Reply With Quote
Same could be said for Boston, but they have parts around the engine that have improved while the engine has gained significant miles.
I would trade Tim Duncan to the Mavs if I was RC.
Same could be said for Boston, but they have parts around the engine that have improved while the engine has gained significant miles.
Fit? Probably. Better production? Maybe not -- I'd be on the phone with Philly and GS a.s.a.p.
Really, he's probably the closest thing they could find to a "fit." I'm skeptical of just how good of a defender he is -- as I haven't seen him enough in the type of matchups I'd have liked to make my best judgment -- but I've always been intrigued by him and I'm not sure there's a player that possesses a better skillset for the Spurs that's somewhat attainable.
Not this guy. And with each passing year, I only appreciate him more and more (and it's the same with all their championship role-players). There'll never be another Bruce but it'd be nice to see a poor-man's version (and no, that ain't Bogans -- I'm sure he'll be back, though).
What if they feel that way about Bogans?
Pretty much. And I agree with the notion that what we're likely to see is a fresh coat of paint -- add Splitter, their first-rounder, find a adequate "centerpiece" and count on the internal growth from the team in the form of a revitalized Parker, a second year for RJ and the development of Blair, Hill and THG. I think that's pretty much the offseason's goal.
But, in the end, it always comes back to one thing: health.
It's a tenuous position to have to rely on a Big 3 with as much mileage as the Tim, Tony and Manu do, but it is what it is. There's really no other option. And it's not only about being healthy, but being healthy at the right time -- as we're seeing with the Celtics at the moment. The Big 3 is still what's going to get it done in the end.
So while there are about two somewhat realistic trades I'd like to see happen (RJ for Iguodala or RJ for Maggette and Randolph -- and I'm perfectly aware there'd have to be some filler involved in both) and one I'd think about but's not quite as realistic or even defined (Tony for Mayo, a decent point and maybe a pick), I just don't see anything like that going down; but I'd pull the trigger on the two RJ deals in a heartbeat.
Bottom line, if the Spurs are going to get one for the thumb next year, just about everything is going to have to go their way. And I mean, everything.
In my opinion to get back to the le we would need to improve the bench as others have stated, and build a time machine to get Tim and Manu back to at least their 2007 level of health and energy.
Tim ran out of gas this year playing about 32 minutes a game. Manu also ran out of gas in my opinion, though the broken nose clearly didn't help matters. If we play those guys 25 minutes a night to save them for the playoffs, can we even get into the playoffs? Tony would have to have his absolute best season yet. With a full summer to rest it is possible he will come back fully reloaded for a dominant season but I don't think he by himself can carry us all season long into the playoffs.
As it was, we had to go on an amazing stretch on the back of Manu to secure a seat in the playoffs, and that was with Tim in relatively good health and injury free all season. Can we expect El Contusion and Tim to be injury free for a whole season? I wouldn't say the odds are in our favor.
I understand that trading Tony is a roll of a dice because it leaves us a hole at the PG position and Hill isn't ready to lead the team. Yet with Hill and Parker I think we're overloaded at the PG position.
I've supported the idea of trading Tony because it was the best way to reload on the fly. Honestly, I think no matter what we do we're in a tough situation after having been dominant so long and not been able to find another star player to put into the lineup.
If the FO wants to hold on to Parker, I think there is some logic to trading Hill. Hill's stock went up greatly this year (even if his performance didn't always suggest it.) If the FO can use Hill to move up in the draft to get a real impact player to fill one of our many voids, then I think they should do it without question.
If we can get a star player out of this draft and bring Splitter over, then we really have improved our chances for a le. I can live with Temple learning to be the backup point guard. When Tony was out he showed he can handle playing on the Spurs.
Anyway, that's just my two cents. No matter what the FO does I'm excited for another Spurs season.
Why do you hate me?
Moving RJ to get someone who is a better fit is not quite as hard as you make it out to be. You took better fit to mean "Perfect Bowen Replacement". Those criteria you laid out would certainly be a better fit, but that is not the only way.
There are lots of areas to improve over RJ production wise. Meeting all the criteria would be a perfect scenario, but RJ really meets none. If you can get a player that can produce better from the position, whether that be just defensively, or just offensively or some combo of both, I think it would be better.
But your post was a good one though and made a lot of sense. I don't know who is attainable off of your list, but there are FA routes as well. Moving RJ's contract just does not have to be for the same position imo. If you can get a serviceable starter at the SF spot via FA or internally (which is tough), you can use RJ to try and bring in more talent from a distressed team.
As good as Maggette and Iggy's production looks from their respective teams being the number 1 option (or number 2 in CM's case), it won't be the same on the Spurs. I don't think the Spurs FO would value such additions at such a high cost to an already established team because of what happened to Jefferson this year.
Iggy and Maggette would still be the 3rd or 4th banana and inconsistent 3 point shooters that don't necessarily spread the floor when Parker and Manu are being the ball-dominant number 1 and number 2 options in half-court sets. As good as Maggette or Iggy look on paper, those two players will get 50-60% fewer touches than they were accustomed to on their respective teams. Same thing happened to Jefferson this year.
People want to use Jefferson as the scapegoat but they don't realize the man still increased his overall shooting percentage from the previous season. It has to do with the amount of touches and Maggette and Iggy would only become the next victims. The only thing different between the 3 players (Jefferson, Maggette, Iggy) that has significant value to the Spurs' overall offense is that Jefferson has been a proven 3 point shooter. Something Maggette and Igoudala can't say for themselves. Even though Jefferson had one of his worst seasons from 3, I have more hope he will be able to turn it around than I do for Maggette or Igoudala to have it finally developed.
Taking that into consideration, I doubt the Spurs would hinder their future rebuilding resources(cap-room) by adding another Jefferson (Ball dominant offensive players who need touches to be effective, which lack a consistency from the 3) so to speak for the next year or two during Duncan's 2 year window.
I was skeptical as well on Webster. I really liked how he improved his game in the 2008 season on both ends, then in 2009 he suffered an injury set back and the jury was out to see how he would comeback. From the games I saw him defend and from what I've read, he's become a much better one on one perimeter defender. There were games he held Kobe and Durant to horribly inefficient games. Time will tell if he can build on the year he performed really well on both ends.
Bogans' ceiling is a lot lower to where summer workouts wouldn't really make a significant difference. The guy could probably practice 12 hours a day for 3 months and nobody would really be able to see any difference in his game.What if they feel that way about Bogans?
Jefferson on the other hand is a totally different story as you would know being an established starter in the league.
I agree as always it is health. But that is the only thing that can't be controlled.
Everybody in the organization just needs to worry about what they can control.
Last edited by MaNu4Tres; 05-19-2010 at 08:20 PM.
Also, the main difference with Boston is they have a true "Big 4". The Spurs have an often injured "Big 3" with no true fourth option, at least not the caliber of Ray Allen, KG, Pierce or Rondo.
That is a huge difference.
Maggette has an ability that RJ does not have; getting to the line. Iggy has ball handling and play making. Plus he is a good defender.
While I agree their numbers won't be the same, I disagree it will be an RJ like effect. RJ's problem is that he is content to be a no show. Maggette and Iggy won't just stand around. It would allow the Spurs to have a true "Big 4" and the balance would be much like the Celtics where on any given night, the leading scorer could change. That would be a great thing for the Spurs.
Especially with Iggy imo. His ball-handling/playmaking would instantly allow for much more balanced and dangerous line ups. Having TP/Manu/Iggy would be 3 very good ball handlers and playmakers to varying degrees. That alone would be a huge upgrade over RJ imo.
You should have seen the post I had. It was AWWWESOOOME . . .
But it got erased when the computer logged me off.
And now I'm left to drink . . .
Heavily.
I also think that RJ has to go for other reasons. I know people say he would be hard to replace if he opts out, but that is from a talent standpoint, not an impact standpoint. I truly think the Spurs could go with a much lesser player at SF and get better impact, as long as that guy does a couple things better than RJ; shoot 3's and defends smartly.
If the Spurs keep RJ, I think you have him and Manu come off the bench. I think you stick with that. RJ starting is pointless and I don't see him making some significant second year leap.
I think he has to be moved for someone else because it will not work. I don't expect the FO to take on some long-term bloated contract, but hopefully they can net something with his expiring.
I hate when that happens. I am guessing you like Iggy's game for the Spurs?You should have seen the post I had. It was AWWWESOOOME . . .
But it got erased when the computer logged me off.
And now I'm left to drink . . .
Heavily.
Moving RJ to get someone who is a better fit is not quite as hard as you make it out to be. You took better fit to mean "Perfect Bowen Replacement". Those criteria you laid out would certainly be a better fit, but that is not the only way.
There are lots of areas to improve over RJ production wise. Meeting all the criteria would be a perfect scenario, but RJ really meets none. If you can get a player that can produce better from the position, whether that be just defensively, or just offensively or some combo of both, I think it would be better.
But your post was a good one though and made a lot of sense. I don't know who is attainable off of your list, but there are FA routes as well. Moving RJ's contract just does not have to be for the same position imo. If you can get a serviceable starter at the SF spot via FA or internally (which is tough), you can use RJ to try and bring in more talent from a distressed team.
I was just trying to make it aware its extremely hard to find the perfect fit. And if you do find a fit, it's even harder to attain such a fit.
And I really think Jefferson gets too bad of a rap for this past season. The guy was inconsistent on the offensive end. But so were his touches. He still shot a respectable 47% from the field. And had some good defensive games and some bad ones. Overall I don't think he's the culprit for the 2nd round out.
Do I think he's a perfect fit? Of course not.
Do I think there's better options out there that are starter material and realistically attainable on both ends? Not really.
Like I said before I'd hold on to him. Sick Chip Engelland on him for the entire summer to get his confidence back. It seemed like every game Jefferson got in a rhythm on the offensive end, he's defensive and all around game shined. Hopefully he can find his rhythm next year with the help of the Spurs coaches/players.
I think finding that 5th banana behind the Tony, Hill, Manu and Jefferson is easier to attain than a starting caliber small forward that fits.
I said it last year in the off-season and I'll say it again. Spurs need to find a clear cut consistent 3rd wing behind Manu and Jefferson. (4th behind Hill, Manu, RJ). Whether if it's from the draft, if not then by packaging the 20th pick in a trade, or having Hairston or Gee step up to the plate.
(I really don't think there's anyone out there in free agency that can provide what the Spurs really need. In terms of a consistent 3 point shooting, long-defensive oriented small forward or tall shooting guard. Closest ones IMO are Rasual Butler, Raja Bell, or Dorell Wright but all of them lack one or two of the attributes that the Spurs need at the spot.)
I know Bruno has pointed out only 10 mpg would be available for such a spot if the minutes are like this past year, but I think it would be different if Spurs can find the right piece. This piece can relieve some of Hill minutes at the two, giving Hill more energy to be more efficient in his increased responsibilities on both ends. At the same time he could relieve Manu's minutes at the back-up 3 spot, giving Manu more gas to go for the throat in the last 6 minutes of the 4th quarter on the offensive end. I think more minutes at this spot can be beneficial for the team as a whole if this guy can come in and be consistent on both ends night in and night out.
Last edited by MaNu4Tres; 05-19-2010 at 07:36 PM.
Excellent writeup MaNu4Tres.
Webster was a name that sprung to mind months ago, but I didn't like his contract (I remembered it being worse than the numbers you've presented). He's a solid defender and a good shooter. But, he isn't very athletic and not the quickest laterally. He is a high character, humble, hard working, Spurs-type of player/person. I could see the Trail Blazers moving him to free up some space past next season.
Iguodala is a guy I've liked for a long time, but I'm not sure he's at the stage in his career where he could not just accept, but thrive, in a drastically reduced role offensively. He seems relatively humble, but all those types of guys who team's foolishly paid to be franchise players are out to prove that they're legit franchise players at his age. It's usually not until they're in their late twenties, like Jefferson, that they are humbled by not winning and no longer thrilled to just pile up points, so they willingly take on a reduced role to play on a winning team.
Jefferson is still salvageable, but the Spurs need to, as you say, sic Engelland on him. I'm not expecting him to shoot the three at 39% like he did with the Bucks, but he can't shoot 32%, either. He's got to shoot (at least) 35-37%, which he's eminently capable of doing.
10 mpg, says Bruno? Try 15-20 mpg. Primary backup wing is a (relatively) significant spot that the Spurs have to fill and if they don't fill it with the right player, then despite all of the potential positive they may have going into next season, they're still not going to be championship contenders.
I do understand that, but how does that help the Spurs when Tony and Manu have the ball just about every offensive possession they are in the game?
IMO My point is in the grand scheme of things, Maggette's touches would be limited to where his play with the ball wouldn't be as significant or have as much value to the Spurs as his play off the ball would . I.E spot up shooting from 3 or from 20 feet out. Same problem Jefferson had.
Same thing with Iggy. Unless you want to limit Tony and Manu's touches and put the game in the hands of Iggy or Maggette?
Me personally I want Tony and Manu to have the ball 9 times out of 10 in a close game.
And you can point out that Igoudala and Maggette's ability to create would be a plus over Jefferson when Manu and Tony are resting. I agree with that. But is that 15 minutes when Manu or Tony rest worth the money Igoudala and Maggette will recieve the next 3-4 years? I don't think so.IMO
I don't think Maggette's one on one defense is better than Jeffersons.
Igoudala's? Yes I agree there.
RJ is a guy who's numbers were ok, but his impact was terrible. Far too often he has 2-4 nights. He does nothing far too often. He does not hurt the Spurs, but he does not help them.
I just don't see him making an impact at all, even if he is confident. We will see though. The Spurs are in a tough spot.
I would like an Iggy or Maggette from a fan standpoint, but I hate their contracts, especially Iggy's.
But I am of the firm opinion that based on a few factors (RJ's game, team's view of him...) that anyone is better than RJ on this team. I think he has to be moved if this team wants to be successful. Maybe that is harsh. I don't think he is a cancer in the true form of the word, but I think he really has no trust from anyone on this team.
I agree with that to an extent, but like I said I think RJ stands around and is content. Iggy and Maggette would force the issue a bit more. I agree that TP and Manu would have the ball more, but I also think it would be, throughout a season, more spread out offensively if you have a guy like Iggy.
Their production would take an obvious hit, but not like RJ. RJ literally is a ghost. His production is not just down, it is muted far too often. Iggy and Maggette would be required to do more spot up shooting than normal, but not as much as RJ because when they have more ability, it opens things up a little more. To what extent, I am not sure.
The contract issue is a different issue altogether.
Depends. Theoretically, I think it would be enough to make the Spurs a legit contender. But, for as intriguing as Splitter is, we don't know for certain how he'll do in the NBA, because he's never played an NBA game. And even if he is going to be good, how good will he be in his first season, despite his vast international experienced? Bell, he was slipping two seasons ago and basically didn't play this season. So, would the Spurs be getting the Bell who's, even at his advanced age, a better defender than Bogans and a 40+% three-point shooter, or would they be getting an old, mostly washed up player?
Here's the thing: A lot of the Suns role players could have easily been playing above their heads this season. Even if they do re-sign Stoudemire, can a lot of those guys repeat their performances? I'm skeptical. Plus, they won't be sneaking up on anyone next season. I think they'll still be good, but I don't see them making the conference finals again. They remind me of the '09 Nuggets and '08 Hornets.
James, if he goes to another team, we'll have to see how that goes throughout the season before declaring them contenders. But, if he leaves the Cavs, obviously rule them out.
So that leaves the Lakers, Celtics and Magic, as the three teams that would (to enter the season, at least) be for sure ahead of the Spurs. It's not like they need to leapfrog ten teams to be legit contenders again. I know people will say, what about young teams like the Trail Blazers and Thunder? We've got to see them ascend to that level before proclaiming it just because of their potential. Could another surprise team like the '08 Hornets, '09 Nuggets, or '10 Suns rise to that level? Yes and most likely someone will, but still, the Spurs should be legitimately in the hunt and able to matchup better with the Lakers than they have been since the Gasol trade.
I don't see getting back to being legit contenders next season as being that monumental a task. Beating the top three-five team, of course, will be, but being in their class? I don't think the Spurs are that far off.
I actually thought R.J made several cuts off the ball for potential dunks and layups just about every game. Only so often was the pass made for the conversion.
IMO It was his inability to shoot the 3 that haunted his overall aggression when the ball was kicked out to him. The defense wouldn't close out as hard (taking away his ability to create off the dribble). This is when he sometimes became passive in a sense, instead of attacking because the defense simply didn't give it to him. (Don't get me wrong, I don't think Jefferson can create off the dribble efficiently in one on one situations. I'm clearly pointing out if he had a reliable 3 point shot, it would give him a very easy opportunity to create off the dribble when the defense closed out on him hard.) I think standing around is a bit of an exaggeration but I get your point. His inability to live up to his offensive production from the Bucks is what really gets Spurs' fans hot and bothered about Jefferson but I just don't think you can expect even 15 ppg from a 4th or 5th option. Offensive opportunity was simply scarce for R.J it's as simple as that. IMO
Because of the R.J trade and the amount of touches that were available for such an acquisition, I highly doubt the Spurs would even consider a trade for Iggy or Maggette mainly because of their absurd contracts. Those acquisitions wouldn't be any where worth the price. If it weren't for the length of their contracts I'm sure the Spurs would contemplate about it. At the same time I'm sure they would discuss how they would fit if there touches are cut by 40-50%. And also figure in their play off the ball and their defensive ability ect.
Overall I do agree Iggy provides better ball-handling and creating than R.J. As well as Maggette.
IMO I just don't think those two attributes are valued or significant or needed (for the price) to an already established machine that consists of two ball-dominant guards already.
I definitely believe he'd be a better player with the Spurs than RJ; and I'm pretty much with you on him needing to go for the Spurs to win a le.
I agree with 'Tres that RJ isn't the reason they lost last year and that he's shouldered too much of the blame because of an overinflated expectation.
But while he might not be the reason they lost last year, you could just as easily say he'll be the reason they don't win -- while his contract is the reason the Spurs were able to acquire him, it's also preventing them from adding better quality depth and his lack of an overall game (the guy doesn't defend, make plays, rebound consistently or provide energy) doesn't bode well for the team. You want your best players on the floor in the fourth and on this team and in this system, he's not. You shouldn't be having to play a rookie or veteran-minimum type in the guts of the game when your paying RJ $15M, but if your doing what's best for the team ... you have no other choice.
That's why Iguodala works better. Andre can give you some of what Bruce did defensivley; he can run the point alongside Hill and shoulder much more of the playmaking responsibilities over the course of the regular season (which allows the Big 3 to not have to put as much wear on the tires); he's a workhorse and could be a godsend to Manu; he rebounds, disrupts passing lanes, gets to the line, finishes in traffic (there's no OCD or whatever the it is with RJ that makes him believe he can only finish on the weakside or with a reverse) and he can ignite the break off the glass on his own.
AI is a Leatherman or Swiss-Army Knife that's in a miscast role as a No.1 and he's overpaid. But I'd definitely welcome him to the Spurs in place of Jefferson. He's just a better overall player, even if not the perfect fit (which he's not, and I'll readily admit that).
I just don't see RJ becoming the spot-up three-point shooter Kidd's been able to become, 'Tres. I hope I'm wrong and I wish he'd put something like this up on his bulletin board to fire him up and prove people like myself wrong, but the guy's soft.
I hate using that word but I believe it to be true. When everyone knows you've got trouble with spacing and that they need you to show confidence and take a corner three ... you take it. It's not about you, it's about the team. You step up, give it your best effort and you live with the result. Not RJ. The guy was turning them down without even looking at the rim so much that he flat-out abandoned it. As a matter of fact, I'd almost be willing to bet that upon Pop and the staff seeing how reluctant he was to shoot the ball and watching him consistently make poor drives or take off-balance jumpers off the bounce from inside the line, that they had him purposely set up two-feet inside the line so he'd just let it fly. That's just not gonna get it done.
So call me skeptical that Chip can do anything with him when it comes to the playoffs. At heart, RJ's a slasher. He's just not a shooter. And while the numbers look good in Milwaukee and the corner three looked like something he might actually excel at with the Spurs, it's just not the same -- he was seeing the ball as a No. 1 option and playing with house money. When the pressure's at its greatest a player reverts to what he knows. And unfortunately for the Spurs, he knows he ain't a shooter, just a guy that's capable of shooting when he's catered to and can find a rhythm; something he won't ever be able to do consistently playing with the Big 3.
I'd take Iguodala's overall game or Maggette's free-throw dominance and ability to play the smallball-4, with Randolph's future, as soon as the deal's put on the table. But that's just me.
I need a nap.
That is the thing with RJ. He does the thing I hate the most for an athlete; he is in-between. Not only did he abandon the 3-PT shot, he got stuck in the middle too often. He would not drive consistently or look for his offense enough.
He is a slasher, but not one that can create on his own enough like a Maggette.
Maggette and Iggy, for as much as they have weaknesses, do not get stuck in neutral. They do what they do, and they do that well.
Their contracts suck so bad though, but if you were able to get Randolph with him? No brainer imo.
Good take.
My whole point is Iggy and Maggette's offensive production would still decline in this system, like R.J. And I don't think Spurs would want to take on those contracts because of what transpired this season, with the amount of touches available for such players. Therefore it's not as realistic to me to attain those players.
If the length of their contracts were cut by 2-3 years, I'm sure the Spurs would consider it. Although, I don't think their offensive game would be as such an improvement as you are implying with all due respect. Simply because of the amount of touches available.
I do agree with you though on Igoudala improving the Spurs overall defense by him being a better overall perimeter defender. Because of that I would definitely consider a R.J for Igoudala deal because R.J more than likely won't shoot 39 % from 3 again anyway.
If money were not the issue Iggy would be closer to a better fit than R.J and I'd do the trade in a heartbeat. But since money is the issue I'd be extremely hesitant. But then again I'm acting like I'm talking about my money here, so excuse the whole what would I do if I'm Holt/Pop perspective.
Yeah, if GS would do it it, you'd be foolish to turn it down. I mean, would the Spurs be appreciably worse with Maggette as apposed to RJ?
I don't think so. In fact, I think they'd be as good or better.
If they got Maggette, I think I'd put him back as a sixth-man. He's got no problem doing it and he'd have free reign to make his assault at the rim. Maggette's got a game that translate whether you're playing in San Antonio, Boston or Uranus (Get it? Your anus -- I kill myself sometimes), IMO. You give him the ball at the top of the key, he draws contact, gets to the line and hits 85-percent. It's just what he does. And I'm a huge proponent of the free-throw line and would love to have a weapon like that coming off the bench; you could still keep Manu's minutes down and you'd have him playing less taxing minutes spending more of his time with Tim and Tony. Call me crazy, but the guy I couldn't stand a couple of years ago is now someone I actually wouldn't mind having. He really seemed turn a corner last year and his efficiency was pretty damn impressive.
Iggy's contract is bad. There's no getting around that. Maggette's? Not so much, IMO. His money will look pretty decent for the type of sixth-man he'll be for a team and it wouldn't bother me all that much. But as it pertains to Iguodala, what if the Spurs fall flat next year. What if, for whatever reason, they just fall by the wayside a bit and out of contention. Are the Spurs going to bring Tony back? Would Tony want to come back if the team was going nowhere? With Hill on board, Andre could be the ideal backcourt mate. Maybe that contract doesn't look so bad then . . .
I get it, bro. It sure is easy playing with everyone else's money.
I just believe those two trades at worst keep the team where it is and at best put them back into contention, and in the case of the GS deal, put them in a better position for the future with Randolph -- Maggette's contract would be well worth it if you get Randolph, IMO.
I agreeI get it, bro. It sure is easy playing with everyone else's money.
I just believe those two trades at worst keep the team where it is and at best put them back into contention, and in the case of the GS deal, put them in a better position for the future with Randolph -- Maggette's contract would be well worth it if you get Randolph, IMO.
I actually was one of the advocates for a crazy Maggette/Randolph/Azubukee/Turiaf deal for Jefferson/Bonner/Mason/Finley at the deadline
If Holt gave R.C and Pop the green light. Spurs would have to consider taking on Maggette's contract, if it included Randolph.
Last edited by MaNu4Tres; 05-19-2010 at 09:35 PM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
