With time becoming a factor, Spurs try to stay on right path

By Art Garcia: NBA.com

Sustainability isn't just a catch word among the environmental set. It's a purpose the league's most successful franchises subscribe to. Those who eschew prolonged stretches of mediocrity and just win.

For them the lottery isn't a reward. It's failure.

The Lakers and Celtics have won for the vast majority of the league's existence. The Jazz and Blazers enjoyed playoff runs lasting decades -- yes, decades -- and quickly rebounded after recent falls from grace. The Mavericks have emerged a postseason staple in the new millennium. The Suns have been relevant going on 30-plus years.

And then there are the Spurs.

The modern-day model of consistency, this no-nonsense outfit from deep in the heart of Texas stumbled upon a formula that sounds as simple as it is intuitive. Find good players. Develop those players. Try not to screw up. Keep your stars happy.

"The challenge in staying competitive is not making mistakes," Gregg Popovich said, "is finding guys that fit the system."

Popovich has 20 years invested in San Antonio's system, the last 14 as head coach. The Spurs have captured four championships in that span -- only the Lakers (five) have more -- and own the league's longest active playoff streak at 13.

There's also evidence, albeit slight, that slippage is occurring. In each of the last four seasons, the Spurs have won fewer games than the season before. That's actually the longest such stretch in the franchise's 43-year history. While such a stat should be taken with a grain of salt, considering San Antonio has won a title during that span, a drop from 63 wins in 2005-06 to 50 last season can't be ignored.

So while it's foolish to suggest the Spurs are rebuilding, especially with the nucleus of the last three championship teams still intact, they are in process of replenishing around Tim Duncan, Manu Ginobili and Tony Parker. This is an organization focused on maximizing the present while remaining cognizant of the future.

"We've used Utah as our example to try to make sure we do things in a way that's consistent and can maintain a certain level of play and a certain level of character," Popovich said. "They're the best at it."

Duncan has been the one hardwood constant during San Antonio's postseason run, and Popovich has always been the first to point out the Spurs' good fortune in building on such a foundation. But even the most transcendent of players don't win alone, as LeBron James reminded us again a couple of weeks back.

Flanked for Ginobili and Parker for the last three titles, the cast around Duncan continues to evolve. It's a continual task for Popovich and general manager R.C. Buford to churn out willing and able complementary pieces, all in hopes of keeping that championship window ajar.

It's a delicate balance act for a franchise lacking South Beach sizzle and bound by the strictest budget parameters of any title-winning team during the luxury tax era. Despite those inherent challenges and traditionally drafting in the crapshoot that's the bottom of the first round and lower, the front office almost feels like it can't miss on incoming rookies, free agents and trades.

"If you get guys and find out this guy doesn't work and that guy doesn't work, then all of the sudden you've wasted money and you've wasted corporate knowledge and the best player's time," Popovich said. "Great players only have so much time in the league, and it goes more quickly than any of us think.

"It's a matter of really making sure you bring in guys that have both the character and the ability to accept a role that you plan for them. If you're just thinking that because someone is talented it's going to work, it usually doesn't."

That's been the thinking behind the veteran signings of Robert Horry, Brent Barry and Antonio McDyess over the years. Even the trade for Richard Jefferson last summer, which was panned throughout the season, was made for the right reasons. Popovich and Duncan had experience with RJ, who by all accounts was a model teammate and tried to fit in.

"When you're trying to manage money and make sure that you respect the franchise players on your team, it's a big responsibility to make sure we do our homework," Popovich said. "R.C.'s group starts that and runs that very, very well and then we all get together and try to make sure which ones will fit those roles and be part of that team. So far we've been fairly successful at it."

When it comes to cheap and vibrant talent, the last four drafts have been critical in San Antonio's quest to keep piling up victories and postseason shares. Starting in 2007, the Spurs have selected Tiago Splitter, George Hill, DeJuan Blair and James Anderson. That's a base of youth and athleticism for a team stuck with the stigma of old and slow since the last title in 2007.

Hill has Rondo-like upside, leading to rampant speculation this summer that Parker was on the block. Blair proved to valuable rotation piece along the frontline as rookie last season. Tiago finally brings his reputation as Europe's best over this season to take over at center. Anderson ideally provides swingman depth behind Ginobili and Jefferson.

At some point Duncan, 34, is going to hang it up. Ginobili, 33, isn't far behind. Parker is the baby of the group at 28, but, let's be honest, he's the best bet to finish his career outside of the Alamo City. Once the Three Amigos are gone, the Spurs as we know them will be, too.

But Popovich expects the Spurs to carry on past Duncan and Co. Just as the Lakers, Celtics and those other franchises that find a way.

"We want to bridge that gap," Popovich said. "A lot of teams have gone right into the toilet for five, eight, 10 years before they get back up. I don't think we're going to do that. Whether you're a championship-caliber team is another question, because as we look at championship-caliber teams, every one of them has got a player who's a franchise player. Not a max player."

Popovich expounds.

"There's a difference between a max player and a franchise player," he continued. "There aren't too many franchise players and a whole lot of max players. That's the deal. You can count the franchise players on one hand. Until you get one of those, it's not going to happen for you."

Time will tell if and when the Spurs fine another. Until then, they keep sustaining.

http://www.nba.com/2010/news/feature...s=iref:nbahpt1

hmm good read.

I think Tony will leave SA after Tim duncan retires bc he knows the value of a great big man is to a PG, he stated that many times over his career. So he will probably look for one.

Pop talking about the future here? I swear he said the second Tim hangs them up he is right behind? Was he joking? Did he say that or was I just thinking of something else?

Props, ace3g.

I see you. :tu

Quote:

---

"We want to bridge that gap," Popovich said. "A lot of teams have gone right into the toilet for five, eight, 10 years before they get back up. I don't think we're going to do that. Whether you're a championship-caliber team is another question, because as we look at championship-caliber teams, every one of them has got a player who's a franchise player. Not a max player."

---

I also don't expect the Spurs to go down the toilet. Even during the so called dark age of Spurs history of the late eighties, the Spurs only missed the playoffs twice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sean Cagney

Pop talking about the future here? I swear he said the second Tim hangs them up he is right behind? Was he joking? Did he say that or was I just thinking of something else?

---

Pop has always said it with tongue planted firmly in cheek. IE- his career is over if he doesn't have Duncan. It has never been more than pure speculation as to how much he actually means it. I'm not sure even he knows when he will retire, I'm sure some part of him likes the idea of hanging it up with Duncan, but he could always rebuild, it's a challenge that would cement his legacy.

Personally I'd like it if he ran for governor. He's got the fiscal responsibility down, but he'd never do it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Libri

I also don't expect the Spurs to go down the toilet. Even during the so called dark age of Spurs history of the late eighties, the Spurs only missed the playoffs twice.

---

+1. The Spurs wont be a championship contender but for sure they can make some noise. A lineup of Splitter, Blair, Anderson, Hill, and a veteran Parker looks very promising for the future.

So as Pop says you can only win a ring with a franchise player, we don't have one now. So the question is how can we get a frachise player ?. Unless we have Robinson injury like 1996 season, we're certainly not doing it through the draft. That leaves us with trades or Free agency. With trades you have to give to get, so the only way to get a frachice player is find a disgrunted player like Paul and trade half your team away. Spurs simply don't do that. FA ? Will the Spurs ever have enough cap space to sign a player to the max and even if they did have cap. why would an LBJ come to SA over vibrant Miami. ... hmm ? It might take another 20 years before we start seeing rings again, makes you appreiciate how lucky we were with the 4.


Whether you're a championship-caliber team is another question, because as we look at championship-caliber teams, every one of them has got a player who's a franchise player. Not a max player."

Popovich expounds.

"There's a difference between a max player and a franchise player," he continued. "There aren't too many franchise players and a whole lot of max players. That's the deal. You can count the franchise players on one hand. Until you get one of those, it's not going to happen for you."

Time will tell if and when the Spurs fine another. Until then, they keep sustaining.

[/QUOTE]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DespЏrado

Pop has always said it with tongue planted firmly in cheek. IE- his career is over if he doesn't have Duncan. It has never been more than pure speculation as to how much he actually means it. I'm not sure even he knows when he will retire, I'm sure some part of him likes the idea of hanging it up with Duncan, but he could always rebuild, it's a challenge that would cement his legacy.

Personally I'd like it if he ran for governor. He's got the fiscal responsibility down, but he'd never do it.

---

The moment Pop retires, NBA teams are gonna call him days begging him to come out of retirement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ace3g

"There's a difference between a max player and a franchise player," he continued. "There aren't too many franchise players and a whole lot of max players. That's the deal. You can count the franchise players on one hand. Until you get one of those, it's not going to happen for you."

---

Story of the summer.
Great read

Pop might actually be talking about TP. Parker wants the MAX, and some team will probably give it to him.

But he is simply not a franchise player. And Pop is here saying he does not think you pay the max unless they are a franchise player. Therefore, TP will never get what he wants from the Spurs.

Perhaps the Spurs also recognize that TP does not want to use his last few prime years on a non-contending team? The Spurs window, if open still, will be closed after this year.

parker haters reading with parker hate glasses...amazing how those hater glasses will actually twist words to fit your existing hate...

One could also argue that the market dictates that you must pay a guy max money even if you don't think he's a franchise player. That could bode well for retaining Parker.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ffadicted

Story of the summer.
Great read

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ace3g

By Art Garcia: NBA.com
"There's a difference between a max player and a franchise player," he continued. "There aren't too many franchise players and a whole lot of max players. That's the deal. You can count the franchise players on one hand. Until you get one of those, it's not going to happen for you."

---

Detroit didn't have a franchise player when they beat the Lakers in 2006.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cantthinkofanything

detroit didn't have a franchise player when they beat the lakers in 2006.

---

2004

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by analyzed

So as Pop says you can only win a ring with a franchise player, we don't have one now. So the question is how can we get a frachise player ?. Unless we have Robinson injury like 1996 season, we're certainly not doing it through the draft. That leaves us with trades or Free agency. With trades you have to give to get, so the only way to get a frachice player is find a disgrunted player like Paul and trade half your team away. Spurs simply don't do that. FA ? Will the Spurs ever have enough cap space to sign a player to the max and even if they did have cap. why would an LBJ come to SA over vibrant Miami. ... hmm ? It might take another 20 years before we start seeing rings again, makes you appreiciate how lucky we were with the 4.


Whether you're a championship-caliber team is another question, because as we look at championship-caliber teams, every one of them has got a player who's a franchise player. Not a max player."

Popovich expounds.

"There's a difference between a max player and a franchise player," he continued. "There aren't too many franchise players and a whole lot of max players. That's the deal. You can count the franchise players on one hand. Until you get one of those, it's not going to happen for you."

Time will tell if and when the Spurs fine another. Until then, they keep sustaining.

---

[/QUOTE]
i doubt he considers paul a franchise player i think he considers him a max player

Great read....

"But Popovich expects the Spurs to carry on past Duncan and Co. Just as the Lakers, Celtics and those other franchises that find a way."


Do you think that Pop is going to be the next Sloan? Hope so.

"time becoming a factor"???

time has been a factor since 2008

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cantthinkofanything

Detroit didn't have a franchise player when they beat the Lakers in 2006.

---

Chauncey Billups? Look what he has done in Denver. This guy is just an outstanding leader on the floor. Too bad he never received the recognition that JKidd, Nash, CP3, DWill and Parker have received the last several years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LongtimeSpursFan

Chauncey Billups? Look what he has done in Denver. This guy is just an outstanding leader on the floor. Too bad he never received the recognition that JKidd, Nash, CP3, DWill and Parker have received the last several years.

---

Weird, isn't it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cantthinkofanything

Detroit didn't have a franchise player when they beat the Lakers in 2006.

---

That Pistons team is the one anomally. They had a good system with a bunch of good players but no franchise guy. In fairness though the Lakers imploded in the finals due to the mounting tension between Kobe and Shaq.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LongtimeSpursFan

Chauncey Billups? Look what he has done in Denver. This guy is just an outstanding leader on the floor. Too bad he never received the recognition that JKidd, Nash, CP3, DWill and Parker have received the last several years.

---

The original quote mentioned franchise players and max players. With that distinction in place, none of those players you mentioned is a franchise player in my opinion.

My point in mentioning Detroit is that there is always hope of putting together a team of good (and some great) players and still having a chance at winning a title. Granted, a small chance, but enough to be fired up about another season. Even without Duncan or a franchise player.

Quote:

---

"The challenge in staying competitive is not making mistakes," Gregg Popovich said, "is finding guys that fit the system."

---

What a load of horseshit. They just re-upped a player to the tune of 40 million that doesn't fit.

Don't worry Pop...all the fans will blame you for not adjusting when you spend yet another year trying to stick that square block through that round hole.

Problem is there are over 400 players in the NBA and maybe 5 that are franchise players....two of which are on the same team, in LeBron and Wade. I'd say Dwight Howard and Kevin Durant are also franchise players. You'd be hard pressed to find another one. Rose? Williams? Paul?...I dont think so, max players but not franchise players. Duncan and Kobe are on their last legs so they are out.

I think Bron Bron might have forfeited his "franchise player" status.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ohmwrecker

I think Bron Bron might have forfeited his "franchise player" status.

---

+1:toast

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ohmwrecker

I think Bron Bron might have forfeited his "franchise player" status.

---

Disagree...

Lebron just allowed Miami to have TWO franchise players on one team...as someone already mentioned

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 20beastie45

Great read....

"But Popovich expects the Spurs to carry on past Duncan and Co. Just as the Lakers, Celtics and those other franchises that find a way."


Do you think that Pop is going to be the next Sloan? Hope so.

---

Why be the next Sloan when he can be the only Pop? The man has 4 championships and Sloan has none. It would be better to compare him to Reilly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by silverblk mystix

Disagree...

Lebron just allowed Miami to have TWO franchise players on one team...as someone already mentioned

---

You can't have two franchise players on one team. That's why they are called the franchise player.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ohmwrecker

You can't have two franchise players on one team. That's why they are called the franchise player.

---

says who?

Miami has TWO ...not opinion...fact.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by silverblk mystix

says who?

Miami has TWO ...not opinion...fact.

---

If that is your claim, then the burden of proof is on you. I think I will wait and see them actually play some games before I start claiming opinion as fact.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ace3g

"The challenge in staying competitive is not making mistakes," Gregg Popovich said, "is finding guys that fit the system."

---

And they've done well, until the past 2-3 years that is. The Scola hiccup and Mason/Bonner/Bogans moves haven't yielded good results unfortunately. Hence the Spurs are not a top echelon team anymore.

Quote:

---

"There's a difference between a max player and a franchise player," he continued. "There aren't too many franchise players and a whole lot of max players. That's the deal. You can count the franchise players on one hand. Until you get one of those, it's not going to happen for you."

---

Indeed......

Timmy, Kobe, Wade = Franchise Players

Dirk, LBJ, Bosh, Howard, McGrady, Johnson = Max Players

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by silverblk mystix

says who?

Miami has TWO ...not opinion...fact.

---

Miami has one, and one who potentially could have been but realized he wasn't. That's the entire reason why LBJ made the move to South Beach.

as much as I hate Dwhistle he is a franchise player. and so is lebron

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ace3g

By Art Garcia: NBA.com


Hill has Rondo-like upside,

---

really ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Agloco

Miami has one, and one who potentially could have been but realized he wasn't. That's the entire reason why LBJ made the move to South Beach.

---

Do you think that Lebron is now a worse player than last year?

Lebron is still in his prime and so is Wade--where is it written that there can only be one?

This is new territory now and in the past --any team would be lucky to have even ONE franchise player

but all of a sudden Miami has two...Lebron will probably play even better than he did at Cleveland---and that is scary because now Lebron doesn't have the pressure of doing everything and he can be more of an all around player.

Remember when Lebron was criticized for passing to a teammate in clutch time---well the play--and the pass were correct but the teammate missed the shot so Lebron caught all kinds of shit for it---so he tried to be something he was not and that was to be a player in the MJ/Kobe mode...

but Lebron might be more of an Oscar Robertson type---by triple doubling the shit out of the NBA and if THAT isn't a franchise player...then I don't know what is...

so Wade can continue his clutchness in the final moments---but Lebron can make Wade's job easier by controlling the ball and drawing attention -therefore allowing Wade to seal the deal...and this I believe in NO WAY diminishes the talent of Lebron


UNLESS

you are caught up in the MJ/Kobe type of hero and feel the NEED to invent ANOTHER Jordan...then you will accuse lebron of being---LESS...


ALL a matter of opinion in the end...

Franchise player isn't the "player who win the NBA" .A franchise player is a player enough good to built a team to compete for the tittle around him.Only an idiot can say the Cavs weren't a tittle contender with LeBron.They had 2 times the best record of the league and they played the Finals in 2007.

Under 25 if James (2 times MVP) isn't a franchise player then none is. Now he couldn't be the leader in Miami but that's not what Pop was talking about

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hater

as much as I hate Dwhistle he is a franchise player. and so is lebron

---

LeBron was a franchise player in Cleveland. He is now in Miami who already has their franchise player in Wade. Nobody thinks that LeBron is a worse basketball player, but Wade is the leader of that team. He will be the one everyone else defers to. He has already won a championship for the franchise. Wade is the franchise player. I can't think of a team that has ever had two franchise players.
You can look at the 2000-2003 Lakers. Shaq was the man there. The franchise player. Once Kobe decided he wanted to challenge that, the Lakers made the decision to let Shaq go (coincidentally, to Miami, where he deferred to Wade) and Kobe became the Lakers' franchise player.
Or, look at the Spurs. While the transition was smoother and free of jealousy, David Robinson, the previous franchise player, took a step back and made way for the new franchise player, Tim Duncan.

Now this is just my opinion, but I believe that the franchise player is the guy that teams build around for a championship future. There may be some really great players at his side, but only one can be "the man".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Josepatches_

Franchise player isn't the "player who win the NBA" .A franchise player is a player enough good to built a team to compete for the tittle around him.Only an idiot can say the Cavs weren't a tittle contender with LeBron.They had 2 times the best record of the league and they played the Finals in 2007.

Under 25 if James (2 times MVP) isn't a franchise player then none is. Now he couldn't be the leader in Miami but that's not what Pop was talking about

---

Agree. Miami now has two franchise players and an all star big. The future has been set now where top free agent players will team together to create super allstar teams.

The days are over for teams like the spurs, trying to win with the main core of the team built around their draft picks and a couple low end role player pickups.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ohmwrecker

LeBron was a franchise player in Cleveland. He is now in Miami who already has their franchise player in Wade. Nobody thinks that LeBron is a worse basketball player, but Wade is the leader of that team. He will be the one everyone else defers to. He has already won a championship for the franchise. Wade is the franchise player. I can't think of a team that has ever had two franchise players.
You can look at the 2000-2003 Lakers. Shaq was the man there. The franchise player. Once Kobe decided he wanted to challenge that, the Lakers made the decision to let Shaq go (coincidentally, to Miami, where he deferred to Wade) and Kobe became the Lakers' franchise player.
Or, look at the Spurs. While the transition was smoother and free of jealousy, David Robinson, the previous franchise player, took a step back and made way for the new franchise player, Tim Duncan.

Now this is just my opinion, but I believe that the franchise player is the guy that teams build around for a championship future. There may be some really great players at his side, but only one can be "the man".

---

Go back a little further in time. The lakers of the 80s had two franchise players in Abdul-Jabber and Magic.

Why do teams only have to have 1 franchise player? Two players can play great on the same team. Hall of fame players like Abdul-Jabber and Magic are franchise players. Also Shaq and Kobe and Duncan and Robinson were all franchise players. Those teams with the two franchise players all won more than 1 title.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rascal

Go back a little further in time. The lakers of the 80s had two franchise players in Abdul-Jabber and Magic. Also Shaq and Kobe and Duncan and Robinson were all franchise players. Those teams with the two franchise players all won more than 1 title.

---

Those are examples of teams that transitioned from one franchise player to the next. The showtime Lakers and the Duncan era Spurs were able to do it smoothly were as one player declined, the other would rise.
Like I said, it's just my opinion. Maybe the Heat will prove me wrong, but both James and Wade are in their prime, so it's a different situation. It will, at least, be interesting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by elbamba

Why be the next Sloan when he can be the only Pop? The man has 4 championships and Sloan has none. It would be better to compare him to Reilly.

---

I find it strange as to how Pop always publically reveres Sloan and his disciplined system, as a model for the Spurs. It's strange to hear all that public fawning when the Spurs are the organization with 4 championships.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rascal

Go back a little further in time. The lakers of the 80s had two franchise players in Abdul-Jabber and Magic.

Why do teams only have to have 1 franchise player? Two players can play great on the same team. Hall of fame players like Abdul-Jabber and Magic are franchise players. Also Shaq and Kobe and Duncan and Robinson were all franchise players. Those teams with the two franchise players all won more than 1 title.

---

Robinson was a franchise player, but he passed it on to Duncan. Shaq was the franchiser player, and that team imploded and had to trade Shaq when Kobe challenged him. Kareem was a franchise player, but he stepped aside to let Magic run the show. Pippen is a top 20 NBA player of all time, but Jordan was the franchise player. Theres a difference between "great" and "franchise." The Franchise player is the one the team builds around, the one the future rests on, the one who if taken away the team is no longer the same caliber. In Miami that guy has and will be Wade. Lebron lost his legacy when he hitched hiumself on the D-Wade bandwaggon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trimble87

Robinson was a franchise player, but he passed it on to Duncan. Shaq was the franchiser player, and that team imploded and had to trade Shaq when Kobe challenged him. Kareem was a franchise player, but he stepped aside to let Magic run the show. Pippen is a top 20 NBA player of all time, but Jordan was the franchise player. Theres a difference between "great" and "franchise." The Franchise player is the one the team builds around, the one the future rests on, the one who if taken away the team is no longer the same caliber. In Miami that guy has and will be Wade. Lebron lost his legacy when he hitched hiumself on the D-Wade bandwaggon.

---

...matter of opinion...

Pippen may have been a top 20 player---but Lebron is more than that...so that theory is out the window...

Wade and LBJ are BOTH top 5 at least---maybe even top 3

BOTH are still in their primes and both are going to wreak havoc...

here is ANOTHER way of looking at it;

Wade or LBJ would be many teams 1st choice to build a team around---either would be picked as their franchise player if given the chance

Wade isn't that high up on the list of all time shooting guards. He's good, make no mistake but he's not top 25 of all time as an overall player and not a top 5 shooting guard all time. Wade does have a strong leadership personality which in some ways allows him to lead a team beyond how good he actually is. He's a good but not elite ballhandler, a merely adequate passer, and only above average as a jumpshooter. He's really good as a finisher in the lane and at drawing fouls and making those foulshots. He's also very competitive He's above average on defense but not great there either. He's also pretty good at marketing himself. quite honestly age being equal (its not) I'd rather have manu on my team as a shooting guard over wade, wade is an all star player but he's not much more than that. Name one skill Wade really outshines Roy or Manu or Kobe at?