Reply With Quote
I'll take the "under" on Finley @ 30mpg next year.
Unless if he gets a lot of minutes, WGAF. Won't matter. 8/9th man on the bench.
I'll take the "under" on Finley @ 30mpg next year.
I thought about it last night. I totally respect everything that Mike has done for this team. He's filled a vital role in the backcourt for four years. He was crucial in our 2007 run. He has always shown outstanding professionalism, accepts the role that is given to him (even if it is too much), and should be a favorite in the locker room and by the fans.
That being said, I'm sticking to my guns...
Last edited by Dex; 06-30-2009 at 09:38 AM.
Echo, echo, echo....echo......
With a healthy Manu and hopefully a slightly improved Hill along with a 35 a minute a night starter in Jefferson I don't see Fin getting anywhere near those kinds of minutes. Lets not forget that although he's young Pop still likes Hill's defense and surely he likes it over Fin's.
This team is quite a bit deeper than a year ago. They just added a 35 a minute a night starter. You guys are overreacting.
Finley was a bad idea from the jump. I warned everyone of this declining one-trick pony. He was serviceable in '06, but that was about it. He's declined every year he's been here. It was a bad idea then and a worse idea now. Pop has proven that he can't be trusted to limit Finley to a specified role. His presence on the roster makes absolutely no sense. I just can't fathom another year of his turnovers and bricklaying.
I don't know where you got any indication of that. Last I checked Hill was riding the bench while Mike was attempting to guard Durant.
You guys are pretty naive if you think Pop will LIMIT Finley's minutes to 10-15 mins a game.
i'll be happy if Finley doesn't start.
I assume that Pop/RC already met with Fin and explained the situation. Unless Pop's pre-Alz he should have explained that not only is Fin not starting --- he's not even in the normal rotation. Lots of DNP or inactives. Fin has been a solid pro and doesn't need the embarrassment of finishing his career that way. Hopefully, they are working on some dignified way of parting.Bowens would be a better compliment player ot RJ.15 minutes a nite of solid D.
my thoughts exactly!
ing . Not only does Finley ensure Bruce isn't back, but the er is also going to take Hill's and Mason's minutes. !
Go home, Finley.
That's not valid at all. Bowen is a far better player who had his minutes cut to nil the entire season for Finley's washed-up ass.
I dont want him back anymore than any one here, but other than Mason did anyone on our squad hit more game winner, game tying shots in the last few seconds, experianced vet not afraid to take the last shot sound like a great end of the bench guy if forced to keep him, look at it this way he stays maybe JV gots ta go.
JV is an expiring....
I'm going to laugh when Finley doesn't pick up his option and Bowen still isn't brought back.
I'm ing pissed he's back, but Steve Smith is still the worst Spurs player of all-time IMO because:
1) He was being paid $10 million per by the Spurs.
2) He threatened to hold out if Pop didn't give him a $10 million per extension, with two ing years still on his contract.
3) He completely mailed in the 2002 series with LA. You'd think a guy making $10 million would chase loose balls and get on the floor for them, but you'd have thought wrong with HITA. Just no effort whatsoever in that series; you could tell he was still pissed about not getting the extension.
4) He was done.
I'm pretty ing disgusted that Finley is back though; make no doubt about that. What the was RC thinking giving him that player option this year?
If Finley truly comes back over Bowen...I can't even finish that sentence. I will be ing pissed.
I don't want Finley back for the minimum.
Yeah, IMO, it makes no sense to partially trade out of the 2010 plan. Expiring contracts are supposed to be valuable for the 2010 FA bonanza; with Finley we have at least 3 practical pieces to trade on contract value alone - Finley, Bonner, and Mason. Given that letting them expire won't give us squat for maneuvering room, trading for a useful piece makes much more sense.
Maybe Finley would be capable of a solid 10 minutes off the bench, but instead we'll get a ty 25 minutes. , another year of getting eaten alive by the Brandon Bass es of the league.Why everybody hates on Finley? He's a proven vet, who's 24/7 better than Gist, Hairston or the Spurstalk fan favourite Sanikidze. He can give us solid 10-15 mins off the bench + he's clutch. Can be argued, whether 2,5 MIL is too much for his services, but I don't believe we could get someone better for this money, though I'd welcome Anthony Parker for example.
ive always liked finley, i realize that its best that he does not come back so we can save money and let the younger guys play more but it wouldnt be terrible if he stuck around to mentor some of them. then again, im not sure how interested hes in tutoringthe young guys.
The thought process in this thread boggles my mind. This guys contract is a huge trade asset.
Not really. $2.5 million isn't much of a trade asset. By itself, it'd get nothing. I don't see the Spurs doing another 3-for-1 deal to further lessen the depth.
The fact that Finley's contract will basically cost $5 million when you factor in the lux tax threshold trumps its trade power by itself. If Finley opts out, the Spurs are much more likely to use their MLE and LLE. If he doesn't opt out, it's doubtful the Spurs use both. It might be difficult to get Holt to use the entire MLE if Finley doesn't opt out.
Makes perfect sense.
This is nonsense. 7 pages of hate for a guy who has done nothing but be a solid role player for us the last 3 years. If you guys really have such little faith in Popovich then thats fine, but 4 championships later I think he knows how to handle a rotation.
If Finley comes back I'm 100% sure it will be as a role player coming off the bench for spot up shooting 10-15mpg.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
