Raja Bell

[TD 21]

Fair enough. I'll take my chances with the young guy(s).

Are you serious? You'd rather not sign a vet like Bell, who even with his decline defensively, is still annually a 40+% three-point shooter and leave this role in the hands of three young, unproven players? Why pick one when you can have both? The Spurs could sign Bell and just have these guys be further down the depth chart.

When you're aspiring to win a championship, it's not wise to entrust three young, unproven players to fill a role of importance. It's one thing to do that with a talent like Hill or Blair, but not guys like Hairston, Gee or Temple. I like Hairston and want to see him play more, but he's not a good catch-and-shoot guy and the Spurs need shooting in their primary backup wing.

[benefactor]

I'm about ready to start championing Sato. If Bell's the best they can do and there's no one else that can fit the bill on both ends for their "centerpiece" role, Sato could be a great get; and cheap, too.

[Mel_13]

Are you serious? You'd rather not sign a vet like Bell, who even with his decline defensively, is still annually a 40+% three-point shooter and leave this role in the hands of three young, unproven players? Why pick one when you can have both? The Spurs could sign Bell and just have these guys be further down the depth chart.

When you're aspiring to win a championship, it's not wise to entrust three young, unproven players to fill a role of importance. It's one thing to do that with a talent like Hill or Blair, but not guys like Hairston, Gee or Temple. I like Hairston and want to see him play more, but he's not a good catch-and-shoot guy and the Spurs need shooting in their primary backup wing.

Yes. The problem I have with a guy like Bell is the same I had with guys like Finley and Bogans. They have an NBA track record and they still believe that they can play rotation minutes in the NBA. Maybe Bell still can, but we certainly don't know that. He'll turn 34 before the season starts and is coming off a season lost to injury. He may still be able to knock down 40% of his 3s and play above average defense. He also may never be able to achieve that level of play again.

So he would sign with the expectation of playing and his NBA credentials will guarantee him first shot at those minutes. Problem comes if he's slipped a little too much, but he's held the role long enough to re the progress of the young players behind him. Now we're approaching the All-Star break and rotations are shortening and we stick with him because it's too late to make a change.

I've seen that movie before and I don't want to watch it again. I'd like to see the Spurs draft a player with legit size for a SF and have that guy and Hairston/Gee/Temple compete for the minutes behind Parker/Hill/Manu/RJ and let them earn their place(s).

I perfectly understand the case you make for a player like Bell. It makes sense. I would still rather see that role in the hands of a young guy on the way up rather than an a vet trying to hang on. I won't boycott the team or call for RC's head if they go with a vet, but I'd like to see the 8th or 9th player in the rotation be closer in age to Hill than to Duncan.

[TD 21]

Yes. The problem I have with a guy like Bell is the same I had with guys like Finley and Bogans. They have an NBA track record and they still believe that they can play rotation minutes in the NBA. Maybe Bell still can, but we certainly don't know that. He'll turn 34 before the season starts and is coming off a season lost to injury. He may still be able to knock down 40% of his 3s and play above average defense. He also may never be able to achieve that level of play again.

So he would sign with the expectation of playing and his NBA credentials will guarantee him first shot at those minutes. Problem comes if he's slipped a little too much, but he's held the role long enough to re the progress of the young players behind him. Now we're approaching the All-Star break and rotations are shortening and we stick with him because it's too late to make a change.

I've seen that movie before and I don't want to watch it again. I'd like to see the Spurs draft a player with legit size for a SF and have that guy and Hairston/Gee/Temple compete for the minutes behind Parker/Hill/Manu/RJ and let them earn their place(s).

I perfectly understand the case you make for a player like Bell. It makes sense. I would still rather see that role in the hands of a young guy on the way up rather than an a vet trying to hang on. I won't boycott the team or call for RC's head if they go with a vet, but I'd like to see the 8th or 9th player in the rotation be closer in age to Hill than to Duncan.

You know, just because things didn't go as planned last season doesn't mean if the Spurs sign another veteran wing it automatically plays out the same way.

Just like we don't know that Bell can still play, we don't know that he can't and the reward would outweigh the potential risk. Even if he can't play anymore and needs to be dropped from the rotation, the Spurs could just trade/release him. It's not like his contract would hamper them and unlike Finley, his lack of prior track record with the Spurs would mean that the Spurs probably wouldn't care nearly as much to do this. So that means they probably wouldn't play games and keep running him out there if they realized he was done or close to it.

I'd like to see them draft the same type of player, only have a vet like Bell as a safety net in front of that player and the other young perimeter players. Doing otherwise would be an unnecessary risk. I'd like to see the 8th-9th man be closer to Hill's than Duncan's age, too, ideally. But, I don't think the Spurs are going to get an ideal player to fill this role. That's why until someone presents an option that I see as clear cut better, I'm going to continue to refer to Bell as the best realistic option to fill this role.

[Mel_13]

You know, just because things didn't go as planned last season doesn't mean if the Spurs sign another veteran wing it automatically plays out the same way.

Just like we don't know that Bell can still play, we don't know that he can't and the reward would outweigh the potential risk. Even if he can't play anymore and needs to be dropped from the rotation, the Spurs could just trade/release him. It's not like his contract would hamper them and unlike Finley, his lack of prior track record with the Spurs would mean that the Spurs probably wouldn't care nearly as much to do this. So that means they probably wouldn't play games and keep running him out there if they realized he was done or close to it.

I'd like to see them draft the same type of player, only have a vet like Bell as a safety net in front of that player and the other young perimeter players. Doing otherwise would be an unnecessary risk. I'd like to see the 8th-9th man be closer to Hill's than Duncan's age, too, ideally. But, I don't think the Spurs are going to get an ideal player to fill this role. That's why, until someone presents an option that I see as clear cut better, I'm going to continue to refer to Bell as the best realistic option to fill this role.

Like I said, I understand the case you lay out and we would seem to agree on many points of discussion. We just come to a different conclusions.

My problem with the Bell (or similar vet) option is that his presence on the roster makes it unlikely that a previously unknown player can emerge as a clear cut better option. If Jerry Sloan had a healthy Raja Bell-type vet available to him then maybe Wes Matthews spends the season in the D-League. In the case of the Spurs, we're only talking about the 8th/9th guy in the rotation, not a starter on a 50-win team.

Limiting risk may only serve to limit opportunity.

[TD 21]

Like I said, I understand the case you lay out and we would seem to agree on many points of discussion. We just come to a different conclusions.

My problem with the Bell (or similar vet) option is that his presence on the roster makes it unlikely that a previously unknown player can emerge as a clear cut better option. If Jerry Sloan had a healthy Raja Bell-type vet available to him then maybe Wes Matthews spends the season in the D-League. In the case of the Spurs, we're only talking about the 8th/9th guy in the rotation, not a starter on a 50-win team.

Limiting risk may only serve to limit opportunity.

For this particular role I don't even care if Hairston/Gee/Temple could be a better option. I don't want to risk finding out, because the downside is they're all what they are now: fringe NBA players and that would leave the Spurs perilously thin with quality wing options. I see this role more about having a proven commodity who can still play. I don't expect Bell to be in 05-07 form, but that doesn't mean he can't still contribute.

The reality is Matthews type stories are rare. For every Matthews, there's umpteen of those types of players who don't even get to the league, or get to it but don't stick, let alone start for a 50-win team. And the thing that helped Matthews is that he could shoot the three; Hairston can't. At least not at a high enough clip to fill this role. If he makes a Hill like jump in his shooting in the off season, then he might be a good option to fill this role, but it's too risky to put all their eggs in one basket. If they sign one veteran, it allows them to have a proven commodity without burying the young guys.

[BackHome]

I hate when people make the comments we need a Bowen replacment, we need a David Robinson replacment, we need a Sean Luck_The_Fakers_Luck_The_Fakers_Luck_The_Fakers_Lu ck_The_Fakers_Luck_The_Fakers_Luck_The_Fakers_ replacment, we need a Robert Horry replacemnt.

This team is different you are not going to create the past because these players no longer exist. You pick the best player in the draft and you change to match your players strengths.

I fill good with our team which is decent we can make it better but the ball has to be bouncing our way. The first thing we need is to get Splitter that is a fact we have been missing and inside prescence for a long time. Getting him is going to cost us the full MLE so money is the issue.

Going into the draft the best player that will be in our range and is actually made for us is Luke Babbit who fits perfectly in our type of offense.

I still hope that we can be like the Portland and just buy a number one draft pick from a team. If not then look at packaging Bonner and Ian for a mid to late first rounder. The teams that come to mind are Chicago who will be using all their money to get Lebron and then the Grizz and the Wolves who have three number one draft picks.

If we trade Bonner and Ian you can replace Bonner with Babbit and replace Ian with either Larry Sanders or Erick Bledsoe.

I still think they is going to a lot of chatter around Tony and I know New Jersey is looking at getting Lebrong but if that doesn't happen they gotta bring in somebody.

[Mel_13]

For this particular role I don't even care if Hairston/Gee/Temple could be a better option. I don't want to risk finding out, because the downside is they're all what they are now: fringe NBA players and that would leave the Spurs perilously thin with quality wing options. I see this role more about having a proven commodity who can still play. I don't expect Bell to be in 05-07 form, but that doesn't mean he can't still contribute.

The reality is Matthews type stories are rare. For every Matthews, there's umpteen of those types of players who don't even get to the league, or get to it but don't stick, let alone start for a 50-win team. And the thing that helped Matthews is that he could shoot the three; Hairston can't. At least not at a high enough clip to fill this role. If he makes a Hill like jump in his shooting in the off season, then he might be a good option to fill this role, but it's too risky to put all their eggs in one basket. If they sign one veteran, it allows them to have a proven commodity without burying the young guys.

I understand your reasoning. If I had to place a bet on what the Spurs will do, I would bet on the scenario you describe. It fits perfectly with how the Spurs have operated for the better part of a decade.

I would prefer that they follow a different path.

[TD 21]

I understand your reasoning. If I had to place a bet on what the Spurs will do, I would bet on the scenario you describe. It fits perfectly with how the Spurs have operated for the better part of a decade.

I would prefer that they follow a different path.

Well, I don't understand yours. I understand not wanting to bury the young guys behind three minimal vets again, but to not have even one vet? It makes no sense.

What does make sense is having a safety net in place, a bridge between the four proven perimeter players and the three unproven perimeter players. Otherwise, if for whatever reason(s) those three unproven perimeter player fail, what are your options? Keep running out unproductive players or run your proven players into the ground. Neither is appealing.

How hard would it be for the Spurs to, if it doesn't work out, bench, release or trade a vet like Bell on an affordable one year contract?

There are no downfalls to this. Hairston or the first round pick could still be the tenth man and play at least semi consistently. Then, if Bell struggled, they could simply take his spot in the rotation.

[nbaman99]

Yeah he may never come close to Bowen type defence and he may turn 34, but i still can trust him to do the job than Mlike, Gee and temple. Further more there is so much those guys can learn from a guy like Bell. We all know how much that veteran leadership means to a championship team, so if he we can get him at the right price i like him as a Spur.

[Mel_13]

Well, I don't understand yours. I understand not wanting to bury the young guys behind three minimal vets again, but to not have even one vet? It makes no sense.

What does make sense is having a safety net in place, a bridge between the four proven perimeter players and the three unproven perimeter players. Otherwise, if for whatever reason(s) those three unproven perimeter player fail, what are your options? Keep running out unproductive players or run your proven players into the ground. Neither is appealing.

How hard would it be for the Spurs to, if it doesn't work out, bench, release or trade a vet like Bell on an affordable one year contract?

There are no downfalls to this. Hairston or the first round pick could still be the tenth man and play at least semi consistently. Then, if Bell struggled, they could simply take his spot in the rotation.

I'll get over it. (Your not understanding my reasoning, that is).

I disagree that there are no downfalls to this for the reasons I have already stated. You see things differently. A variety of opinions make this a more interesting place. On this issue, you seem content with yours. I know I'm perfectly content with mine.

[Spursfan 87]

34 years old and coming off a season in which he played only 6 games.

Enough with guys that we hope can be as good as they once were. Better to go with someone who has their best basketball in their future rather than in their past.

+1

[HarlemHeat37]

I feel like Bell would expect minutes automatically, which is something I have a problem with..I don't think the Spurs would sign him and make him compete with the young guys, so I find it to be pointless, since he wouldn't agree to sign here if he doesn't have a guaranteed spot..Bell was overrated during his prime IMO, and his defense has declined a lot in the last few years..

To replace Bogans? sure, but I don't want guys like Bogans on the team in the first place..

If they bring in Bell and make him compete with Hairston/Gee/Temple for a spot or 2 spots, then cool, but there's absolutely no way the Spurs would sign Raja Bell and not guarantee him a role IMO..look at Bogans..Hairston severely outplayed him in preseason, yet Bogans had a guaranteed spot going into the season..Bell is a better version of Bogans, so it would be even worse..

[Srupsog]

Spurs should only get him, if he's willing to play for the minimum

[Agloco]

Best to go with someone who's playing their best basketball currently. This particular role should be (and I assume is) reserved for someone who's a proven commodity. Someone who can step right in and be counted on for solid 3D and 15-20 mpg as the 8th-9th man. It's not about the future with this role as it pertains to next season. If the Spurs could have their cake and eat it too, so to speak (acquire a young, proven commodity to fill this role), then obviously that would be ideal. But, I don't see that player being available, not for what the Spurs have to offer (both financially and in terms of assets) at least.

Well, that's certainly NOT Raja Bell.....

Move along, there's nothing to see here.

To replace Bogans? sure, but I don't want guys like Bogans on the team in the first place..

[Blackjack]

Agloco, that sig and avatar is just flat-out distracting (and yet I can't complain).

[ElNono]

I like Raja. I'm also hesitant because of the mileage. The thing is, we're going to need some vets if we seriously want to make a run next season. I don't care how good rooks or sop res are, it's undeniable that come playoff time it's a lot harder for them to perform. In that sense Bell could be an interesting gamble. The biggest problems we had with vets in the past was because they play only one side of the court and were way over the hill (Finley), flat out did not have the talent (Bogans).
If he has anything left in the tank those things shouldn't be a concern. Now, I fully understand that this might push back Hairston's development one more season, but if we're in win now mode then you have to evaluate the possibility.

[Gagnrath]

For about the third time temple isn't a 3, he's a combo guard or big PG. He might have spot minutes at the 3 but isn't a small forward.

Templ;e last year with the spurs showed he is a serious NBA level player, not a guy who might get a few 10 days. He's probably never going to be an alstar but is going to turn into a pretty decent rotation combo guard for somebody, I hope the spurs.

[mingus]

i haven't seen the guys play in a long time. i remember him most as being a very good defender that can spot up outside the 3.

he's old - 34 - but at 34 Bruce Bowen was still in his prime. i'm not comparing Raja Bell to Bruce Bowen on the basis of talent. i'm just saying age shouldn't be a sole reason to not bring someone over. if he sucks, he sucks, though. like i said i haven't seen him play in while.

[BadMotorscooter]

i haven't seen the guys play in a long time. i remember him most as being a very good defender that can spot up outside the 3.

he's old - 34 - but at 34 Bruce Bowen was still in his prime. i'm not comparing Raja Bell to Bruce Bowen on the basis of talent. i'm just saying age shouldn't be a sole reason to not bring someone over. if he sucks, he sucks, though. like i said i haven't seen him play in while.

+1. Just look at Grant Hill. Age is a factor, but there is a special type of player who can transcend it.

[BackHome]

please don't compare Hill to Raja....haha