100% agreed on the find :wowQuote:
Originally Posted by timvp
Printable View
100% agreed on the find :wowQuote:
Originally Posted by timvp
Yeah, I agree completely. If he grows as much this year as he did last year, I think he'll be as good or better than Finley was in his first year in San Antonio. The more I look at things, the more I'm convinced that he will get some good back up minutes at PG (unless Hill develops surprisingly fast)-- a backcourt of Mason/Manu has good size and will be nice defensively. Guys like Mason and Udoka aren't going to blow us away with their numbers, but they do give Pop a lot of flexibility, and are smart, focused players. I think a lot of teams are kicking themselves for not pursuing Udoka last year (considering how inexpensive he was for the Spurs) and hopefully many teams will feel the same way about Mason once this season gets underway.Quote:
Originally Posted by xtremesteven33
Even if the Spurs did overpay a bit, it was a smart analysis of the cap situation in Washington that probably made them arrive at that number. I know people were excited for a bigger name (Maggette, Smith), but I think their approach to this off season was pretty sound: take a chance on the longshot Maggette, and once he was gone, go with an unrestricted guy who looks realistic in Mason. I was never a fan of Smith because of character issues & his disinterest in D, but even I was on the fence about whether a full MLE offer would be matched by Denver due to their payroll situation. I don't think too many people could've predicted that the defense-impaired Nuggets would give away a former DPOY center for nothing, but that's what happened and it shows just how unpredictable the whole free agent season can be. If the Spurs had signed Smith to an offer sheet, the Nuggets probably would have waited the maximum time to make their deal and match the offer, during which time Mason quite possibly signs with Riley & the Heat...Quote:
Originally Posted by texbound
Another interesting situation to keep an eye on will be Washington's: I've always like Jamison, but is signing a 32 yr old to a 4 yr/$50 mil deal a good idea? We've seen how quickly Ben Wallace declined after age 32/33, and he's in incredible physical shape... also, I know a lot was made of Arenas's willingness to take a less-than-max deal, but I don't really think he's a max guy anyway.... all of this stuff goes into managing payroll, and we'll see if the Spurs signing one of Washington bench guys actually turns out to be a better move than them resigning their two biggest stars to big contracts.
I don't think Mason can play point guard, he's more of a tweener Guard/Small Forward. He's more of a spot-up jump-shooter but he has good size and strength and can be good defensively if he bought into it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tully365
Jamison was for sure extended a bit too long but it's one of the prices you have to pay when a good player hits 32 years old. At 32 he has a solid record of about ~20 ppg, 10 rebounds. But you know he's going to decline but you can't lose that 20/10 right now.Quote:
Another interesting situation to keep an eye on will be Washington's: I've always like Jamison, but is signing a 32 yr old to a 4 yr/$50 mil deal a good idea? We've seen how quickly Ben Wallace declined after age 32/33, and he's in incredible physical shape... also, I know a lot was made of Arenas's willingness to take a less-than-max deal, but I don't really think he's a max guy anyway.... all of this stuff goes into managing payroll, and we'll see if the Spurs signing one of Washington bench guys actually turns out to be a better move than them resigning their two biggest stars to big contracts.
What's even more interesting is Scola will probably be close to 20/10 for $3.1 million this year and $3.3 million next year...cheaper than Jamison's $12 million/year and Roger Mason's $3.5 and $3.7million next year :D
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat Riley
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil Jackson
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gregg Popovich
are you a mod troll that nothing gets you banned?Quote:
Originally Posted by MiamiHeat
http://fantasyfootball.usatoday.com/...877&line=93466Quote:
Originally Posted by Allanon
Feb. 11, 2008 - 1:04 a.m. ET
Roger Mason started for the Wizards on Sunday with Antonio Daniels (ankle) sidelined, finishing with 18 points on 7-of-14 shooting, four three-pointers, five rebounds and one steal.
*
Jan. 15, 2008 - 10:58 p.m. ET
Roger Mason started at point guard for ailing starter Antonio Daniels (knee) and scored 20 points on 8-of-14 shooting.
*
Dec. 29, 2007 - 9:51 p.m. ET
Roger Mason finished a blowout victory over the Heat on Saturday with 12 points, two three-pointer, five assists and four steals in a team-high 34 minutes.
Mason has hit at least one three-pointer in every game this month, and has been providing nice value with Gilbert Arenas and Antonio Daniels both sidelined.
*
Dec. 22, 2007 - 9:40 p.m. ET
Roger Mason got another start at point guard Saturday against the Pacers and had 20 points, five rebounds and four assists.
*
Dec. 21, 2007 - 11:04 p.m. ET
Roger Mason started at point guard Friday against the Hawks...
*
Dec. 15, 2007 - 10:05 p.m. ET
Roger Mason came off the Wizards' bench on Saturday and logged 35 minutes compared to only 14 minutes played by starting point guard Nick Young. Mason converted 13 points on 6-of-12 shooting, and grabbed three rebounds.
Good Catch Tully
I guess he can play some point guard after all. I'm used to seeing him play the 2 and the 3 against some teams.
If he can do a good job at PG, he'll be one of the biggest point guards in the NBA.
Here's another bit of info on him that is very interesting-- stats as a starter: (you can find these on nba.com: underneath the player profiles, click on "season splits")Quote:
Originally Posted by Allanon
9 games started
37 mpg
17.4 ppg
3.4 apg
3.0 rpg
52.6% FG
43.1% 3PT
90.1% FT
I realize this is a small sample size, but you can definitely argue that when the opportunity presented itself, Roger stepped up big time.
I've been saying this since we signed him..I saw a lot of him last year, and I'm expecting good things from him..all the Wizards fans I talked to after the trade say they absolutely loved the guy, he's a team player, he's a good guy and gives a lot of effort..from what I saw, he's a solid shooter and a guy that can potentially score 20+ points every once in a while..something we've lacked for a little while..he definitely helps our scoring..
the reason he wasn't re-signed was simply because of money..the Wizards weren't going to give out that much $ when they have Nick Young waiting for playing time..
Your not the smartest kid around this block. I saw you make a post the other day saying if you workout Scola's number for 48 minutes he would average 20 and 10 :lolQuote:
Originally Posted by Allanon
If Leon Powe played just 40 minutes a night he would average
22 PPG
11.2 RPG
3.6 APG
Leon Powe > Tim Duncan
Doc Rivers must be stupid not playing him 40 minutes when he could get that sort of production, he should really be playing him all 48 minutes.
Randy Wittman is even dumber, Craig Smith averages 6 and 5, but if the Wolves had the brain to play him for 40 minute last season he would have put up 19 and 9.... thats all star numbers.
Chris Wilcox?
Per 40 Minutes
19 PPG
10 RPG
8.8 APG
This dude could put up Oscar Robertson numbers if PJ would only play him for 40 minutes. I should coach in the NBA.
Thats 3 all stars right there... that will be fighting Luis Scola for that final per 40 minute All-Star spot.
Ah but your mind is shallow, you're trying to compare a guy who actually got minutes and will continue to get more minutes to scrub minutes by Leon Powe and underachieving minutes by Chris Wilcox.Quote:
Originally Posted by mystargtr34
You pull Leon Powe out of the air... who saw only 11 minutes during the Playoffs....what chance would he have of getting 40 minutes average? Zilch, nada, none.
Chris Wilcox? He's been in the league for 7 years and he averages 22 minutes, he ain't going to get 40 minutes a game this late in his career.
Now let's look at Scola. He got sporadic minutes as he is a rookie. But towards the end of the season, he saw major playing time.
During the Playoffs, Scola played 37 minutes and averaged 14 points and 9 rebounds. That's during the PLAYOFFS when things get much tighter and he was still able to get his.
It's not a stretch at all to say Scola can average 20/10 this year and actually get 40+ minutes this year. But to bring up guys who don't get minutes and WON'T get any minutes to compare to Scola who increased his minutes to 37? During the Olympics Scola dropped 28 points and 11 rebounds on the best basketball team in the world. He averaged 18 ppg per game for 3rd best in the Olympics only behind Yao and Pau. You don't think Rick Adelman's going to give him 35-40 minutes this year?
Next thing I know, you'll be saying Bynum won't be getting his 20/10 this year either because you can't give him a per 48 either.
Haha, please buy a clue.
No. However, San Antonio is in Chile, which is a neighboring country of Argentina.Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
Does that count? :spin
Chileans hate Argentine's and Peruvians and vice versa.
So. nope, no count. :spin
Kevin Garnett > Carl Landry.Quote:
Originally Posted by Allanon
How many minutes you think Scola would get playing with KG?
Chris Wilcox wont start getting more minutes at this stage of his career? Hes two years younger than Scola, and he played nearly 30 minutes a game last season. He played 32 minutes per game the year before that. Thats regular starters minutes. Most times he is the number 2 guy the opposition has to stop behind Durant. Do you have any clue why he didnt get minutes early in his career? Have you heard of Elton Brand?
While Scola has to beat out Carl Landry and Chuck Hayes, Wilcox was fighting for minutes with Elton Brand. I should be pulling your card back on you and saying whats to say Scola will get more minutes and increase his numbers when the team is bringing back a healthy Yao AND adding Ron Artest.
All im saying is its a bit stupid to start simply multiplying numbers to get to a certain amount of minutes.
Scola averaged 10 and 6 in the regular season in 25 minutes.... you say if he played 48 he would average 20 and 10? Then how come when he went up to 37 minutes he couldnt increase his numbers at the same rate. He put up an extra 4 points and 3 rebounds in 14 minutes extra - that doesnt quite equate to your theory.
Not to mention his FG% dropped to .448% and his turnoverswent up and his fouls went way up with the extra touches and minutes.
It doesnt quite work the way you say buddy.
It seems like all of your posts involve bashing another country. It is possible, you know, to love your own country and still be interested in other countries. Not every human born outside of the US is your enemy.Quote:
Originally Posted by MiamiHeat
And to answer your question: Manu is their employee, so chances are even if there are some mixed feelings, the Spurs would still be classy enough to congratulate and yes, even to celebrate the accomplishments of one of their best employees. It's not war-- it's the olympics, which is supposed to be the exact opposite.
Uhm, yeah, Chris Wilcox has been "the man" in Seattle for 3 years now, if anything, he's losing minutes. He's been fighting himself for those minutes, really, even Carl Landry is a better player than Chris Wilcox.Quote:
Originally Posted by mystargtr34
Yao is a Center, Artest is a Small Forward/Guard. Scola is a Power Forward, they're not going to have Yao Play Power Forward and Ron Ron is not playing Power Forward.Quote:
While Scola has to beat out Carl Landry and Chuck Hayes, Wilcox was fighting for minutes with Elton Brand. I should be pulling your card back on you and saying whats to say Scola will get more minutes and increase his numbers when the team is bringing back a healthy Yao AND adding Ron Artest.
If I started simply multiplying #'s for Smush Parker or Leon Powe, yes that's stupid. But I'm multiplying numbers for Luis Scola who has improved by leaps and bounds. I'm also multiplying numbers for Andrew Bynum. I suppose we'll see at the end of the year if multiplying #'s for these 2 guys is stupid.Quote:
All im saying is its a bit stupid to start simply multiplying numbers to get to a certain amount of minutes.
PLAYOFFS are different then the regular season, much more difficult to score then, buddy.Quote:
Scola averaged 10 and 6 in the regular season in 25 minutes.... you say if he played 48 he would average 20 and 10? Then how come when he went up to 37 minutes he couldnt increase his numbers at the same rate. He put up an extra 4 points and 3 rebounds in 14 minutes extra - that doesnt quite equate to your theory.
Not to mention his FG% dropped to .448% and his turnoverswent up and his fouls went way up with the extra touches and minutes.
It doesnt quite work the way you say buddy.
I can see Mason as the new S-Jax :hat
Allanon:
You can't talk about Scola becoming a very good player in the NBA on Spurstalk... it will instantly make 50% of the posters here either start foaming at the mouth, slip into seizures, or kick their dogs. It's like arguing religion with your new girlfriend's parents the first time you meet them. Get out now, while you still can!
Ah I know, I just made a small passing comment but it was picked up and harshly criticized with my intelligence questioned so I had to respond.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tully365
It's all good though, what better way than to spend 60 days than to find some debates here and there? MyStar and I have argued often in the past (and probably half the board here) and probably will do so again.
That's why I don't go to Laker boards and only really post here at Spurstalk, it's opinionated :D
Scola is a good player, hes 10x better than the 6'10" robot playing next to Duncan, or any other big we have next to Duncan, Thomas included.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tully365
It was a stupid trade then, and its a stupid trade now, doesnt change my argument one bit though.
It had nothing to do with the fact Scola was a former Spur, my point had nothin to do with that. Ive stated more than nearly everyone on here that it was a stupid trade. Scola is one of the better PF's in the game, but just because he averages 10 and 6 in 25 mins doesnt mean hes putting up 20 and 12 in 50 minutes - i tried to use examples to show that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Allanon
He is because by your criteria he would average 20 and 11 if he played 40 minutes, and Wilcox would only be at 19 and 10.Quote:
Originally Posted by Allanon
Seriously though, Wilcox > Landry
I was talking more about the touches he would get rather than him losing minutes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Allanon
Yao will average 20-22
T-Mac 20-22
Artest 14-16
Battier 8-10
Rafer 10-12
Thats about 77 points that those guys could easily end up accounting for, given the Rockets are a slow paced walk it up the floor defensive team, they only score about 95 a game.
That leaves about 20 points for the rest of the entire team.
I think Scola will definately improve but i cant see him going over 13-7 on that team.. which is still more than any Spurs big could put up if they were in a gym on their own.
Fair enough, but it also gets tougher once you become a bigger part of an offense, defenses will key in even more. I just cant see him being anywhere near a 20-10 guy - doesnt change the fact hes a damn good player.Quote:
Originally Posted by Allanon
Buddy
Pat Riley is senile.
I've pretty much forgotten what we were arguing about now and had to laugh at your add-on there.Quote:
Originally Posted by mystargtr34
Anyways, good points bitch :toast