Vince Carter trade that didn't happen

[EricB]

That's a 17 million dollar expiring contract, I think everyone knows how valuable a big expiring deal is.

Teams also have limits to what they will trade for.

Carter's contract would've been an albatross.

[Chillen]

The Spurs wanted him bad but the Nets were not taking the bait, he would have been excellent here in SA.

[TIMMYD!]

I still like the Jefferson trade better because of his defense.

[jag]

It's not as easy as just comparing Jefferson to Carter. You have to take into consideration how the Spurs would be impacted in acquiring either of those players.

For Carter, it would have cost the Spurs their best 3-point shooter (Mason) and their best young player who's now the backup PG (Hill). The Spurs would have no bigs...and their bench would be depleted.

For Jefferson, it cost the Spurs two players that they weren't planning on bringing back (Oberto and Bowen) and Kurt Thomas. It was Gasol-like.

[jason1301]

I would have done the Hill+Mason for VC...he's looking like a star on the Magic. I think Tim could have brought the best out of VC.

no pun intended but I bet you were one of these Lakers fans that would have shipped Bynum for J-Kidd a few years ago.

[HarlemHeat37]

Um, I see every single person backing Jefferson and basically nobody for Carter.

The point I'm making is that as this season goes on, you're going to see VC shine next to good teammates(even though they will lose to the Cavs or Celtics) and you're going to see Jefferson crumble, in the playoffs, when it matters most. He's going to be bricking 3's left and right. Book that right now.

I backed up Carter as a significantly better play, as did most..

Vince is one of my favorite players, and I argued for weeks here about the misconceptions that people use against him..I still feel like Jefferson is a better FIT considering his potential role, and the fact that we didn't give up ANYTHING significant..to get VC, we would have had to give up Hill, which would clearly be a mistake(even though you aren't a fan, Spurstrodamus)..

the Carter trade wasn't nearly as close as it was reported in the National NBA coverage..everybody here knows how Thorn operates, and he wouldn't have done it unless we threw in Hill AND some draft picks..

Orlando's package was much better than ours..much better..

[anakha]

I didn't get that role then, and I don't get it now. Carter knows how to play. He isn't the selfish player people make him out to be. Even though I'd like the ball in his hands more than Manu or Parker, I think he'd be willing to give it up. Plus, he can defend just as well as Jefferson. People are overrating Jefferson's D and underrating Carter's.


It isn't that I don't like Hill, it's that #1, I think Carter is a major upgrade over Jefferson. #2, Hill isn't a true point. A team like this with a lot of weapons needs a true point. Knowing that, we could have just used Carter at backup point for most of the minutes, which he's MORE than capable of running. #3, Udrih was traded away for nothing and we essentially wasted a 1st round pick on Hill for nothing.



Still, no one knows that for sure.

Carter's a true point now?

Hill is nothing?

Still advocating Beno when his own team wants to trade him?

[ChumpDumper]

Vince Carter: True Point Guard

[ChumpDumper]

I never said he was a true point guard. It must be that Texas education. GG reading comprehension.

You said the team needs a true point guard, and that Vince can do that.

Hill isn't a true point. A team like this with a lot of weapons needs a true point. Knowing that, we could have just used Carter at backup point for most of the minutes, which he's MORE than capable of running. #3

Were you lying?

... But I can tell you this, Vince Carter has 3000x the court vision and is 3000x the passer George Hill is.

3000?

How did you quantify that?

Let us in on your process.

[anakha]

I never said that. I said Carter is capable of running point as well as being an elite 2/3.

Hill is a 2 guard stuck in a point guard's body.

Hill isn't a true point. A team like this with a lot of weapons needs a true point. Knowing that, we could have just used Carter at backup point for most of the minutes, which he's MORE than capable of running.

You just contradicted yourself again.

Fact of the matter is, Beno's rookie season trumps Hill's...

http://www.basketball-reference.com/...udrihbe01.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/.../hillge01.html

The only difference I'm seeing in their production is in the shooting. That cons utes 'trumping' in your dictionary?

and Beno is a starting NBA point guard. Which he traded away for absolutely nothing.

A starting NBA PG whose own team wants to trade him. Go ahead and keep sticking your head in the sand.

[ChumpDumper]

Yes, the team, as it is NOW, needs a true point.

And that true point is Vince Carter.

OK, I'll let you in on my secret................ I watch games. People on the forum should try it.

And how is the 3000 number calculated?

Show your work.

[Mel_13]

OK, I'll let you in on my secret................ I watch games. People on the forum should try it.

What I find amusing about this debate is that you have a one or two line point available to you that absolutely settles this thing in your favor.

Damned if I ever post it.

[ChumpDumper]

You wanted to trade for Vince Carter to play him at backup point.

This gets better and better.

[Drewlius]

Giving up George Hill for Vince Carter is an absolutely awful move for the Spurs FO, I'm sure they hardly even considered it.

Let's not forget how thin it makes us.

Let's also remember how difficult it is for someone to learn our system, and how well Spurs players get as they progress in the system.

Let's not forget Carter's injury history, and possibly putting us in a position to have both of our SG/SF playmakers out for a majority of the season.

Then there all of Carter's mental question marks, is he going to give 100% if things get cloudy?

Will he learn to dedicate himself to a defensive mindset in his mid 30s?

Can he play third or even fourth fiddle?

It was just a bad idea from the beginning.

[ChumpDumper]

At this point, most d-league point guards will have better court vision than Hill.

Which D-League point guards have you seen play enough to make that claim?

[NFGIII]

It's not as easy as just comparing Jefferson to Carter. You have to take into consideration how the Spurs would be impacted in acquiring either of those players.

For Carter, it would have cost the Spurs their best 3-point shooter (Mason) and their best young player who's now the backup PG (Hill). The Spurs would have no bigs...and their bench would be depleted.

For Jefferson, it cost the Spurs two players that they weren't planning on bringing back (Oberto and Bowen) and Kurt Thomas. It was Gasol-like.

Agreed. VC is a more explosive offensive player than RJ but the cost is what many I think are missing out on. Losing Mason is one thing but shipping out Hill is another. That would have been a major mistake by the Spurs FO and would have come back to haunt them later. His play so far, though only the preseason, more than proves him to be a player in this league for many years to come.

imagine if the Spurs had been able to do that deal and HIll continues to develop? This board would go nuclear, especially if VC goes down with an injury.

The RJ trade and keeping Hill/Mason is far better for the Spurs IMHO. Though VC would have been a fun experiment to watch I don't think it would have get us to the Finals again. Now we are in a much better position to get back to the Finals.

[anakha]

Jesus christ. How old are you guys? Read a little bit into it. If we HAVE Carter, yes, he CAN run backup point. This team NOW(with Jefferson) has a lot of weapons, which a true point is needed for. Jefferson is one of those weapons, as Carter would be. If you take Carter out of the equation of players you need to get involved from the PG spot(assuming Carter IS the backup point), the options are obviously a lot more limited, thus not wasting offensive talent on the floor.

You're still advocating the Spurs having a true point guard and proposing Carter to fill that role. No amount of doublespeak can hide the fact you talked yourself into a corner.

Is his season better or worse than Hill's? That's all I want to know.

Sure as didn't trump it, which was what you were claiming.

And don't think I didn't see through your transparent attempt to duck out of the fact you made a bull claim without any proof to back it up.

Is George Hill a starting point guard? That's all I want to know.

Head still in the sand, I see.

So in the end, all your argument stems from 'Ha! Beno starts!' and ignores the fact that he's a starter on a team that didn't want him.

[ChumpDumper]

I haven't.

So you just made it up.

After bragging that you form your opinion from watching games.

[anakha]

At this point, most d-league point guards will have better court vision than Hill.

Which D-League point guards have you seen play enough to make that claim?

I haven't. I'm making the point that he doesn't have good court vision.

Caught making a bull claim and backpedals frantically out of it? I'm shocked!

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

I haven't. I'm making the point that he doesn't have good court vision.

Seems like you haven't watched anything at all, well maybe boxscores, at least judging on your basketball knowledge. If you've actually watched basketball,that'd be sad.

[ChumpDumper]

They didn't want him, they just traded for him and then let him start at point guard.

The Kings never traded for Udrih.

Are you sure you follow the NBA?

[ChumpDumper]

Watching NBA games, yes. Sorry, I don't watch scrubs in the d-league. You caught me.

Yep, you get caught making up things a lot here.

[anakha]

You use the same shtick every time and it doesn't even make sense half of the time, including here.

In other words, you were talking absolute horse , got caught, and can't back out of it.

I'm going to let you off the hook here, because I'm assuming you're a foreigner... but please, go look up the word "trump" in the dictionary.

Make the claim, then push the burden of proof on the guy you're arguing with.

Still backpedaling.

They didn't want him, they just traded for him and then let him start at point guard.

'Ha! Beno starts!'

How convenient you ignore the team's attempts to trade him this past season.

[Mel_13]

Yep, you get caught making up things a lot here.

Damn, CD. It's like arguing with a less profane, slightly more literate version of KBP.

Not quite as amusing, but still well worth reading.

Please proceed.

[ChumpDumper]

Whatever, traded/waived/signed. The point is they obviously wanted him.

No, it's not whatever.

They didn't trade for Udrih. Period.

You just showed your ignorance here, just after you flat out lied.

Impressive.