*sigh* Sorry your team went to pot, Tim.
but if this was true, why are they involved in so many speculations at all? or do you mean, that they got the order, do whatever you want if you think it makes the team better, BUT NO to any trade that brings back salary beyond this season. this would more or less kill any value our expiring contracts have.
When you consider the fact that it will free enough room for a max contract or more next year...I see them tanking the season easily...the bulls are not going anywhere this season...look to the future.
Don't give the man sympathy.
He had an opportunity to take on contracts from 2003-2009, but he chose the cheap route.
Yes I know Spurs still managed to win 3 les during the 5 years (2003-2007), but had Holt took on contracts then instead of now, Spurs would have probably three peated or won 4-6 les during that time.
Instead he chose to wait til Tim and Manu were passed their prime to finally break the bank.
Last edited by MaNu4Tres; 02-17-2010 at 11:32 AM.
That wasn't my point.
I suggested that may be willing to make trades that bring back salary beyond this season, but not MLE level salary attached to a an over-30 role player.
If all we can get for expiring contracts contracts of our aging roles are slightly younger, slightly better players on more expensive contracts, then perhaps it it better to just let those contracts expire.
In this view of affairs, acquiring a player like Salmons does nothing but kick the can one year down the road.
Only thing I don't agree with what you said Mel. I know this is your opinion of what they might do oppose to you. I think that route will be a mistake and prolong the time to compete for a championship again.
I believe Spurs shouldn't just let their expirings expire if they agree to start rebuilding to any degree. If they agree to start rebuilding then try to get as many assets for the future for those expirings this year and next year. If we simply just let them expire without any compensation, that will only just prolong the rebuilding process. Thunder and Blazers did it the right way, oppose to the Pistons, who resigned Hamilton to a lucrative deal once he was past his prime ( similar to Manu's situation now).
Sympathy's got nothing to do with it. Once you come to the conclusion that more money won't solve the problem, it would be pure stupidity to keep spending.
This is actually the very point I was trying to make. If you can acquire future assets with expiring contracts, then do so. In the example we're using here, Salmons is not a future asset.
I know more money won't solve the problem. I'm not stupid. I'm aware any move we make won't bring the Spurs a championship. Those days have obviously passed.
I'm saying don't give the man sympathy for his plan not paying off this year. He had from 2003-2008 to give the FO his consent to do everything possible to keep the O'Brien in San Antonio. But he didn't.
I don't feel sorry for him for it not working out as planned this year.
Yeah, sympathy for millionaires and billionaires is a misplaced emotion.
I know Salmons isn't. A Thomas/ Salmons move is a move to help NOW.
We don't know if Spurs are prioritizing moves for NOW or for the future. Only time will tell that.
If they are trying to make moves for the future then I say get as much as you can for all your expiring contracts.
I.E
Manu for Big Z and J.J Hickson and a 1st rounder. ( Spurs would buy out Big Z, and he'd return to Cleveland in 30 days)
And even put McDyess on the table in a similar deal to a contender:
I.E McDyess for Scalabrine and Sheldon Williams and a 1st.
I know that, some fans on here have been pulling the " I feel sorry for him" card.
Yeah, sympathy for millionaires and billionaires is a misplaced emotion.
I'm having the hardest time dealing with this. Duncan is having a good season, and over his career I think he had more in him. I'm not complaining about four, it's been a joy. But he had more. He could still have more in him with the right pieces. I hope the front office can give him the shot.
I agree. I actually proposed the Manu to Cleveland trade in jest in another thread, but it actually makes sense.
As to their priorities they could be working under guidelines that say trades to improve the team NOW must be cost neutral, otherwise only make trades that improve future prospects.
At least we know, from this past offseason, that they were serious about trying. Now it becomes, do they keep trying? Is the desire to capitalize on Tim's last years greater than the desire to rebuild? Not to say the two are mutually exclusive, but they don't exactly coincide, either.
If anything, these past few weeks have helped me realize that love for a player doesn't put him above trading (*cough* Manu). It has to be all about getting Tim his next ring.
The first question to be answered is:
Is it even possible to make a series of transactions that transform the current roster into a championship contending team in 2010 or 2011?
If the answer is no, then a gradual rebuilding is the only logical choice.
If the answer is yes, then you have decide if you can afford it.
Not sure I agree with you. A Jefferson + expirings for Iguolda and Dalembert/Brand deal would make us contenders next year, and probably this year. However, it would be a lot more money long term...
Holt not signing off on a Salmons/ Thomas deal for expirings indicates Holt can't afford it.
There is your answer.
I appreciate the FO trying this offseason. The moves were both bold and swift. However, it could be that they waited too late because now there's not much room for error.
Perhaps this "can do" strategy should have been taken during the run. Certain key acquisitions could've been had and perhaps others (SJax) could've been retained. The team could've been better positioned to repeat and repeat.
I realize this is all hindsight and greed, but perhaps instead of "every other year champions", we'd be sitting here appreciating a 5-6 le dynasty.
+1
It's really been a tough year to swallow. I feel your pain, Duncan228.
This team had enough for one more run. They still do, perhaps. They have the big 3 finally healthy this year for the most part (Parker is 75% but still that's better than most). All they need is a few pieces in the supporting cast.
Obviously the team needs either some athleticism/shotblockers or pure physical size (or both in one package, if possible) on the frontline to help Tim.
Also wouldn't hurt to get a wing who can give them some consistent scoring and defense that Pop sticks with. The musical chairs he's been using is making it difficult for players to get into any kind of rhythym.
Bogans was given the most consistent role and minutes of anyone and hasn't proven any type of consistency. RMJ and Finley have fought over the remaining leftover minutes and both also struggle to be consistent as well.
Even though it's a risk I wish the spurs could get a Thomas/Salmons package deal together. I think these two players address the two glaring weaknesses the best right now and would really solidify the rotation. No more musical chairs, Salmons starts and Roger off the bench. No more Finley / Bogans bull . Same with Thomas, he either starts or comes off the bench to help anchor the defense and allow Blair to do his best work on the offensive end. Bonner is the 5th man in spot minutes.
I'm not really impressed with the excuses why this trade can't happen. The fact is Manu might be gone anyway after this year and Splitter has not committed, and really .. who cares if he does?
You gotta wonder how many more times are we going to see the big 3 all healthy (relatively speaking). I'm guessing not many more. Might as well go for the gusto.
I don't think you can say Holt has/hasn't signed off just yet. I'm pretty sure that such an offer wouldn't be accepted by the Bulls just yet. They hope to either move Hinrich at the deadline, or get more back. Salmons/Thomas for expirings is their fallback position...
I have no insight into what Holt and the rest of the ownership group think is appropriate spending; I didn't think they would come within sniffing distance of the Jefferson deal...
I don't know if is possible but I know we have to try just because of the chance that is possible...have a little window to compete is better than have nothing at all...we have a lot of exemples (see Bulls) of teams that are out of contention for years and years after their stars have retired (see Boston after Bird, Bulls after Jordan etc etc.) and of teams that, despite the pletora of high draft choices, have never been able to compete for the le.
'till we have Duncan It's not time to re-build at the point to take low draft choices instead of good players with nba experience...I don't see Tim in a rebuilding team.
The Jefferson deal was thought as impossible but given the current economical situation has been made...didn't work till now, but was a chance to take (I would have preferred Maggette over him...but ther's no counterprove that he would have been better).
We already had exemples of how the market gives somehow unexpected opportunities...and rememeber next year we have Splitter, the expiring of Jefferson (in case he won't play a lot better than now), one year more of experience for Hill and Blair... that could be just what the doctor ordered.
And there would still be plenty of complaining that not enough was being done to get a 7th.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
