Reply With Quote
I read this earlier. I disagreed with it.
http://www.nysun.com/sports/spurs-no...tooling/79176/
Spurs, Not Pistons, Need Major Retooling
By JOHN HOLLINGER
It's the Lakers and the Celtics in the NBA Finals, and the world is rejoicing.
We'll get into all that starting tomorrow. But for now, let's have some words for the losers.
Both San Antonio and Detroit find themselves in similar straights today, coming off disappointing conference finals defeats and staring down Father Time in the mirror. It promises to be an interesting offseason for each team.
For the past six seasons, these have been the two most successful franchises in basketball. Detroit made the conference finals every one of those years — ponder for a second how consistently good a team must be to pull that feat off — and won the le in 2004. San Antonio won three championships in that time; in each of the other three, they lost to the eventual conference champ.
Yet, each has to be questioning whether they'll make it back to this point anytime soon. Both clubs are rife with age issues. If they stand pat, each will enter 2008-09 with only one starter under the age of 30 (oddly, they have the same initials). San Antonio's Tony Parker (26) and Detroit's Tayshaun Prince (28) are what passes for youth on these two clubs, while the other eight starters are almost certain to decline in the coming seasons.
To hear most people tell it, the Spurs are the ones more likely to stand pat, while the Pistons are the ones who need to perform major surgery. Alas, this has everything to do with the halo of being a recent champion and nothing to do with the facts of the two teams. The way I see it, the exact opposite is true.
The consternation in Detroit is understandable. This is the third straight year they've lost in the conference finals, and in two of these three they were overwhelming favorites entering the series. Additionally, the Pistons haven't achieved the ultimate goal of winning the le since 2004, while San Antonio has tasted glory twice since then.
It seems, then, that all options are on the table. For starters, speculation is rampant that Detroit will fire head coach Flip Saunders. At the very least, he's unlikely to get an extension and will enter next year as a lame duck.
That's unfortunate, because Saunders appeared to do one of his best coaching jobs this season. He guided the club to 59 wins while bending over backward to keep his vets fresh for the postseason — no player averaged more than 34 minutes per game. He also played the kids and developed the bench much more than in past seasons, with the result that youngsters such as Rodney Stuckey and Jason Maxiell were huge contributors come playoff time.
If you really wanted to quibble, you could point to his use of decrepit vet Theo Ratliff ahead of rising star Amir Johnson in the postseason, but given the small number of minutes that were at stake, it's hard to see how this altered Detroit's destiny much. And his other moves — such as benching the ineffective Jarvis Hayes and reinstating Antonio McDyess as a starter — were spot-on.
Beyond that, the sentiment in Motown is that they have to make some kind of move — something, anything-- as a result of falling short three straight years. Within 48 hours, I read different opinion pieces in Detroit papers advocating trading Prince, Richard Hamilton, and Rasheed Wallace. In no case was it made clear what the Pistons would gain by such a move.
This is when it's useful to take a step back and remind people that only one of the league's 30 teams wins a le each year, and that Detroit was in as good as position as anyone to claim it before Chauncey Billups hurt his hamstring. Yes, it's frustrating, but that's the league.
Undoubtedly, there are age concerns. When next season tips off, Billups will be 32, Hamilton will be 30, and Wallace and McDyess will both be 34. But Pistons general manager Joe Dumars has done an outstanding job of managing his cap and bringing in younger players.
As a result, Maxiell (25), Stuckey (22), Johnson (21), and Arron Afflalo (who will be 23 next season) are ready to ride in to the rescue. Stuckey and Johnson in particular appear to be stars in the making, and within a year or two could be pushing their older mates for starting gigs. Moreover, Dumars will have his cap exceptions ready to wield because he's kept the Pistons well below the league's luxury tax threshold.
The alternative is to focus on the unhappy ending rather than the process of building a team. There's another word for that, and it's called panic. If Dumars wants a couple examples to dissuade him from that course, he need only look at Phoenix and Dallas. Each thought they had to do something after a series of near-misses, and each made foolish gambles on fading superstars that only hastened their demise.
The Spurs, on the other hand, stand on much shakier ground. Like Dumars, general manager R.C. Buford has managed his cap extremely well and heads into the summer ready to use his exceptions — and remember, these are powerful weapons for strong teams because most quality vets want to play for a winner.
But the rest of the picture is much bleaker. Like the Pistons, the Spurs have serious age problems among the starters. When the 2008-09 season begins, Tim Duncan will be 32, Manu Ginobili 31, Bruce Bowen 37, and Fabricio Oberto 33.
Unlike the Pistons, however, the Spurs have virtually no youth in reserve. In fact, the bench is even older than the starters. Michael Finley (35), Kurt Thomas (35), Brent Barry (36), Ime Udoka (who will be 31), and Jacque Vaughn (33) all are likely to decline rapidly, while Robert Horry (who will be 38) is likely to retire and no longer good enough to help if he doesn't.
Moreover, San Antonio's strategy of stockpiling players in Europe until they are needed has hit a snag thanks to the dollar's decline against the euro, all but eliminating the financial incentive to cross the pond. 2006 first-round pick Tiago Splitter reportedly decided to rebuff their advances to sign in Spain for two more years, where he can make a lot more money than under the NBA's rookie salary scale. Other than Parker, the only player under 27 is 2005 first-rounder Ian Mahinmi, a raw big man who spent most of the year in the D-League.
So when you look at the futures of these two incredibly successful teams, don't let the champions' halo fool you. Looking backward, it may seem as if Detroit is the team in need of urgent action. But looking forward, it's the Spurs who require much more radical surgery to stay at the league's forefront
I read this earlier. I disagreed with it.
hollinger is
Sorry if it was posted already. I looked but didn't see it.
Oh no, it wasn't posted, I read the actual article from the paper's website.
Not a terrible take, but this is what happens when a stat-geek starts to talk strategy.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3423956
Apparently the Pistons themselves don't agree with this.
Spurs fans are always in denial.
Not necessarily.
Me thinks the complaints from Spurs fans are getting to him.
Hollinger finally gets it right. Of course he is on the money. The Pistons have two young guards, and two young forwards ready to come in and take over. We have Ian, and we don't even know if he's ready, and that's it.
I think the Pistons will offload Sheed to make time for Johnson and Maxiell, and really, that's all they need to do.
OTOH, we need to find 2 young swings, another young big, and a backup PG, with very few trade assets and a tight cap situation.
What's not to agree with?
The Pistons are in a much better spot that the Spurs youth wise, I'm not sure on there cap figure but I imagine thats decent as well.
Pop and RC have neglected developing any youth since Parker... there are young benches around the league performing valuably now... and will perform even better in the future. See the Lakers and Pistons as the prominent examples.
Spurs need a major youth injection now, arguing against this is naive. Pop needs to bring some kids at low cost, develop them and not wall them up in the dog house at every turnover. They'll make mistakes but you live with them for the future rewards.
For the Pistons, sacking the coach doesn't qualify as major retooling; it's closer to "routine housekeeping." (Not saying that's a good thing...it's just not unusual).
Hollinger certainly was right about Manu declining in 2008, wasn't he?
Hollinger needs major retooling
Ready to take over? They've got a younger bench than us, obviously. But there is no reason to believe that these guys can come in and be championship caliber starters any time soon.
Maxiell is a great effort guy - but he's basically just their version of Malik Rose.
I like Affalo and Stuckey, but they are a long ways off from being dependable on a team competing for the crown.
Honestly, we need better role players. That's what ed us over this postseason. Manu's injury wouldn't have been a problem had our role players been able to step up like the Lakers' role players did for them. The Big Three + Bowen are fine, but we can't keep getting ty role players who are all defense orientated yet somehow get lit up by younger players while offering no consistent production on offense.
Hollinger is wrong once again. Completely healthy, Spurs >>> Pistons. Hollinger's article reads as if he's saying Spurs = Pistons right now. Give me a 100% healthy Spurs squad and I'm pretty damn confident against anyone.
Secondly, calling Stuckey and Johnson "stars in the making" is a bit of a stretch. I'm a fan of both players and I think they can be really good but neither one is going to be a star in the next few years. By the time that duo comes into their prime, their current real stars will be washed up.
And then when you look at the two teams, I'd say Rasheed is the Pistons' best player and Duncan is the Spurs' best player. Rasheed not only is getting up there in age, he seems to have burned bridges. Without Rasheed, it'd be difficult for the Pistons to be a championship contender. They could pull off a trade and try to turn Rasheed into a comparable part ... but that's not easy.
Truth be told, neither team is in horrible shape. But it's much easier for the Spurs to make the moves they need to do to make another championship run. The Spurs have no chemistry issues. Their best three players are happy and locked up contractually. Finding a scoring swingman, a backup point guard and a perhaps a backup big isn't exactly that tough. Sure, we'd like those players to be young, but they don't have to be young.
The Pistons, on the other hand, have to work in a new coach. Probably trade Rasheed. Find a starting center. The chemistry on the team isn't the greatest. Due to all the deep runs into the playoffs, their main players have a ton of mileage on them. Stuckey and Johnson will help but both will just quality as good bench players next year.
If we're talking about which of the two teams remains in the better position to win championships in the next 2-4 years, it's easily the Spurs. Pistons have a brighter future if you look 5+ years down the line but I don't think anyone really cares about 2013 right now.
In regards to your point about being healthy, I think it's going to be a challenge for our Big 3 to be healthy/rested for the playoffs if they have to do all the heavy lifting in the regular season. A productive bench is crucial to take the stress off our core. Without that, we're creating a negative feedback loop of wearing out Tony, Tim, and Manu. The Pistons have a young productive bench to develop and give relief to their stars. Stuckey may not be a star in the making, but he sure isn't Beno who folded under pressure.
Yes, we need to fill in a few spots. How difficult will that be? For our new players to be legitimate additions, I think it will be not as easy as you describe, nonetheless, I hope the FO can make the right decisions.
exactly. yes, based on current personnel, the pistons are looking at a brighter distant future than the Spurs. but would it shock anyone if a Stuckey/Affalo/Maxiell triumverate along with their younger role guys top out as a bottom tier playoff team (or less)?
In terms of the core guys who you can build a championship team around, the Spurs have a longer shelf life.
the media has been all over lakers and celtics all year. im not surprised were getting all these articles and analsysts picking against us.
interesting
The only thing I agree with is that the Spurs need to add youth to this team.
As of right now, I'd take the Pistons bench over ours easily. As far as his take on the Spurs, it's not like he is lying - especially in reference to the FO's "Euro-only" drafting philosophy taking a huge hit. That, above all else, has contributed to the fact that there is no current pipeline of younger talent ready to come aboard.
The Spurs may be able to retool the holes over the offseason (and I hope they do). Yet the age and skill limitations of the current roster were obvious even before reading this article.
And - moving forward - I'd take our core over theirs. It's much easier to retool benches and role players on the fly than it is to find guys you can build your championship team around.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
