I know the Spurs haven't picked a decent player in the draft in about 8 years. What does that say about Pop's character, termperament, or history?
If Gist signs with the Spurs next year, he will likely do all the things Arthur does. Don't forget, there was also that story about him having the kidney problem. What would people say if the Spurs had picked him, and the su ions were true? Every person here would be posting about how stupid they were for drafting a guy with a suspected bad kidney.
The evidence is the fact that they picked Hill. Why would you pick a backup point guard (and unproven at that) with your first round pick? Especially when the Spurs already have a young star at that position. To me it's blatantly obvious that they panicked.
Nice way to avoid the topic. The Spurs picked Scola and Splitter recently, so your theory is completely wrong. The Blazers have been awful for 5 years, picked in the lottery every year, and still can't make the playoffs... what does that say about them?
we shouldve just resigned barry and trade him to the rockets for batum...
That's ridiculous. If Gist could do all the things that Arthur is doing the Spurs would have signed him this year.
He's a combo guard. You'd prefer Chalmers, who like Vaughn, went to a more high profile school? The Spurs worked out Hill and Chalmers together and Hill outplayed him. I'd say that makes the choice a good one. Chalmers has already gotten in trouble for smoking pot in the hotel room at rookie camp, which kinda shows that he's probably not terribly smart. The Spurs don't want a Jailblazer environment.
Remind me. How many games have Scola and Splitter played for the Spurs?
You seriously think that the Spurs went in to the draft with one piece of paper that said Batum on it, and then when batum was picked, RC and Pop looked at each other and said oh , whadda we do now?? That's ridiculous.
You said they haven't picked anyone good. You were wrong.
WTH does Chalmers have to do with this? The Spurs biggest need is front line help.
They had two players they had circled going into the draft. They had one of them taken out from under them, and when they heard that another team was thinking of taking the other player, they grabbed him. One could make the argument that it's blatantly obvious that they weren't going to allow anyone to do that to them again.
Hill's a proven scorer and defender, and probably more proven than Batum. The Spurs have a young star at the point, and have been looking for a backup for him years, going back to when they picked Beno in the first round, and they've suffered through bargain basement castoffs in order to keep their heads above water, while giving him more minutes than they want to because of it. Why would you be surprised that they'd take him?
You still like the Portland move of trading Deron Williams? That worked out pretty good.
So you're saying taking a couple of players that never play for you is good drafting? Got it.
If the Spurs' biggest need is front line help, then why didn't Gist get invited to camp?
How is Hill a proven scorer? He played for IUPUI. You can't prove anything playing in that podunk league. Based on summer league I'd say he's a proven non-scorer.
The Spurs have Vaughn to back up Parker already and they also have Mason (who's doing a nice job). What they don't have is any decent young bigs.
I'm guessing it's because he sucks.
Because if he doesn't, then the Spurs FO is even worse than I thought.
When we traded down in that draft it was extremely stupid. I admit it. Fortunately the tools that were running our FO at the time, Steve Patterson and John Nash, have been -canned. Our Front Office is damn good now. The Spurs FO used to be good. IMO, they have lost their edge.
We'll see. It's easy to assemble a few good players when you are in the lottery every year. If they miss the playoffs this year and Oden is the new Bowie... you might be singing a different tune.
Losing out on Splitter was the result of a changing global economy, and had nothing to do with the talents of the FO. The choice was still a very good one IMO.
He scored more in pre-season than he did in summer league, which is better opposition. If you have to eliminate his entire college career and then cherry-pick his worst performances to make your argument, then it's not much of an argument.
Vaughn is a third string point guard. Thanks for playing.
Mason is indeed doing a nice job, but he wasn't signed as a point guard. Without Hill or Mason, the Spurs don't have any decent young guards. Mahinmi is decent and young, Gist is in the pipeline and they may have hopes of bringing Splitter in next year. They also had designs on that Batum guy, who's pretty ing good. I wouldn't have had a problem with Arthur, but I try not to judge someone else's decisions after having the benefit of hindsight.
Given that you've doomed George Hill to being a NBA washout due to his performance in summer league, how is it you come to the conclusion that Gist sucks when he was really good in summer league?
Losing out on Splitter was the result of a ed-up NBA technicality, and the Spurs' mistaken impression that Splitter was going to give up millions of dollars just to keep his word to the team. The Spurs should have known the rules before they picked him at that spot. I have a whole lot more problem with that pick than I do taking Hill earlier than he was projected, particularly if he's one of the players they wanted. At this point I'd be really happy with Batum if the Spurs had jumped up and gotten him, even if people were saying they reached to get him.
Mahinmi sucks. The Spurs want him to play center and he's WAY too skinny. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe the Spurs own the rights to Gist. He was a 2nd round pick, wasn't he? I believe you only retain the rights to 1st round picks.
The Spurs DO have Tony Parker who is a young All Star caliber point guard. The Spurs DON'T have any quality young bigs.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote