Spurs going same route as 80s Celtics?

[mogrovejo]

The 80s Celtics were better.

Actually Danny had a conversation with Red in 1988 and told him he should trade the Big 3. Red ended up trading him. But Ainge has said multiple times that he'd have traded Bird+McHale after Bias death + the loss to the Pistons in the conference finals and that in a similar situation he'll do the same (meaning Pierce probably won't end his career as a Celtic).

[superjames1992]

The similarities abound.
The Celts had a big 3, as do the Spurs.
The Celts won 3 les in 6 years, the Spurs 3 in 5 (4 in 9).
Both had a coatail riding coach who did little if anything to help get the les, but who definitely screwed up (and continues to screw up) chances for more les and at least one repeat.

I stopped reading after that.

[ShoogarBear]

Both had a coatail riding coach who did little if anything to help get the les, but who definitely screwed up (and continues to screw up) chances for more les and at least one repeat.

So you don't like KC Jones, but what exactly did he do to "screw up " the Celtics chances for more les?

KC Jones' last season, 1988, the Celtics won 57 games and made it to the ECF. He then retired, a short two years after the last Bird le. The horrible Jimmy Rodgers coached them for the next 2 years, followed by Chris Ford for five.

in all fairness the death of Lenny Bias and continuation of KC Popavich as coach were huge contributing factors to their downfall.

See above.

(I think Bob Parish could have stayed if he wanted to, i know he left for Charlotte then went on to play a small role but contributing role in two more les with a real coach on the Bulls.)

BOB Parish? Might as well call him Zack Parish.

He got one ring with the Bulls, playing two games in the playoffs that year, i.e., Glen Robinson contributed more to get his ring.

Instead, they traded the youngest of their core, Danny Ainge who went on to start in like 3 more Finals. For Joe Klein. Can you say "dumbass front office"?

So you criticize the Celtics for trading the youngest of their core, and then in the same post you suggest this:

Would OKCity have gone for a Parker for the #2 pick (Kevin Durant)? I'm sure OKC would have at least considered it. That's just one possibility.

It's okay to criticize Pop and the front office. I've been critical of some of Pop's coaching moves, and so have others. But try to do it in a coherent, logical fashion.

So much concentrated fail here; it's like the Black Hole of Fail.

[Fabbs]

The 80s Celtics were better.

Actually Danny had a conversation with Red in 1988 and told him he should trade the Big 3. Red ended up trading him. But Ainge has said multiple times that he'd have traded Bird+McHale after Bias death + the loss to the Pistons in the conference finals and that in a similar situation he'll do the same (meaning Pierce probably won't end his career as a Celtic).

So do you have any other reasonable people in Boston who would have at least considered what Ainge suggested?

[mogrovejo]

So do you have any other reasonable people in Boston who would have at least considered what Ainge suggested?

Well, hindsight is great, but when Red had to make the decision he had a team that had the 2nd best regular season record, lost the conference finals in a close series while dealing with health problems all year along and having Mark Acres as the 6th man. They were 2 years removed from being probably the best team in the history of the game and the core was the same. Do you blow up a top-3 team? Now it's obvious they never recovered from the health problems, but in 88 I don't think it was. Bird had a great year between the back issues, arguably one of his career years - 30/9/6/2 with crazy scoring efficiency. Ainge was proven right, but I understand Red's reluctance.

As for the current team, I've been on record for awhile saying they should blow up the team, even if they win the le. From the current roster, I'd keep Rondo, maybe Scalabrine, maybe Perkins if I couldn't get good offers for him but I'd shop him hardly.

Not sure if it's the right idea for the Spurs though. I don't think it is. I believe the Spurs have the assets to be strong contenders in the next 2 years. After that they stop with the retooling and can enter into a proper rebuilding stage. Heck, trade RJ for Pierce or Garnett, add a small-ball 4 and you're a top team in the NBA just like that. Bring De Colo to be the backup guard and shop Parker around, it's another good option to improve the team in the short term.

Plus, sometimes the best decision for a franchise is not the one that maximizes their chances of winning les. How would the city of San Antonio react to the Spurs trading Duncan? Even the national media. I think it'd get ugly. There's more to the game than winning.

[mogrovejo]

So you don't like KC Jones, but what exactly did he do to "screw up " the Celtics chances for more les?

Exactly what he did to enhance the Celtics chances: waived towels.

No complaining from me.

[Ignignokt]

Fabbs just bukkaked Eric B, FWD, and ShoogarBear hardcore.

NO surprises here.

[Mr Bones]

I actually feel pretty optimistic about the future because the Spurs have, for the first time in a long time, some great trade assets and options:
1. Own the rights to Splitter, one of the best centers in the world not currently in the NBA.
2. Young talent like Hill and Blair, both of whom are attractive to other teams because of thier combination of talent and low salaries.
3. Parker. An asset that many teams would be willing to trade for.
4. The highest pick in the draft in a very long time.
5. A huge expiring contract in Jefferson that many teams will covet next year while trying to clear cap space for the 2011 free agency market.

The Spurs have a ton of options.

[poop]

first three responses to this thread all discussed 'splitter'

[Fabbs]

Well, hindsight is great, but when Red had to make the decision he had a team that had the 2nd best regular season record, lost the conference finals in a close series while dealing with health problems all year along and having Mark Acres as the 6th man. They were 2 years removed from being probably the best team in the history of the game and the core was the same. Do you blow up a top-3 team? Now it's obvious they never recovered from the health problems, but in 88 I don't think it was. Bird had a great year between the back issues, arguably one of his career years - 30/9/6/2 with crazy scoring efficiency. Ainge was proven right, but I understand Red's reluctance.

Right on all accounts. Red was understandably reluctant, but the right thing to do would have been to do at the least a partial blow up. The possibilities are (well, were ) salivating to me. Bird available for trade?! Can you imagine what some of the other teams owners/GMs would give up for Bird? Shaun Kemp and X McDaniel i would think Seattle would do in 0.0 seconds but I'm sure the Celts could have done much better.
Would Seattle even have done McHale or Parrish for Kemp?
Bird for Stockton and ____? There's your All Star point guard for the next 10 years.
1987 that rebound that McHale and Parrish fought over and lost to gift the Lakers a 3-1 lead instead of a 2-2 tie. That was a nightmare. What fried me tho was KC Moron letting a 16 point lead evaporate as he (like Moronovich) gave NO confindence to his younger fresher bench so that gassed McHale, Parish and Bird could get some much needed rest.

As for the current team, I've been on record for awhile saying they should blow up the team, even if they win the le. From the current roster, I'd keep Rondo, maybe Scalabrine, maybe Perkins if I couldn't get good offers for him but I'd shop him hardly.

Not sure if it's the right idea for the Spurs though. I don't think it is. I believe the Spurs have the assets to be strong contenders in the next 2 years. After that they stop with the retooling and can enter into a proper rebuilding stage.

With a good coach, sure. With Popovich, they're gonna keep fading like the Celts did.

Heck, trade RJ for Pierce or Garnett, add a small-ball 4 and you're a top team in the NBA just like that.

No way Boston falls for that.

Plus, sometimes the best decision for a franchise is not the one that maximizes their chances of winning les. How would the city of San Antonio react to the Spurs trading Duncan? Even the national media. I think it'd get ugly. There's more to the game than winning.

They'd get over it real fast if the Spurs took a 5th Championship. This is where it takes a strong GM and owner. They've instead given the keys to the car to Popovich in 2008, "President of All Things Basketball" or whatever his le is.

[galvatron3000]

Spurs may need to trade Jefferson to Utah for AK 47. AK would fit better and if he is hurt it would be just like having Jefferson, if he isn't then he will be better than Jefferson. Jefferson can play with a PG that can push the ball and find him in the offense and on the break.

Spurs need to draft and sf or a center/pf.

Also, consider trading Parker, love him but it may be necessary to trade him to bring in something.

The bench needs a semi uhaul, Bonner, Mason and Bogans should be gone.
Hairston should get some burn, Gee should get a shot in training camp and Garrett may have earned a spot already, I like Phil love big pg's.

Pop should have given Hairston some burn against Phoenix.

[lefty]

The 80s Celtics were better.

Actually Danny had a conversation with Red in 1988 and told him he should trade the Big 3. Red ended up trading him. But Ainge has said multiple times that he'd have traded Bird+McHale after Bias death + the loss to the Pistons in the conference finals and that in a similar situation he'll do the same (meaning Pierce probably won't end his career as a Celtic).

[TampaDude]

Wow...I remember Len Bias...he went to UMCP...I grew up in the DC area, and that was a huge, huge story...what a tragedy...that kid was gonna be a monster in the NBA. His younger brother, James, was shot and killed a few years later, too... ing heartbreaking.

[Ignignokt]

Incase you missed it ST, Fabbs just applied some zygote jelly on the foreheads of EricB and FWD.

Truly a remarkable thread.

[Ignignokt]

Just so you remember, this thread is all about how Fabbs sploaded on ST regulars.

These are things we know.

[Blackjack]

You do know that Fabbs completely ripped this notion from Simmons, right (as this was talked about more than a year ago)?

[Ignignokt]

You do know that Fabbs completely ripped this notion from Simmons, right (as this was talked about more than a year ago)?

I'm pretty sure everything you write is all your original whimsical thoughts.

[Blackjack]

Appreciate the vote of confidence.

I don't have a problem with discussing something someone else brought to the fore but I have a hard time giving them credit for it.

[Fabbs]

You do know that Fabbs completely ripped this notion from Simmons, right (as this was talked about more than a year ago)?

spare us.
Anyone on this board for any length of time knows I've been posting about Popzit and the Spurs Championships -or not- since long before the Simmons article.

If anything as has been posted by many, the *jounalists* lurk around ST and rip us off.

[Blackjack]

Sure, brah.

We're all aware of your disdain for Pop and the amount of maturity you choose to display incessantly when showing it. This we know; doesn't have anything to do with you coming up with the Celtics comparison.

And I really couldn't care less about Simmons or what he has to say (he's entertaining at times and usually brings a decent perspective), you're just not going to get credit from me for rehashing something that was talked about ad nauseum after a couple of his columns and excerpts from his book were posted here more than a year ago . . .

[Fabbs]

Sure thing bra.

You've added a lot to the discussion. Like zero cred.
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/show...ighlight=Jones
Ignignokt, could you please add Zero Cred errr i mean BlackJacker to the sploaded list.

[Blackjack]

Sure thing bra.

You've added a lot to the discussion. Like zero cred.
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/show...ighlight=Jones
Ignignokt, could you please add Zero Cred errr i mean BlackJacker to the sploaded list.

Just as I suspected.

Check the date, brah; I'm sure it's just a coincidence that your thread was started less than a month after the Simmons' thread and even longer after Simmons first started making the comparisons.

Just to make it easy on you, June 14, 2009 comes after May 20, 2009 (and it happens to only reinforce my first thought).



Hey, Ignignokt ... could you please add Zero Cred Fabbster to the sploaded list?

Thank you much.

[Fabbs]

^^oh my. 1st time I've checked back. That you want to believe Simmons is the 1st person to compare Boston and the Spurs les? Go for it.
And/or that i ripped Simmons off?

Before i was going to say "You must be or be related to a journalist".
Now i know.

[Fabbs]

The 80s Celtics were better.

Actually Danny had a conversation with Red in 1988 and told him he should trade the Big 3. Red ended up trading him. But Ainge has said multiple times that he'd have traded Bird+McHale after Bias death + the loss to the Pistons in the conference finals and that in a similar situation he'll do the same (meaning Pierce probably won't end his career as a Celtic).

galvatron3000

Spurs may need to trade Jefferson to Utah for AK 47. AK would fit better and if he is hurt it would be just like having Jefferson, if he isn't then he will be better than Jefferson. Jefferson can play with a PG that can push the ball and find him in the offense and on the break.

Spurs need to draft and sf or a center/pf.

Also, consider trading Parker, love him but it may be necessary to trade him to bring in something.

The bench needs a semi uhaul, Bonner, Mason and Bogans should be gone.
Hairston should get some burn, Gee should get a shot in training camp and Garrett may have earned a spot already, I like Phil love big pg's.

Pop should have given Hairston some burn against Phoenix.

And the key for both the Celts and the Spurs is to make the right trade, not just a trade for the sake of trading. Celts of old could have kept it going depending on who they traded for post 1987.

Probably going to be a moot point for the Spurs as all indications are Monronvich is simply going to ride the wheels off Duncan Gnob and Parker and then coatail off while his Apologists will then spout how much he is missed as the predecessor has to attempt to rebuild from the ruins.

[G-Dawgg]

I'm worried the Spurs r gonna suck next year. Realistically we are rebuilding now. We have to many holes that need to be filled and most likly wont. If players ARE found to fill some holes then they'll likely need time to develop or learn the system. Sorry for saying exactly how it is, but the spurs are no longer contenders and likely wont be for while.