10 Top Worst Moves by the Spurs Front Office this Season.

[TJastal]

I'm not saying the Spurs would have gotten a better talent, I'm saying that from the Bulls perspective the Bobcats pick is better and no they don't miss out on it, it's much more complicated, you just don't know the facts - google it, read, then argue.

If the FO already knows that Splitter will stay in Europe, then it'd be extremely naive from you to think other teams are not aware of it as well. If he's not coming then his rights have no value at all and would be of no interest to anyone. If there's a chance he'd come, then the Spurs would be wise to keep him, as the Scola deal has proved. Now, if you think the FO did great with trading away Scola, then fine.

http://sports.espn.go.com/chicago/nb...ory?id=4925000
Forman said on "The Afternoon Saloon" on ESPN 1000 that the first year for the pick would be 2012, and it would be lottery protected that year. Forman said the protection would decrease each year after that for "four or five years."

The bulls would miss out on the pick next year if the bobcats missed the playoffs which was looked like a possibility at the time of the trade deadline.
Hard to say whether they might be happy to salt it away, maybe the don't care or maybe they are hoping to have it for next year when they put their big FA plan together. The latter seems the most likely to me. In this regard, the spurs pick would seem the safest bet. /shrug

I don't think the F.O or anyone really knows anything about what Splitter's plans are. I just have a hunch he's going to stay in Europe. He may just make me look stupid and turn out to be just as good as Scola eventually. Question is, do we want to try to win now while the window is cracked or a few years or when the window is shut completely? The former is the route I would take.

[TJastal]

Nah, Theo is just a stat padder with little to no impact on the game; worse than even Marcus Camby and he'd likely get eaten alive in the West. Who the is EricB?

And now you pulled out bull that we could've gotten Thomas and say I'm "sugar coating" that failure? GTFO, no wonder you can't start threads

The only trades available were to cash in expirings like Mason and Theo for future draft picks unless they throw in Blair, Hill, or Ginobili which would be dumb as .

Yah that Ratliff sure sucks against western conf opponents. That laker game when he was blocking Gasol and Bynum on the same sequence, and helping the bobcats give the best team in the west a beatdown sure backs up your crackhead theory huh?

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

http://sports.espn.go.com/chicago/nb...ory?id=4925000
Forman said on "The Afternoon Saloon" on ESPN 1000 that the first year for the pick would be 2012, and it would be lottery protected that year. Forman said the protection would decrease each year after that for "four or five years."

The bulls would miss out on the pick next year if the bobcats missed the playoffs which was looked like a possibility at the time of the trade deadline.
Hard to say whether they might be happy to salt it away, maybe the don't care or maybe they are hoping to have it for next year when they put their big FA plan together. The latter seems the most likely to me. In this regard, the spurs pick would seem the safest bet. /shrug

I don't think the F.O or anyone really knows anything about what Splitter's plans are. I just have a hunch he's going to stay in Europe. He may just make me look stupid and turn out to be just as good as Scola eventually. Question is, do we want to try to win now while the window is cracked or a few years or when the window is shut completely? The former is the route I would take.

The pick they receive also depends on Minny/Denver, so the Bulls will likely not see it for a couple of seasons, but when they get it it'll likely be a much better pick than the Spurs' 20th(ish) pick this summer. Safe bet for the Bulls since they don't exactly want many first round picks this upcoming draft - on the contrary - they want as much cap space as possible, similarly to what the Spurs did in 2003 when targetting J Kidd.

As for Splitter - you're right that at this moment in time problable no one knows whether he'll come to the NBA or not, which is why his trade value is extremely low ( see Scola's proposed deals in 2007 ) and would have been unlikely to swing a deal in the Spurs favor. The best case scenario would be if the Spurs keep his rights and bring him over, chances are he's not far behind Scola as a player and his game is much more likely to translate to the NBA.

All in all, what I'm trying to say is that the FO might have presented an offer but obviously Bobcats had a better one for Chicago and obviously the Spurs didn't want to bid any higher, that is if they even had interest in Thomas.

[SenorSpur]

Greatly improved this squad? Get John Salmons. Look at that trade

John Salmons + 2 2nd round picks + First round exchange rights with the bulls in 2010

for

Joe Alexander and Hakim Warrick (2 expirings worth 5.5 million combined...)

Would John Salmons upgrade our wing rotation? He'd be the 2nd best wing on our team... Manu, Salmons, RJ,...

Could we do 2 expirings worth 5.5 million? Easy Peasey! Would we have happily skipped either one of the 2nd round picks or the first round exchange rights, yep! Gee we could have offered a better package than MIL!

[TJastal]

The pick they receive also depends on Minny/Denver, so the Bulls will likely not see it for a couple of seasons, but when they get it it'll likely be a much better pick than the Spurs' 20th(ish) pick this summer. Safe bet for the Bulls since they don't exactly want many first round picks this upcoming draft - on the contrary - they want as much cap space as possible, similarly to what the Spurs did in 2003 when targetting J Kidd.

As for Splitter - you're right that at this moment in time problable no one knows whether he'll come to the NBA or not, which is why his trade value is extremely low ( see Scola's proposed deals in 2007 ) and would have been unlikely to swing a deal in the Spurs favor. The best case scenario would be if the Spurs keep his rights and bring him over, chances are he's not far behind Scola as a player and his game is much more likely to translate to the NBA.

All in all, what I'm trying to say is that the FO might have presented an offer but obviously Bobcats had a better one for Chicago and obviously the Spurs didn't want to bid any higher, that is if they even had interest in Thomas.

Good point about not wanting the pick this year, due to capspace concerns. I overlooked that fact and also the fact that the pick isn't available until
2012, which supports your argument.

Still, I could easily imagine the bobcats being a strong playoff team in a few years and the spurs could be starting a rebuilding phase if Manu doesn't resign and TD retires. As a future pick I think I might actually prefer the spurs' future pick over the bobcats if I was the bulls.

[Cane]

Yah that Ratliff sure sucks against western conf opponents. That laker game when he was blocking Gasol and Bynum on the same sequence, and helping the bobcats give the best team in the west a beatdown sure backs up your crackhead theory huh?

The same game where he fouled himself out from playing substantial minutes (4 fouls in 16 mins) and where they got lucky that others stepped up their game and LA fumbled it away? Theo is inconsistent and his only asset are blocks - his offense, rebounding, etc just don't stack up well to what the Spurs already had. Spurs also already have a younger version of what Theo contributes and thats Ian.

Crackhead theory? Puff, puff, pass whatever you're smoking:

I do agree with you on the trade deadline though, contrary to what some think on this forum I don't think Popovich tried hard at all.

You make up bull and paint a delusion that the Spurs could've easily grabbed Thomas or a substantial trade without including guys like Blair, Hill, or Ginobili. Not only that but you try and downplay their efforts even though they were shopping around and had a disappointment named Richard Jefferson on their payroll to exchange?

Just gotta face the reality that the Spurs and the market didn't have the contracts or players to make a worthwhile trade AND that there was no trade that would've elevated the team substantially. Imo Tyrus Thomas is too inconsistent, lacking in IQ, and needs too many minutes and attempts to be worthwhile especially in exchange for significant assets - not to mention the rise of Blair and Tiago's potential. Both he and Theo would take up minutes better suited towards the bigs the Spurs have had + Blair.

[JR3]

Now say something nice... list the top ten best things the front office did this year... okay there might only be a few (blair, blair, and blair)

[TJastal]

The same game where he fouled himself out from playing substantial minutes (4 fouls in 16 mins) and where they got lucky that others stepped up their game and LA fumbled it away? Theo is inconsistent and his only asset are blocks - his offense, rebounding, etc just don't stack up well to what the Spurs already had. Spurs also already have a younger version of what Theo contributes and thats Ian.

Crackhead theory? Puff, puff, pass whatever you're smoking:



You make up bull and paint a delusion that the Spurs could've easily grabbed Thomas or a substantial trade without including guys like Blair, Hill, or Ginobili. Not only that but you try and downplay their efforts even though they were shopping around and had a disappointment named Richard Jefferson on their payroll to exchange?

Just gotta face the reality that the Spurs and the market didn't have the contracts or players to make a worthwhile trade AND that there was no trade that would've elevated the team substantially. Imo Tyrus Thomas is too inconsistent, lacking in IQ, and needs too many minutes and attempts to be worthwhile especially in exchange for significant assets - not to mention the rise of Blair and Tiago's potential. Both he and Theo would take up minutes better suited towards the bigs the Spurs have had + Blair.

I actually watched the bobcat/laker game, Theo's presence as a paint deterrent did have an impact on that game there is nothing you can say to change that fact.

And the fact that the spurs have Ian doesn't mean jack if they don't give him the necessary minutes to develop. Another whiff for you.

I'm calling bs he couldn't have helped the spurs. For the bobcats he's averaging in 26 minutes a game: 12 pts, 8 reb, 1.4 ast, 1 stl, and 2.6 blocks while shooting 50% from the field and 76% from the line. Put that in your crackpipe and smoke it.

Three strikes, your out.

[rascal]

So you're saying the spurs would get a higher impact player in the 1st round than what Tyrus Thomas is doing right now for the bobcats? I'm sorry, but that's what is really laughable

And the bobcats pick was protected, meaning if they miss the playoffs (which at the time of the trade deadline looked fairly likely) the bulls miss out on the pick. Spurs' pick would have been much more secure bet for next season. That you debate this is laughable as well.

As for Splitter, just because it's my personal belief that he is staying in Europe doesn't mean everyone else does. There's always a chance he could come and teams might be willing to gamble on that chance. It makes perfect sense in that light, if I was the spurs F.O. and it was my opinion he was going to wig out on my team again then I am going to get something of value for him while I still can.

good post. You countered all his arguments logically.

[Johnny RIngo]

Doing nothing at the trade deadline was a big failure for the front office. It was apparant the spurs were not good enough this year to contend for a le and still they could not upgrade the roster while other teams did.

Agreed. It's as if they decided to wave the white flag and pack it in for the season. Either that or the Spurs FO just suck at making trades(giving away useful players like Scola and Ratliff for virtually nothing)

[rascal]

Agreed. It's as if they decided to wave the white flag and pack it in for the season.

They were more concerned with trimming payroll.

[rascal]

The spurs should have offered Manu in a type of package deal to Wash for Butler and Heywood. Manu was a great trade chip I doubt the spurs dangled.

The spurs need a capable starting quality big and Butler has more solid years left than Manu.

[Cane]

I actually watched the bobcat/laker game, Theo's presence as a paint deterrent did have an impact on that game there is nothing you can say to change that fact.

And the fact that the spurs have Ian doesn't mean jack if they don't give him the necessary minutes to develop. Another whiff for you.

I'm calling bs he couldn't have helped the spurs. For the bobcats he's averaging in 26 minutes a game: 12 pts, 8 reb, 1.4 ast, 1 stl, and 2.6 blocks while shooting 50% from the field and 76% from the line. Put that in your crackpipe and smoke it.

Three strikes, your out.

Nah, Theo's presence was limited (16 minutes due to his foul trouble) and barely did jack. LA just sucked ass that game; then again the Bobcats are to the Lakers like the Bucks used to be to the Spurs - a ty team that counters a good one.

Thomas would've "helped" the Spurs at the expense of using 13.6 FGA which is less than one attempt away from Duncan's average. Fact of the matter is the Spurs didn't have the players, contracts, or assets to make your delusional Thomas trade a reality. No wonder you can't start threads.

[rascal]

Nah, Theo's presence was limited (16 minutes due to his foul trouble) and barely did jack. LA just sucked ass that game; then again the Bobcats are to the Lakers like the Bucks used to be to the Spurs - a ty team that counters a good one.

Thomas would've "helped" the Spurs at the expense of using 13.6 FGA which is less than one attempt away from Duncan's average. Fact of the matter is the Spurs didn't have the players, contracts, or assets to make your delusional Thomas trade a reality. No wonder you can't start threads.

Disagree, the spurs have enough players, contracts etc. to make a trade, they didn't want to make a trade.

[Johnny RIngo]

Disagree, the spurs have enough players, contracts etc. to make a trade, they didn't want to make a trade.

Seems like Holt clamped down on the FO after the Jefferson debacle.

[TJastal]

Nah, Theo's presence was limited (16 minutes due to his foul trouble) and barely did jack. LA just sucked ass that game; then again the Bobcats are to the Lakers like the Bucks used to be to the Spurs - a ty team that counters a good one.

Thomas would've "helped" the Spurs at the expense of using 13.6 FGA which is less than one attempt away from Duncan's average. Fact of the matter is the Spurs didn't have the players, contracts, or assets to make your delusional Thomas trade a reality. No wonder you can't start threads.

You sure got a load of excuses for everything.

You say Ratliff had no effect on that game. Just a coincidence that Pau Gasol shot 5 for 14 and Andrew Bynum 3 for 9. Pass the bong, please.

Spurs might not have had the better 1st round "pick" to offer but they did have better players as expiring deals (proven shooters which we know the bulls were looking for) and also Splitter's rights that might have been the sweetener that got the deal done. And let's just say its hard to believe that the spurs couldn't have put together something better than Acie Law, Flip Murray and a future protected pick.

[Johnny RIngo]

I thought it was pretty embarrassing that SA was looking to trade Dice only months after giving him that bloated three year deal. Talk about incompetence.

[Chomag]

3. A min player playing better than the supposed level of a min player, not his fault Mason's and RJ's balls have shrunk.Who else would you have brought for the min?

How about play and develop a player that totally outplayed and destroyed him in pre-season? Bogans is starting but he did not earn that spot his lack of production on all levels points to this.

Bogans playing better then supposed level? Sorry that one made me chuckle. I'm not even going to go in that Bogans has started more games with the spurs this season then he has his entire year.

[TJastal]

As for Salmons that is a head scratcher too. Bucks bent over the bulls on that one in their desperation to clear cap room. I think the spurs could have done better.

Bulls only got a role player in Hakim Warrick and 1st round superbust Joe Alexander, and gave up two future 2nd rounders. And that's not all. Milwaukee can switch 1st round picks with CHI as long as its not a top 10. Looking right now like they might cash that one in for a move up in the draft if they keep winning ballgames.

Salmons is proving to be a solid 2nd/3rd option on the bucks. Considering the spurs have Keith Bogans as a starter they should have been more actively pursuing this too.

[dbestpro]

The point is there have been a lot of things go wrong. I don't think you need a list of ten.

You can point the finger at the front office, Pop and the players not named Hill, Manu and Duncan.

[LongtimeSpursFan]

Nobody ing wanted to make a deal with the Spurs; you look at the trade deals that happened and the Spurs didn't have the contracts or players to make a deal unless you throw in George Hill, Manu Ginobili, or DeJuan Blair which would be dumb to do.

Mason Jr. almost got traded to Miami for a second round pick but their trade exception retired. Theo is a ty and older version of Marcus Camby except he only statpads blocks and little to nothing else; Bonner, McDyess, and Blair all contribute more. Theo is better than Ian though but when it comes to garbage minute players, la-dee- ing-da

No trade would've made the Big 3 younger, Parker healthy, or greatly improve this squad and there was none that the Spurs could really capitalize on.

Finally a voice of reason.

[ChumpDumper]

Good point about not wanting the pick this year, due to capspace concerns. I overlooked that fact and also the fact that the pick isn't available until
2012, which supports your argument.

You can understand another team's cap concerns but pretend the Spurs have none.

[TJastal]

You can understand another team's cap concerns but pretend the Spurs have none.

Stale, old argument. I outlined before how the spurs could have made a trade for Salmons and Thomas and still had $$ leftover for Manu and even the mythical Splitter next year. And seeing what Salmons has done for Milwaukee and what Thomas is doing for the bobcats I think its fair to say that plugging Salmons in for Bogans and Thomas in for Bonner would have vaulted the spurs right up into the top of the league.

So for just a little bit more (actually spending the same $$$ in the future as this year) the spurs could have put them in a prime position to contend for a le for this year and next. And after next year Jefferson and McDyess come off the books. Then they would have alot of options depending on how Salmons and Thomas were performing, including keeping both as replacements for Jefferson and Dice, trading them, or letting them walk.

[FeZZy]

we missed on 3 wizards players! not one but THREE and they could all be been diffrence makers

[Johnny RIngo]

we missed on 3 wizards players! not one but THREE and they could all be been diffrence makers

Don't forget the two Bulls players(Thomas and Salmons)