Spurs dropped the ball

[FromWayDowntown]

Come playoff time when pop starts bonner or Blair against pau, Bynum, odom, dirk, Chandler, haywood in a 7 game series....everyone will about it then hopefully come read this thread again so we can all discuss how we should have gotten a decent big...

Who should they get and for what? And what proof do you have that the Spurs haven't already tried to do this?

Is your ultimate point that the Spurs should accept some ridiculous, lopsided (and still unspecified) trade just so that they'll have more size?

[Shifty]

Lets try with this:

R.C.: Hi, I'm looking for a big man and you have some, want to trade?
Other team's GM: Sure, who are you interested in?

R.C.: I want player X (7ft 260lbs 15ppg 10rpg).
OTGM: We don't want to get rid of him but what do you offer?

R.C.: Everyone is up for discussion outside of my big3. How about Bonner and Hill?
OTGM: mmm Sounds good but I'm actually looking for SF and you only have RJ, he costs too much and you don't have good draft picks to sweeting the deal. How about I throw Horrible Contract and Bad at ude and you give me Blair too?

R.C.: I don't think I like that.
OTGM: Yeah I know but I want to get rid of them so bad, plus the money doesn't match. Any other offers? No? Ok, good luck.
R.C.: Wait, how about we include a third team? I heard LotteryBound team is doing a firesale, would you be interested in any of its players?
OTGM: Maybe their starting SF but he is too expensive and I want to get under the Luxury tax.
R.C.: Ok, Call me if you find anyone willing to get involved.
OTGM: See you.

Now imagine 100 calls going like this a day...

Meanwhile Gregzilla: The Spurs have dropped the ball!

[EricB]

Lets try with this:

R.C.: Hi, I'm looking for a big man and you have some, want to trade?
Other team's GM: Sure, who are you interested in?

R.C.: I want player X (7ft 260lbs 15ppg 10rpg).
OTGM: We don't want to get rid of him but what do you offer?

R.C.: Everyone is up for discussion outside of my big3. How about Bonner and Hill?
OTGM: mmm Sounds good but I'm actually looking for SF and you only have RJ, he costs too much and you don't have good draft picks to sweeting the deal. How about I throw Horrible Contract and Bad at ude and you give me Blair too?

R.C.: I don't think I like that.
OTGM: Yeah I know but I want to get rid of them so bad, plus the money doesn't match. Any other offers? No? Ok, good luck.
R.C.: Wait, how about we include a third team? I heard LotteryBound team is doing a firesale, would you be interested in any of its players?
OTGM: Maybe their starting SF but he is too expensive and I want to get under the Luxury tax.
R.C.: Ok, Call me if you find anyone willing to get involved.
OTGM: See you.

Now imagine 100 calls going like this a day...

Meanwhile Gregzilla: The Spurs have dropped the ball!

Fantastic post. I can with almost certainty guarantee you that's how and how it has gone down.

[Gregzilla]

Who should they get and for what? And what proof do you have that the Spurs haven't already tried to do this?

Is your ultimate point that the Spurs should accept some ridiculous, lopsided (and still unspecified) trade just so that they'll have more size?

No what I'm saying is that if size is something NEEDED, then do what's necessary to get size.. as I type this mark stein is tweeting about Houston trying to trade for camby, go figure...Again I understand completely how the front office would be reluctant to pull the trigger on any trades being as though we have the leagues best record.. BUT IMO I would sacrifice a key role player or two just to get that guy while timmys on his last leg..repeating myself again, I've stated SEVERAL times that im not just talking about right now, but rather the past 2-3 off seasons/seasons collectively..the FO has had plenty of time to put in work for bigs to make another le run.. But what do they do? Continue to sign guards to 10 day contracts, sign bigs who can spread the floor and shoot 3s... Assign players to the D League, call them back up , send them back...draft euros who they let "blossom" overseas and then don't play them over here..the point is we didn't get one / don't have one... And I think that's gonna cost us big in the 2nd/3rd round of the playoffs. Then bye-bye Timmy in 2yrs and we start all over

[FromWayDowntown]

No what I'm saying is that if size is something NEEDED, then do what's necessary to get size.. as I type this mark stein is tweeting about Houston trying to trade for camby, go figure...Again I understand completely how the front office would be reluctant to pull the trigger on any trades being as though we have the leagues best record.. BUT IMO I would sacrifice a key role player or two just to get that guy while timmys on his last leg..repeating myself again, I've stated SEVERAL times that im not just talking about right now, but rather the past 2-3 off seasons/seasons collectively

So suppose that the Spurs go to Portland and ask about Camby -- the Blazers say "okay, but we'll only do that if we get Tony Parker." (and those salaries match). The Spurs can offer every role player on their roster, but Portland isn't shipping out Camby to SA without getting Parker. What would you have the Spurs do then?

I realize that your point is about role players, but why on earth would Portland deal with the Spurs and take back a package that's something like McDyess, Splitter, and Anderson? From a basketball standpoint, what's in that for Portland? Their problem isn't depth; as their interest in dealing Andre Miller suggests, they perceive their biggest need to be a lead guard to play along with Aldridge.

And the point about the past few seasons and offseasons is nonsense. As noted, over the last 4 seasons, they've traded for Kurt Thomas at the deadline, given a big chunk of available money to Drew Gooden, signed Antonio McDyess, drafted and signed Tiago Splitter and DeJuan Blair during that time. They've certainly sought bigs; you might believe that they've come up short in those efforts, but they have made moves for bigs.

[Gregzilla]

Lets try with this:

R.C.: Hi, I'm looking for a big man and you have some, want to trade?
Other team's GM: Sure, who are you interested in?

R.C.: I want player X (7ft 260lbs 15ppg 10rpg).
OTGM: We don't want to get rid of him but what do you offer?

R.C.: Everyone is up for discussion outside of my big3. How about Bonner and Hill?
OTGM: mmm Sounds good but I'm actually looking for SF and you only have RJ, he costs too much and you don't have good draft picks to sweeting the deal. How about I throw Horrible Contract and Bad at ude and you give me Blair too?

Funny post , but um... How do u NOT pull the trigger if you're RC on this deal bruh? .... A 7fter who's avg 15 and 10 next to Timmy. Plus we still have our big 3, Neal, dice, splitter, Anderson, and RJ?... And we lose Pops BONER?.. I know what u meant but the deal u threw out is a GO.




R.C.: I don't think I like that.
OTGM: Yeah I know but I want to get rid of them so bad, plus the money doesn't match. Any other offers? No? Ok, good luck.
R.C.: Wait, how about we include a third team? I heard LotteryBound team is doing a firesale, would you be interested in any of its players?
OTGM: Maybe their starting SF but he is too expensive and I want to get under the Luxury tax.
R.C.: Ok, Call me if you find anyone willing to get involved.
OTGM: See you.

Now imagine 100 calls going like this a day...

Meanwhile Gregzilla: The Spurs have dropped the ball!

[rascal]

Its not if the spurs have tried or not because no one in this thread knows what eactly is going on, it is the end results of not getting it done to add enough depth on the frontline.

[Shifty]

Funny post , but um... How do u NOT pull the trigger if you're RC on this deal bruh? .... A 7fter who's avg 15 and 10 next to Timmy. Plus we still have our big 3, Neal, dice, splitter, Anderson, and RJ?... And we lose Pops BONER?.. I know what u meant but the deal u threw out is a GO.

What deal, they never agree! RC offered Bonner and Hill and the other GM was not interested because he wanted to add RJ AND Blair while ALSO dumping the bad contract and ty at ude player on us along with the player!

This would have looked like if RC would have agreed:

Spurs get:
Big man
Horrible Contract player
ty at ude player

Other team gets:
Bonner
Hill
RJ
Blair

no! You gut out half the team to get the big man while you get stuck with 2 players you don't want just to get a player?

[Gregzilla]

What deal, they never agree! RC offered Bonner and Hill and the other GM was not interested because he wanted to add RJ AND Blair while ALSO dumping the bad contract and ty at ude player on us along with the player!

This would have looked like if RC would have agreed:

Spurs get:
Big man
Horrible Contract player
ty at ude player

Other team gets:
Bonner
Hill
RJ
Blair

no! You gut out half the team to get the big man while you get stuck with 2 players you don't want just to get a player?

Oh, the way its written makes it seem like the gm WANTED rj but he was too expensive. So he agreed to Hill, Bonner, And Blair if he gave us his big, ty contract and ty at ude player.

[Shifty]

Oh, the way its written makes it seem like the gm WANTED rj but he was too expensive. So he agreed to Hill, Bonner, And Blair if he gave us his big, ty contract and ty at ude player.

Yes, he wanted RJ and yes, he was too expensive and that's why he had to throw in the additional contracts to balance out the salaries while getting rid of 2 unwanted players we would have be stuck with.

[FromWayDowntown]

The hypothetical is completely unreasonable, if only because there are only 10 guys in the NBA not named Tim Duncan who are 6'10" or taller and who are averaging even 12 PPG and 9 RPG, and the Spurs aren't getting any of them for spare parts.

[Gregzilla]

So suppose that the Spurs go to Portland and ask about Camby -- the Blazers say "okay, but we'll only do that if we get Tony Parker." (and those salaries match). The Spurs can offer every role player on their roster, but Portland isn't shipping out Camby to SA without getting Parker. What would you have the Spurs do then?

I realize that your point is about role players, but why on earth would Portland deal with the Spurs and take back a package that's something like McDyess, Splitter, and Anderson? From a basketball standpoint, what's in that for Portland? Their problem isn't depth; as their interest in dealing Andre Miller suggests, they perceive their biggest need to be a lead guard to play along with Aldridge.

And the point about the past few seasons and offseasons is nonsense. As noted, over the last 4 seasons, they've traded for Kurt Thomas at the deadline, given a big chunk of available money to Drew Gooden, signed Antonio McDyess, drafted and signed Tiago Splitter and DeJuan Blair during that time. They've certainly sought bigs; you might believe that they've come up short in those efforts, but they have made moves for bigs.

I agree with you 100%, they have been somewhat "active" in trying to get a big...but with the spurs FO I honestly think they have players layed out that are Reaches (might have to give up a valuable role player or two) and players who are "safe" and would fit the mold w/o giving anything up really. And they seem to always go the safe route..As I type this, 7fters Kendrick Perkins and Thabeet are now on the Thunder and Rockets, go figure. Anyway, yea they have tried..no doubt. But have failed

[Gregzilla]

The hypothetical is completely unreasonable, if only because there are only 10 guys in the NBA not named Tim Duncan who are 6'10" or taller and who are averaging even 12 PPG and 9 RPG, and the Spurs aren't getting any of them for spare parts.

Rasho, Elson, Nazr, and Fab were all 7 footers who did NOT avg 12&9...double double numbers are not needed for what we need from timmy's frontcourt teamate.

[Gregzilla]

update---looks like OKC got 2 footers, Perkins and Nazr AND Portland shipped out J Pryz to charlotte. damn

[moisaenz]

The only trade I would do involving splitter would be for Marc Gasol.... Gasol is 28 days older and already has somewhat NBA experience.... Both are injury prone.

[Gregzilla]

*pats self on the back*

[Shifty]

*pats self on the back*

Why, are you chocking?

[4>0rings]

Generally I'd agree, a shot blocking presence and rebounding are huge keys to success but the Spurs are just playing too damn good right now to mess with it.

[Mel_13]

*pats self on the back*

What for? The OKC trades prove that the premise of this thread is terribly flawed.

[Beau]

Spurs dropped the ball, mine have yet to.

That may be TMI, Greg...

[Gregzilla]

What for? The OKC trades prove that the premise of this thread is terribly flawed.

so you think Sam Presti made a dumb move by getting two 7 footers and still keeping a core of westbrook, harden, and durant?....yea he's a dumb guy, i'm sure he wasn't thinking about LA or Dallas or Boston or Orlando or Miami when he pulled the trigger. Fukouttahere idiot

[DirkISaCocLuvinPuSSy]

@OP

dude, we didn't make a move but we didn't need to, the chemistry of a team well beat out talent any day, just look at the 99 Spurs vs Portland and LA that year.

plus

The West is weaker now and not just now but for the foreseeable future

Nuggets and Jazz in one week went from playoff contenders to rebuilding.

MEANS MORE EASY GAMES = LESS PLAY FOR VETS = Worst fear for west teams...... a healthy rested SA team in the PO's

WE ONLY NEED TO BEAT 1 EAST TEAM

with all the stars over there now, they'll just beat each other up all season and all playoffs.

also LA and Dallas aka Kobe and Dirk and wearing themselves out keeping their teams on pace with us.

This year has SO FAR been all win for the Spurs, the basketball gods are being good to us its best not to temp them.

[Mel_13]

so you think Sam Presti made a dumb move by getting two 7 footers and still keeping a core of westbrook, harden, and durant?....yea he's a dumb guy, i'm sure he wasn't thinking about LA or Dallas or Boston or Orlando or Miami when he pulled the trigger. Fukouttahere idiot

We can add reading comprehension to the list of things you fail at.

I said no such thing. Great moves by Presti. Kudos and all that stuff.

Now look at the two transactions and tell us:

How could the Spurs have made better offers? I'll save you the trouble. They couldn't.

So if they couldn't beat, or even match, the offers made by OKC in those two trades, then they didn't drop any ball.

Simple enough for you?

[Gregzilla]

We can add reading comprehension to the list of things you fail at.

I said no such thing. Great moves by Presti. Kudos and all that stuff.

Now look at the two transactions and tell us:

How could the Spurs have made better offers? I'll save you the trouble. They couldn't.

So if they couldn't beat, or even match, the offers made by OKC in those two trades, then they didn't drop any ball.

Simple enough for you?

I think we have to work on your reading comprehension too...because all along i've said COLLECTIVELY over the past 3 yrs (drafts, offseasons, mid-season trades, FA' signings) the spurs failed to acquire a proper 4 or 5 to start next to tim during his last years. In no way did I say the spurs should have made a deal for perkins or nazr...i've given a list of 25 big men who have all been shipped and signed that could have helped with our biggest weakness. I don't know how they could have done it or why they didn't..all i know is that they DIDNT and it's going to cost them when it really matters.

oh and thank god you didn't put that stupid laughing smiley face, 's played out. thanks

[Mel_13]

I think we have to work on your reading comprehension too...because all along i've said COLLECTIVELY over the past 3 yrs (drafts, offseasons, mid-season trades, FA' signings) the spurs failed to acquire a proper 4 or 5 to start next to tim during his last years. In no way did I say the spurs should have made a deal for perkins or nazr...i've given a list of 25 big men who have all been shipped and signed that could have helped with our biggest weakness. I don't know how they could have done it or why they didn't..all i know is that they DIDNT and it's going to cost them when it really matters.

oh and thank god you didn't put that stupid laughing smiley face, 's played out. thanks

You pointed to the OKC trades as reasons to pat yourself on the back. You'd have a very hard time making a case for those on your list, but just stay focused on today.

The OKC trades contradict the premise of this thread, yet you claim otherwise.

You can't just say "they dropped the ball". You have to demonstrate how they dropped it. Otherwise you're just ing that the team has flaws.

So....

Tell us how the FO dropped the ball by not acquiring the players that OKC traded for today?