Reply With Quote
Don't try to muck this up with facts.
While I think there's a fairly good chance that the FO signs a veteran shooter to add to the mix, I think there's a pretty decent chance that you could find at least one NBA caliber shooter among the Anderson/Hairston/Gee trio. Anderson shot 37.5% from three-point range in college (closer line, I know), Hairston shot 42.7% on three pointers in the D-League for his career, and Gee shot 39.3% from three in Austin last year.
Don't try to muck this up with facts.
Well shooting in college and shooting in the NBA is a different thing. Just look at Jack McClinton. He had a 45% FG percentage for two and for the three pointer, and he couldn't make a jumper in ing summer league.
And LOL at Hairston's D-League achievements. He played some games for the Spurs also, and he wasn't really that good. So no thanx for having Malik as our shooter from the bench.
Gee played really good in the summer league, but he is a bad shooter. He can score in the paint and is athletic, but not a shooter. And there will be much more tougher to get in the paint in the NBA than in the summer league.
So I would rather like to see another FA SF on this team.
btw: just read about Bobby Jones and that an Italian team is interested in signing him for the next season.(Pesaro)
any thoughts about bringing him back? last season he showed quite some improvement with his shooting. and on defense he would be better than any other of the discussed minimum contract options.
any thoughts?
(he will likely stay in Europe though. point will be guaranteed money)
Anderson, Gee and Hairston are more viable options.
No need for Jones who would be below them on the depth chart.
If Spurs are going to add another wing they should be better than Anderson,Gee and Hairston. If not it would be a waste of money.
It never ceases to amaze me how people can shrug off larger data sets because they are contradicted by smaller data sets. Jack McClinton shot nearly 800 three pointers over 120+ games in college, but that's contradicted by a small handful of summer league games? Malik Hairston went 50 for 117 from three point range in the D-League (same three point line as the NBA), but he must suck as an NBA shooter because he went 2 for 12 in mostly garbage minutes for the Spurs?
Listen, I realize there's more to being an effective NBA shooter than being able to hit shots in an empty gym, or college, or even being able to hit them in a scrub league like the NBADL. There's a certain mental toughness you need as an NBA shooter. You need to be able to shrug off misses and take the next shot, even as 20,000 fans are screaming at you. You need to be able to execute your textbook stroke as 6'11", 250 pound men are running toward you. You need to be able to take good shots, pass up bad shots, and learn how to tell the difference. You need to know offensive spacing, where to be on the floor, when to be there, and how to get there around double screens. You need to have the work ethic to practice hundreds of shots, run some sprints, lift some weights, and come back to practice another few hundred shots, most days of the week.
Do any of the young guns the Spurs have meet these requirements? No one knows, including me. But larger data sets have said they have a chance, and I personally think it would be fun to find out.
I hear you.
this would pretty much mean we are finished with our roster building. (I'm fine with this). there are some minutes available coming from 3rd option SG (behind Manu and Hill) and 2nd option SF (behind RJ). overall it will be about 25 minutes (at best). Anderson, Hairston, Gee will fight for those minutes. (I get the feeling Hairston won't survive the camp, finally Anderson will play 15MPG and Gee about 10)
Sorry for that mini-rant Texas_Ranger. Nothing personal, just getting some general stuff about this entire board sometimes off my chest.
For the record, I'm generally not one of the people here who over-hype young talent; quite the opposite, actually. I also have no real problem with the idea of bringing in a veteran SF to back-up RJ, and won't be horribly upset if they do so (though the only available players that seem worth it at the moment are Rasual Butler and MAYBE Bobby Simmons). However, I do like the idea of throwing the young guys into the fire and seeing what happens. The Spurs certainly have some wiggle room to play with during the preseason and beginning of the regular season.
For what it's worth, here's my personal opinions on the three young guys, as far as they relate to being NBA-caliber shooters:
Alonzo Gee: Though he has shown some promise of hitting three-pointers, it still seems that his weakness is outside shooting. While he could surprise me, I think he projects more as a slasher than a shooter.
James Anderson: I think he could be ready in a year or two, with a slight chance that he could be ready this year. More likely, I think he'll have a few growing pains as a rookie, though he may be able to contribute in other ways (e.g.- via his athleticism). If he can develop his game yearly, he has a chance to be a good cog in the post-Duncan era.
Malik Hairston: I really think this guy is ready now. I haven't been on his bandwagon nearly as much as some around here, but his defense and three-point shooting is at a level that the Spurs need to throw him in there and see what happens. I think good things are on the horizon.
Lurker FTW
Oh, and bonus evaluation:
Jack McClinton: The kid really can shoot, but I don't know if he possesses a lot of the other skills and/or work ethic that I listed above. I really haven't seen enough of him to know one way or the other. However, when you're a 6'1" guard, you need to be more than a one-trick wonder to make it in the NBA, and so far McClinton hasn't really shown that he can do much else other than shoot.
Hey, it's OK.Sorry for that mini-rant Texas_Ranger. Nothing personal, just getting some general stuff about this entire board sometimes off my chest.
For the record, I'm generally not one of the people here who over-hype young talent; quite the opposite, actually. I also have no real problem with the idea of bringing in a veteran SF to back-up RJ, and won't be horribly upset if they do so (though the only available players that seem worth it at the moment are Rasual Butler and MAYBE Bobby Simmons). However, I do like the idea of throwing the young guys into the fire and seeing what happens. The Spurs certainly have some wiggle room to play with during the preseason and beginning of the regular season.
For what it's worth, here's my personal opinions on the three young guys, as far as they relate to being NBA-caliber shooters:
Alonzo Gee: Though he has shown some promise of hitting three-pointers, it still seems that his weakness is outside shooting. While he could surprise me, I think he projects more as a slasher than a shooter.
James Anderson: I think he could be ready in a year or two, with a slight chance that he could be ready this year. More likely, I think he'll have a few growing pains as a rookie, though he may be able to contribute in other ways (e.g.- via his athleticism). If he can develop his game yearly, he has a chance to be a good cog in the post-Duncan era.
Malik Hairston: I really think this guy is ready now. I haven't been on his bandwagon nearly as much as some around here, but his defense and three-point shooting is at a level that the Spurs need to throw him in there and see what happens. I think good things are on the horizon.
I hear what you're saying. I'd also really like to see that those 3 young guys can be pretty good. If just one of those turns to be like Hill or Dejuan that would be really something great.
I don't know why, but I just don't believe that they will be good, that's why I'd like to see a veteran guy. But then again young players will sooner or later need to play, so they deserve a chance.
And for me none of those players is a scrub, I just said Hairston didn't show that he is that good. I love to see when young players can step up. Gee is already one of my favourite guys on the team and I just watched him in summer league.
There are still some FA to sign, so we'll just have to wait and see what hapens.
Don't waste your bandwidth, Ruff. All these schmucks on this site all think like Pop, they'd rather be lazy heads and throw some money at some washed up scrub (like Bogans last year) rather than actually put in the time and effort to develop the new players they have on the roster.meltdowns. I expect Splitter's first year to be solid but unspectacular. Of course there will be bumps in the road as he adjusts to the NBA game, but he'll get there, and bandwagoner/cliff-jumper-incited meltdowns can go themselves!
The world in general needs to rediscover the virtue of patience.
A lot of people keep saying we have to sign a backup... WTF? We have two ideal backups in Gee/Hairston. How do you think young players develop? By PLAYING. One of our youngsters has to be the backup, surely.
Way to go, don't let those statistics sway you. They're all scrubs.
But what options do we have? You guys keep saying we should get a backup SF. Can you guys give us some names? We can't even get Butler with the MLE left.
It's impossible to find a guy with the money we have.
Hey in another few weeks McGrady's fat, out of shape washed up ass might be desperate enough to sign for the vet min....and then Pop would have an excellent excuse to not have to coach/develop Gee/Hairston
Jefferson is not a washed up scrub by any means.
Giving him a deal 3 yr/24-27 mil or 4 yr/30-32 mil (4th year being partially guaranteed or having a team option) is a good and fair deal to make and it doesn't necessarily hinder the Spurs future by any means.
Explained here..
Last edited by MaNu4Tres; 07-21-2010 at 08:17 AM.
Unless I'm mistaken, Ruff was only referring to the sf backup, which many Popologists here are clamoring for YET ANOTHER signing in addition to Jefferson which would probably completely shut out any chance of Gee or Hairston to crack the rotation. Totally unnecessary IMO.
Jefferson is not a washed up scrub by any means.
Giving him a deal 3 yr/24-27 mil or 4 yr/30-32 mil (4th year being partially guaranteed or having a team option) is a good and fair deal to make and it doesn't necessarily hinder the Spurs future by any means.
Explained here..
But hey, now that you've brought up Jefferson, spurs should have just let him go his separate way, his value is limited because he wasn't productive at all until Pop paired him up with Ginobili and Hill. And unless Pop plans to bring Parker off the bench again his game will go back into the toilet.
Is the Spurs goal for this season to be the best basketball team possible, or is it to do whatever is best for the personal careers of Malik Hairston and Alonzo Gee? Personally, I think the Spurs should be trying to be the best team possible. If that means signing another veteran SF to improve the team's depth and Hairston's and Gee's chances of cracking the rotation suffer because of it, so be it. If they can't earn their spot in the rotation because better players are ahead of them, then tough for them.
Problem is, this strategy of signing scrubs (Bogans) and/or holding onto washed up billygoats (Finley) who are well past their glory days hasn't been working out lately.
So your theory of "being the best team possible" isn't suceeding. Especially considering all the wasted minutes that could have been invested into young players and been paying dividends by now.
I hate to break this to you, but that d-league prospect strategy isn't paying too many dividends these days either. If James White and Marcus Williams,........err I mean Keith Langford and Melvin Sanders,.....err I mean Desmond Farmer and Jeremy Richardson,....errr I mean Malik Hairston and Alonzo Gee are really all that, then beating out some "washed up billygoat" shouldn't be a problem.
Hairston did beat out Bogans last year, so while I understand your point, I don't think it's valid here..generally when 2 players are of similar talent levels(so a scrub like Bogans vs. an unproven player like Hairston), the guy that performed a lot better in preseason would probably get the nod..unless the vet is familiar with the system, which Bogans was not..it's fair to say that coaches like Pop are like that..
Either way, the backup SF/9th or 10th man in the rotation isn't going to win you or lose you an NBA le under any cir stance..I would rather get an unknown player with upside, as opposed to a vet that is already past his prime, which is pretty much the only other option the Spurs have..the Spurs have nothing to lose by giving these young players a chance at the 9th or 10th spot in the rotation IMO..
I also disagree with the point about not using Hairston and Gee because they aren't proven shooters..you have to have a mix of shooters and slashers, not just shooters..the Spurs lacked shooters last year, but if you recall the years prior, they had too many shooters and not enough slashers/athleticism..
Anderson is supposed to be a shooter, so having a defensive/athletic alternative in Hairston or Gee for situational purposes is the right move IMO..
Im fine with signing RJ and calling it an off-season. Unless maybe Butler is interested. He is probably better than Hairston or Gee at the moment. Other than that I would rather RJ start and let Hairston/Gee/Anderson get some backup minutes rather than some scrub like nachbar or simmons
this....
I honestly believe this team can contend as is. While we did get swept last season we weren't that far behind the compe on to be honest. We rarely had parker on the floor all season and he was pretty ineffective coming back since he was so out of sync and unfamiliar. I think if RJ improves and Blair and Hill continue to get better than we are right there in the hunt. Tony will be a beast next season during his contract year and if we can get some solid play out of Splitter/Anderson/Hairston rather than Mason and Bogans than were seeing a huge improvement right there. This team is good enough.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
