Reply With Quote
And some of us are aware that the Spurs are not much worse without him...something you will come to realize 6-8 months from now.
Not really
Maybe you are just too good at over-exaggerating. From "R.J looks like LeBron to many of you", to " Bobby Simmons= R.J".
Some of us are just aware that he was the best available option. And we are satisfied and feel fortunate Spurs did everything they could do (realistically) to bring in the best possible pieces (at center; at the 5th big; at SF). At the same time, most of us don't like the contract when you look at just the contract, but when you factor in the cap and financial situation the Spurs have in place from here on out, his salary per year and contract isn't nearly as bad as it is at first glance because it doesn't hurt the rebuilding process or the future when you actually break things down.
Last edited by MaNu4Tres; 07-27-2010 at 07:11 AM.
And some of us are aware that the Spurs are not much worse without him...something you will come to realize 6-8 months from now.
No one will come to realize or prove anything, as the alternatives - Simmons, TMac, Hairston and Gee ( when waived ) - will not start for any other playoff team to prove your point, as they're all simply much worse than RJ at this moment in time.
Not really because we won't have your Bobby Simmons scenario to compare.
I have a couple of questions for you.
Why didn't Jerry Buss and Mitch Kupchick go after Ime Udoka instead of Ron Artest last year for 1/5th the price? *According to you, statistically with the opportunities available they would have been marginally similar too*
Or why didn't they just let Odom go at 8 mil per season at 10 ppg and sign Tim Thomas for 2 million instead?
Last edited by MaNu4Tres; 07-27-2010 at 07:36 AM.
Not really because we won't have your Bobby Simmons scenario to compare.
I have a couple of questions for you.
Why didn't Jerry Buss and Mitch Kupchick go after Ime Udoka instead of Ron Artest last year for 1/5th the price? *According to you, statistically with the opportunities available they would have been marginally similar too*
Or why didn't they just let Odom go at 8 mil per season at 10 ppg and sign Tim Thomas for 2 million instead?
This is getting stupid. We'll see who's right soon enough.
Just to be clear here...I will gladly eat crow if by some act of God RJ starts to be a good fit for this team. I just don't see it happening.
Probably because comparing Richard Jefferson and Bobby Simmons wasn't stupid enough...
This is getting stupid.
Stupidity is paying a player 40 million in hopes that he will start to fit when he doesn't.
As I said in another thread, you failed Finance 101. This is the best the Spurs could do given the situation. The Spurs FO operates in the real world, you operate in a fantasy world.
Umm maybe because those moves strongly increased their chances at a le? When making moves with a le in mind, the only time it makes sense to spend the money is if you can reasonably conclude the moves give you a legit shot at a le. The Lakers knew that and they were correct.
Not really because we won't have your Bobby Simmons scenario to compare.
I have a couple of questions for you.
Why didn't Jerry Buss and Mitch Kupchick go after Ime Udoka instead of Ron Artest last year for 1/5th the price? *According to you, statistically with the opportunities available they would have been marginally similar too*
Or why didn't they just let Odom go at 8 mil per season at 10 ppg and sign Tim Thomas for 2 million instead?
We know RJ does nothing to realistically help the Spurs win a le.
For some reason this has become very difficult to understand.
No...I operate in a world where you pay for a player that actually works for your team, no one you hope will work.
The bad tail end of this deal are lottery pick years.
This deal was a last best chance to win with Duncan deal.
Win-lose, but with fingers crossed that the win is bigger than the loss.
The Spurs lose in the first round last year without RJ.
Simple fact.
You guys are really getting out of control with your hyperbole on RJ just to try to make it seem like he's incredibly horrible.
So do you mean that, if you're not going to win a le, you shouldn't spend money.
Well, but if we're going to reach WCF with RJ and quit in first round with Simmons, I'll buy RJ. Winning le doesn't mean everything, you can be a solid team if you're unable to win it.
Uh no, you work in a world where you sign a player who hasn't played a single minute on the Spurs or players who essentially are rookies and hope that they will work only because of your Bobby Simmons, Hairston and Gee scenario.
Apparently you operate in a world where RJ opts out regardless of the prearranged 4/40 offer from the Spurs. The money on the tail end of the deal should concern only Holt, but the deal doeasn't financially restrict the Spurs from assembling the best (realistically) possible team until Duncan retires.
This deal had to have been arranged in February or so. The Spurs had enough dignity to honor it, even when they could have lowballed him.
Link? Also, so what? The Spurs goal is a le. Not a first round win and second round sweep. It is le or bust and that is the only fact.
No one is saying RJ is horrible. What we are saying is that he is a horrible fit for the Spurs. What we are also saying is that if the Spurs goal is to truly win a le, then signing a declining player to a LTD when you know he does not fit and does nothing to realistically help you win a le is a losing proposition. This has nothing to do with RJ himself. It has to do with the situation. RJ just happens to be the guy.You guys are really getting out of control with your hyperbole on RJ just to try to make it seem like he's incredibly horrible.
If you are looking at things in a bubble, RJ is superior basketball player compared to any other FA the Spurs could have obtained. No oneis disputing that. But when you stop looking at an overall talent and start looking at impact and fit that gap between RJ and whomever else shrinks. That does not mean the Spurs would be an overall better team without RJ, but that is what we are arguing. We are arguing that even though the Spurs are marginally better with RJ that they know it is no where near enough to win a le. That is their only goal. So with that in mind we are saying the contract is a terrible one.
I don't know what else the Spurs could have done to help themselves achieve their goal, but I do know giving that kind of money to someone who is aging, that does not fit & to whom you have the luxury of seeing concrete evidence of this is bad.
Like I said, it makes sense for LA to overpay Artest & Odom because you could reasonably conclude it strongly increased their chances for a le. RJ, not so much.
Logicfail. You can spend the money and make the moves if you are doing so with good logic. Some teams don't have the realistic goal of winning a le. Spurs do.
Sometimes you make a move and it does not work. You have to be ok with that. What is not ok is making the same mistake twice knowing you don't have a legit shot.
As I said before: Winning le may be the first aim of Spurs, but should w do nothing if we're not going to win the championship? Can't "Reaching to WCF" be the goal of Spurs? If we're not win the championship, should we tank the season? That has no logic.
If RJ continues to be a bad fit next year, it is either because Pop is too stupid to realize it, or too stubborn to change the system to fit his players. Do you think either of these are true?
But you don't have any solution offer. Spurs don't have a chance to win le this year, so what should they do? Don't resign with RJ and bring Simmons? For what? Tank this season and to get a free-agent next summer? We don't have any cap space next year, with or without RJ. We don2t have cap space in even 2012 summer. So why do we sign with Simmons instead of RJ?
So now it's gonna be Pop's fault the Spurs re-signed a player that doesn't fit. Got it.
ST is already coming up with excuses for the failure to come.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
