Printable View
I started trying to remember some of the guys the Spurs drafted and wondered what happened to them or why we let them go.
Then it made me think that the Spurs do a decent job of drafting, but not so good at signing all the really good picks.
Salmons
Barbosa
Scola
Who else?
Obviously we drafted unheralded players like Parker and Ginobili who turned out to be fantastic.
Anyone got a list of all of the Spurs draft picks since the year 2000?
Question.
2007
Rnd Name College/HS/Country Note
1 Tiago Splitter Brazil
2 Marcus Williams University of Arizona
2 Giorgos Printezis Greece
2006
Rnd Name College/HS/Country Note
2 Damir Markota Croatia
2005
Rnd Name College/HS/Country Note
1 Ian Mahinmi France
2004
Rnd Name College/HS/Country Note
1 Beno Udrih Slovenia
2 Romain Sato Xavier
2 Sergei Karaulov Jakutsk (Russia)
2003
Rnd Name College/HS/Country Note
1 Leandrinho Barbosa Brazil
2002
Rnd Name College/HS/Country Note
1 John Salmons Miami
2 Luis Scola Tau Ceramica (Spain)
2 Randy Holcomb San Diego State
2001
Rnd Name College/HS/Country Note
1 Tony Parker None
2 Robertas Javtokas
2 Bryan Bracey Oregon
2000
Rnd Name College/HS/Country Note
2 Chris Carrawell Duke
Bam. That "Greek Steve Nash" guy should note that we already drafted a Greek.
-Mars
Nice, man.
Some names jump out at me like Scola (we have another thread for him), Scola, Salmons, and even Udrih.
What did we get in return for each of these guys?
Question.
2007
Rnd Name College/HS/Country Note
1 Tiago Splitter Brazil <-- Playing in Spain, coming over next year.
2 Marcus Williams University of Arizona <-- Playing for Austin Toros.
2 Giorgos Printezis Greece <--Traded to Raptors for future second round pick
2006
Rnd Name College/HS/Country Note
2 Damir Markota Croatia <--Traded for the pick that turned into Marcus Williams.
2005
Rnd Name College/HS/Country Note
1 Ian Mahinmi France <--Promising big who was called up to the big leagues today by Spurs
2004
Rnd Name College/HS/Country Note
1 Beno Udrih Slovenia <--Sucked and was traded for nothing.
2 Romain Sato Xavier <--Sucked and was waived
2 Sergei Karaulov Jakutsk (Russia) <--Sucks and is overseas.
2003
Rnd Name College/HS/Country Note
1 Leandrinho Barbosa Brazil <--Traded for a first round pick that eventually helped land Nazr Mohammed
2002
Rnd Name College/HS/Country Note
1 John Salmons Miami <--Traded for Speedy Claxton
2 Luis Scola Tau Ceramica (Spain) <--Traded for money
2 Randy Holcomb San Diego State <--Sucked and was waived
2001
Rnd Name College/HS/Country Note
1 Tony Parker None <--Traded for Gary Payton errrrrr Finals MVP
2 Robertas Javtokas <--Decent but overseas
2 Bryan Bracey Oregon <--Sucked and waived
2000
Rnd Name College/HS/Country Note
2 Chris Carrawell Duke <--Sucked and waived
wasn't Randy Holcombe traded as opposed to signed and waived?
No but I got a list of championships. :froQuote:
Originally Posted by Ghost Writer
Yeah you're right he was part of the Speedy trade.Quote:
Originally Posted by objective
Sanikidze is missing on that list as well I think..
IMO, he oughtta be brought over next year and given the Ian treatment.
Thanks, timvp.
And you can laugh all you want about Parker for Payton back in the day, but how many late first rounders amount to anything these days. I wanted a sure thing.
Barbosa sure would be nice right about now. Fvck Scola... Barbosa is nasty.
And the Kings are making good use of Salmons and Udrih.
Please give me everything you got on Ian Mahinm and Marcus Williams.
Thanks!
I'd argue that, given where the Spurs have drafted for the last decade, their drafts have actually been relatively productive. Sure, they missed on Josh Howard, but beyond that, they nailed the Parker pick, dealt the Salmons pick for a guy who immediately helped to win a title, and traded the Barbosa pick for another pick that brought back an important piece to a 2nd title team. They've also managed to find at least 2 promising young big men.
From picking no better than 26th (2002) over a 7 year period, the Spurs have found a two-time All-Star and Finals MVP, have dealt for 2 immediate difference makers to championship teams, and have stockpiled 2 young bigs. I'd be surprised if you could find many teams that have done more with the draft than that, at least in terms of results (and not promise).
Relax, FWD.
How many times have those "2 immediate difference makers to championship teams" been moved?
And call them by name.
Speedy Claxton and Nazr Mohammed
I look at the Spurs drafting as feast (Parker) and famine (trading quality players for nothing in return).
I'm hardly upset -- I'm just providing the other side of the argument you're making. The 2 immediate difference makers didn't stick around for long, but in each case Claxton and Mohammed did make an immediate difference.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost Writer
For someone with a results-oriented, win-now mentality, I'd think that would be preferable to having a bunch of young guys on the roster who didn't win titles but have some talent and make the Spurs pretty good.
You can see it as feast-or-famine all you like. I see it as having been effective to win at least 2 titles, which is the ultimate goal, I think, of building teams.
Actually it is a good record (except for Howard) considering that other teams do not have this kind of record. The problem with Spurs is that Spurs have been a power house for a long time now and they can not develop or retain all the talents they select until now (because of Toros). Let us see how these guys are developed.
I wasn't making an argument until you pretended that it was okay to lose players like Scola, Udrih and Barbosa for crap.Quote:
Originally Posted by FromWayDowntown
Although I will give you this... I agree that trading for Mohammed and Claxton was the right thing to do at the time.
We have no idea what picks will amount to, but when you have a serious contender, you should make moves to put you over the top immediately.
So I can't fault them for the trades, but I hate letting guys go for nothing like Scola, Udrih and Barbosa.
When we have to skim the waiver wire to improve the roster (Ward, NVE, Finley, Stoudamire among others), it sucks to get no ROI for guys that land elsewhere.
Ian Mahinmi is the French version of a poor man's Amare Stoudemire. Very good athlete. Big. Strong. Dunks a lot. Doesn't play much defense but can get highlight reel blocks. Foul prone.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost Writer
Williams sucks. Not an NBA player.
Only other real player in the pipeline is Tiago Splitter. Splitter looks like he has the potential to be a taller, longer, more talented version of Oberto somewhere down the line.
Overall, it's impossible to complain about how the Spurs have drafted if you look at the body of work. Plucking two borderline Hall of Famers from the depths of the draft in the last nine years erases any mistakes that have been made.
Tiago is great, better version of Biedrins plus younger and a good person
Thanks, tim.Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
The only thing that I lament is getting nothing for some players that have started elsewhere.
I applaud them for the wisdom to draft Parker and Manu and trade draftees for missing pieces on title teams.
That's quite a upgrade from Steven Hunter. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
I'm not pretending that it's okay to lose quality players, but I am saying exactly the same thing that you just propped timvp for saying. The Spurs' use of draft picks since 2001 has been effective for a team with a win-now mentality. Of all people, I'd think you would most appreciate effectiveness that embraces a win-now mentality.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost Writer
True, but please acknowledge that there's no excuse for getting nothing for Udrih, Barbosa and Scola.
Udrih sucks. He only tries when he starts. Check out his numbers now that he's back to the bench in Sacramento. Plus he's not a playoff player.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost Writer
Stoudamire > Beno. And I don't even like Stoudamire.
They got something for Barbosa -- the pick that became Mohammed. You've acknowledged that in the win-now world, Mohammed was a worthwhile deal, so I'm not sure how you can say that the Spurs got nothing for Barbosa.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost Writer
I agree with timvp as to Beno and the Scola thing was a take what you can get or get nothing at all scenario. They shopped Scola for more, but didn't get it. I can't blame them for deciding that Scola wasn't worth his pricetag, particularly given this team's financial constraints and Scola's half-year production.
I think the Tiago draft was the biggest deciding factor in letting Scola go.
Actually, Ed, the Spurs still probably win with Rose that year.
They gave him, the pick that led to Barbosa and another pick in 2006 to the Knicks in that deal.
Just sayin'...
So wait -- now Mohammed wasn't a key contributor to a championship?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost Writer
Nah... he was, but would Rose have been any less?
And Barbosa is pretty good.
Who resulted in the other first rounder?
I think Mohammed made a huge difference to those Spurs, if only because his presence meant that the Spurs didn't have to start Rasho throughout that playoff run. Nazr was 5th on that team in playoff scoring and 2nd in rebounding, so it's pretty tough IMO, to argue that he made no difference or that things would have been the same with Malik coming off the bench. Plus, Nazr's deal was far more cap-friendly for the Spurs than Malik's was.
Barbosa is pretty good, but there's also no evidence to suggest that the Spurs would have drafted him had they kept that pick. The best argument in your favor is that keeping the pick might have encouraged the Spurs to draft Josh Howard. Then again, the justification for dealing the pick in the first place was to clear cap room to make a push to acquire Jason Kidd while replacing David Robinson.
New York turned around and drafted David Lee with the pick that the Spurs dealt for Mohammed.
I dunno.Quote:
Nah... he was, but would Rose have been any less?
Mohammed had some pretty Fing strong games in the playoffs.
I think against the Sonics he put up 20 and 10 in a crucial game 5 where it was him and Manu against them.
Mohammed in those playoffs was the best center since DRob left.
Shame he reverted back to Old Nazr after that ended.
The Spurs probobly wouldn't have drafted Lee either.Quote:
New York turned around and drafted David Lee with the pick that the Spurs dealt for Mohammed
He had 19 and 7 in that game, but was 8-10 from the floor. He and Manu (39 points on 10-15 from the floor, 4-6 from the arc, and 15-17 from the line) had help from Duncan, who went for 20 and 14 in a game that the Spurs won by 13.Quote:
Originally Posted by T Park
Yeah the one play I remember well was him downlow Ginobili throwing him a no looker and him throwing one down on Nick Collision for a HUGE and 1.
didnt we also missed out on josh howard who was drafted in the 2nd round after someone we drafted, due to one of our scouts at WF who......arrgggg what couldve been
So it was Rose, Barbosa and D. Lee for Mohammed
ROSE was a straight up trade with the knicks for NAZRQuote:
Originally Posted by Ghost Writer
barbosa traded on draft night to the suns, for a draft pick and trade exception i believe
Splitter may be closer to Gasol than Oberto. Oberto looks like the floor for Splitter, the ceiling may be very nice.Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
False.Quote:
Originally Posted by TDMVPDPOY
http://www.nba.com/knicks/news/rose_050224.html
and a championship. Yup.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost Writer
Mohammed was not the difference maker and arguably not as good as any of the components of that trade.
Okay -- so you're admitting that the Spurs would have won the 2005 title with Rasho Nesterovic starting at center?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost Writer
Rasho and Rose... possibly.
Quite frankly, I don't have a big problem with the deal.
I take issue with people like you who pretend it did not come at a significant cost.
I like "win now."
They made a "win now" move with Mohammed. Since that's your mantra, I'm not sure why we're arguing about this, unless your mantra is really "try to win now, but better if you can build for the future."Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost Writer
You can't have it both ways, no matter how much you try to.
Furthermore, I'm not saying the deal didn't have a cost; I am saying, however, that the cost was balanced out by the fact that the deal netted a title that I don't think the Spurs would have otherwise won.
Passing on a Howard or Barbosa was bad, but I think the Rose trade was the worst. The Spurs could have used those two picks, plus given their history Pop and Malik would have found a way to work it out.
Overall, their record's been damn good using their late 1st and 2nd round picks. It could have been ridiculously good if they had drafted Howard and kept the two picks they traded to the Knicks.
Agreed, even if they wouldn't have picked Howard that year. The Rose trade wasn't that great in retrospect, was another one of those 'kill assets to save money' deals that bites you in the ass down the line (now) when you most need developing youthful players.Quote:
Originally Posted by Holt's Cat
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost Writer
Gdub....you mean Nazr and his 20 head fakes wasn't the key in 05? :)
Wasn't Javkotas touted as someone who was going to be good before his accident?
He was, and still seems to be decent, if only in Europe.Quote:
Originally Posted by samikeyp
Sanikidze was not drafted by us.
He was traded to us via Atlanta.
In 4 games off the bench- Beno is shooting 45% and averaging 7.75PPG. Still a lot better than Jacque's exciting 4 PPG and 40% FG.Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
And hey- at least Sacramento can beat Seattle.
FWD, listen to your fellow Spurs fans in this thread.
Aside from Parker and Ginobili, the Spurs have managed to squander virtually every other draft pick.
Do NOT make the mistake of suggesting Mohammed was better that year than Rose and 2 first rounders could have been.
Here's what I know: since 2001, the Spurs have use their draft picks to acquire:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost Writer
1. A 2-time All-Star point guard who's 7 years in and still only 25 years old.
2. A backup point guard who played a crucial role on a championship team.
3. A starting center who played a crucial role on a championship team.
4. A 21-year old big French kid who can jump out of the gym.
5. A young, bruising Brazilian big man who was slated at one point to be a lottery pick.
Now, could they have done more? Sure. But have they been ineffective? Absolutely not.
Have the picks been squandered? I guess that depends on whether or not you believe that acquiring key pieces to 2 championship teams is an ineffective use of draft picks. I don't. No peer pressure is going to change my mind on that.
The Barbosa one shouldn't be held against them. He was drafted for the Suns, not drafted by the Spurs and then they decided to trade him away. That makes that a difficult situation to judge.
On a pure talent standpoint, I doubt he would of blossomed into the player he is now, playing in the Spurs system. I don't particularly like the player he has become anyway because I think he is a definite product of his system, but yeah, I'm not sure the Spurs are to blame for letting him go, he was drafted for the Suns.
39% from off the bench. Check your stats. Plus 1.7 assists in 21 minutes per game off the bench.Quote:
Originally Posted by ploto
Great point guard production there :rolleyes
FWD where are those critical championship pieces today and of the two... are they any better that what we sacrificed to get them.
So in other words, we did great with Manu and Parker and squandered the rest.
timvp, how about we compare Beno and Vaughn's numbers in starts this year, too?
Question.
You hated Beno when he was here. Why you frontin'?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost Writer
And if Vaughn were to leave the Spurs and put up stats somewhere else your BAMA take would be something like ...........
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost Writer
Anthony Harper is looking pretty good on the Nuggets, maybe we should have kept him around.
So the Spurs win a title in 2003 with John Salmons instead of Speedy Claxton?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost Writer
The critical championship pieces did what any good BAMA would want -- they made plays that won championships. I don't think you can expect that the Spurs could both build for the future and try to win championships in the moment. After the titles, things change -- Claxton wanted more money than he proved to be worth, given his frailty and Mohammed became a dinosaur in a game that passed him by in one year. Regardless, each was vital to 2 of the Spurs' championships and I doubt that any reasonable fan would trade the titles for a hope that the draft picks sent out to get those guys would pan out.
I really don't get your position here, frankly. For someone who has, for as long as I've discussed things with him, constantly preached about the merits of winning now and worrying later, you now seem to be lamenting that the Spurs made moves to win then and to worry later. Like I said before, I don't think you can have it both ways -- I don't think you can be pissed that the Spurs dealt a guy like Salmons when the guy that they got back paid immediate dividends that culminated in a title. The Spurs knew when they acquired Claxton that there was significant risk that he'd want a payday after a successful season and that they wouldn't be able to mee that demand both because he wouldn't start here and because he'd interfere with Operation Kidd in the summer of 2003. Still, they made the move and got the guy by selling off a rookie with some talent who's proven to be an average or better-than-average player in the league. I'll take that trade every day of the week and it's completely compatible with a BAMA view of Spurs basketball as well.
We fundamentally disagree, apparently, on the merits of the Mohammed deal, but I think the same principle applies there. Even if that deal could somehow be deemed a mistake -- a point I'll continue to reject -- my point holds: you've now got 2 significant mistakes on your side (dealing for Mohammed by using a pick and drafting Udrih) while I've got the drafting of an All-Star, dealing for a championship difference-maker, and drafting two promising young bigs on my side. I think my 4 beats your 2 and says that the Spurs have had more solid uses of picks than squandered picks.
It's simple.
Yes, I believe in "Win now, worry later."
But I think we overpaid for Mohammed in that particular deal and lament the fact that we've squandered all these other drat picks, yet have to scrounge for a Stoudamire today.
:wtfQuote:
Originally Posted by Ghost Writer
What has Scola done?
Most of these past trades were done mainly for monetary reasons and were pretty much inevitable given the cap or tax situations in those years or the price-to-production ratio of the players who were shipped out.
Okay -- so you've got Mohammed and Udrih. What else? Are you seriously going to suggest that the Spurs win a title with John Salmons in 2003? If not, that's at least 4 solid moves with draft picks since 2001.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost Writer
And Chump is absolutely right, too. It's pretty easy to sit here and look back on all of these decisions with the clear view of hindsight, but in virtually every case, there was substantial financial decisions that played a role in the equation -- the decisions about pursuing Kidd and the decisions that allowed the Spurs to keep Parker and Ginobili without grossly exceeding the tax threshold.
I thought I'd never say this, but I kind of miss Mohammed and what he brought defensively and offensively around the rim. Only if his attitude was different during and after the intelligent 06' small ball plan against the Mavs.
I miss Mohammed's rebounding, but he was about as clueless as Elson in the defense.
Picks that produced Barbosa, David Lee, Salmons, Udrih... who else?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChumpDumper
There were times he was clueless as you say yes. But when in doubt the man would just about always contest shots inside. Something that we don't have outside of Duncan.
Chris man you're right. The Spurs will never win a championship until they draft better.
Don't forget about Derrick Dial. Dusty seems to know something.
Grant Hill is a free agent next summer, too.
This thread takes me back.
Didn't we keep Derrick Dial's 40 inch vertical over Raja Bell?
The Spurs have a secret they're about to unleash upon the NBA.Quote:
Originally Posted by MaNu4Tres
I don't know why we rehash this stuff so often.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcus Bryant
Barbosa, Lee, and Mohammad are all the same. If the Spurs don't deal the pick that became Barbosa, they never have the pick that they traded to get Mohammed, which became Lee.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost Writer
And why are you avoiding the Salmons v. Claxton circa 2002-03 issue?
I wonder what brought Casper back. Probably his drinking buddies ribbing him about the Spurs' latest mid-season swoon.
It diverts attention from the Spurs' 3 game losing skid. And it's addictive.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChumpDumper
Nevermind that the Spurs' two backcourt stars, players who were integral to 3 championships, were nabbed with late round picks.Quote:
Originally Posted by FromWayDowntown
Dealing the pick in '03 to have a shot at Kidd is part of the Win Now, Worry Later Church's Gospel.
Anyways, it's good to see Casper back to his happy griping self.
Javtokas is still playing? I assume he'll never make the NBA, right? Because if he could, why the hell do we have Elson?
Hello, Marcus.
I really don't have an axe to grind about the Spurs drafting other than not feeling great about letting guys go for diddly-pooh.
Even the Mohammed deal was the right thing to do at the time, if a bit costly.
Hindsight is always 20/20.
:reading what money did the spurs get for Scola???Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
2 Luis Scola Tau Ceramica (Spain) [b
wasn't it the greek steve nash and a future draft pick for Butler and Scola's rights?
I would say:we traded Scola for nothing.
This reminds me of the "Why did we trade Antonio Daniels" rants from the early parts of 2002-03.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost Writer
FWD, do you like giving away picks for nothing?
Question.
Trading away Scola for nothing was kind of dumb.
There, I had to say it.
How about letting Udrih walk?
D. Lee, Barbosa and Rose for Mohammed sounds good.
Do you just choose not to listen or do you just insist on making things up?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost Writer
The Spurs didn't trade Barbosa and Rose and Lee for Mohammed. They got a pick from the Suns for the pick that became Barbosa. So, it's either the pick or Barbosa, not both. If there's no pick, it's Barbosa and Rose for Mohammed. If there's a pick, it's Rose and Lee for Mohammed. In either event, I still say that a championship made the trade worthwhile.
Win now and worry later, after all.
False.
They traded Rose and 2 future first rounders that resulted in Barbosa and D. Lee for Mohammed.
no, you are still wrong on this one. barbosa was drafted in the 2003 nba draft. he was acquired by the suns in a pre-arranged draft day deal (with san antonio selecting barbosa for the suns, in exchange for a future first round pick in 2005).Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost Writer
malik played the entire 2003-2004 season with the spurs. malik was then traded that next season (2004-2005) along with two first round picks, our 2006 pick (that became mardy collins) and that future pick from the suns. david lee was selected with that future suns pick in 2005. so if the spurs dont make the pre-arranged draft day deal with the suns, they wouldnt have had the pick that became david lee in the first place.
so to sum it up for you, cause you seem to have some difficulty picking this up, the spurs couldnt have had both barbosa and lee instead of nazr. to get the pick that became lee, they would have had to first trade barbosa.
unless you want to argue that the spurs passed on lee in the 2005 draft, selecting ian two picks earlier. but if thats the case, i guess you also want to bitch about the spurs passing on al harrington, rashard lewis, gilbert arenas, carlos boozer, josh howard, mo williams, and a long list of players that the spurs (as well as most every other team in the league) passed on. but you would never do something like that...
seems to me if you are going to argue past spurs personal moves, you should have at least a base understanding of said moves.
Maybe he'll listen to you ss1986v2.
He sure won't listen to me.
Leandrinho and Luis should be here, with them this team wouldn't be suscking like we are !!! only two mistakes.
Phew.Quote:
Originally Posted by ss1986v2
Now that you clarified the order of sending all those picks/players away for nothing, I feel a lot better.
Thanks much.