Reply With Quote
i'm actually just looking for someone to spell thomas and bonner if the spurs need someone to cover a mobile forward. maybe even the first big off the bench to sub for TD when kt is starting.
I think some of you clowns in here are expecting too much from GOODEN, we are not expecting BILL FKN RUSSELL type of defense from him, just the avg big defense and rebounding will be fine.
Wrong comparison. This isn't about whether Gooden is better than Thomas; Thomas is going to play no matter what. The question is whether Gooden is an upgrade -- particularly as a rebounder and an offensive player -- over either Bonner or Oberto. Frankly, I think your argument that Gooden isn't any better than Thomas is a ringing endorsement for his signing, because he's going to do things that a guy like Fab can't. Having the Spurs 3 "rugged" bigs as Duncan, Thomas, and Gooden instead of Duncan, Thomas, and Oberto strikes me as an upgrade on the offensive end as well as on the glass. And that seems like a positive to me.
I don't think anyone's considering Gooden a savior. I think most who look at things fairly objectively would still consider the Spurs to be unlikely to beat LA or Cleveland or Boston over the course of a 7 game series. But, again, Gooden seems to make the margin for error a bit wider than it was before. And I, for one, think that's a positive.
I find it funny when pop was asked about the waiver wire he stated, "" “So when there's a trade deadline, or waiver wires, we pay attention to it, like any other team would, because you're always trying to upgrade your team if you think you can. It's just logic that the later in a season a team might add a player, the more difficult it could be, but that depends on the player's intelligence and experience,” he said.
So i guess its logical that if we sign Gooden then some of y'alls over exaggerating comments are spot on over Pops analysis of the idea of adding Gooden
Exactly. Though I'm not sure the gap is that big, especially with a healthy Ginobili.
You hit on the main issues with respect to the frontcourt. Those are lack of depth and the drop off in quality of depth between the 2nd and 3rd best bigs on the roster. Gooden would add to depth, but more importantly add some quality to the rotation. Yeah, he's not a candidate for DPOY, but is Bonner or Oberto?
As always in this forum, the negatives of certain players grow a bit out of proportion, while the positives are overlooked. Yes, Gooden is one of the better rebounders in the league, but why is that? It's because he's fairly mobile. If I'm wondering how this helps against LA, Cleveland and Boston, having a more mobile big who can board is rather significant. The Spurs don't have that much in the way of mobility and length in the frontcourt, even when you define that more broadly to include the 3 spot.
Yes, Gooden did not come to mind when I thought of bigs the Spurs could target to improve the rotation. Trying to land Camby made a lot of sense before the deadline...and probably still will this summer. But, Gooden's now available, and I think he could have a positive impact on a frontcourt that at full strength is not that deep.
Thanks, Marcus for some common sense!!
If Gooden gives the Spurs that extra "oomph" and help the team win then I'm all for it.
But Lordy it is going to be difficult looking at the 'thing' on his chin. And wondering how it migrated from the back of his head (2007 Cleveland) to the front and if that is a good thing. And why wondering about it makes me write run-on sentences.
He doesn't have the serpent thing on his chin anymore. He had a bet with Stevenson about who could go the longest without shaving. I think he has just a normal beard now.
He's still a bag and I'm not sure I'd be for giving him a long term deal, but in this scenario, sign him up.
I know this guy has good talent and that we could use. But I saw a few games of him in while he was on Chicago and I'm not sure if he cares about anything anymore, other then maybe padding stats so he can get a large contract. Wouldn't you guys think that might be very risky for the team chemistry?
At the moment I'm pretty torn on us getting him.
For a guy like Gooden, who was starting for a Cleveland team that had just won the East in '07 and was on its way to taking the Celtics to 7 in '08, a trade to a non-contending Chicago team had to be deflating and the business end of the NBA had to be appealing.
I would hope that a chance to find himself back with a contender and a chance to play well (not just be a stat hound) deep into the playoffs again would be enticing in his quest to get a new deal. Putting up good numbers in Chicago is one thing when it comes to contract time; playing a significant role for a true contender for several rounds of playoffs in April, May, and June is very much a different thing.
the thing on his chin is gone.
i like the Spurs to sign him. i know he's a risk, but it is better than nothing. i rather have him in the roster than Jacque Vaughn. atleast this guy can do things, can be an option.
if he fails to do what we need him to do or try to overdo things, Pop is smart enough to just bench him.
Time to order up the number 90 jersey ...................
Well, he did give up his Bird Rights with Sacto to become a free agent and presumably to join a playoff team. He could just as easily stayed with the Kings and racked up big stats on a sucky team. There's a bit of a risk he's taken with agreeing to the buyout, especially for a bigman at his age. His next long term contract could very well be his last in the NBA. Even with the economy and the outlook for the cap where it is at, teams will still spend somewhat to improve this summer.
Nice. Now Manu needs to get back and Bowen needs more PT.
Yeah, gotta give props to Gooden for likely giving up money to join a contender. Even though the Kings weren't going to re-sign him, he could have stayed in Sacramento and had more options in the offseason.
Hopefully he can get and stay healthy and earn himself a big contract this summer. If he's matured, takes the game more seriously and plays well next to Duncan, there are worse ways for the Spurs to spend the MLE.
Ultimately, this appears to be a win-win for both sides in a number of ways.
The Spurs immediately improve their depth at the 4/5, improve their rebounding on both ends, add a guy who can score in double digits while offering the possibility of playing well in 2-man games, and a guy who's endured the rigors of a deep playoff run and won't be awed by the big stages of the later playoff rounds. They get all of that on the cheap and they get it without having surrendered any significant assets.
Meanwhile, Gooden gets the chance to play on the big stage again and show the league that he can be a useful player to a team with championship aspirations. On top of that, if he succeeds to any degree, his desireability as a free agent is enhanced if only by virtue of the fact that other Western contenders might be willing to up the bid for him in an effort to keep him out of San Antonio (whether the Spurs consider keeping him or not). This is a positive perception move for Gooden on a lot of fronts. It's up to him to maximize the benefits that the situation creates. I'm going to remain optimistic that if this thing happens, he'll seize the opportunity and make the most of it -- for himself and the Spurs.
Well, that move definitely went against what you would expect from his public persona. I would still be hesitant to commit to him long term. Of course, the larger issue is who could the Spurs find that's better? Hill for Camby was obvious, so obvious that the Clippers figured out they shouldn't do it.
Oh well, that's for future threads.
Indeed. Definitely a mutual marriage of convenience.
I am speaking purely from a Cavs fan perspective right now. I've watched the guy play for a few years and I think I can put some input here.
To be brutally honest, I hate the guy's game. I really do. All of the people who say he "isn't the best defender, but he can play" need to realize that he may not be the best defender; he may be the worst.
He is capable of putting up good numbers, but does so outside of the flow of the game. He is a "me-first" player, never looks to pass and is too stupid to understand the team game offensively and defensively.
Pop is the best coach in the NBA, but he isn't a miracle worker. Gooden has had opportunity after opportunity with different teams and coaches to prove that he isn't an empty calorie player who puts up good numbers on bad teams outside of the flow of the game. I can't possibly see a Pop/Gooden tandem working out.
Having said that, the Spurs should pick him up. When he is your starting PF, has a large role and is making serious money, his bone-headed play is too much to handle. However, you guys can get him for free and can pretty much have him at no expense. I don't think he is a team cancer in the locker room and genuinely tries.
All I am saying is that if you guys do go down this road, be ready to have some very frustrating nights and possessions. He has all the talent in the world, but for some reason cannot put it together.
I think Sheed is a relatively sure thing, especially if he feels the same after the POs as he did when he made his famous quote. The only good thing about not geting #5 would be Sheed seeing he is what the Spurs need to get over the top, and a refresher on how great Timmy is. Dice might also be an option, if the Spurs somehow got both, I would be amazed.
Good post and welcome to the forum
I think a lot of what you said is accurate. The best news is the Spurs won a championship with Nazr Mohammed, who is almost the exact same type of player. In other words a low IQ, no rhythm, no flow, empty stats type of player.
Hopefully that experience will help Pop understand how to milk production from Gooden but not lean on him as an integral part of the team.
So when are the Spurs gonna sign this guy?
Great post. Thanks for sharing a helpful perspective.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
