Reply With Quote
That has A LOT to do with it. Teams with bad chemistry don't win championships. And tell Phil Jackson that, not me. I am kind of glad it took them 7 years to do it though lol
1. Let's hear your plan
2. Well then maybe they should. I mean, that is the least you can do if you want a good role player to help contend. At least sign 2 for the MLE.
That has A LOT to do with it. Teams with bad chemistry don't win championships. And tell Phil Jackson that, not me. I am kind of glad it took them 7 years to do it though lol
Not true at all. Even if the Spurs extend Manu to the value his current contract in 2010, that would be ~10M.
By adding Blatche and Wallace, Spurs add ~13M per year going to 2012, an extra 3M per year.
The Spurs with Gino at 10M per year in 2010, would still have 14M in cap space if they pick up their options. That is significantly better than 11M when it comes to filling out a roster.
They might not be able to sign Bosh, but they can still get a much better center and they have more options if they keep Manu. They can trade him, let him expire or extend him.
I'm not sure I follow you. I'm only making Blatche out to be as good as being better than Oberto. Something you agree with. Yes, there are a lot of players out there younger and more athletic than Oberto. None of them are in the deal we're discussing. Just Blatche. And the evaluation isn't just about how much better is Blatche than Oberto. It's about whether or not the team is better having Manu/Bowen/Fab on it or by having Wallace/Blatche/James/#5 pick on it.
I also never said you would be cutting Manu loose. I said there is insurance to sign someone to a similar type of deal if Manu gets hurt because Manu is expiring.
Wallace, if he gets hurt, is still on the books.
I'm fine with signing a decent big such as Pachulia or Bouroussis, bringing over Gist, if possible move up to get Casspi, and maybe re-sign Hairston.
I agree. But I don't see a reason to blow up the roster and get rid of one of our best players when you just said it's fine to use the full MLE.
If the spurs couldn't get a big name free agent in 2003 i don't know what makes the FO think they can next year i don't think LeBron and Bosh would turn down a big market like New York just to sign with the spurs i hate to say it but i don't see it happening plus the spurs are not going to have the money to sign a max player, Screw the 2010 plan the spurs need to add the best team around Duncan right now while he is stil in his prime Duncan is not getting any younger. Just my five cents
okay but do you really think zaza, bouroussis, gist, and/or casspi is what will help us contend? and why?
That is exactly right and there is no argument from me that the team would be better by having Blatche/Wallace/James/#5 vs Manu/Oberto/Bowen. That I agree with.
What I am trying to say is that there are opportunity costs associated with this proposal that I feel are too negative in order to pursue. Although I agree that Blatche/Wallace/James/5th are better, that is not enough imo to help the Spurs to win a le.
Keeping that in mind, since one last legit le shot is what the goal is:
I feel that if you stick with Manu, you can still trade Bowen/Oberto (whos partially guaranteed/expiring contracts are attractive) and get a better big man than Blatche or a solid SF. You can also have some insurance in case Manu gets hurt (his expiring contract, vs Wallace who is on the books).
I also feel the 2010 plan can yield a greater opportunity to net a better package than Blatche/Wallace/5th that can actually give the Spurs a legit shot at going for a le, not just get marginally better.
Do you think Blatche and Wallace minus Manu will?
So make the trade now, plug way more holes for 2009-2010 and several seasons thereafter. Then in 2010 go get the center and try to bring back Manu for whatever is left. If he won't take it, oh well. Get someone else. That's way better than just pissing away the 2009-2010 season by not doing anything that will improve the team because of what it might do to the 2010 plan.
Yes, because I believe a decent amount of the reason why we didn't go as far this year was just the coaching moves Pop made, such as moving Mason to point guard and benching Hill. He's already stated Hill will be more of a factor come next season, so that's already an offseason plus to me. I still have faith that Ian will come back into the season healthy and with a great shot to be a key rotation player, our frontcourt is worse than ever, but I think just adding one solid big man such as Zaza or Bouroussis can help out tremendously. All in all, we just need one more big man to take part of the load off Duncan, and obviously Thomas and Bonner wasn't enough. I don't count on Gist becoming a main player, but seeing him in San Antonio and getting closer to the big time would be nice to see, since I believe he has good potential. And in case Gist doesn't work out at the 3, we have Casspi.
Why would you want to commit to that salary when you do not have to if it won't make you good enough to legitimately win a le?
You are pissing a year away anyways because adding Blatche/Wallace won't be good enough to win more than likely so what is the point?
You can keep Manu and sign someone to the MLE, hope that Manu is healthy and have just as good of a chance to win next year with less committed salary.
Yes I do, and for the long run too
no way , this happens
You think a lineup of TP,Mason,Wallace,Blatche and Tim will beat Fisher/Kobe/Ariza/Bynum and Pau or Fisher/Kobe/Ariza/Odom/Pau?
Where the Lakers either have Bynum or Odom off the bench and the Spurs have KT?
Well it will compete against that lineup better parker/injured 32 yr old manu/bowen/tim/KT or Oberto
Much better than that
True, but do you honestly think that line up would beat the Lakers?
Another reason to do this trade is to give Tony Parker a reason to stick around when his contract is up in 2 years. With a 26 year old Wallace and the #5 pick(who will be rounding into form nicely by then)...it gives Parker a future to believe in for the Spurs. Otherwise all he sees is Tim Duncan on his last legs and Ginobili on 2 bad wheels. The Spurs have to create some kind of youth movement to placate the new Spurs foundation which is Parker. You dont want him running off to some other team.
But no way this happens. The Wizards would shoot you the finger and never answer the phone again if the Spurs came calling. Ever.
Disagree. Even with a healthy Manu we weren't going to win a le this year. Wallace/Blatche/James/#5 and an MLE FA this year make the Spurs contenders again. Then in 2010 you can still offer up a contract that beats the MLE and have a nucleus that includes Duncan and a slew of under-30 year olds that will be very attractive to free agents. Putting all your eggs in the 2010 basket is extremely risky. Especially considering how much panic money will start flying around once Lebron and Bosh make their decisions.
Last edited by coyotes_geek; 06-17-2009 at 03:38 PM.
Nope, its a statistical calculation based off of boxscore values.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/about/ws.html
A lot of it based on Dean Oliver's book, "Basketball on Paper"
To confirm this, consider the Washinton Wizards in 08/09.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/WAS/2009.html
The team only won 19 games, but the total WS for all the players is 21.2 (Pyth W 21)
Similarly, San Antonio,
http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/SAS/2009.html
has a total of 50.5 win shares, but actually won 54 games. (Pyth W 52)
One of the reasons the methodology is interesting is because of it's apparent accuracy, building from individual player stats to a composite that comes pretty close to accurately measuring real wins. It typically comes even closer to the pythagorean wins value ( http://www.basketball-reference.com/...html#wins_pyth , which is predicted wins based off of points for/against for a complete season).
Hey look, I am all for avoiding the 2010 FA war. In fact, I have outlined some scenarios earlier advocating that trades are the best way to go, especially in this "buyers market" you will see next year.
But that is only the case if the haul is worth it. You and I are just disagreeing that Blatche/Wallace/5th is enough to abandon the plan. I don't think so all things considered and you do.
I trust that the Spurs FO knows what they are doing. They knew, or at least know now what the market is shaping up to be and the compe ion they will be facing. They also know their own history with regards to luring FA's. So if they think the plan is viable, then so do I.
Of course it is all cir stantial and somewhat of a gamble. You can not make teams trade with you or FA's sign with you, so who knows???
All fair points. I agree with you that trades would be a much better way to go.
Funny thread,
but I thought not really close to that famous
PARKER FOR COLLISON.
I dont know why a lot of Spurs fans are discounting that #5 pick as if it is nothing. Here are a list of some #5 picks taken since 2000.
Dwayne Wade
Devin Harris
Raymond Felton
Kevin Love
Jeff Green
And all of those guys are having big impacts on their teams. And it also shows that there has been a high success rate for #5 picks this decade. So if the Spurs were to get anywhere near that #5 pick and another top player like Wallace for a 32 year old SG on two bad wheels, they should pull the trigger.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions