Reply With Quote
When has a draft pick, besides the #1, ever impacted the Spurs. We get a guy named George, and Rush. A no impact rookie and and RJ clone.
Can I be in your clique.........
When has a draft pick, besides the #1, ever impacted the Spurs. We get a guy named George, and Rush. A no impact rookie and and RJ clone.
Tony Parker, Sean Elliott and Manu didnt impact the Spurs? What about Larry Kenon?
Except for the salary considerations.....
This.
Heh, I wanna believe that you're being sarcastic, but you didn't post it in blue.....
Phila, where the are you? I want to call you out for starting this blue thing.Heh, I wanna believe that you're being sarcastic, but you didn't post it in blue.....
I really don't think the Spurs should swap picks. Can anyone ever remember a time where the Spurs had two 1st round picks? I surely cannot.
But the Spurs are going to have to swap picks and/or involve De Colo to get the Pacers to bite, IMO.
IMO, the Spurs NEED both those first round picks to help immediately transform this roster. If they have to give up De Colo to sweeten the deal, and if Bird is indeed especially high on him, so be it. However, the Spurs should do everything in their power to get that #10 pick, without having to sacrifice their own.
Why in the do people keep posting that they would want Granger in return. Tell me why would the Pacers give up the 10th and Granger for Hill and RJ???? Granger is their best player.
I get real sick and tired of people not thinking rationally and posting stupid , do you people really think that would be possible?
I would do the deal in a heartbeat. I was sold on Garrett Temple's abilities when he started during the season. It's not like they would be asking him to fill Tony Parker's shoes. He would just be the backup PG to fill in when Tony needs a break.
I also agree with SenorSpur that the Spurs should do everything in their power not to get rid of the #20 pick. If the Spurs are going to be in contention in the years after Duncan decides to hang them up, then they need to start now. 2 draft picks this year can help in that area.
How come I'm not in anyone's clique.
The OP is where this all started. It's the opinion and wish of Bob Kravitz, not some substantiated or reported rumor from a supposed inside source. It's just us specualtin' on speculatin':
Of course you'd prefer and hope to keep both your first-rounders but you've got to look at this from their side and what the Spurs would be getting.
If the Spurs were actually offered this opportunity and were to use that 10 pick on Paul George, meaning they believe he's worthy of the pick and capable of harnessing all that size and talent, then you're giving up the 20 for Brandon Rush -- a player 2-years removed from being the 13th pick and other than a few pipe dreams and a guy like Martell Webster, maybe the best possible "centerpiece" player the Spurs could acquire. This would give the Spurs plenty of youth, size, ability and talent on the perimeter for both their win-now needs and life after Duncan.
So if it comes down to a swap of first-rounders and Hill to get Rush and George (again, assuming the Spurs believe George to be worthy), it's really a deal I think you've got to do.
Now, if they can save the pick by giving them Nando instead? You obviously do it. But let's not forget that we're talking about the Spurs acquiring two lottery picks for two late first-rounders or a late first and a second-rounder when you boil it all down (even if Hill's the best player involved, In my view).
The Omnipotent, Blackjack, is not amused.How come I'm not in anyone's clique.
When are you gonna answer my question?
@ "...speculatin' on speculatin'.... "
Ya know, the re-implementation of the blue should probably be helpful. Why we abandoned it in the first place? Complacency. We assumed that every one had caught on and forgot there are new members joining every day.
Incompetence really. BP ain't got nothing on us sarcastic, negligent assholes . . .
I'm guessing not, but I'll ask anyway: Do you not see the hypocrisy in this?
When is the last time any team won a le with two rookies playing significant minutes? How about two rookies, a "rookie" from Europe, and a second year player?
And many of you also want Temple and Hairston getting increased playing time? So now we're talking about a team with 6 players of two years experience or less expected to play fairly significant roles... and you expect to really compete?
There is a REASON teams that win les tend to be older. Spurs, Lakers, Celtics, Pistons, Heat... all mid-aged or old teams, with heavy reliance on veterans.
So you're saying potentially starting two 25-year-old players with a high-level of experience (Splitter and Rush) equates to having legitimate rookies?
Well, we'd have Splitter (who would be an "experienced" rookie in his first year with the Spurs), as well as pick #10 (rookie, year 1 with the Spurs), pick #20 (rookie, if we could keep it, year 1 with the Spurs), Blair (year 2), Hairston (year 2), Temple (year 2), and Rush (year 3, year 1 with Spurs).
That's as many as 7 rotation players of whom the most experienced (in the NBA) is in just his third year, and who have no more than 2 years in the Spurs system tops (which everyone knows is complicated and takes time to adjust to).
Or, to put it another way: 7 players with a combined seven years NBA experience and just 171 total GAMES in the Spurs system.
I have little faith in our ability to compete with veteran playoff teams and establish the right chemistry with that kind of lineup. With Tim and Manu's time remaining at an elite level, I don't value the second draft pick nearly as much as some on here. We ARE getting younger... I think this kind of trade might be a good one if our window wasnt so limited, but given the time we have left, I want people with "corporate knowledge" and not ones who pull an RJ (or any other of the myriad of players who come in and initially struggle with our schemes).
Last edited by ajh18; 06-17-2010 at 05:15 PM.
i think if the spurs somehow trade hill for the 10th pick i would think the spurs would try trading the 10th and 20th pick for the 3rd pick
Day 2 of the "Butthurt Saga"
The legend continues.................
if you going to want a big, u look for one thats already got nba experience, not one in the draft unless they are onces in a decade type of player
Is this in reference to what I said about you in this thread? What you did and what I did are nothing alike.
In your own words "this is a message board." Part of being on a message board is getting flamed when you do something stupid. It has nothing to do with attention seeking on my part. It's an unspoken code that pretty much everyone that posts on this board follows at some point or another. You decided to take an innocent comment made about you and get all butthurt so you could continue to portray yourself as some sort of fake message board renegade.
, your attention seeking even went as far as you sending me a PM trying to continue to get a rise out of me after I got bored and moved on. I'm sorry that I left you with your boner in your hand by not responding to you.
You should buy a dog or something.
Chrome
You just proved my point.Is this in reference to what I said about you in this thread? What you did and what I did are nothing alike.
In your own words "this is a message board." Part of being on a message board is getting flamed when you do something stupid. It has nothing to do with attention seeking on my part. It's an unspoken code that pretty much everyone that posts on this board follows at some point or another. You decided to take an innocent comment made about you and get all butthurt so you could continue to portray yourself as some sort of fake message board renegade.
, your attention seeking even went as far as you sending me a PM trying to continue to get a rise out of me after I got bored and moved on. I'm sorry that I left you with your boner in your hand by not responding to you.
You should buy a dog or something.
You talk about me needing to lighten up, then you take that PM, which was obviously a joke (I thought you'd send one back in a similar manner and we'd be done with this back and forth) and take it seriously.
I actually thought about not sending that for a minute. Then I thought, "nah, there's no way he can take this as anything other than a joke". I stand corrected.
But you're simply not addressing one huge issue: what's the alternative?
The Spurs' veteran presence is now in its core, the Big 3. And though your premise isn't off base (i.e. corporate knowledge and veteran knowhow), I just can't come to the same conclusion: the Spurs are lacking in the requisite talent at key positions to just add a couple of vets and be done with it, IMO.
The Spurs shouldn't look to get rid of Hill. He's got a bright future and he's really a of a player, one that's become undervalued and nitpicked to death because of a perceived overvaluing. But the fact remains that his talent lies in an area of strength for the Spurs and he's not going to make his best contributions in this league solely at the 2; he's actually gonna end up playing the point position when it's all said and done (even if people dismiss him playing the position because he's not the prototypical or quintessential point guard -- as if those are what we see winning les).
So if the Spurs could get a guy like Rush to play the now infamous "centerpiece" role and a player at 10 that should be able to contribute off the bench in his first year and potentially grow into a star at the 2/3 in the future, it's hard to see much downside in it. They'd now have the requisite talent and size across the board to get the job done and, really, that's all you can really hope for. I'd much rather have the arsenal to get it done anchored by warhorses like Tim, Manu and Parker, than a team consisting of little-to-no margin of error that's in need of extenuating cir stances or outside factors to get the job done.
If the Spurs were able to roll out: Duncan, Splitter, Rush, Ginobili, Parker in their starting lineup and have a bench that consisted of RJ, 'Dyess, Blair, the #10 pick (George for arguments sake) and whomever makes it from THG (Temple, Hairston and Gee), Mahinmi and a possible vet minimum or two?
I think I could roll with that. I'd take my chances with the youth; and it's not like the team you start the season with is necessarily the team you finish with.
Hill is a player with brains and heart but a limited ammount of athletic talent. He's got a pretty good skill set and is learning to compensate some for being shorter and slightly slower than average for an nba 2 guard. Is he going to be a decent starter yes, is he anything more than a starting caliber role-player? I don't really think so. Like the guys heart alot, but he's definitely got an nba ceiling that we are getting close to in my opinion.
So now you are trying to joke around with others after pages of butthurt, emo posts because someone joked around with you? You should probably stay away from the internets on days that you skip your bipolar meds.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
