I Think We Should Go After Camby

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HarlemHeat37

We don't have the roster to compete for a title, that's why we want a trade..

It doesn't make you any less of a fan to admit it..a 2nd legit big is clearly a glaring need..

---

I'm not questioning the "fan-ness" of people wanting a trade....I'm questioning the logic.

This is the same team on paper that analysts across the country said would be in the thick of it come playoff time. Their issues ARE NOT with the level of talent on this team. The issues are with chemistry, plain and simple.

So even if the Spurs were to get another big man, you'd have to consider two things:

1) At what cost? Is it a net gain or loss in overall talent of the team?

2) How does adding that player at that time impact the chemistry the team had built to that point in the season?

I'm of the opinion that adding a player like Camby or Haywood at the sacrifice of Hill or Blair or even guys like Bonner & Mason (sad to say) would do more harm than good.

Again, I don't see the logic.

The Spurs DO have enough talent to compete for a championship and they DO have enough veteran savvy (players and coaches alike) to pull it all together in time.

Believe.

Camby won't help. The Spurs weakness is at point guard and shooting guard right now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Interrohater

Camby thread!

Good suggestion, but you're definitely not the first. Right now, Clips won't get rid of Camby, blah blah blah, not happening.

---

wow you think they wont let him be touched? theyre trying to dump him before he gets injured again

i have been saying camby for like three years, it wouldnt be suprising to me if we got him right now, he fits our perfect trade lol great player in his prime, older than 33 oh and plays D. why in the hell did we keep gettin old pf's and C'rs ! screw it better late than never we need something

of course Haywood is a good idea. funny thing is, Wizards fans on realgm also talk about a trade with the Spurs. and about the great idea to get Splitter in this trade. (idiots even talk about the cheap rookie contract Splitter would get for the next 4 years)
however, of course getting Haywood by sacrifice Splitters rights is a bad idea. could turn into another Scola story.
so, if the Wizards in fact put Haywood on the market, what's the price. it's not that other teams wouldn't show a lot of interest. not only the Spurs feel that they need more size to be able to match up with the Lakers. think about what for example Blazers could offer. so, if the Spurs don't want to give up Splitter, the Wizards will ask for Blair IMO.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mountainballer

of course Haywood is a good idea. funny thing is, Wizards fans on realgm also talk about a trade with the Spurs. and about the great idea to get Splitter in this trade. (idiots even talk about the cheap rookie contract Splitter would get for the next 4 years)
however, of course getting Haywood by sacrifice Splitters rights is a bad idea. could turn into another Scola story.
so, if the Wizards in fact put Haywood on the market, what's the price. it's not that other teams wouldn't show a lot of interest. not only the Spurs feel that they need more size to be able to match up with the Lakers. think about what for example Blazers could offer. so, if the Spurs don't want to give up Splitter, the Wizards will ask for Blair IMO.

---

Found that thread page.
http://www.realgm.com/boards/viewtop...5659&start=180
It is not that scary. Plus, it is not as if Splitter gets traded for practically nothing, if Haywood stays after 2010. Like HarlemHeat37 said, Splitter may or may not blossom in the NBA. Besides, this is the year the Spurs are going all in. Management may not do this deal just because of Splitter, maybe throw in the 2010 1st round pick to the Wizards instead of Splitter.

who would we give up to get him? McDyess?

Camby's defense is ridiculously overrated, and his horrible offensive skills would cripple our starting lineup even worse. I get no pleasure out of saying I told you so now, but what this team could clearly use is Bruce Bowen. Bogans is way too much of an offensive liability to play as big a role as Bruce, and he's not as good defensively either. Keith definitely has his moments, but he doesn't have anything approaching the consistency of old #12.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baseline bum

Camby's defense is ridiculously overrated, and his horrible offensive skills would cripple our starting lineup even worse. I get no pleasure out of saying I told you so now, but what this team could clearly use is Bruce Bowen. Bogans is way too much of an offensive liability to play as big a role as Bruce, and he's not as good defensively either. Keith definitely has his moments, but he doesn't have anything approaching the consistency of old #12.

---

well, it took Bowen a little while to settle into the team, too. Bogans has only been a Spur for a couple months.

The big question is whether Hill or Bogans will be most ready to guard the top offensive players come playoff time. Maybe a combo of them both.

I agree that Camby is overrated, but the one thing he has that the Spurs lack right now is SIZE. As good as Blair and McDyess CAN be - they are both undersized.

i'd rather have dalembert, or maybe sean williams from the nets. williams would be cheap, young and he's a future camby

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baseline bum

Camby's defense is ridiculously overrated, and his horrible offensive skills would cripple our starting lineup even worse. I get no pleasure out of saying I told you so now, but what this team could clearly use is Bruce Bowen. Bogans is way too much of an offensive liability to play as big a role as Bruce, and he's not as good defensively either. Keith definitely has his moments, but he doesn't have anything approaching the consistency of old #12.

---

Honestly, the Spurs not resigning Bowen is about as close an act of betrayal as there is, IMO (the Spurs had no reason to go in another direction, having ballsed all out with the RJ trade).. he isn't 2007 Bruce obviously, but the 2009 Bruce was underplayed and underrated now that we see Bogans attempting to take his place. Bowen's shooting is missed, especially. He could have still earned a niche on this squad as long as he shot 40% from 3.

As it is, the rest of our perimeter is too stacked offensively for an offensively inconsistent and good-but-not-incredible+undersized defender in Bogans.

I called that a trade of Dalembert and Iguodala for Manu last year would be a good trade for the spurs. TPark/EricB and others wanted no part of that trade. That trade would look great for the spurs today.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rascal

I called that a trade of Dalembert and Iguodala for Manu last year would be a good trade for the spurs. TPark/EricB and others wanted no part of that trade. That trade would look great for the spurs today.

---

Why would Philadelphia do that at all? Even more so last year?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by z0sa

Honestly, the Spurs not resigning Bowen is about as close an act of betrayal as there is, IMO (the Spurs had no reason to go in another direction, having ballsed all out with the RJ trade).. he isn't 2007 Bruce obviously, but the 2009 Bruce was underplayed and underrated now that we see Bogans attempting to take his place. Bowen's shooting is missed, especially. He could have still earned a niche on this squad as long as he shot 40% from 3.

As it is, the rest of our perimeter is too stacked offensively for an offensively inconsistent and good-but-not-incredible+undersized defender in Bogans.

---

Bowen would not be a savior to the defense. Move on!!

The spurs need another defensive big to clog the lane and take away easy interior scoring.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sananspursfan21

i'd rather have dalembert, or maybe sean williams from the nets. williams would be cheap, young and he's a future camby

---

Both have a Bball IQ of a brick though.

:lol Dalember AND Igoudala for Manu's corpse

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rascal

The spurs need another defensive big to clog the lane and take away easy interior scoring.

---

I'm sure that would have stopped Channing Frye and Dragic from nailing threes all night...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

Why would Philadelphia do that at all? Even more so last year?

---

The point was not if Philly would do the trade the point is that you and others thought that was a terrible trade for the Spurs back then.

any trade for camby would probably start with hill and blair so i doubt it gets anywhere

I called that a trade of Wade and Haslem for Manu last year would be a good trade for the spurs...

I called that a trade of Brooks and Scola for Manu last year would be a good trade for the spurs...

I called that a trade of Devin Harris and Brook Lopez for Manu last year would be a good trade for the spurs...


See, I can do it too!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

I called that a trade of Wade and Haslem for Manu last year would be a good trade for the spurs...

I called that a trade of Brooks and Scola for Manu last year would be a good trade for the spurs...

I called that a trade of Devin Harris and Brook Lopez for Manu last year would be a good trade for the spurs...


See, I can do it too!!!

---

You did not call anything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rascal

The point was not if Philly would do the trade the point is that you and others thought that was a terrible trade for the Spurs back then.

---

I'm not sure it's as great a trade as you think, even right now... I mean, the incentive for the Spurs is Iguodala, because Dalembert is barely better than Theo...

I believe the point in this thread is to try to land Camby without getting rid of any of the big 3... I could be wrong though...

Jeez, people are stuck on Bowen in the same way they're still stuck on Robinson. They were both tremendous players, irreplaceable, but like all of us do, THEY GOT OLD. There is a reason they both retired. It's not like we let Bowen go because we were stingy or because we wanted to, it's not like he's tearing it up somewhere else. HE RETIRED. He retired because he got OLD. It's not his fault or ours, it's just life.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rascal

You did not call anything.

---

I just did... I didn't have to explain how could it be all worked out... It was fun! :lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sananspursfan21

i'd rather have dalembert, or maybe sean williams from the nets. williams would be cheap, young and he's a future camby

---

You'd rather have a guy (Dalembert) that is far less proven and makes more money for a longer period of time or a guy that can't buy minutes on a lottery-bound Nets team?

I'm not a proponent of a Camby trade given the likely cost (Hill? Blair?) and additional chemistry concerns, but I HAD to comment on this one.

If, and I say IF, the Spurs were to entertain a trade for another big, it would have to be someone that significantly improves their chances against the powerhouse teams. Camby and Biedrins are the only two in my mind that fit the category...but I don't consider either realistic or worth it when you consider what they'll cost.

Again though, Dalembert or Williams? Yeesh.