The Spurs roster is becoming more balanced

[lurker23]

When it comes to building a basketball team, there are basically three types of players you want on your team:

1. Go-to guys - These are your superstars, the core of your team. Without these guys, there wouldn't be anything to build around.

2. Proven veterans - You know what you're going to get from these players. They may not be as athletic as the days of their youth, but you rely on them to provide some sort of steady role on your team.

3. Youth with potential - Young guys who have athleticism, energy, or above all, potential. Sometimes these players are expected to provide a spark off the bench. Sometimes they get heavy minutes and are billed as "the future of the team." Or sometimes they sit on the sidelines as they develop.


In the last couple of years, the Spurs have tried to build championship teams largely with numbers 1 and 2. Yes, they've relied somewhat heavily on young guys at times (see Parker, Tony and Jackson, Stephen), but for the most part their role players have fit into category #2 (Kerr, Barry, Finley, etc.). And yes, they've occasionally signed younger guys, but you wonder how much they really staked in their development (Butler, Marks, Washington, etc.).

Now, however, the 12-man roster for 2008 is expected to be a pretty even balance of all three categories. I could break it down by position and show you that they have at least one of each in the PG, wing, and big man rotations, but for the sake of brevity, here's the synopsis:

1. Go-to guys

Parker, Ginobili, Duncan

2. Proven veterans

Vaughn, Finley, Bowen, Oberto, Thomas

3. Youth with potential

Hill, Mason, Udoka (still developing despite age), Mahinmi, Bonner, (Tolliver)

(yes, I know there are 13 guys on my "12-man" roster; most likely out: Hill or Vaughn)

Obviously relying heavily on category #3 is much riskier than going with proven experience, but there's no doubt the Spurs needed to get younger, and at least they've done it with a sense of balance.

[manufor3]

When it comes to building a basketball team, there are basically three types of players you want on your team:

1. Go-to guys - These are your superstars, the core of your team. Without these guys, there wouldn't be anything to build around.

2. Proven veterans - You know what you're going to get from these players. They may not be as athletic as the days of their youth, but you rely on them to provide some sort of steady role on your team.

3. Youth with potential - Young guys who have athleticism, energy, or above all, potential. Sometimes these players are expected to provide a spark off the bench. Sometimes they get heavy minutes and are billed as "the future of the team." Or sometimes they sit on the sidelines as they develop.


In the last couple of years, the Spurs have tried to build championship teams largely with numbers 1 and 2. Yes, they've relied somewhat heavily on young guys at times (see Parker, Tony and Jackson, Stephen), but for the most part their role players have fit into category #2 (Kerr, Barry, Finley, etc.). And yes, they've occasionally signed younger guys, but you wonder how much they really staked in their development (Butler, Marks, Washington, etc.).

Now, however, the 12-man roster for 2008 is expected to be a pretty even balance of all three categories. I could break it down by position and show you that they have at least one of each in the PG, wing, and big man rotations, but for the sake of brevity, here's the synopsis:

1. Go-to guys

Parker, Ginobili, Duncan

2. Proven veterans

Vaughn, Finley, Bowen, Oberto, Thomas

3. Youth with potential

Hill, Mason, Udoka (still developing despite age), Mahinmi, Bonner, (Tolliver)

(yes, I know there are 13 guys on my "12-man" roster; most likely out: Hill or Vaughn)

Obviously relying heavily on category #3 is much riskier than going with proven experience, but there's no doubt the Spurs needed to get younger, and at least they've done it with a sense of balance.

tolliver, if he makes the team will be the odd-man-out

[lurker23]

tolliver, if he makes the team will be the odd-man-out

I had Tolliver in parenthesis already, for a couple reasons: his contract is likely not guaranteed, and he's almost definitely going to be an odd man out if he makes the team, unless he beats out Bonner. If you count Tolliver, I listed 14 players.

[urunobili]

no love for Hairstron?

[Amarelooms]

Dont know what bull you have written above but I'd take the Mavs roster right now over the Spurs...and that's a bad thing to say. Both teams gonna be in bottom four playoff seeding

[SenorSpur]

Dont know what bull you have written above but I'd take the Mavs roster right not over the Spurs...and thats a bad thing to say. Both teams gonna be in bottom for playoff seeding

Spoken like a true Mavs fan. You go ahead and keep your Mavs roster. No one wants a 36 year-old, non-shooting, aging PG. That is reason enough to trash your roster.

[xtremesteven33]

optimistic way of looking at things....

im still not very confident

[Amarelooms]

Spoken like a true Mavs fan. You go ahead and keep your Mavs roster. No one wants a 36 year-old, non-shooting, aging PG. That is reason enough to trash your roster.

Mavs will finish with a better record and both will lose in the 1st or 2nd round

[Ed Helicopter Jones]

Threads presenting a positive opinion on the state of the Spurs' roster are not acceptable offseason material around these parts.

Please take that kind of crap elsewhere.

[duncan228]

Is this an optimistic thread?!

Am I on the right board?

It's the exception to the rule thread.

[Tully365]

Lurker23-- when I first found this forum just a few months ago, I was pretty amazed by how many posters regularly trashed the players and FO. It didn't seem possible that the single most successful sports franchise in this country for the last decade could really have fans saying Pop sucks or Manu is overrated, but, along with lots of great insights and lots of hoops knowledge, that's what it has on a pretty consistent basis. I've gotten used to it, just like people who lose their hearing adjust to life without great music, or the sounds of their friends' voices, or the wind.... but it still usually strikes me as strangely unnatural.

[HarlemHeat37]

Dont know what bull you have written above but I'd take the Mavs roster right now over the Spurs...and that's a bad thing to say. Both teams gonna be in bottom four playoff seeding

LOL would you like to elaborate?..

in case you didn't watch last year, we beat the Hornets with an injured Manu..the Hornets dominated Dallas..we should be better just based on health, while the Mavs are the Mavs..

I don't see the similarities..

Duncan > Dirk
Ginobili >>> Howard
Parker >> Kidd at this point

there's the BIG difference between both teams..

[Amarelooms]

LOL would you like to elaborate?..

in case you didn't watch last year, we beat the Hornets with an injured Manu..the Hornets dominated Dallas..we should be better just based on health, while the Mavs are the Mavs..

I don't see the similarities..

Duncan > Dirk
Ginobili >>> Howard
Parker >> Kidd at this point

there's the BIG difference between both teams..

Umm Dirk and Duncan are a wash. Manu has a slight edge over Howard but not by much and of course Paker is better than Kidd. However, the Mavs have a better bench and role players. Thus advantage Mavs on a head to head matchup

[SenorSpur]

Even though I didn't see the drafting of Hill coming, I still like what the Spurs did in the NBA draft. It's in free agency where they came up waaaay short. I would've felt better if they could've inked Najera. I would've preferred him even over Pargo. I sincerely hope they give Tolliver an honest shot at unseating Bonner.

It looks like it'll be next year before they rid the roster of Vaughn, Bonner and perhaps Finley. Of course, these three will be counted on for consistent bench contributions this year. We'll see if they're up to the task.

[your_pimp]

When it comes to building a basketball team, there are basically three types of players you want on your team:

1. Go-to guys - These are your superstars, the core of your team. Without these guys, there wouldn't be anything to build around.

2. Proven veterans - You know what you're going to get from these players. They may not be as athletic as the days of their youth, but you rely on them to provide some sort of steady role on your team.

3. Youth with potential - Young guys who have athleticism, energy, or above all, potential. Sometimes these players are expected to provide a spark off the bench. Sometimes they get heavy minutes and are billed as "the future of the team." Or sometimes they sit on the sidelines as they develop.


In the last couple of years, the Spurs have tried to build championship teams largely with numbers 1 and 2. Yes, they've relied somewhat heavily on young guys at times (see Parker, Tony and Jackson, Stephen), but for the most part their role players have fit into category #2 (Kerr, Barry, Finley, etc.). And yes, they've occasionally signed younger guys, but you wonder how much they really staked in their development (Butler, Marks, Washington, etc.).

Now, however, the 12-man roster for 2008 is expected to be a pretty even balance of all three categories. I could break it down by position and show you that they have at least one of each in the PG, wing, and big man rotations, but for the sake of brevity, here's the synopsis:

1. Go-to guys

Parker, Ginobili, Duncan

2. Proven veterans

Vaughn, Finley, Bowen, Oberto, Thomas

3. Youth with potential

Hill, Mason, Udoka (still developing despite age), Mahinmi, Bonner, (Tolliver)

(yes, I know there are 13 guys on my "12-man" roster; most likely out: Hill or Vaughn)

Obviously relying heavily on category #3 is much riskier than going with proven experience, but there's no doubt the Spurs needed to get younger, and at least they've done it with a sense of balance.

Just shoot yourself in the head...

You are in denial

[T Park]

Threads presenting a positive opinion on the state of the Spurs' roster are not acceptable offseason material around these parts.

Please take that kind of crap elsewhere.

[Fabbs]

Umm Dirk n Bavetta and Duncan are a wash. Manu injured at 70% has a slight edge over Howard but not by much and of course Paker is better than Kidd.

FIFY

[Tully365]

Just shoot yourself in the head...

You are in denial

in denial-- that's what Suns' fans, who just spent the last two years harping on how old the Spurs were, are in with a 36 year old Shaq, a 34 year old Nash, and a just-about-to-turn 36 year old Grant Hill.

[mystargtr34]

Mavs will finish with a better record and both will lose in the 1st or 2nd round

As great as Dirk is, ive defended him more than most here, he doesnt have the impact Duncan can have on the game.

Offensively, both draw constant double teams and have a similar impact in making everything easier on the rest of the team, but as of now id give Dirk the edge in that department.

Defensively on the other hand...

[dknights411]

Umm Dirk and Duncan are a wash. Manu has a slight edge over Howard but not by much and of course Paker is better than Kidd. However, the Mavs have a better bench and role players. Thus advantage Mavs on a head to head matchup

One little problem, coaching. Who knows what Carlisle is gonna do in his first year in the Mavs organization, and you can not tell 100% if the players are gonna respond positively. At least when the Mavs made the switch from Nellie to AJ, they went with someone who was already in the system and had a raport with the players. There's gonna be a feeling out period of sorts in Dallas, especially coming off the heals of three very dissapointing seasons. Do the Mavs match up with the Spurs? Maybe. Can they beat them? That's a completley different story altogether.

[SenorSpur]

Mavs will finish with a better record and both will lose in the 1st or 2nd round

You are as delusional as your owner.

[Bigzax]

2. Proven veterans

Vaughn, Finley, Bowen, Oberto, Thomas

i'm with you man, but these "proven" vets will have alot to prove...

[lurker23]

The only thing they need to prove is that they can still do what they need to do. Orberto needs to rebound and make his easy shots. Thomas needs to defend and hit that mid range shot of his. Vaughn needs to bring that defence leadership and hustle. Finley just needs to be that shooter we need. Fortunatly Mason can pick up some of the shooting we will loose from not having Brent.

Exactly. These proven veterans don't need to be spectacular, they just need to be solid in whatever their role is. Whether that role is to defend or rebound or make a couple shots or play backup PG and make sure the team doesn't absolutely implode while you're in there, that's all they have to do, no more (and no less).

BTW, my utmost apologies for the optimistic threads. I know the Spurs FO isn't perfect, and I know this offseason hasn't gone as many have scripted, but sometimes we have to balance out the hundreds of Chicken Little threads with at least one or two positive threads. And you know what? I really don't think you have to stretch that far to find a lot of positives in this team.

[HarlemHeat37]

this is what a lot of people ignore when they dismiss players..they don't have to be anything special..they just have to be good role players..not complimentary players, but role players..we already have our 3 stars..

as for the Mavs fan..Dirk and Duncan is a wash offensively..Duncan is arguably the best defensive player of this generation though, while Dirk is just average..

Manu is EASILY better than Josh Howard, who looks like he is on the decline already..

who are these Mavs role players?..

[knee-knee-3]

Mason and Mahinmi have upside, while Thomas and Udoka will surely (hopefully) improve after being rookies in the system, so it's not unrealistic to expect that we can compete for the conference le. Ginoblili was a beast last year before he got hurt, so let's cross our fingers and hope he stays healthy.

The Mavs, on the other hand, are up to their nuts in : they've got some talent (though not enough), they've paid and overpaid for their nucleus, they have a new coach and an aging point guard - and it still won't be enough, and it's not even close! The skies may seem to be cryin' over San Antonio right now, but Dallas is a laughable mess.