draft is a crap shoot, which is why teams have to do their homework. For many years now the Spurs have carefully mined the international market, at the expense of the domestic market. Now, it's coming back to haunt them. With the influx of talent pouring into the drafts from various sources, a team can be successful, if it does it homework. So don't try and convince me that lower round picks are useless.

Look, the Euro drafting strategy was not a bad one. Hell, it yielded Parker and Ginobili. It just should not have been the ONLY strategy. The strategy of adding experienced vets was also not a bad one. It yielded players like Kerr, Willis, Smith, Finley, et all. Again, it just should not have been the ONLY one. Adding at least 1 young player, even ever other year, would've helped fortify the bench to a point that perhaps this team would have had a more balanced roster. As has been pointed out, think what a boost the potential additions of a Josh Howard, a Luis Scola and even the development of Beno, would have made to this roster.

[Mr. Body]

Best-case scenario is that my guess of 48 wins is too optimistic, and they fall further down the standings and get a better draft pick in '09... oh, wait, they already gave away that pick.

Really, the best chances at championships are already past. The window may get pried back open a little bit for the '10-'11 season, but for the next two years the Spurs are just playoff fodder.

If they make the playoffs next year. We'll see a young and tough Portland team coming up, Oden healthy and maybe a good #13 pick added. The Clippers may manage a P.O. run with Brand back.

Ginobili may be 1/2 talent next year after the Olympics. The bench will be smeared shit.

The teams on the decline will be fighting to stay in the race. These include Dallas, Phoenix, and San Antonio. Denver has an outside shot of collapse as well.

The upshot is the Spurs get to keep their lottery-protected pick. I think they were wise enough to do that.

[Extra Stout]

If they make the playoffs next year. We'll see a young and tough Portland team coming up, Oden healthy and maybe a good #13 pick added. The Clippers may manage a P.O. run with Brand back.

Ginobili may be 1/2 talent next year after the Olympics. The bench will be smeared shit.

The teams on the decline will be fighting to stay in the race. These include Dallas, Phoenix, and San Antonio. Denver has an outside shot of collapse as well.

The upshot is the Spurs get to keep their lottery-protected pick. I think they were wise enough to do that.
Phoenix and Dallas will be falling off the face of the earth. Those were essentially .500 teams following their panic trades.

[Mr. Body]

Phoenix and Dallas will be falling off the face of the earth. Those were essentially .500 teams following their panic trades.

We weren't much better, were we? All year we rode on an extremely strong first two months.

If Diop goes back to Dallas they can piece it together. Phoenix has a tougher road to hoe, but has a decent draft pick.

I place San Antonio's fortunes equal to Dallas and better than Phoenix, but they should all be at the very end of the playoffs picture.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

well he might not be the player he is today if pop had him instead of the great overrated aj

but howard never has wanted ball in 4

Who really gives a shit if Howard doesn't want the ball in the fourth, we already have Tim, Manu, and Parker for that.

Stupid argument.

[Extra Stout]

We weren't much better, were we? All year we rode on an extremely strong first two months.

If Diop goes back to Dallas they can piece it together. Phoenix has a tougher road to hoe, but has a decent draft pick.

I place San Antonio's fortunes equal to Dallas and better than Phoenix, but they should all be at the very end of the playoffs picture.
Dallas shot its wad with the Kidd trade, even if they get Diop back. Kidd is done.

I expect Dallas and Phoenix both to miss the playoffs, while the Spurs qualify in the lower half of the order.

[Mr. Body]

Dallas shot its wad with the Kidd trade, even if they get Diop back. Kidd is done.

I expect Dallas and Phoenix both to miss the playoffs, while the Spurs qualify in the lower half of the order.

Kidd doesn't need to be more than a generous quarterback. The season will depend as always on Dirk and the Dirketeers. Kidd won't be playing Paul every night and still has enough to waste most of the PGs in the league.

[Marcus Bryant]

The athletic big coming in is young, green, and unproven. You have to assume he is better than expected, and has a flat learning curve. That is just blind hope.

Mahinmi is a little bit better talent than that. The Spurs are moving to a style which certainly fits his skill set.

So the Spurs are supposedly doomed because they haven't prepared by drafting young, long, athletic talent, but when they are bringing in that talent, then there's yet something else wrong with it, as if all young athletic talent that the Spurs could bring in would be polished and ready to play championship basketball.



Given the Spurs draft history in the past five years, assuming that the #26 and #45 picks will amount to anything is likewise blind hope.


Spurs were drafting international talent that could stay abroad for a while before they figured out what to do with it. Now they are drafting for a contributor next season.



Given the players available in the free agent class, assuming the Spurs will acquire anything more than a fringe contributor is blind hope.


We'll see. Since they are looking to rebuild the supporting cast rather than maintain, I think they'll be a little more aggressive in free agency this summer.



Meanwhile, there still will be four players over the age of 35 expected to play major roles, and the member of the Big 3 who was completely gassed in the playoffs, and whose effectiveness is most tied to his energy level, is going to log heavy Olympic minutes for Argentina. Oh, and the E-N reporter in charge of relaying official Spurs spin already shared with us that the Spurs expect big things from the corpse of Michael Finley to spell said Big 3 exhausted player.


Doubtful. Between the draft and free agency they will find some swingman talent, as the focus is now not on maintaining but regenerating the supporting cast. The Spurs have done rather well in the Duncan Era rebuilding an ineffective supporting cast when it looked like everything was lost.



Really, thoughts of contention next season rely almost exclusively on blind hope.

Best-case scenario is that my guess of 48 wins is too optimistic, and they fall further down the standings and get a better draft pick in '09... oh, wait, they already gave away that pick.

Really, the best chances at championships are already past. The window may get pried back open a little bit for the '10-'11 season, but for the next two years the Spurs are just playoff fodder.

Oh yes, it's all over. The Spurs are old and the rest of the league has passed them by. Rinse. Repeat.

[Extra Stout]

Mahinmi is a little bit better talent than that. The Spurs are moving to a style which certainly fits his skill set. http://www.nba.com/playerfile/amir_johnson/index.html


So the Spurs are supposedly doomed because they haven't prepared by drafting young, long, athletic talent, but when they are bringing in that talent, then there's yet something else wrong with it, as if all young athletic talent that the Spurs could bring in would be polished and ready to play championship basketball.
Please make up your mind. You can't simultaneously make excuses for why Ian Mahinmi won't be ready to play championship basketball in '08-'09 and then claim him as a reason the Spurs should be able to contend for a championship in '08-'09.


Spurs were drafting international talent that could stay abroad for a while before they figured out what to do with it. Now they are drafting for a contributor next season.
The Spurs aren't particularly adept at scouting domestic talent.


We'll see. Since they are looking to rebuild the supporting cast rather than maintain, I think they'll be a little more aggressive in free agency this summer.The free agent class is not good. They can't acquire players in free agency that aren't free agents.


Doubtful. Between the draft and free agency they will find some swingman talent, as the focus is now not on maintaining but regenerating the supporting cast. The Spurs have done rather well in the Duncan Era rebuilding an ineffective supporting cast when it looked like everything was lost.
That was five years ago. What they succeeded in doing then, they are failing to do now.


Oh yes, it's all over. The Spurs are old and the rest of the league has passed them by. Rinse. Repeat.
The Spurs are old and the rest of the league has passed them by. They will be first- or second-round playoff fodder for the next two years before another possible contending run or two.

[Twisted_Dawg]

no gm thought scola would rebound like he did
had ming been more healthy scola would not have seen as many minutes and not put up as good as stats


Apparently the Houston GM did.

[Twisted_Dawg]

For those of you who say Holt is a cheap ass owner.....wasn't he prepared to offer Jason Kidd a mega contract in 2003 on the foolish advice of the Buford & Popovich?

[angelbelow]

Bad moves.
Steve Smith(HITA), Rasho, S Jackson, Going after Kidd, Splitter, Elson, Scola
Hedon't, trading Barbosa, not recognizing to draft J Howard, resigning Bonner, not making any big moves that help the team with all star talent with trades in over 10 years.

a lot of these are justifable my man (unless youre a woman in which i apologize for calling you a man) but this is how it breaks down.

Steve Smith-we had ginobili coming up, we had stephen jackson coming up. unless youre talking about trading for him, because anderson wasnt going to beat out ginobili or sjax for playing time anyways.

Rasho-its true it was a mistake, but it was a calculated one, rasho was coming off a promising season 11 pts 1.5blks 6.5 rebs and he didnt do bad his first year here. 8.7pts, 2 blks, 7.7rebs. besides as soon as we realized he was no good, we traded him for 2 expiring contracts.

Going after kidd? at that point who wouldnt want him, he was 2nd in MVP voting and he was even a better shooter back then.

Elson-cheap athletic big, and i believe we won a championship with him on the team.

Barbosa-now this is a fun one, passing up on barbosa, in retrospect looks pretty bad. passing on josh howard who was drafted one pick after ours probably looks worst, but you know what? we were coming off a championship and we wanted to add some firepower. Let me ask you this, who was more accomplished as a scorer Michael Finley, or some rookie named barbosa? another shrewd move imo, finleys age shows now but hes given us some nice moments in the clutch.

Splitter/Scola - This one hurts, we let scola go because we drafted splitter, and plus all those other reasons im sure we all know about.

to conclude my post, if you saying that the spurs havent made any big trades to acquire allstar level talent in the last 10 years is a bad move, then im saying that that is a HORRIBLE argument. We won 4 championships in the past 9 years, In those 9 years the spurs amassed the highest winning percentage in ALL major sports. I can't imagine you being a real spurs fan.

[ducks]

Apparently the Houston GM did.

no he did not
thought the deal was worth it anyhow

[Harry Callahan]

That's a cop out and an excuse. Other perennial playoff teams like Detroit and Houston seem to routinely find talent, despite their less-than-favorable drafting position. Detroit has literally transformed their bench overnight into one of the better benches in this league. That can only happen if you do not "throw away" draft picks, invest in scouting and make the right decisions.

We all know the draft is a crap shoot, which is why teams have to do their homework. For many years now the Spurs have carefully mined the international market, at the expense of the domestic market. Now, it's coming back to haunt them. With the influx of talent pouring into the drafts from various sources, a team can be successful, if it does it homework. So don't try and convince me that lower round picks are useless.

Look, the Euro drafting strategy was not a bad one. Hell, it yielded Parker and Ginobili. It just should not have been the ONLY strategy. The strategy of adding experienced vets was also not a bad one. It yielded players like Kerr, Willis, Smith, Finley, et all. Again, it just should not have been the ONLY one. Adding at least 1 young player, even ever other year, would've helped fortify the bench to a point that perhaps this team would have had a more balanced roster. As has been pointed out, think what a boost the potential additions of a Josh Howard, a Luis Scola and even the development of Beno, would have made to this roster.

It's not a cop out and I never said lower picks are useless. Probably 80% of players picked after 20 don't become quality players. 4 out of 5 don't contribute much. Every team makes personnel mistakes.

When you have only four first round picks that you actually keep in ten years, it is difficult to have tremendous success with that few picks because some of them will not make it, I don't care who you are.

Take a closer look at Houston and Detroit (who do not "routinely find talent" as you say. The Rockets made nothing but bad drafting decisions from 1997 until 2002 when they drafted Yao (remember Eddie Griffin in 2001? - Look it up). They traded away lottery pick Rudy Gay (a possible star) for a decent role player Battier a couple of years ago. They traded for McGrady. Head and Landry are good draft picks.

Detroit has a couple two nice recent additions, but have the Spurs been drafting ahead of detroit to get Stucky or Maxiell? No they haven't. Please do not forget that the Pistons passed on D Wade, Anthony, and Bosh in 2003 for Darko. Did the Spurs have a #1 pick in 2003. No. The pistons let Okur go to Utah, too.

You have to have the opportunity to draft the right guy, and you don't hit on all players.

Parker, Beno, Ian, and Splitter are the only #1s SA has drafted in a decade because SA has traded picks for veteran players. With so few opportunities to even draft in the first round in the first place, it is TOTALLY unrealistic to pick four Tony Parkers with those four picks.

These are not cop outs or excuses. When the Spurs have drafted (at the 28th pick each time) they have actually drafted pretty well. All four of these guys have ability.

Hopefully, the #26 will yield a decent player who will play this year.

[Marcus Bryant]

http://www.nba.com/playerfile/amir_johnson/index.html


Sure, they had interest in Johnson last summer. With Splitter not coming in Mahinmi will be in the rotation next season.




Please make up your mind. You can't simultaneously make excuses for why Ian Mahinmi won't be ready to play championship basketball in '08-'09 and then claim him as a reason the Spurs should be able to contend for a championship in '08-'09.

You can't castigate the Spurs for not having young talent lined up and then ignore Mahinmi. Mahinmi will be raw but he certainly can be a contributor next season. Also, knocking the Spurs for not having that much young talent and then saying that young talent isn't good for winning a championship is a bit contradictory. Are the Spurs competing for the Most Ballas in the NBA award?



The Spurs aren't particularly adept at scouting domestic talent.


Sure. So draft for athleticism. At least you can keep Ginobili's minutes down during the regular season.




The free agent class is not good. They can't acquire players in free agency that aren't free agents.


There are quite a few useful and available players for the Spurs' needs.




That was five years ago. What they succeeded in doing then, they are failing to do now.


They've certainly regenerated the supporting cast over the last 5 years on the fly. What are they failing to do? It's June 6th.



The Spurs are old and the rest of the league has passed them by. They will be first- or second-round playoff fodder for the next two years before another possible contending run or two.

They passed all but 3 teams by this season.

[timvp]

I see being concerned about the Spurs but I just don't see where the 48-win-maybe-no-playoff talk is coming from. The Spurs were old ... but that was mostly by design. The Spurs didn't try to get younger last summer and failed. They tried to get as old and veteran as possible.

And even given their age, they were one healthy Manu ankle away from gas being put into the river boats. The Spurs didn't get it done but I don't see how they aren't going to improve.

Finley was a shell of a basketball player. Whoever they bring in will be better. Anyone will produce better than Horry. You can't do worse than Vaughn. Then add those upgrades to a team that was close to winning championship number five and I don't see the problem.

And posters are saying the Spurs don't have assets ... I disagree. When was the last time the Spurs could use the entire MLE? This is the first time they'll use every drop of it in years. Add in a 25th pick, which is lower than usual, and two second round picks, the bi-annual LLE, a couple trade exceptions, a number of tradeable expired contracts, four or five roster spots to work with and no worries about going over the lux tax threshold for the first time since 2004 ....... and things are bad? Really?

As constructed this second, I agree the Spurs won't win the 2009 championship. But the Spurs have a ton of options this summer and as much ammo to get things done as they've had since the 2003 offseason.

And the competition is solid but not too impressive. The Lakers? Eh, Bynum will be an upgrade but Odom sucks at small forward, Gasol is more center than power forward, Fisher is their glue guy and he's almost ready to be sent to the glue factory and Kobe has more mileage than anyone on the Spurs. Everyone gets all flustered by their supposed awesome bench but their bench consists of Vujacic, Farmar, Walton and Turiaf. All pretty good players but far from the Dream Team that they are made out to be. Are any of those players even above average NBA contributors? PJax is a great coach and Kobe is a great player but honestly the Kobe and Shaq Lakers were about five times as intimidating. If the Spurs rid themselves of their old parts, add a hint of athleticism and stay healthy, I love their chances.

The Celtics are good but they are even older than the Spurs. Cassell and Brown make Horry and Finley look like youngsters. Detroit in the East is getting rebuilt. The Cavs are still a one-man team.

In the West you have the up-and-coming Hornets but Byron Scott usually alienates his team after a good playoff run or two. Plus a team built around four injury prone players likely won't have the planets align ever again where they will all be healthy. The Jazz are good but Boozer is declining and Kirilenko and Okur make them beatable. Portland is rising but they are still a couple years away from contending.

I just don't understand where the sense of total and complete doom is coming from. The Spurs have the means to get better and the parts that are leaving automatically make the team better. As always, it'll come down to health and the Spurs Big Three is pretty damn durable compared to the foundation other teams are built upon.

I was much more worried after 2006 than this summer. Even 2004 was bleaker. This is the brightest post playoff defeat summer since 2002.

[Mr.Bottomtooth]

:tu 100% agreed.

[ducks]

I think the spurs could win it all next year
but it depends on alot of things
ian
draft
fa's
health

[Mr. Body]

And posters are saying the Spurs don't have assets ... I disagree. When was the last time the Spurs could use the entire MLE? This is the first time they'll use every drop of it in years.

Two years ago - split between Butler and Elson.

But disagree in part. Things are pretty lousy. There's a lot of revamping to do but not a lot available to do it with. They'll be a playoff team again next year.

[Marcus Bryant]

Lousy? They have their 3 stars set. All they have to do is fill in the supporting cast.

[timvp]

Two years ago - split between Butler and Elson.It wasn't the whole MLE they split.

[Mr. Body]

OK. Even more evidence, perhaps -- you see them spending that kind of money on a single player?

[timvp]

OK. Even more evidence, perhaps -- you see them spending that kind of money on a single player?Yes. There is no luxury tax concerns for the first time since 2004 so there's no reason not to spend every dime.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

OK. Even more evidence, perhaps -- you see them spending that kind of money on a single player?

I don't see the MLE being a big deal to spend, they're nowhere near the lux tax.

Spurs current salary commitments:

2008-2009: 53 million
2009-2010: 52 million
2010-2011: 32 million

And you're talking about the lux tax threshold, which has been the hard cap for the Spurs ownership group, being up at $70 million for the coming season.

Essentially, the Spurs have $17 million in wiggle room this summer, $18 million next year.

[Mr. Body]

Last question then -- can the MLE be for 2 years. Or, say, 3 years with team/player option after 2? How do they protect their 2010 cap?

[angelbelow]

Last question then -- can the MLE be for 2 years. Or, say, 3 years with team/player option after 2? How do they protect their 2010 cap?

youre posts in this thread have mainly been negative or/and overly critical. bare with us fans as we are all curious to see the changes that we all expect to be made this summer. if at the beginning of training camp our roster is the same, then we'll be negative together. until then have some faith in rc, pop, duncan, and the entire spurs family.

to answer youre question, the MLE could be used to sign a better for however long they want. team options, player options etc are all available.

[rascal]

a lot of these are justifable my man (unless youre a woman in which i apologize for calling you a man) but this is how it breaks down.

Steve Smith-we had ginobili coming up, we had stephen jackson coming up. unless youre talking about trading for him, because anderson wasnt going to beat out ginobili or sjax for playing time anyways.

Rasho-its true it was a mistake, but it was a calculated one, rasho was coming off a promising season 11 pts 1.5blks 6.5 rebs and he didnt do bad his first year here. 8.7pts, 2 blks, 7.7rebs. besides as soon as we realized he was no good, we traded him for 2 expiring contracts.

Going after kidd? at that point who wouldnt want him, he was 2nd in MVP voting and he was even a better shooter back then.

Elson-cheap athletic big, and i believe we won a championship with him on the team.

Barbosa-now this is a fun one, passing up on barbosa, in retrospect looks pretty bad. passing on josh howard who was drafted one pick after ours probably looks worst, but you know what? we were coming off a championship and we wanted to add some firepower. Let me ask you this, who was more accomplished as a scorer Michael Finley, or some rookie named barbosa? another shrewd move imo, finleys age shows now but hes given us some nice moments in the clutch.

Splitter/Scola - This one hurts, we let scola go because we drafted splitter, and plus all those other reasons im sure we all know about.

to conclude my post, if you saying that the spurs havent made any big trades to acquire allstar level talent in the last 10 years is a bad move, then im saying that that is a HORRIBLE argument. We won 4 championships in the past 9 years, In those 9 years the spurs amassed the highest winning percentage in ALL major sports. I can't imagine you being a real spurs fan.


Steve Smith was suppose to be the big backcourt scorer when they got him and ended up a bench player. He was clearly on the decline thats why he was being shopped by Portland. The spurs thought they were getting a better player then what he turned out to be. Sprewell would have been a better option at that time. They miscalculated Smiths value and did not realize he was way past his best years.

Rasho was the big free agent signing the team waited 3 years on. Nothing more than a role player cailber type of player. That was the year they were suppose to get a max all star and went after Kidd. Kidd was not a good fit anyways since they already had an up and coming future star in Parker. J O'Neal would have been the better target.

9 points 8 rebounds from Rasho is not what you get when you plan all your moves for 3 years around getting a max star as a free agent signing.

The whole max free agent plan was a failure.

Elson was not a very good pickup and the faster they got rid of him the better. They won despite him.

Bonner, why did they bother extending him if he isn't good enough to play in the playoffs?

Scola/Splitter Got nothing of value back in the Scola trade. Decided to keep bonner instead. Splitter looks to also be a wasted foreign pick. You think they would have been more sure that a guy would come over and play after what happened with Scola.

Steven Jackson They did not want to pay him after he proved he could hit big shots in the playoffs and instead let him walk.

Barbosa and J Howard They did not recognize these guys would turn into very good players and let them slip away. They could have had either with just a late round draft pick.

Yes in 10 years the spurs have not gotten any really good players through trade. Many players have switched teams through trade during that time and many players went for cheap shit in return. what was wrong with trying to get R Wallace when Portland was giving him away or targeting a young sf like Caron Butler when his value was not high? Or getting Sprewell when GS wanted to get rid of him. The spurs could have had more titles with sprewell in the backcourt instead of S Smith. A good front office lands players through trades.

This is about player acquisistions that Po/RC have made not on the titles they won. But if you want to talk about titles, Duncans greatness has covered up a very inadequate front office. Shaq and Duncan have been the two most dominate big men in the game over the last 10 years. Those type of dominate post players have historically won titles.

They won 2 titles not so much by their moves but by having two dominate post players in Robinson and Duncan when most teams did not even have one good one and the other two with two great low round draft picks that panned out and Duncan in his prime and no other dominate team during that time.

[Mr. Body]

youre posts in this thread have mainly been negative or/and overly critical. bare with us fans as we are all curious to see the changes that we all expect to be made this summer. if at the beginning of training camp our roster is the same, then we'll be negative together. until then have some faith in rc, pop, duncan, and the entire spurs family.

to answer youre question, the MLE could be used to sign a better for however long they want. team options, player options etc are all available.

Thanks for the well-wishing, but you didn't really answer the question.

What are the technical requirements for the MLE? I believe there is a minimum number of years it must be signed for.

[JamStone]

You can go team by team in the NBA, or even in any of the major team sports, and you will find several mistakes by management regardless of the success of each team. Mistakes in the draft happen all the time, with every team, from the #1 draft pick to late second round picks. It's been said so much, but the cliche is true that the draft is not an exact science. NBA GMs and scouts cannot predict in absolute how a player will develop his skills, how mentally tough he is or can become, how injury proof he will be throughout his career.

Of course you can criticize the Spurs for some of their draft maneuvering since the Tony Parker draft pick, but you can do that with every single NBA team over a period of time.

Likewise, making the right moves with free agency and trades is also not a sure-fire process. First of all, you can target the best players for free agency and trade, but it's always at least a two-way street, sometimes a three-way street. The player has to want to join the team at the price the team can afford when it comes to free agency. With trades, not only should there be player interest, but the willingness of the other team to make a deal with the pieces you are willing to trade. It's not always an easy task.

All that said, one can definitely criticize the Spurs management for not being more proactive in replenishing the team during their championship run with some youth and athleticism. They did wait too long. The process should have begun in the summer of 2005. In fairness, they tried with the draft of Ian Mahinmi. But, their other moves that summer can be questioned to a certain degree. With already an aging bench and role players like Bowen, Barry, and Horry, they went out and added Finley, Van Exel, and Oberto. That was the summer they probably should have targeted younger, more athletic role players. They did the following year with Jackie Butler and James White, but with as little money as possible, the very cheap they could go to get youth and athleticism.

Criticism is fair because in the business of professional sports, even great teams and organizations must strive to continue to get better. In some ways, the Spurs have appeared like they are trying to hold on for dear life as long as they can, instead of proactively trying to replenish the roster.

You cannot argue with the success of the Spurs, but you can question how they have been able to re-tool during this championship run. It's possible they can make 2-3 strong moves in free agency and in the draft and maybe push to extend their success. But, right now, it's questionable at best. The league is getting younger and better. And, the Spurs currently have several needs to address.

[JamStone]

Last question then -- can the MLE be for 2 years. Or, say, 3 years with team/player option after 2? How do they protect their 2010 cap?

I'm under the impression that the MLE can be for 1 year if both sides agree.

Not completely sure, but I'm pretty sure the MLE is like any other contract offer. It can be between 1-6 years in length.

[NewJerSpur]

I was much more worried after 2006 than this summer. Even 2004 was bleaker. This is the brightest post playoff defeat summer since 2002.

Agreed, especially in terms of the 2006 Dallas team. It seemed as if they'd finally "put it together" so to speak (meaning they realized that there is more to the game than just scoring). They had a nice blend of youngs and vets and Avery scared them into playing harder in every aspect of the game. They torched the Spurs in transition and had even more free reign in the middle of the lane than N.O. this past postseason. Diop had the ability to frustrate TD and Harris wore Tony out on the defensive end with his quickness and that mid-ranged jumper he developed. Terry seemed to be the missing link that finally gave the team a real closer as well as some heart and fire. Oh, and their offense never slept because the bench was equipped to score as well.

-The Lakers outplayed the Spurs without Bynum, but I'd still hesitate to call them the "better" team overall....maybe the better word would be "fresher".

-N.O. could become the next Pheonix Suns: Equipped with the best PG in the league and possible future MVP and "all the right weapons" yet unable to summon the mental toughness to win on the big stage. They botched a prime opportunity this year and they are only guaranteed a high level of production from about 3 of their players next season.

-Houston....will they ever get over their injury issues before T. Mac eventually moves on?

-Pheonix: Remains to be seen what a new coach can bring to the table, but the team has a loser's mentality when facing the Spurs in critical situations, and the 1st round of this postseason didn't help matters much.

-Utah: Still doesn't have a real post threat or lane clogger that can take pressure off of Boozer...this in a conference where size is now at a premium.

-Blazers: Mighty young...mighty young indeed.

-Dallas now: Back to playing "shaky" to "no" defense....that trade has messed them up for some time to come even if the series ramifications of it aren't seen for a few seasons. They should still make the playoffsa though.

Going back to my original point (or rather Timvp's point) there have been bleaker situations and longer championship droughts, yet the team has continued to move forward. Time to learn from any past mistakes and see what unforseen cogs can be brought in and developed to aid the system. I think Ime and KT are good building blocks.

[leemajors]

i'm surprised lexi didn't declare for the draft and not work out for anyone. of course, someone would probably scoop him up before the Spurs anyway.

[timvp]

What are the technical requirements for the MLE? I believe there is a minimum number of years it must be signed for.The MLE can be used to sign for contracts up to five years with raises of 8%. Yes, it can be be used to sign a player to a one-year contract. It can be split as many ways as possible.

This summer, a max MLE contract runs about 5-years and $32M ... so it's a pretty nice chunk of change. The LLE can be up to a 2-year, $4M contract.

I fully expect the Spurs to use as much of these exceptions as possible this summer.

[timvp]

I don't see the MLE being a big deal to spend, they're nowhere near the lux tax.

Spurs current salary commitments:

2008-2009: 53 million
2009-2010: 52 million
2010-2011: 32 million

And you're talking about the lux tax threshold, which has been the hard cap for the Spurs ownership group, being up at $70 million for the coming season.

Essentially, the Spurs have $17 million in wiggle room this summer, $18 million next year.By my calculations, the Spurs have about $57M in contracts for next season. That's counting TD, TP, Ginobili, Bowen, Oberto, Bonner, Vaughn, Udoka, Mahinmi and Barry. Add in a couple rookies and then it basically comes out to the Spurs having about $10-$12M in wiggle room to add the remaining two or three players they need.

That's a lot of money ... especially compared to the pennies the Spurs have had in prior summers.

[T Park]

It would be great if they would spend it right for the first time in many summers.

[itzsoweezee]

I just don't understand where the sense of total and complete doom is coming from. The Spurs have the means to get better and the parts that are leaving automatically make the team better. As always, it'll come down to health and the Spurs Big Three is pretty damn durable compared to the foundation other teams are built upon.

I was much more worried after 2006 than this summer. Even 2004 was bleaker. This is the brightest post playoff defeat summer since 2002.


the west is the best it has been in more than a decade. maybe ever. the hornets are good. really good. and they're only going to get better. the spurs can't beat the hornets if the hornets have a legit bench. the blazers are going to be much improved next year. the lakers are going to be much improved next year. the rockets are going to be a contender if yao can stay healthy.

manu and tim are not the players they once were. you can chalk it up to manu's ankle being hurt. but what is more likely at this point in his career, manu being hurt or manu not being hurt?

you think even older versions of manu and tim, plus tony and some FA they sign for $10/year is going to cut it two years down the line? keep dreaming.

[angelbelow]

Thanks for the well-wishing, but you didn't really answer the question.

What are the technical requirements for the MLE? I believe there is a minimum number of years it must be signed for.

i thought i fully answered your question when i said they can sign a player to how ever long they want, meaning that if the team only wants to sign him for 1 year, then 1 year it is. there are no requirements in minimum number of years.

[angelbelow]

Steve Smith was suppose to be the big backcourt scorer when they got him and ended up a bench player. He was clearly on the decline thats why he was being shopped by Portland. The spurs thought they were getting a better player then what he turned out to be. Sprewell would have been a better option at that time. They miscalculated Smiths value and did not realize he was way past his best years.

Rasho was the big free agent signing the team waited 3 years on. Nothing more than a role player cailber type of player. That was the year they were suppose to get a max all star and went after Kidd. Kidd was not a good fit anyways since they already had an up and coming future star in Parker. J O'Neal would have been the better target.

9 points 8 rebounds from Rasho is not what you get when you plan all your moves for 3 years around getting a max star as a free agent signing.

The whole max free agent plan was a failure.

Elson was not a very good pickup and the faster they got rid of him the better. They won despite him.

Bonner, why did they bother extending him if he isn't good enough to play in the playoffs?

Scola/Splitter Got nothing of value back in the Scola trade. Decided to keep bonner instead. Splitter looks to also be a wasted foreign pick. You think they would have been more sure that a guy would come over and play after what happened with Scola.

Steven Jackson They did not want to pay him after he proved he could hit big shots in the playoffs and instead let him walk.

Barbosa and J Howard They did not recognize these guys would turn into very good players and let them slip away. They could have had either with just a late round draft pick.

Yes in 10 years the spurs have not gotten any really good players through trade. Many players have switched teams through trade during that time and many players went for cheap shit in return. what was wrong with trying to get R Wallace when Portland was giving him away or targeting a young sf like Caron Butler when his value was not high? Or getting Sprewell when GS wanted to get rid of him. The spurs could have had more titles with sprewell in the backcourt instead of S Smith. A good front office lands players through trades.

This is about player acquisistions that Po/RC have made not on the titles they won. But if you want to talk about titles, Duncans greatness has covered up a very inadequate front office. Shaq and Duncan have been the two most dominate big men in the game over the last 10 years. Those type of dominate post players have historically won titles.

They won 2 titles not so much by their moves but by having two dominate post players in Robinson and Duncan when most teams did not even have one good one and the other two with two great low round draft picks that panned out and Duncan in his prime and no other dominate team during that time.

Again, it doesnt matter if steve smith sucked or if he worked out, it really doesnt. the fact of the matter is that we had Manu Ginobili who was ready to take over, and Sjax. Sure steve smith was on the decline, but we had two absolute studs coming up, and with derek anderson here, it would have been 3 young wing players, at least steve provided some leader that derek anderson could not.

Rasho-most quality big men in this league get paid damn well, esp the starters. we signed rasho partly because of a concept called money management. Sure we can give JO the max, Jkidd the max, and live with 40 million+ dedicated to two players. so we now have 37 million to spend on 10 more JUST TO REACH THE LEAGUE MINIMUM in players. We paid rasho 7-8 million a year, and because of the limited quality bigs, i think that is a appropriate signing. Btw, with 40 mill dedicated to 2 players, we would probably have no room for ginobili, parker, or even brent. ginobili probably would have taken that 5 year 60 mil from denver and parker would have taken a 10 mil somewhere else.

I think giving out the max to more than one player on a team is just hurting your salary cap. Look at the suns, they havent been able to surround their team with enough talent for the past 4 years. theyve have to trade their rookies for cash. They could have had Deng, Nate Robinson, etc. But they couldnt, you know why? because nash has a near max, amare has a max, marion when he was here had a max, shaq, now has a max, barbosa has a 7 mil, diaw has a 9mil bell has the full MLE. WITH JUST 6 PLAYERS THEY HAVE A 62 million dollar payroll. surely you can see why handling out max contracts to 2 more players can be devastating. I can use the Lakers as an example too, they look awesome now, but they will run into trouble as soon as next year. unless odom or bynum is willing to take a HUGE paycut, lakers are screwed. Kobe 20+ gasol 13+ odom 13+, Vlad/Walton 10+ b/t the 2 and you have bynum ready for an extension. Lets not kid ourselves, bynum is gonna get 10+. there you have 6 players again potentially earning 66 million.

barbosa and howard, as i explained before, our man was finley. we traded/passed up those players to acquire michael finley. again, in retrospect it doesnt look great because we could have used howard or barbosa. but you must understand that AT THE TIME, Finley was absolutely the smarter move.

you want us to make a play at players when their value is low, what happens you do understand that if they break out, their going to get offers and we'll lose them anyways right? if we went after Caron, sure that would have been absolutely deadly, but the very next year when he becomes a FA hes gonna walk out and make 10+ somewhere else because we cannot afford him. and if you want to trade for him, then we are trading our pieces away for 1 potentially good season. also you make it seem like its easy to land a player when a team is having a fire sale with their players, you have 29 other teams to compete with. sometimes other teams can just offer better deals, doesn't mean they didn't try, doesn't mean our FO is worthless.

And how soon we forget, i honestly think you are not a spurs fan, and if you are it HAD to be recent. we didnt win 2 championships JUST because of 2 dominant big men. Incase you forgot, AJ hit the game winner in 99. Also we acquired veteran pieces like Steve Kerr, Jerome kersey, Mario Elli, and we had sean Luck_The_Fakers_Luck_The_Fakers_Luck_The_Fakers_Lu ck_The_Fakers_Luck_The_Fakers_Luck_The_Fakers_ and already mentioned, the little general. In 2003, we were EVEN deeper than 99, We had a monster in Duncan, but Robinson was barely a shade of his old self. In a strict statistical sense, rasho had better numbers than robinson. This was also the year we introduced Manu ginobili and saw the emergence of Sjax. Ofcousre Bowen was there, steve smith, speedy, kevin willis, kerr, ferry, to round out our bench. As you can clearly see, rather than the two headed monster that people conveniently attribute our championship to, we actually had what you call a basketball team.

[T Park]

the west is the best it has been in more than a decade. maybe ever. the hornets are good. really good. and they're only going to get better. the spurs can't beat the hornets if the hornets have a legit bench. the blazers are going to be much improved next year. the lakers are going to be much improved next year. the rockets are going to be a contender if yao can stay healthy.

manu and tim are not the players they once were. you can chalk it up to manu's ankle being hurt. but what is more likely at this point in his career, manu being hurt or manu not being hurt?

you think even older versions of manu and tim, plus tony and some FA they sign for $10/year is going to cut it two years down the line? keep dreaming.

Yeah that Tim Duncan is washed up, as evidenced by his play.

Also, where is the guarantee the Lakers will be better?

Where is the guarantee that Peja and Chandler will stay healthy?

Where is the guarantee that the Blazers will improve and or stay healthy?

[itzsoweezee]

Yeah that Tim Duncan is washed up, as evidenced by his play.

Also, where is the guarantee the Lakers will be better?

Where is the guarantee that Peja and Chandler will stay healthy?

Where is the guarantee that the Blazers will improve and or stay healthy?

who the hell is talking about guarantees? i'm making rationale guesses based on the evidence. you're clutching at pipe dreams.

[objective]

Rasho-most quality big men in this league get paid damn well, esp the starters. we signed rasho partly because of a concept called money management. Sure we can give JO the max, Jkidd the max, and live with 40 million+ dedicated to two players. so we now have 37 million to spend on 10 more JUST TO REACH THE LEAGUE MINIMUM in players. We paid rasho 7-8 million a year, and because of the limited quality bigs, i think that is a appropriate signing. Btw, with 40 mill dedicated to 2 players, we would probably have no room for ginobili, parker, or even brent. ginobili probably would have taken that 5 year 60 mil from denver and parker would have taken a 10 mil somewhere else.

In general I don't quite fault the Spurs for Rasho, though I was sure at the time that the deal sucked and Rasho wasn't the right fit.

The problem was that PJ Brown turned down their 4 year, 32 million dollar offer. After that happened, there wasn't much left, so they gambled on Rasho.

[Extra Stout]

Again, it doesnt matter if steve smith sucked or if he worked out, it really doesnt. the fact of the matter is that we had Manu Ginobili who was ready to take over, and Sjax. Sure steve smith was on the decline, but we had two absolute studs coming up, and with derek anderson here, it would have been 3 young wing players, at least steve provided some leader that derek anderson could not.
The acquisition of Steve Smith was a case of the Spurs getting what scraps they could in the S&T deal once Derek Anderson announced he was going to Portland. I don't remember having any delusions about how limited he was going to be. That the Spurs went 58-24 with the garbage lineup they trotted out in 2001-02 was a testament to the greatness of Tim Duncan at the peak of his powers.


Rasho-most quality big men in this league get paid damn well, esp the starters. we signed rasho partly because of a concept called money management. Sure we can give JO the max, Jkidd the max, and live with 40 million+ dedicated to two players. so we now have 37 million to spend on 10 more JUST TO REACH THE LEAGUE MINIMUM in players. We paid rasho 7-8 million a year, and because of the limited quality bigs, i think that is a appropriate signing.
Obviously, the Spurs did not agree that it was such a good price since they were so eager to dump him. Rasho was what they settled for when they couldn't get any first-tier players with their free agent money. Rasho had a good scoring game once against the Spurs, and Pop liked him. That summer was turning into a huge bust until Sam Presti, who in actuality was the real brains of the operation, figured out a way to get Hedo Turkoglu for nothing. That was slick.


Btw, with 40 mill dedicated to 2 players, we would probably have no room for ginobili, parker, or even brent. ginobili probably would have taken that 5 year 60 mil from denver and parker would have taken a 10 mil somewhere else.
If the Spurs had acquired Kidd, they never would have had enough money to keep Ginobili. Parker would have demanded a trade. They lucked out when Kidd decided to stay in New Jersey. Had R.C. gotten his way, the Spurs contending days would have been long over. They win in spite of R.C.


I can use the Lakers as an example too, they look awesome now, but they will run into trouble as soon as next year. unless odom or bynum is willing to take a HUGE paycut, lakers are screwed. Kobe 20+ gasol 13+ odom 13+, Vlad/Walton 10+ b/t the 2 and you have bynum ready for an extension. Lets not kid ourselves, bynum is gonna get 10+. there you have 6 players again potentially earning 66 million.
It's the Los Angeles Lakers. If they want to pay the luxury tax, it doesn't kill them. If they don't, players like Radmanovic and Walton are easily expendable.


barbosa and howard, as i explained before, our man was finley. we traded/passed up those players to acquire michael finley. again, in retrospect it doesnt look great because we could have used howard or barbosa. but you must understand that AT THE TIME, Finley was absolutely the smarter move.
That is absolute and utter nonsense. The Spurs acquired Finley two years after the 2003 draft flub. They threw away that pick to conserve cap space for the Jason Kidd run. They lucked out in not getting him, but had they drafted Howard in 2003, he never joins the Mavericks, never creates the infamous mismatch in combination with Nowitzki, the Mavs never get far enough against the Spurs for Manu's foul to make a difference, and right now we're bummed because the Lakers just returned the favor in preventing a four-peat.

They got Finley in 2005 because of a one-time luxury tax amnesty event where Mark Cuban could waive a player and not pay the tax on his salary (though he still had to pay the salary). Finley chose the Spurs over the Miami Heat.


also you make it seem like its easy to land a player when a team is having a fire sale with their players, you have 29 other teams to compete with. sometimes other teams can just offer better deals, doesn't mean they didn't try, doesn't mean our FO is worthless.
Neither are they the transcendant geniuses people make them out to be. When Presti was there, they could make magic things happen with the salary-cap rules. Look at what he did in Seattle: he got draft picks from Phoenix in order to take Kurt Thomas off their hands, then got another pick for passing Thomas off to the Spurs. He turned thin air and a four-month rental of Kurt Thomas into three first-round picks. That's a genius. R.C. Buford struck it rich on draft picks nearly a decade ago, and got credit for Presti's brainstorms, and people make him out to be a model GM, which is nonsense. The league has long since caught up on international scouting, he's repeatedly flubbed basic details like dates of birth and buyout clauses that have cost the Spurs chances at players who can contribute, and frankly it's hard to see where he's brought enough to the table to have any confidence that he knows what he's doing enough to restock this roster.


we didnt win 2 championships JUST because of 2 dominant big men. Incase you forgot, AJ hit the game winner in 99. Also we acquired veteran pieces like Steve Kerr, Jerome kersey, Mario Elli, and we had Sean Elliott (learn to spell) already mentioned, the little general.
The Spurs have never had much of a problem getting aging veteran free agents to fill out the roster. Following 1999, that team aged out of contention rapidly, culminating in a 2001 Western final where the Lakers posted the worst beating on the Spurs in NBA playoff history. That team featured 108-year old Terry Porter at the point, who was passed up by elderly ladies in motorized carts as he brought the ball up the court.

The team was rebuilt because the Spurs struck draft gold in Parker and Ginobili, and made a sage move in acquiring Bruce Bowen as a free agent. Everything else was gravy.

Now they're back in the same boat they were in back in 2001. They lost to the Lakers in the WCF. I'm glad they at least were competitive instead of going down 111-72 and 111-82 to close out a sweep, but clearly there are a lot of old pieces to replace. I don't even detect any sense of urgency on Pop's part that they need to get that much younger. He and R.C. seem quite content to bring in Mahinmi to replace Horry, sign a swingman with the MLE, and grab a scrub point guard to replace Jacque Vaughn. That will still leave senior citizens Kurt Thomas, Michael Finley, Bruce Bowen, and Brent Barry on the team, expected to play significant roles. That just isn't going to cut it anymore. The 2008 Spurs already were the oldest team ever to make a conference final. I don't support the apparent effort to break that record next season. It won't succeed.

[objective]

R.C. Buford struck it rich on draft picks nearly a decade ago, and got credit for Presti's brainstorms, and people make him out to be a model GM, which is nonsense. The league has long since caught up on international scouting, he's repeatedly flubbed basic details like dates of birth and buyout clauses that have cost the Spurs chances at players who can contribute, and frankly it's hard to see where he's brought enough to the table to have any confidence that he knows what he's doing enough to restock this roster.

Ouch.

It hurts because it rings true.

[Mr. Body]

Now they're back in the same boat they were in back in 2001. They lost to the Lakers in the WCF. I'm glad they at least were competitive instead of going down 111-72 and 111-82 to close out a sweep, but clearly there are a lot of old pieces to replace. I don't even detect any sense of urgency on Pop's part that they need to get that much younger. He and R.C. seem quite content to bring in Mahinmi to replace Horry, sign a swingman with the MLE, and grab a scrub point guard to replace Jacque Vaughn. That will still leave senior citizens Kurt Thomas, Michael Finley, Bruce Bowen, and Brent Barry on the team, expected to play significant roles. That just isn't going to cut it anymore. The 2008 Spurs already were the oldest team ever to make a conference final. I don't support the apparent effort to break that record next season. It won't succeed.

This is all excellent. We need Presti back; won't happen. But what's sad is that everything shown by Pop and Buford in the last two years (at least) has been lethargy and self-satisfaction. I don't expect them to show panic, but their tepid public pronouncements gibe perfectly with their tepid and meager personnel moves.

[Blackjack]

The acquisition of Steve Smith was a case of the Spurs getting what scraps they could in the S&T deal once Derek Anderson announced he was going to Portland. I don't remember having any delusions about how limited he was going to be. That the Spurs went 58-24 with the garbage lineup they trotted out in 2001-02 was a testament to the greatness of Tim Duncan at the peak of his powers.


Obviously, the Spurs did not agree that it was such a good price since they were so eager to dump him. Rasho was what they settled for when they couldn't get any first-tier players with their free agent money. Rasho had a good scoring game once against the Spurs, and Pop liked him. That summer was turning into a huge bust until Sam Presti, who in actuality was the real brains of the operation, figured out a way to get Hedo Turkoglu for nothing. That was slick.


If the Spurs had acquired Kidd, they never would have had enough money to keep Ginobili. Parker would have demanded a trade. They lucked out when Kidd decided to stay in New Jersey. Had R.C. gotten his way, the Spurs contending days would have been long over. They win in spite of R.C.


It's the Los Angeles Lakers. If they want to pay the luxury tax, it doesn't kill them. If they don't, players like Radmanovic and Walton are easily expendable.


That is absolute and utter nonsense. The Spurs acquired Finley two years after the 2003 draft flub. They threw away that pick to conserve cap space for the Jason Kidd run. They lucked out in not getting him, but had they drafted Howard in 2003, he never joins the Mavericks, never creates the infamous mismatch in combination with Nowitzki, the Mavs never get far enough against the Spurs for Manu's foul to make a difference, and right now we're bummed because the Lakers just returned the favor in preventing a four-peat.

They got Finley in 2005 because of a one-time luxury tax amnesty event where Mark Cuban could waive a player and not pay the tax on his salary (though he still had to pay the salary). Finley chose the Spurs over the Miami Heat.


Neither are they the transcendant geniuses people make them out to be. When Presti was there, they could make magic things happen with the salary-cap rules. Look at what he did in Seattle: he got draft picks from Phoenix in order to take Kurt Thomas off their hands, then got another pick for passing Thomas off to the Spurs. He turned thin air and a four-month rental of Kurt Thomas into three first-round picks. That's a genius. R.C. Buford struck it rich on draft picks nearly a decade ago, and got credit for Presti's brainstorms, and people make him out to be a model GM, which is nonsense. The league has long since caught up on international scouting, he's repeatedly flubbed basic details like dates of birth and buyout clauses that have cost the Spurs chances at players who can contribute, and frankly it's hard to see where he's brought enough to the table to have any confidence that he knows what he's doing enough to restock this roster.


The Spurs have never had much of a problem getting aging veteran free agents to fill out the roster. Following 1999, that team aged out of contention rapidly, culminating in a 2001 Western final where the Lakers posted the worst beating on the Spurs in NBA playoff history. That team featured 108-year old Terry Porter at the point, who was passed up by elderly ladies in motorized carts as he brought the ball up the court.

The team was rebuilt because the Spurs struck draft gold in Parker and Ginobili, and made a sage move in acquiring Bruce Bowen as a free agent. Everything else was gravy.

Now they're back in the same boat they were in back in 2001. They lost to the Lakers in the WCF. I'm glad they at least were competitive instead of going down 111-72 and 111-82 to close out a sweep, but clearly there are a lot of old pieces to replace. I don't even detect any sense of urgency on Pop's part that they need to get that much younger. He and R.C. seem quite content to bring in Mahinmi to replace Horry, sign a swingman with the MLE, and grab a scrub point guard to replace Jacque Vaughn. That will still leave senior citizens Kurt Thomas, Michael Finley, Bruce Bowen, and Brent Barry on the team, expected to play significant roles. That just isn't going to cut it anymore. The 2008 Spurs already were the oldest team ever to make a conference final. I don't support the apparent effort to break that record next season. It won't succeed.

Ya know.... Sometimes I read some of these posts and feel the need to correct them, but this disease I have just won't allow me to. I think the Dr. called it "Lethargy?"

In any case, props to you. You're definitely a better man than I.:toast

[timvp]

Neither are they the transcendant geniuses people make them out to be. When Presti was there, they could make magic things happen with the salary-cap rules. Look at what he did in Seattle: he got draft picks from Phoenix in order to take Kurt Thomas off their hands, then got another pick for passing Thomas off to the Spurs. He turned thin air and a four-month rental of Kurt Thomas into three first-round picks. That's a genius. While I agree with some of your post, I have to vent on this pet peeve. A lot of people love to give Presti props on that move but it was nothing special. He had a $9M trade exception. That size trade exception is a once in a lifetime gift to a GM.

He turned the $9M into three future first round picks. That sounds good but when you consider that future first round picks have a market value of between $1.5M and $2M ... he basically turned a $9M asset into at most $6M in assets. Presti had a chance to go out and get a building block for the Sonics but instead rolled the dice that the Suns will be a lottery team in 2010. Only if that 2010 pick turns into a lottery selection does Presti's gamble pay off. Otherwise he just wasted a great opportunity.

Overall, I wasn't overly impressed with Presti in his first year in Seattle. He dumped Ray Allen when his value was low for the fifth pick in a draft that was four good players deep. He got a gift of a trade exception when the Magic inexplicably gave Rashard Lewis a billion dollars ... and he didn't do really take advantage of that trade exception. The Suns might die off but the more likely scenario is it'll be a pick no lower than 11 or 12.

We'll see what Presti does during this draft. He has six picks. The pressure is on for him to do some wheeling and dealing a la Portland the last couple years.

I agree with the premise that Buford has a lot to prove. He hasn't made that good of a move in a while. Not all of the bad moves in recent years were on Buford (Kid Genius Presti was the brains behind Elson, Butler, Sanikidze, Karaulov, White, Sanders, Scales ... to name a few) but he hasn't been overly impressive recently. He made the call on Brent Barry, which has worked out well for the most part. Recognizing Horry had more magic after 2003 was a good call. Thomas for Elson and a first still is up in the air.

Then again, I contend that the Spurs haven't really tried to retool for a long azz time now. In the transition between the 1997 disaster and Duncan being drafted, Buford picked up some gems off the trash heap in Malik Rose and Jaren Jackson. Two players instrumental to a championship run snagged for only training camp invites? That's gold.

Then with the pressure on once again to transition from the 1999 team to an NBA that suddenly started to run, he got Parker late in the draft, picked up SJax for nothing and along with Pop get Bowen.

Since that point, the Spurs haven't done any retooling. It's basically just been plug'n'play vets. Now with some retooling needed, Buford will once again be aggressive. We'll see what happens but he's pretty good at picking competitors out of the trash heap that play to win. And the good news is he has about $12 million buffer to play with before the lux tax becomes a factor, so he isn't relegated to the trash heap. As a comparison, last year the Spurs had less than $2 million to work with heading into free agency. Can't expect miracles with nothing to work with.

I'd be less confident if Buford had failed again and again to retool but I don't think he's been asked to work any magic in a while. This summer, the pressure is back on and RC has to perform. I guess we'll see in a couple months if he still appears clueless or if he'll make the needed moves.

[T Park]

Whos idea was the Malik for Nazr deal?

Just curious.

[angelbelow]

extra_stout, i was replying to another posters comments, please read his comments because it'll make more sense to you what i was trying to say.

[Marcus Bryant]

So I guess if RC wants to be considered a genius by internets GMs he will set up Thomas to walk into a S&T so the Spurs can get back a significant trade exception, which then can be used to perhaps find a lesser player.

:jack

RC is caught between an ownership group which is willing to pinch pennies at the expense of basketball talent and a coach who demands polished, experienced talent to fill out the supporting cast. Ownership was prepared to let Parker walk over the amount of $2 million over 6 years. Now who would have received the blame for Parker being lost in free agency?

RC managed to find complementary 2nd and 3rd stars for Duncan, stars good enough to win multiple championships, yet somehow he doesn't know what he's doing. Nevermind that the Big 3 are eating up $40+ mil of cap room year in and year out and from there it doesn't take much in supporting cast contracts, cap holds, etc... to ensure you have no cap flexibility.

Pop demands players who are ready to play championship basketball. Beno Udrih would get 25 minutes a night on just about any other team in this league. Not so in SA. Pop killed Beno's market value. The Spurs have been in 'win now' mode for a while. Predictably, they end up with an aging supporting cast. Yet again. Why is that? Is that because somehow the GM doesn't see the need to give the coaching staff and bunch of young, raw athletes to develop? Or, perhaps, it's because the GM is giving the coaching staff exactly what they wanted?

Fans like to bitch about the Spurs when they don't win a championship (which is quite hilarious in and of itself) but RC did what he could to serve the two masters. I didn't realize CATs came with Teflon coating these days.