I personally think Gee will make the team and Hairston will not. I don't believe that we will have room for both. However, it is a long summer and there are some interesting variables in play this year especially.
I didn't see a lot of improvement in Malik's handling, and the difference between his and Gee's handling is quite glaring, especially in traffic. The big knocks on Gee are very significant from the Spurs' point of view -- lack of defense and ballhogging -- but it seems both Gee and the Spurs want to work it out. Otherwise he would have finished the season in DC.
Everyone in the d-league is young and works hard. So what makes Hairston, Gee & Temple more special than guys like Marcus Williams, Keith Langford, Desmond Farmer, Jeremy Richardson, Anthony Tolliver and James White? All those guys were young and worked hard too.
I know we all like to get excited about young players, but people need to remember that the d-league exists for players who aren't good enough to be in the nba. Yes there are examples of guys who do turn out to be contributors, but they're the rare exceptions. While it's certainly okay to use the last 2 or 3 spots on the roster to carry a couple of those guys who you think might become an exception you really don't want to be carrying any more than that because you're not going to be a very deep basketball team. If you go look at the rosters of the teams still left in the playoffs, you're not going to find too many Hairstons, Gees and Temples on their rosters.
I think the odds are good that the Spurs bring Mahinmi back for one more year. After that, pick one from Gee, Hairston, Temple & Jerrells and cut loose the rest. Between Hill, Blair, hopefully Splitter, the 1st round draft pick, Ian and whoever wins the Gee/Hairston/Temple/Jerrels sweepstakes that's PLENTY of youth for the Spurs to worry about developing.
Last edited by coyotes_geek; 05-15-2010 at 03:44 PM.
Yea I admit the Mason S&T is bad, but I think Sessions is generally undervalued, and depending on how the lottery plays out, I could see them trading him(If the get#1 and Wall, I'd guess someone out of Flynn, Rubio and Sessions will be traded, Sessions seems most likely, and a Mason EC package seems decent(If he returned to form, though a late pick to make it slightly more even(possibly add cash)
Back to Gee though: I'm definitely of the opinion that we keep those guys till training camp, and pick the 1/2 guys who will contribute the most or fill a whole. If de Colo doesn't come over, I'd say Temple has a pretty good shot, if he does It's more likely to be Gee/Hairston
coyotes_geek, why would the odds of the Spurs bringing back Mahinmi for another year be good? I'd like to see him return, but there's no incentive for him to do so assuming Splitter signs. If he wasn't in the big rotation last season, why would he be next season, when the big rotation figures to be improved? I doubt he'd waste another year of his career riding the bench.
As much as he's got a lot of tools to be, at worst, a competent NBA big man, at some point he's going to have to be in a situation where he can show it. Otherwise, he'll be just another name in the long line of guys with NBA bodies who for what whatever reason didn't stick in the league.
As for Gee, he'll have a tough time sticking. Already the Spurs have Ginobili, Jefferson, Hill and Hairston on the wings. I expect them to bring in one veteran, such as Bell, Evans or Cook and to draft one of George, Pondexter, James, etc. Assuming they do this, they'd be well stocked on the wings and unless they decide to carry 14 or 15 players (given their already bloated payroll, I doubt it), he's not going to make the cut unless he blows them away in camp/preseason. The biggest thing he's got going for him is that he has another year of D-League eligibility.
Last edited by TD 21; 05-15-2010 at 09:58 PM.
Ian will not be back (his choice). Malik will not make the team (Spurs choice). Expect the Spurs to load up on outside shooters. As such Gee may not make the team, either.
I'm willing to bet anything Malik and Gee will be on the team. Both have contracts that are bargains that go through 2012 (if options are picked up). And from what I'm aware of they love both players.
Spurs aren't going to get veteran happy and sign a bunch of vet minimum free agents that don't do much for the quality of the depth. Not only does it put double the vet minimum on the cap, but also causes conflicts within the locker room ( Mason, Finley, Bogans this past year for instance all wanted to play which made it harder to manage. Not only that, but it hindered opportunities for the young guys they believe in.)
Spurs are going to fill out the bottom of the roster with deals like Hairston and Gee's this time around. Time will show that.
As for Yanny, a lot of people may not believe Mahimni returning makes sense. But Mahimni and the Spurs have mutual respect amongst one another. More so than you believe.
Spurs took care of Mahimni 2 years he was injured and were by his side through all the tribulations he's been through. The Spurs coaches and organization have spent the past 5 years grooming him and being a father figure for the kid. He has the utmost respect for the organization and if they want him back I can almost guarantee Mahimni will be back.
If people think Mahimni will be put in the same role as this year think again. Duncan and McDyess' minutes will be monitored more than ever before, giving plenty of opportunity to Yan, Splitter and Blair.
Last edited by MaNu4Tres; 05-15-2010 at 10:37 PM.
I like what I'm hearing, 'Tres.
Have you heard anything new lately or is this some older stuff that just left a pretty good, lasting impression on you?
Finally, some sound reasoning as to why the possible resigning of Ian would make sense for the club.
Hairston would have to play his way off the team, Gee will probably need a strong camp to stick. Young guys they believe in? If they believed in them, they'd have played them more. The reality is their was ample opportunity to play Hairston and Mahinmi at least semi-consistently and they never did and for who? Minimal types such as Bogans and one dimensional types such as Bonner.
Mahinmi returning makes no sense from his perspective and if Splitter signs, as expected, then how exactly is he going to play more? This whole resting Duncan and McDyess more than ever before thing is idealistic, but it may not be realistic if this team is battling in the lower half of the West playoff picture all season. They can't afford to do that much and even if they do, that will just mean more minutes for Splitter, Blair and the fifth big (likely a shooter, since they're obsessed with shooting bigs and are devoid of one) in those games.
Mutual respect? The Spurs had that with Finley, how did that turn out? That has little to no bearing on this situation. It's about opportunity and it simply isn't going to be available on the Spurs if Splitter signs.
Took care of him? That was before they knew they had Blair, before Splitter was set to come over. Things have changed. Like I've said many times, I'm all for Mahinmi returning and I hope he does. I just don't see it making sense from his perspective.
I'm with you on filling out the bench with young, cheap players. I definitely think that's the direction they're going. Pop basically admitted as much when he said that while they got younger and more athletic, probably not enough in either case.
A few days ago I said my gut feel is they'd probably sign Evans and I've said Cook (Brian) in the past to fill the Bonner role. But the more that I think about it, they'll probably steer clear of those types. Instead, I could see them signing Splitter, trading for Cook (Daequan), drafting an athletic SF in the 1st round and filling out the remaining spots with young guys who have been in the program in the past and potentially the 2nd round pick.
The Warriors will probably re-sign him, but if they don't, I could see Tolliver returning. There's not a ton of cheap, young, stretch four's available (and Tolliver's not exactly a knock down three point shooter himself), but that's the type of fifth big I presume they'll target.
I could see the only veterans on the team being Duncan, Ginobili, Parker, Jefferson and McDyess.
What incentive there is for him to return depends on whether or not there's another team interested in him. I doubt there is. IMO the Spurs will be motivated to offer him a 1 year league min deal simply because they feel like they owe it to themselves to give the guy they used a 1st round pick on another chance to show something.
It's in no way a given that at worst Ian is a competent NBA big man. At worst Ian is another name in the long line of guys with nba bodies who didn't stick in the league because they're just not very good basketball players. At some point people are just going to have to accept the possibility that Ian just might not be NBA material. Maybe I'm in the minority on this but I think the scenario where Ian just isn't good enough makes a of a lot more sense than the scenario where the Spurs, in dire need of an athletic big man, draft some can't-miss prospoect in the 1st round and then spend the next five years intentionally stunting his growth by not giving him an opportunity.As much as he's got a lot of tools to be, at worst, a competent NBA big man, at some point he's going to have to be in a situation where he can show it. Otherwise, he'll be just another name in the long line of guys with NBA bodies who for what whatever reason didn't stick in the league.
That's kind of what I'm thinking. Gee doesn't make the Spurs but ends up back in Austin.As for Gee, he'll have a tough time sticking. Already the Spurs have Ginobili, Jefferson, Hill and Hairston on the wings. I expect them to bring in one veteran, such as Bell, Evans or Cook and to draft one of George, Pondexter, James, etc. Assuming they do this, they'd be well stocked on the wings and unless they decide to carry 14 or 15 players (given their already bloated payroll, I doubt it), he's not going to make the cut unless he blows them away in camp/preseason. The biggest thing he's got going for him is that he has another year of D-League eligibility.
Now you are seeing the light
Spurs are going this direction. Pop has never played rookies immediately over proven veterans. (Except in Duncan, Tony and Manu's case.)
I take Manu back, it took Pop half a year to be comfortable giving Manu minutes his rookie year and this year the assistants had to convince Pop to give Blair playing time. Pop wasn't going to play Blair nearly as much as he did.
So for you to come to a consensus because, " Well Pop didn't play them over Bogans and Bonner so they are not better", is quite premature and silly for you to say.
Other examples I can point out.
- In the Summer of 2001, Spurs signed Stephen Jackson from the New Jersey Nets after he put up 8 points game on 43 % shooting and 34 percent from 3.
Pop didn't play Jackson til a year and a half later, even though Mike Brown had stated Jackson was the best wing they had in practices from 2001-2003. Go look back at the 2003 championship video if you don't believe me. In 2002, Stephen Jackson was in coat watching Steve Smith hobble around and Charles "Spiderman" Smith be as inconsistent as they come. That is how Pop works, he makes a young unproven kid earn his way on to the court over the course of time.
Another example I can use is Hill last year. Even after he survived being thrown in the fire after everyone was injured, Pop still was hesistant and went to Jacque Vaughn in crucial situations and the playoffs for crying out loud.
Just because Pop didn't play Hairston, Gee or Temple over Bogans. Or Mahimni over Bonner does not mean Pop thinks Bogans and Bonner are essentially better. Bogans and Bonner have just earned their stripes in the way Pop manages his team. Pop isn't like other coaches when it comes to throwing rookies into the fire no matter if they show they are more talented than the veterans filling out the roster. Part of that is because his teams are always in contention and he goes to proven commodities he can trust. It's Pop's way of doing things.
First off, I agree with the whole take (imagine that) and I hope Pop's seeing the light.
But I wholeheartedly agree with that last point, and you hit the nail on the head.
Pop is nothing if not a player of the proverbial percentage. Whether it's defense, offense, personnel or anything else you can think of, it's all about controlling what you can control, limiting and/or eliminating mistakes, then living with the results. And when you've got a 50-plus win team out there and a proven triumvirate like the Big 3, it's not about developing the next star or role-player's game, it's about winning. It's about someone being capable of doing their specialized role on a night-in night-out basis and not so much about upside or potential. He wants to know what he has and he'd much rather have average play on a consistent basis then the hot and cold play of young, developing players.
But that time has gone. It was probably a time that never had to be. They need more from their supporting cast then ever before and because of their cap situation, they're going to have to develop their young, cheap talent over the course of the season and hope that their individual growth over that time gives them the means to have the type of bench that was mostly responsible for their exit against Phoenix. They need the internal growth.
Pop will enjoy spending time with The Coalition. We've got great party favors.
From what I've seen from H-G-T (Hairston/Gee/Temple), I really believe those three are more talented all around players than any of the three Bogans, Mason and Finley were last year. I just think they need time earning Pop's trust, much like Stephen Jackson did. Hopefully this past year and this summer do the trick.First off, I agree with the whole take (imagine that
But I wholeheartedly agree with that last point, and you hit the nail on the head.
Pop is nothing if not a player of the proverbial percentage. Whether it's defense, offense, personnel or anything else you can think of, it's all about controlling what you can control, limiting and/or eliminating mistakes, then living with the results. And when you've got a 50-plus win team out there and a proven triumvirate like the Big 3, it's not about developing the next star or role-player's game, it's about winning. It's about someone being capable of doing their specialized role on a night-in night-out basis and not so much about upside or potential. He wants to know what he has and he'd much rather have average play on a consistent basis then the hot and cold play of young, developing players.
But that time has gone. It was probably a time that never had to be. They need more from their supporting cast then ever before and because of their cap situation, they're going to have to develop their young, cheap talent over the course of the season and hope that their individual growth over that time gives them the means to have the type of bench that was mostly responsible for their exit against Phoenix. They need the internal growth.
Pop will enjoy spending time with The Coalition. We've got great party favors.
The only way I'd go out and sign a veteran wing is if it's Raja Bell( maybe). Any other wing like Mo Evans for instance for the minimum wouldn't be worth hindering opportunities for HGT. Not to mention Mo Evans costing the Spurs 2.4 million on the cap oppose to the 1.5 million HGT each would cost. IMO There would be no drop-off in talent between HGT and the rest of the available wings for the minimum in free agency. Spurs know what they have and what they rather fill out there roster with. I think the writing was on the wall when they chose to go to the 4 non-gauranteed contract route for the next 3 years all making less than the veteran minimum. ( The first time the Spurs have ever done such.)
All in all, Spurs need to start surrounding the nucleus with youth. Times have changed ( Pop and R.C know this obviously from what they've said about still getting younger and giving out the non-guaranteed deals they did). Spurs can't get away with signing one-dimensional veterans around the Big 3 anymore. Like you said Blackjack Spurs need more all around players around the Big 3 now more than ever.
Yes, sir, and I think the acronym you were looking for was THG.
Yeah, I've already thought of it and the marketing: THG: Get Swole; THG: Performance Enhancement and on, and on, and on . . .
Yes, sir, and I think the acronym you were looking for was THG.
Yeah, I've already thought of it and the marketing: THG: Get Swole; THG: Performance Enhancement and on, and on, and on . . .
It's effective and undetectable ... so I've been told.
Oh, and let's not forget about Gee-Unit. If he makes the team we can't have him feeling left out. Haisrton's got THC , Temples got The Temple of Garrett and Gee will have Gee-unit -- it's only fair.
Centerpiece >>> all 3..
It really is a great nickname TBH..one of the highlights of the season this year IMO..
Pop really used the perfect word..what could have been better?..
That is a rather great point. It's science, really . . .
Centerpiece FTW
Look at Mahinmi's physical tools, what he did in the D-League, the organization he's played for and the limited opportunity he's received. Put it this way, if a guy like Petro can continue to cling to a job in the league, then surely Mahinmi will be worth a look. He should have no trouble getting a job this summer. Did they owe it to Udrih? Mahinmi was drafted going on five years ago now. The fact that he was a 1st round pick is meaningless at this point. Like I keep saying, it's about opportunity and if, as I expect, it's not available on the Spurs, why would he re-sign?
I said he's got the physical tools to be at least competent, not that he already is. That's not to say he isn't either. It's tough to judge when we've seen so little of him on this level, particularly when it comes to playing meaningful minutes. I think he's definitely an NBA caliber player, though. With his physical tools and decent skill level.It's in no way a given that at worst Ian is a competent NBA big man. At worst Ian is another name in the long line of guys with nba bodies who didn't stick in the league because they're just not very good basketball players. At some point people are just going to have to accept the possibility that Ian just might not be NBA material. Maybe I'm in the minority on this but I think the scenario where Ian just isn't good enough makes a of a lot more sense than the scenario where the Spurs, in dire need of an athletic big man, draft some can't-miss prospoect in the 1st round and then spend the next five years intentionally stunting his growth by not giving him an opportunity.
I think Gee is 50/50 to make the Spurs (and if he does, I expect him to primarily spend the season with the Toros). If they draft a wing and acquire another one, as I expect, then they'll be well stocked on the wings, so it'll come down to whether they just don't want to lose his rights or not, but he'll probably need an very good-excellent camp to stick.That's kind of what I'm thinking. Gee doesn't make the Spurs but ends up back in Austin.
I'm going by what Pop said. Personally, I'd like to see one at least semi-established wing brought in ahead of Hairston/Gee/1st round pick (assuming it's a wing). That way they'll still be opportunity for those players, but if they all flop they'll be another option as well.Now you are seeing the light
The plan all along was for Blair to be in the rotation. Buford said as much in a radio interview after he was drafted, saying they expected him to play 20 mpg I believe. Opening night and maybe the first part of the season in general, Pop wanted to go with Ratliff, but I don't think he ever planned to do so throughout the entire season.this year the assistants had to convince Pop to give Blair playing time. Pop wasn't going to play Blair nearly as much as he did.
Only that's not at all what I said. This is: If they believed in them, they'd have played them more. The reality is their was ample opportunity to play Hairston and Mahinmi at least semi-consistently and they never did. If you're going to paraphrase someone don't use quotes and at least get the gist of what they said, as opposed to flat out making things up.So for you to come to a consensus because, " Well Pop didn't play them over Bogans and Bonner so they are not better", is quite premature and silly for you to say.
I'm not quite sure why you'd feel the need to give me a history lesson, as if I'm not a fan and don't know how Pop operates. The reality is Mahinmi and Hairston weren't really rookies, they had paid their dues long enough to be given a longer look, particularly when injuries struck and with flat out underwhelming performances of some of the veterans.Other examples I can point out.
- In the Summer of 2001, Spurs signed Stephen Jackson from the New Jersey Nets after he put up 8 points game on 43 % shooting and 34 percent from 3.
Pop didn't play Jackson til a year and a half later, even though Mike Brown had stated Jackson was the best wing they had in practices from 2001-2003. Go look back at the 2003 championship video if you don't believe me. In 2002, Stephen Jackson was in coat watching Steve Smith hobble around and Charles "Spiderman" Smith be as inconsistent as they come. That is how Pop works, he makes a young unproven kid earn his way on to the court over the course of time.
Another example I can use is Hill last year. Even after he survived being thrown in the fire after everyone was injured, Pop still was hesistant and went to Jacque Vaughn in crucial situations and the playoffs for crying out loud.
Just because Pop didn't play Hairston, Gee or Temple over Bogans. Or Mahimni over Bonner does not mean Pop thinks Bogans and Bonner are essentially better. Bogans and Bonner have just earned their stripes in the way Pop manages his team. Pop isn't like other coaches when it comes to throwing rookies into the fire no matter if they show they are more talented than the veterans filling out the roster. Part of that is because his teams are always in contention and he goes to proven commodities he can trust. It's Pop's way of doing things.
In Mahinmi's case, he never really moved ahead of anyone in the rotation or got a consistent look. When Bonner was out, Pop instead went to three bigs (even though he was managing minutes of two of them) and plenty of small ball over giving Mahinmi a look.
Hairston briefly passed, or at least was even with Mason in the rotation before his injury. Then in the playoffs, he wasn't even active, even though it was clear he was over his mild ankle sprain relatively quickly (just go back and watch the practice videos). Maybe Pop wanted another PG option with Temple early on because of Hill's ankle, but when it was clear that Hill was at full strength, there was no excuse.
Last edited by TD 21; 05-16-2010 at 08:02 PM.
Let time show you the light my friend.
I'll let time try to convince you because I obviously can't.
Last edited by MaNu4Tres; 05-16-2010 at 08:51 PM.
Convince me of what? Hairston will probably get a legit opportunity next season, but the rest? I don't see it. I don't think Mahinmi will be back, I think Gee will be buried in the D-League and I think Temple will be firmly entrenched on the bench or in a suit. I could see them bringing back Tolliver, but only to be the fifth big, which means more often than not not in the rotation.
Hairston playing consistently depends on two things: 1) How much progress he makes with his catch-and-shoot jump shot, particularly the corner three and 2) Who the Spurs draft in the 1st round. I assume it'll be an SF, but if it's a raw player like George who might be a year away from contributing, then Hairston will probably play more often than not ahead of him. If it's a more experienced player like James, then it's 50/50.
Is Tolliver under contract with Golden State?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
