Reply With Quote
I gues they'll keep Simmons. So Gee and Gist will go.
Jerrells gone, roster at 16.
btw. Spurs don't need to cut down the roster to their goal of 13 or 14 immediately.
they might just cut one more player (IMO it will be Cousin) to get down to 15 and then for example wait till November 25th, that's the date when next 100K of Gee's contract become guaranteed.
however, the trade of Jerrells might even have secured the spot of Gee for some weeks, because he and Temple remain the only possible trade filler for small trades over the next weeks.
about Gist. some days ago i thought he will be the next cut. if the rumors about Partizan are true it might happen soon, but if not, I think they will keep him over Simmons.
I guess it's kind of general agreement that neither looked even close the be a helpful part of the roster, even not as a 3rd stringer.
so, considering roster quality it's meaningless who you keep. the difference is, that Gist MIGHT have some upside and might become a NBA player down the road, meanwhile Simmons is just done.
and (other than Simmons) Gist CAN actually help the Toros.
I gues they'll keep Simmons. So Gee and Gist will go.
If they keep 14 Gee will stay over Gist, but I don't think they are very high on either one. Cousin should go to Austin.
yes. but not on a roster spot. (same could be said for Gist)
another scenario: Spurs cut Gist, Gee, Cousin and Simmons and sign one the other teams waivers.
for example: Rockets just waived 4 players. (Antonio Anderson, Mike Harris, Alexander Johnson, Jerel McNeal)
what about Mike Harris?
yes, he is undersized, more a PF than SF, can't shoot etc.
but isn't he better than either of the 4 mentioned Spurs players?
couldn't find his niche in Houston, where they have about 5 or 6 PFs with guaranteed contracts. for the Spurs he wouldn't solve the back up SF question, but he would be a true combo forward, who could defend the big SFs. neither Jefferson, Simmons, Gist look to be a good option for that role.
as long as all your players stay healthy, a 13-man rotation will be well enough and work fine. even if you get a few of them injured, it wouldn't cost too much to sign a FA on 10-day short deals. the 14th or 15th player on your roster ain't too much better than a d-leaguer imho, and ain't breaking into the rotation very often tbh.
If I were Spurs FO, I would waive everybody except Gee and Temple to start the season with 13 players.
Gee would only be kept because a part of his salary is guaranteed. When that guaranteed part would have been paid to him (around mid November), I would waive him and try new player(s) for the 13th spot.
Spurs have a little financial flexibility under the tax. I rather see them keeping that flexibility for later in the season than using it on Bobby Simmons.
JMcDonald_SAEN Jeff McDonald
Pop confirms after practice spurs thinking 13 for roster, not 14. Cuts are gonnabe vicious. #spurs
agree. I liked the idea of bring Simmons to camp to see if he'd have something left, since he doesn't cut him go with Gee/Temple
Gist waived.
Once Gee and Cousin are inevitably waived, I suspect the Spurs will attempt to convince them to sign with the Toros.
Cousin, I think it's safe to say he's not going to receive any NBA interest.
Gee might. The Wizards liked him last season and didn't want to lose him at the time, only the Spurs outbid them for his services. They need more depth on the wings, so he could get a look. Another option could be the Nuggets, who need more depth on the wings.
Roster down to 15.
Most likely scenario:
Spurs keep Temple, with a chance he'll be eventually sent to Austin.
Spurs waive Cousin.
The Spurs then have to choose between Simmons and Gee.
None of the 13-18 impressed, other than Jerrells (except for his lack of offensive PG floor mgmt skills).
Suggestion: Watch, with hope, perchance the Heat waive Patrick Beverly and pick him up or perhaps look for a veteran PG with enough saavy to check smaller, quicker PGs. It's a hole the Spurs must plug in order to contend with the favorites.
It's abundantly clear that Simmons will make the team and Gee won't.
A lot of teams have that problem, including the Lakers and it didn't stop them from winning championships. The rules being the way they are, very few players even have a chance at slowing down lightning quick PG's, it's got to be more of a team wide thing. Forcing them into help, trapping and rotating, etc. And rim protection is a must.
Besides, it's not like Beverely would be in the playoff rotation anyway (yeah, I know, I can't say it with certainty, but I don't think I'm exactly going out on a limb, either). Come the playoffs, I expect virtually every back court minute to go to Parker, Ginobili and Hill. If they're in peak form, then the Spurs will have the best back court in the league.
To me, a wing defender is much more important than someone who can defend lightning quick PG's.
Really? The spurs don't need a pg. They need bigs still...if they can't win with parker, hill or manu then wtf is some waived scrub gonna do? Lmao
I'm tired of talking about the Spurs needing a wing defender. Of course the Spurs need a wing defender. I'm tired of talking about the Spurs needing a Big to help defend the lane. There are holes, not 1 hole. The Spurs have not effectively protected the rim and played good team defense beyond a game or two in at least 3 years.
If the Spurs aren't going to play great helping, team defense and they aren't going to get some guys that can defend one-one-one in iso situations, whether wing or playmaker, then they won't contend againt the real favorites (Spurs aren't in that group). Old Steve Nash carved up George Hill (watch a game or read a playoff box score, Sequ). He'll do the same with Garrett Stone Temple.
Why Patrick Beverly? He is another tool in the matchup tool belt and he will rebound when guys like Matt Bonner are in there. This kid has a rebounding gift for a 6'1" guard, plus he can defend decently, get to the line and make a shot.
There are holes to fill and camp has done nothing to do that, so far.
You're tired of talking about it, so you thought it would be fun to pretend as if there's a bigger issue, just to have something new to talk about or to sound clever?
The way I see it, there's one glaring hole and it's wing defender. Anything else and people are nitpicking. As if this team has a ton of holes and the consensus contenders have none.
So you'd limit the minutes or just not play one of Parker, Ginobili or Hill, altogether, in order to play Beverely, if the Spurs were to play the Suns, Thunder, Rockets, etc.?
Yes, I'm tired of talking about getting a role player to defend the perimeter. I'm tired of talking about RJ having A.D.D. on defense last season. That's a big problem, a glaring hole, that needs addressing. If RJ isn't going to play good team defense, then cut his minutes and give some time to a role player who will pay attention, hustle, dig and close-out like he means it.
This thread is not really about the Big Three. They are still 3 of the top 30 (subjective) players in the NBA.
The game of basketball is about paying attention to the little things and in the NBA, it's about getting it right on players 1-13.
You need to find guys that can, at any point in a game, can go in when a player is having trouble. When a starter needs a breather, gets 2 early fouls, gets injured or just is flat getting beaten, a role player that can get stops or change the game is needed that you can count on.
The Spurs don't have a Steve Kerr or Speedy Claxton to come in for Parker like they used to. They don't have a savvy backup PG to defend small, quick guys in spot minutes while having the offensive ability to contribute on offense, although George is trying to get there. George and Garrett are both a little gangly and are still learning how to play in this league. They don't know the tricks that allow them to play over the screens or play good, balanced position as one-on-one defenders.
Maybe Gary Neal can help fill the hole on defense. He's faster and quicker than Mason was. He's not a particularly great defender but he knows some tricks and doesn't get caught going under screens all the time.
Let's not make this into something other than what it is. My premise is that players 13-18 were not impressive in camp. The Spurs need to pay attention to detail because there is a fine line to be drawn with players as well as in execution of offenses and defenses.
You've got to have guys that can deal with 70 pick and rolls/game when the floor is spread or everyone is lifted so that Aaron Brooks or Roddy Boubois or JJ Barea or Steve Nash can do their thing. You've got to have choices when John Wall, Kirk Heinrich and Gilbert Arenas are on the floor at the same time.
I don't think the Spurs have shown us the right mix of guys, yet, to win consistently. Besides the need for a "wing defender", I think the Spurs need to add another player or two. They need protection in the post and at the 1 position.
Sounds great, if you overlook the fact that the only other true SF on the roster is Simmons, who's a fringe player at this point and without Jefferson playing at least competent, this team won't have the talent to compete for a championship.
I agree. But Beverely is not that player. Don't bother responding with "How do you know?". I also don't know for certain that Neal isn't a star in the making, but I can make an educated guess. Anderson might be that type of role player, time will tell. Other than him, the Spurs don't have another even mildly intriguing option to turn to at SF and as far as the back court goes, they're more than fine both in terms of quality and quan y.
Hill is already a better player than either Kerr or Claxton were at any point in their careers. There are very few players in the NBA capable of doing that anymore, both because of the rules and the freakish athleticism, speed and quickness of those types of PG's. It's not the type of thing that almost every contender and second tier team has save for the Spurs (like wing defender).
Unless they can bring in someone markedly better than what they have, I see no reason to go and bring in other fringe players, who play positions the Spurs are already deep at. If they were carrying 15, then maybe it would make sense to take a look at Beverely, should he get cut.
Other teams will have to deal with those same pick-and-rolls from the Spurs. The Lakers have lead footed Fisher defending lightning quick PG's and they're coming off back to back championships. You act like the Rondo's and Lowry's of the world grow on trees.
I agree. They're probably a wing defender short. Protection in the post at the expense of who? Already, Pop is going to have to cut a rotation caliber big out of the playoff rotation. You want him to cut out two and for who? Some random stiff who happens to be a couple of inches taller than McDyess or Bonner or Blair? At the one? Parker and Hill figure to be, at minimum, one of the best duos in the league. You make it seem as if they won't be causing the same problems (often times, they'll cause more) for the opposition that the Spurs will face.
we're down to 14. who gets the final cut?
JMcDonald_SAEN
Special guest in media mess hall before the game. 2010 2nd-round pick Ryan Richards, surgically repaired right shoulder insling. #spurs
Ask him if he rides a motorcycle.
Technically, Gee's guaranteed money allows them to keep him until late November without consequence. There would be little point in cutting him before then. He's a practice body and injury insurance.Pop says #spurs still eyeing 13-man roster, but might not make final move until after opener. At 14, team technically already under NBA max.
Keeping Gee costs nothing to Spurs and he could still be used as a filler in an unlikely trade.
A lot of NBA teams, not just the Spurs, would have a difficult time dealing with the Wizards putting out a 3 guard lineup like you mentioned. I wouldn't lose alot of sleep worrying over defending a eastern conference team you only play twice, and , in all likely hood, won't be seeing in the NBA finals.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
