Spurs have too much time on their hands

[duncan228]

Didn't get to watch the last game, can anyone tell me if Hairston or mahinimi were in street clothes? Thanks

If you're interested, timvp's recap of the game:

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=138554

[TJastal]

This is the same garbage spewed by pundits who said we should have traded our #1 pick (Duncan) for I believe the Celtics 2 top 10 picks.

No thanks. You don't trade a Finals MVP. Period. This is the kind of crap the Clippers do, not the SPURS. You don't change horses mid-stream. You build around the nucleus!

This is so rediculous. Some people aren't tradeable in this league, and right now TP is one of them. Ditto that for Tim & Manu.

First off, EVERYONE'S TRADEABLE. This is business and Holt has invested a ton of money into this team. If it improves the team YOU DO IT. Holt deserves the BEST TEAM he can get.

Parker's trade value is at an all time high, and of course he's a great player I'm not denying that. Of course trading him isn't something your going to think of for no particular reason. But there is a reason. His name is Goerge Hill. That's what makes this idea feasible. Because George Hill could be ready to play at a level close to Parker, that's why you think about this trade.

Sorry for the caps, but as it stands this team does not play the type of defense required to win a championship. I'm trying to think of ways to improve that.

[easjer]

This is what the spurs would look like after that Parker/Fin/Bonner for Jackson/Biedrins/Law

C Biedrins / McDyess
PF Duncan / Blair
SF Jefferson / Ginobili
SG Jackson / Mason Jr
PG Hill / Acie Law

Fillers: Hairston / Bogans / Ratliff

Now that looks like a team that can suffocate teams defensively, as well as still score alot of points. Duncan won't be relied on to make up for so much deficiency by Bonner and Finley so that will ease the burden on his shoulders.

I know everyone loves Tony Parker and all, but I would do this trade in a heartbeat.

Yeah. . . that's why Antonio McDyess and DeJuan Blair and Richard Jefferson were brought in.

The burden Timmy had to carry was exacerbated by a bench of Oberto, Kurt Thomas and Bruce Bowen. Your idea might (and that's a ing big might) have some merit if the remainder of the off-season had not happened.

But since it did, the glaring holes you refer to were filled and there is absolutely zero reason to trade away one of our key players, especially for average to good players.

Fin and Bonner are not going to be playing extended minutes and probably won't be starting come March. Right now, the new guys are being eased in and rotations and player/floor combinations are being tested and Fin and Bonner are being shopped. Have you paid any attention to the Spurs before? It seems like you live in fantasy land.

[easjer]

First off, EVERYONE'S TRADEABLE. This is business and Holt has invested a ton of money into this team. If it improves the team YOU DO IT. Holt deserves the BEST TEAM he can get.

Parker's trade value is at an all time high, and of course he's a great player I'm not denying that. Of course trading him isn't something your going to think of for no particular reason. But there is a reason. His name is Goerge Hill. That's what makes this idea feasible. Because George Hill could be ready to play at a level close to Parker, that's why you think about this trade.

Sorry for the caps, but as it stands this team does not play the type of defense required to win a championship. I'm trying to think of ways to improve that.

You are delusional if you believe George Hill can step into Tony Parker's role full time. Kid is awesome, I love him, and he is showing improvement over last season (which was not bad in itself) and I'm thrilled, but he's not a replacement for Tony Parker right now, except for a few minutes a game.

And their defense is already, in NOVEMBER, way ahead of where it was last year and will only get better as McDyess and Blair get acclimated and get to spend more time in games. The end. Period.

Trading away one of our leading scorers at a position where we are already weak on back up is ridiculous when you are proposing to overload positions we're set at (bench and talent-wise).

[DBMethos]

Boston, Cleveland, LA, Orlando: These are pretty much the consensus for teams that are likely to contend for the championship this year, along with SA.

Yet none of them has a top 3 PG on their roster. That alone sets us apart from them and will give us a serious chance come April/May/June. And you want to trade away the guy that gives us our single biggest advantage against those teams?

[ambchang]

I think it's clear you get Biedrins for his shotblocking and defense. Which he excels at. He still gives you 7-10 points a game same as Bonner. He's going to give you some offensive rebouding too.

As for Azubuike.. you could have said the same about Pietrus on the warriors too... its amazing how Michael's doing once he left there isn't it?

In the spurs system these two players could thrive and fill glaring deficiencies in the spurs lineup.

I'm not saying this is the end all be all trade. Just trying to get people to think outside the box.

One thing is for sure.. having Bonner starting and Finley getting "extended minutes" as Pop "experiments" with lineups will end up with Duncan burned out or injured by the end of season. He cannot make up defensively for these two players' deficiencies.

So you are willing to give up the Spurs leading scorer, and one of the three main pillers for “shotblocking and defense”, and “some offensive rebounding”, as well as someone you can equate to Pietrus? These are some of the things you can get by getting in the draft (Hill), FA (Ratliff and McDyess), or trades that doesn’t involve your franchise PG.

This is most definitely thinking outside of the box.

Duncan is averaging less than 30 minutes a game right now, and is probably not going to exceed that by too much by the end of the season. The offense is running through Parker and Ginobili more and more, relieving Duncan of many of the offensive responsibilities. On defense, players like Hill, McDyess and Ratliff are providing the necessary rest for Duncan.

[Mel_13]

The first thing you should do when you're in a hole is stop digging, but I hope he keeps going.

This thread is a gift that keeps on giving.

[Interrohater]

First off, EVERYONE'S TRADEABLE. This is business and Holt has invested a ton of money into this team. If it improves the team YOU DO IT. Holt deserves the BEST TEAM he can get.

Parker's trade value is at an all time high, and of course he's a great player I'm not denying that. Of course trading him isn't something your going to think of for no particular reason. But there is a reason. His name is Goerge Hill. That's what makes this idea feasible. Because George Hill could be ready to play at a level close to Parker, that's why you think about this trade.

Sorry for the caps, but as it stands this team does not play the type of defense required to win a championship. I'm trying to think of ways to improve that.

Yes, of course technically speaking, everyone is tradeable. But realistically, Parker should be untradeable. I love George Hill, but to say that he can take over for Parker is a gross exaggeration and needs to be put to rest right now. Parker not only knows and understands our system, he LEADS it. Do you honestly think that George Hill can yell in frustration at Timmy because Timmy isn't moving to his spot? no. Parker is the engine on this sports-car of an offense, no way Hill can replace that. Plus, you take away Parker's uncanny ability to drive into the lane and score, not only are you taking away easy buckets, you're also taking away opportunities for the rest of the team to score easy buckets.

Parker opens up the game more than any 3-point shooting center ever could. So you'd rather go from the "Big three plus one (RJ)" to the "big two plus one"? George Hill may be everything we've ever wanted in a point guard, but he's not there yet. By the time he does get there (IF he does!), Timmy's retiring and Manu is playing for the Wizards with Fab. Remember how we all hated the Gasol trade? This would be something like that, we'd get mediocre in return for well-above average excellence.

Again, George Hill is a great talent, but to think that he's at Tony Parker's level is ludicrous. How about this: A lot of people argue on here that TP should be ranked above Chris Paul, it's an ongoing discussion. Who has once said that George Hill is better or equal to Chris Paul?

Insane.

[easjer]

Geez, we're so stacked now I completely and utterly forgot about Theo Ratliff.

Him too.

[easjer]

OK, ok. I'll give you a chance. You tell me how this trade improves the team when you take away Parker's points and assists. Are you legitimately telling me that Hill + Biedrins + Azubuike can replace Parker + Hill in points? And that it won't matter if the offense takes a huge dive in terms of points because the shot-blocking and rebounding will truly be able to compensate?

[TJastal]

OK, ok. I'll give you a chance. You tell me how this trade improves the team when you take away Parker's points and assists. Are you legitimately telling me that Hill + Biedrins + Azubuike can replace Parker + Hill in points? And that it won't matter if the offense takes a huge dive in terms of points because the shot-blocking and rebounding will truly be able to compensate?

A lion's share of the lost points/assists would come from Stephen Jackson, who's currently at 16.7/4.0. Parker is a scoring first point guard, his assists aren't a concern.

As for the rest, Hill picks up more slack due to increased minutes. The thing is the defense will be miles better w/ Finley and Bonner gone from the starting lineup. Stephen Jackson would improve that and take on the role of stopping the other teams' best wing player that always give the spurs' fits.

George Hill may not be able to even come close to Parker's offensive production. But that's ok, his defense is really what the spurs need more of.

Oh, and btw.... Parker is a not a franchise player, Tim Duncan is the spurs' franchise player, that's why Duncan is making franchise type money.

[Phenomanul]

Didn't Detroit begin to unravel when they traded away Chauncey Billups? That's what would happen to the Spurs if they were dumb enough to trade Parker in his prime....

And like someone else mentioned... he's our one matchup advantage over some of the other contenders...

[easjer]

You are out to lunch.

And Parker and Ginobili are living on mere pittances from the Spurs.

[lefty]

Too much time is good for us

[easjer]

Too much time is good for us

I guess so, if preposterous idea threads amuse you.

[Interrohater]

A lion's share of the lost points/assists would come from Stephen Jackson, who's currently at 16.7/4.0. Parker is a scoring first point guard, his assists aren't a concern.

As for the rest, Hill picks up more slack due to increased minutes. The thing is the defense will be miles better w/ Finley and Bonner gone from the starting lineup. Stephen Jackson would improve that and take on the role of stopping the other teams' best wing player that always give the spurs' fits.

George Hill may not be able to even come close to Parker's offensive production. But that's ok, his defense is really what the spurs need more of.

Oh, and btw.... Parker is a not a franchise player, Tim Duncan is the spurs' franchise player, that's why Duncan is making franchise type money.

I give up. You've totally deluded yourself into thinking that you're right. You hadn't even mentioned Stephen Jackson, but that still doesn't make it a worthwhile trade. Even after Timmy himself has said that this is Tony's team now (as in, franchise player), you just make up your own answers. Like seriously man, are you ok?

Deepest team we maybe have ever had, and some people are still not happy. Sheesh.

[guzmangm]

I know finally it seems like we have filled the hole of the missing back up point guard that plauged us since Speedy left and now the original poster is saying lets get rid of a proven champ for some possible good role players and go back to the one good point guard, which is still developing... In case you forgot, Duncan's time is dwindling and it's championship or bust this season. Plus like someone else said, Parker already has the keys to the Porshe, and why change all that know. It would hurt more than help.

[Brazil]

For the first time we have a good back up PG and 3 games after: "now we have a good back up trade the starter and put the back up at starter" just ing lol !

I guess next step will be : we have Blair trade Duncan for Jeff Foster and a 1st pick...

[sexinthatsx]

I just have to step in and give my two cents. I stopped posting on here a while ago because I'm too busy but nevertheless I still browse the forum off and on. This topic of trading tony parker, however, is just ridiculous. Tony is the reason the spurs won the championship in 2007. Granted Tim Duncan was a beast, tony parker made some impossible shots that allowed the spurs to sweep the cavs. To trade parker for biedrins and azibuike, two unproven players outside of the warriors system is blasphemy. If the spurs chucked up as many shots as the warriors did (THANK GOD THEY DON'T) I'm sure Tim duncan would average 13 rebounds, and even matt bonner would average around 8 rebounds. Azuibuike is a good player, but for purposes of this trade I do not think he is worth it at all. End of story.

[objective]

http://www.examiner.com/x-14479-San-Antonio-Spurs-Examiner~y2009m11d5-Spurs-have-too-much-time-on-their-hands

Based purely on watching the 2007-08 college basketball season, my target was Chris Douglas-Roberts. If Derrick Rose was good enough to be the first overall selection in the 2008 Draft, there was no way CDR should have slipped to the tenth pick of the second round.

I was big on CDR too. People on various boards bashed him for being hurt last year.

This year now that he can play?

Starting for the Nets, averaging 15.6 points, 4.8 rebounds on 47.5% shooting. This is no surprise.

[Go For Tree]

Sorry for the caps, but as it stands this team does not play the type of defense required to win a championship. I'm trying to think of ways to improve that.

As it stands, the season is still not 3 games long.... We shouldnt be playing our best basketball now. You want to be like the Suns?

As it stands, we have a damn talented team with some new faces that are working OT at learning the nuances of one the the NBA's most complicated systems. Why would you trade away someone who can run the floor without assistance from his coach for athletes who would spend most of this season scratching their head because they have too much to leanr in the middle of the year? Especially on defense.

[Ibanezsr]

Would you guys trade TP for Al Jefferson if possible? With Minny you never know what kind of crazy deal could be pulled off...

[SenorSpur]

After reading this, I realize that I have too much time on my own hands.

[ajh18]

While I don't think this trade helps the Spurs, there's another reason that I think you don't trade Tony Parker, even if you can get (arguably) comparable talent in the form of an Al Jefferson-type player.

Pop loves his "coporate knowledge" for a reason. It takes a LONG time to really learn the Spurs system. Even longer at PG, and even longer if you hope to be one of the main components of a Spurs team. In Parker, Pop has an all-nba level pg that understands the Spurs system completely. Pop is even letting Tony call plays this year himself. No way he gives that up, or lets the Spurs give that up.

And, even if his feelings werent an issue... I am NOT willing to risk wasting another year of Tim's career by adding talent that is going to take time to integrate and understand the system, at the expense of an all-nba talent that already knows it inside and out. You just dont do that if you want to contend. Some teams are successful adding talent, but very few are successful adding talent at the expense of talent that is integrated into the system.

[TIMMYD!]

Miller's a dumbass.