most overrated FO in the NBA?..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by __JaG__

Then how have the Spurs not exceeded your expectations? Year in and year out the Spurs have surrounded Duncan with two all-stars, vets who are proven winners and great coaching.



They compete for a title every season, literally, every season. So wtf are you bitching about?

---

This thread is about the spurs fo being over rated.

And I agree. I base that on the personal moves they have done and the ones they did not make. When looking at all the moves there is little that they have done with freea gency and trades that really made any type of impact.

I base the success of a fo in what players they acquire through trades, free agency and the draft.

Outside of Manu and Parker the draft did not produce much. Sure they drafted late but they have never even traded up to get a good player who could stick with the team. Free agency has brought in little or next to nothing other then one dimensional role players at the end of their careers. They signed Rasho who was too soft to stick with the team.

And trades, forget about it. The spurs are just too conservative to trade. many good players have switched teams for nothing more than expiring contracts and the spurs have never pulled one of these type of steals off.

They have won mainly due to lottery luck. The luck that landed them a top 10 all time player in Duncan and a great center in Robinson.

Its amazing those two guys playing together for 6 years only won two titles. Those two guys should have been the foundation of a title run.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by __JaG__

"If the Spurs didn't draft Duncan they wouldn't be the #1 winning franchise in all of professional sports in the past ten years and the FO would be exposed"

I think you take for granted what the FO has done with Duncan. You act as if a team receives the #1 pick they're supposed to win 4 titles.

---

Wrong. If your lucky enough to get the top pick in a year when a player like Duncan comes out and add him to Robinson then you better win titles. That type of luck just doesn't happen to every team.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rascal

The spurs would be in the same position or worse than those teams had they not landed Duncan. What impressive personal moves have this fo done in the last 10 years? Bowen(although this guy should be coming off the bench as only a defensive specialist) Parker and Manu Horry off the bench. Less than you can count on one hand. Everything else has been nothing all that great. many players who stayed for a year or two and were replaced by similar talented players. In other words players that can be called interchangeable and not that special.

---

When a team has three players like Duncan, Manu, and Parker, and one of the best defenders around in Bowen, all you need is complementary players-- you don't need and probably can't get another all-star. Again, what would make you happy? Did they need to win 10 championships in a row in order for you to praise them? The Lakers got the most dominant player of the era in Shaq and were still only able to win 3 titles in the same span of time. Every single year, some team gets the #1 pick and is still not able to replicate the success of the Spurs. The Cavs got LeBron as the most hyped and admired #1 in a very long time and they are still looking for ring #1. The Spurs have mores wins in the last ten years than all 29 other teams! What more can they possibly do to "prove" to you that they are competent?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rascal

This thread is about the spurs fo being over rated.

And I agree. I base that on the personal moves they have done and the ones they did not make. When looking at all the moves there is little that they have done with freea gency and trades that really made any type of impact.

I base the success of a fo in what players they acquire through trades, free agency and the draft.

---

Success isn't based upon flashy trades, sexy free agent signings, or recognizable draft names. Success is based solely upon winning...nothing else matters unless it contributes to winning.

If success were based upon the things you stated, then the Clippers, Knicks, Blazers, Mavs, Suns...etc. would all be successful teams with successful FOs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rascal

Outside of Manu and Parker the draft did not produce much. Sure they drafted late but they have never even traded up to get a good player who could stick with the team. Free agency has brought in little or next to nothing other then one dimensional role players at the end of their careers. They signed Rasho who was too soft to stick with the team.

And trades, forget about it. The spurs are just too conservative to trade. many good players have switched teams for nothing more than expiring contracts and the spurs have never pulled one of these type of steals off.

They have won mainly due to lottery luck. The luck that landed them a top 10 all time player in Duncan and a great center in Robinson.

Its amazing those two guys playing together for 6 years only won two titles. Those two guys should have been the foundation of a title run.

---

See Malone and Stockton

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rascal

Wrong. If your lucky enough to get the top pick in a year when a player like Duncan comes out and add him to Robinson then you better win titles. That type of luck just doesn't happen to every team.

---

But a team with Shaq and Kobe shouldnt?

Your arguments are based on you being a confused homer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr. Body

Eh, all that typing and I'm not convinced. I'll bump them to mediocre. Regardless they should have kept Presti and booted Buford. Presti looks like a genius, Buford not so much.

---

For all that Presti has done, the Sonics lost damn near 60 games last year. The Spurs are in a different position, they draft after 25 every year and they're trying to maintain their status as an elite club. All Presti has done so far is stockpile picks and started freeing up cap space. It doesn't take a genius to do that.

While we just waited our entire MLE on DeSagana Diop, the Spurs just got Roger Mason and will probably add Azubuikee, two guys that could've helped the Mavs next year.

I do this every time I think of the difference between the Mavs and Spurs:

:bang

It's not quite as bad as the difference between the Lakers and Clippers, but you get the idea...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Findog

For all that Presti has done, the Sonics lost damn near 60 games last year. The Spurs are in a different position, they draft after 25 every year and they're trying to maintain their status as an elite club. All Presti has done so far is stockpile picks and started freeing up cap space. It doesn't take a genius to do that.

While we just waited our entire MLE on DeSagana Diop, the Spurs just got Roger Mason and will probably add Azubuikee, two guys that could've helped the Mavs next year.

I do this every time I think of the difference between the Mavs and Spurs:

:bang

It's not quite as bad as the difference between the Lakers and Clippers, but you get the idea...

---

Spursfan thinks that it's easy to win when you have a lot of money to work with, they don't realize that the Spurs FO has done more with less than any other team in the NBA. That speaks a lot more about their ability as a FO than all the other GMs whose owners flash big bucks.

I had to quit this thread when I read that Cuban builds champions and Manu/Tony aren't All-Stars.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Findog

For all that Presti has done, the Sonics lost damn near 60 games last year. The Spurs are in a different position, they draft after 25 every year and they're trying to maintain their status as an elite club. All Presti has done so far is stockpile picks and started freeing up cap space. It doesn't take a genius to do that.

While we just waited our entire MLE on DeSagana Diop, the Spurs just got Roger Mason and will probably add Azubuikee, two guys that could've helped the Mavs next year.

I do this every time I think of the difference between the Mavs and Spurs:

:bang

It's not quite as bad as the difference between the Lakers and Clippers, but you get the idea...

---

Presti made a lot of moves after moving his best players and having a #2 pick fall in his lap. Maybe RC should have dealt Parker and Ginobili for high draft choices so he'd be deemed a genius too.

Quote:

---

STFU!!! Was Manu hurt during the regular season when we beat the Spurs? Stop making excuses and except that ass whoopin we put on ya. The Machine owns Manu... SUCK IT!!!

---

You know, when you get to the Finals, you really ought to win more than you lose when you've got the kind of rep the "great" Lakers have. Nice franchise.

spurs FO are just riding on the success of TP and MANU while the rest of the other drafts they screwed big time. i guess they're overrated...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by __JaG__

Spursfan thinks that it's easy to win when you have a lot of money to work with, they don't realize that the Spurs FO has done more with less than any other team in the NBA. That speaks a lot more about their ability as a FO than all the other GMs whose owners flash big bucks.

---

Don't know about that. Spurs FO has done a very good job, but more with less than any other team in the NBA??? Is Tim Duncan not the best power forward in the history of the NBA? Is he not a top 10 player ever in the history of the NBA?

More with less? Come on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HarlemHeat37

overrated or not?..

---

last 4 years very much so.
Nice recovery just before the deadline last season getting Kurt Thomas and Barrdog.

Doesn't matter when you have numb nutts sitting them on the bench.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamStone

Don't know about that. Spurs FO has done a very good job, but more with less than any other team in the NBA??? Is Tim Duncan not the best power forward in the history of the NBA? Is he not a top 10 player ever in the history of the NBA?

More with less? Come on.

---

Wasn't referring to the talent they work with...i was referring to their success coupled with their small market and the money they have to work with. Duncan is one of the all time greats, but does he really have THAT much more talent than say, Kevin Garnett? I dont think so. I think the FO and Pop have had a huge hand in Duncan's success.

If the FO and coaching staff don't work hand-in-hand with their stars you'll get a team that is consistently knocked out of the first couple rounds of the playoffs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by __JaG__

Wasn't referring to the talent they work with...i was referring to their success coupled with their small market and the money they have to work with. Duncan is one of the all time greats, but does he really have THAT much more talent than say, Kevin Garnett? I dont think so. I think the FO and Pop have had a huge hand in Duncan's success.

If the FO and coaching staff don't work hand-in-hand with their stars you'll get a team that is consistently knocked out of the first couple rounds of the playoffs.

---

Exactly! Also, compare Duncan's success with that of Brand, Boozer, Gasol, Dirk, Yao, Malone, Mourning, Ewing, etc... those 8 very good players combined have zero rings...

Spurs FO like all FOs in the league have their share of hits and misses but what seperates the Spurs from most teams is that create an environment of accountability where egos don't matter and where generally most of their players stay out of trouble.

Plus it's easy to say that any team could've won with Tim and that may be right but he fell into a great situation. D.Rob was a great mentor, Pop was the perfect coach for him and he had quailty vets to help him in first few years. That's the sign of a a great organization.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by __JaG__

Wasn't referring to the talent they work with...i was referring to their success coupled with their small market and the money they have to work with. Duncan is one of the all time greats, but does he really have THAT much more talent than say, Kevin Garnett? I dont think so. I think the FO and Pop have had a huge hand in Duncan's success.

If the FO and coaching staff don't work hand-in-hand with their stars you'll get a team that is consistently knocked out of the first couple rounds of the playoffs.

---

Without Duncan, the Spurs have zero championships. He's the reason the Spurs FO can make subtle moves and still contend without blockbuster trades or acquiring a lottery pick every other year. The Spurs FO have Tim Duncan to pitch free agents, so the small market is not nearly as much of an obstacle as you suggest. Without Duncan, no Michael Finley, no Brent Barry, no Robert Horry. And, without those veterans that fit well with what the Spurs needed in supporting role players, it's a different story. How many teams would have liked Michael Finley a couple summers ago? Didn't Robert Horry pretty much save the 2005 title in game 5?

I'm not buying any notion that the Spurs work with much less when they have had one of 2-3 ultimate trump cards in a player like Tim Duncan despite being in a small market and having an owner that won't spend over the luxury tax.