Reply With Quote
The Kings announcer who made the comment is also the Kings Director of Player Personnel (i.e., R.C. Buford's job in the Sacto organization).
So yeah, he talks trades every day as part of his job. Safe bet he's got a clue...
What Pop say has zero value. In 05, he said just before the deadline that Spurs wouldn't make a trade and they traded Malik for Nazr.
The thing to understand with Pop is that his goal isn't to tell the truth to journalist but what can help the most his team. The most useful for Spurs is to claim that they aren't really looking to make a trade for two reasons. First, it doesn't put them in a weakness situation of being a team that has to make a trade when they talk with another team. Second, it doesn't put Spurs' players in a bad situation where they feel that the staff doesn't trust them.
Pop is just saying the right thing. It could be the truth or a lie.
The Kings announcer who made the comment is also the Kings Director of Player Personnel (i.e., R.C. Buford's job in the Sacto organization).
So yeah, he talks trades every day as part of his job. Safe bet he's got a clue...
I'm quite unsettled on Tyrus Thomas. I don't really know what to think about him.
I quite like your trade even if I would do it without Pargo included for luxury tax reasons (so Mason+Bonner+Finley+Mahinmi for Thomas+Salmons). Spurs would need a shooter after that so it woudl be nice if Finley could be bought out and come back after 30 days. Otherwise, Spurs would have to look at a shooter on the FA market where there are better options than Pargo.
I don't see how anyone can argue against TT, if the Spurs get him for Bonner/Finley or something similar. You may question his game, but no matter what he can do no worse than the players going out and there is significant reason to believe he can do much better. He showed that in the playoffs.
Don't expect anything to get done. I think Pop and RC understand that we have too many new faces as it is and adding one or more mid season would be like completely overhauling the entire make up of the team that is still learning on court team chemistry.
If something is done, it won't be anything worthwhile and probably something just to save a few dollars.
I concur.
I really don't get the intelligence arguments, either. This is basketball we're talking about and nothing about his role would suggest him being anymore than a finisher offensively and using his natural, instinctive gifts defensively.
For those who just say he's not the prototypical Spur, I'd tend to agree. But those are a lot of the same people that advocated for RJ because of a perceived feeling about his character, not his on-court game.
The bottom line is, Tyrus could help this team; the package they'd put together would almost surely benefit them on the basketball end, as it's a financial move for the Bulls.
With Tim now going the way of the old aircraft carrier, he simply can't get out on the floor and defend these athletic, face-up 4's. And with the team in need of shot-blocking, preferably in the form of someone that can play alongside him a good amount of minutes, there's just not a much better, more feasible option out there.
For all the talk of Tyrus' low basketball IQ, it's worth acknowledging he's played for one of the better defensive teams over the last few years and played a good role in it. He's a good weakside shotblocker, he can guard out on the floor (even does a credible job switching on wings at times), he's a deer in transition (both ways) and he doesn't need the ball to produce offense (finishes the pass with a face-up jumper, an oop, or gets what he gets off broken plays and garbage around the basket).
Yeah, he'll make a boneheaded play from time-to-time, but, generally, the pros outweigh the cons. And, at least with him, when he makes a bad rotation or gets beat off the dribble, the play isn't necessarily over; athleticism like his always keeps him in the play (I realize that's a foreign concept for we Spurs fans).
This team isn't winning the Championship as is and the vast majority of these trade scenarios aren't going to change that. But moves along the lines of Thomas and Salmons make the team a better, more versatile foe.
I concur.
I really don't get the intelligence arguments, either. This is basketball we're talking about and nothing about his role would suggest him being anymore than a finisher offensively and using his natural, instinctive gifts defensively.
For those who just say he's not the prototypical Spur, I'd tend to agree. But those are a lot of the same people that advocated for RJ because of a perceived feeling about his character, not his on-court game.
The bottom line is, Tyrus could help this team; the package they'd put together would almost surely benefit them on the basketball end, as it's a financial move for the Bulls.
With Tim now going the way of the old aircraft carrier, he simply can't get out on the floor and defend these athletic, face-up 4's. And with the team in need of shot-blocking, preferably in the form of someone that can play alongside him a good amount of minutes, there's just not a much better, more feasible option out there.
For all the talk of Tyrus' low basketball IQ, it's worth acknowledging he's played for one of the better defensive teams over the last few years and played a good role in it. He's a good weakside shotblocker, he can guard out on the floor (even does a credible job switching on wings at times), he's a deer in transition (both ways) and he doesn't need the ball to produce offense (finishes the pass with a face-up jumper, an oop, or gets what he gets off broken plays and garbage around the basket).
Yeah, he'll make a boneheaded play from time-to-time, but, generally, the pros outweigh the cons. And, at least with him, when he makes a bad rotation or gets beat off the dribble, the play isn't necessarily over; athleticism like his always keeps him in the play (I realize that's a foreign concept for we Spurs fans).
This team isn't winning the Championship as is and the vast majority of these trade scenarios aren't going to change that. But moves along the lines of Thomas and Salmons make the team a better, more versatile foe.
Sometimes I wonder what would have happened if we kept the players we had from last year and used the 2007-08 lineups and rotations with Hill/Blair included. Would we have the same record? would our defense be better? Would we be able to execute in the forth?
^ me too. Imagine how far along Blair and hill would be, and all the touches/shots they would get.
Eh, KT and Oberto and Udoka were garbage. And Bowen was slowing down and, for some reason, in Pop's doghouse. (I think Bowen still has 15 mpg in him, but whatever.)
The Spurs upgraded in the offseason. It's just taking time for everything to fall in place. It's obvious that they're improving, if you watch the games.
One thing that strikes me as very strange is how Pop, while praising Blair for his hustle and basketball IQ, often questions how he will fit in defensively as an undersized big man... but then he runs a small ball line-up and Jefferson or Finley are playing the 4 position. If a bulky wide-body like Blair is suspect defensively at the PF spot, how can Pop justify his whole small ball infatuation?
Parker/Manu/Bowen/TD/Oberto. That was the lineup IMO. You had a fluid offense that kept the ball moving, and you had protected paint on the other end, even if it meant Oberto taking a charge instead of blocking a shot.
Yeah, I agree. I think one area where Phil Jackson outcoaches Pop is in his appreciation for defensive length. I find it frustrating that guys who were chosen for their defensive abilities-- Hill, Bogans, etc.-- are constantly put into situations where they are asked to guard much taller players, which seems to me to somewhat negate their advantage as defenders.
To clarify, I'd say Hill has the chance to be a great defender against most PGs, but probably only a good one against most SGs. It's not a huge difference, but if you're giving up these small advantages at one or two spots for 10-15 mpg, that could easily be a 5 point swing, which is enough to turn close wins into tight games... and tight games into losses.
SOLD!I concur.
I really don't get the intelligence arguments, either. This is basketball we're talking about and nothing about his role would suggest him being anymore than a finisher offensively and using his natural, instinctive gifts defensively.
For those who just say he's not the prototypical Spur, I'd tend to agree. But those are a lot of the same people that advocated for RJ because of a perceived feeling about his character, not his on-court game.
The bottom line is, Tyrus could help this team; the package they'd put together would almost surely benefit them on the basketball end, as it's a financial move for the Bulls.
With Tim now going the way of the old aircraft carrier, he simply can't get out on the floor and defend these athletic, face-up 4's. And with the team in need of shot-blocking, preferably in the form of someone that can play alongside him a good amount of minutes, there's just not a much better, more feasible option out there.
For all the talk of Tyrus' low basketball IQ, it's worth acknowledging he's played for one of the better defensive teams over the last few years and played a good role in it. He's a good weakside shotblocker, he can guard out on the floor (even does a credible job switching on wings at times), he's a deer in transition (both ways) and he doesn't need the ball to produce offense (finishes the pass with a face-up jumper, an oop, or gets what he gets off broken plays and garbage around the basket).
Yeah, he'll make a boneheaded play from time-to-time, but, generally, the pros outweigh the cons. And, at least with him, when he makes a bad rotation or gets beat off the dribble, the play isn't necessarily over; athleticism like his always keeps him in the play (I realize that's a foreign concept for we Spurs fans).
This team isn't winning the Championship as is and the vast majority of these trade scenarios aren't going to change that. But moves along the lines of Thomas and Salmons make the team a better, more versatile foe.
I admit that I've been a bit lukewarm on TT. However, all your points make sense to me and I like a potential frontcourt rotation that includes both Blair and Thomas. However, the biggest roadblock in making this happen, to me, is Pop.
The problem is that the Spurs currently have a player similar to TT on the bench, in Ian Mahinmi. We all know that the coach has soured on him, for no apparent reason. It wouldn't take long for Pop to sour on TT.
Salmons and Thomas represent an ideal trade scenario for the Spurs. Players that would help fill two positions and both would give the Spurs better contributions than they are getting from the current in bents right now. Plus, both players would help bridge the gap between for the next several years.
I'm with you in that the potential rewards would outweigh the occasional bone-headed plays. That's part of the growing pains with young players and a consequence of the Spurs complex system. To me, it's worth the risk.
Veteran experience and corporate knowledge be dammed. After all, the Spurs are losing games now with veterans who supposedly are loaded with these traits. Time to take a chance and upgrade the talent and skill level.
So the Spurs were in fact not really close to a deal.
Bonner/Finley
So Tyrus Thomas just got suspended for complaining about his playing time(and other stuff that hasn't been disclosed) and they're reportedly trying harder to trade him now..
I don't think the Spurs would really care about this since Jax is still a favorite, but I would assume that Pop would ask VDN about Thomas if the Spurs were discussing a trade(like Larry Brown asked Pop about Jackson) and that probably wouldn't go well since Del Negro and Thomas haven't seen eye to eye about his role/playing time..
he could really be on the way out if im the spurs im all over that kid
How bout this 3 team trade:
Spurs get Haywood and Salmons
Bulls get Bonner, Finley, and Mason
Wizards get Thomas and Mahinmi
Spurs get their big and wing, Bulls get their expiring contracts,
and Wizards get two young bigs to replace Haywood.
(This trade worked in the Trade Machine)
Trading or staying with current roster are both gambles as far as building something championship worthy. And I haven't seen anyone state a name that is worth trading for.
I think we should hold our guns tight and see what the draw looks like later.
That is a nice trade. That is very similar to the two separate trades I mentioned a few pages back.
mine were Bonner, Finley to Chicago for Salmons and then
Mason Jr., Mahinimi and filler (Bogans, Hairston or Ratliff) to Washington for Haywood.
Starting 5 would be the same as yours:
Haywood
Duncan
RJ
Salmons
Parker
I like your trade a lot better though Cdcast as it makes sense for both teams. The Bulls get some shooters who are also expiring contracts and the Wizards get some young bigs. I'd offer this immediately. If it's not enough would anyone offer Splitter to one of the teams if that got it done?
Then if you want to get silly and offer RJ for Iguodala straight up and see if the 76ers want to do a Grizzlies like trade I am all for that too.
Last edited by Ice009; 02-06-2010 at 07:03 PM.
Wizards wouldn't agree to that trade and the Bulls would want an asset for the future.
Bulls would need a 1st round pick at least from the Spurs. And the Wizards would need a first round pick and or Splitter from the Spurs. IMO
The Wizards getting a 2 month rental in Thomas doesn't help their situation now or for the future.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
