Reply With Quote
Surely been mentioned elsewhere, but worth repeating: Spurs are the only team who have not had a lottery pick since 1997.
2010 was an absolutely horrible draft, though, especially in the middle 30. The Spurs picked a bad year to have a high pick.
Surely been mentioned elsewhere, but worth repeating: Spurs are the only team who have not had a lottery pick since 1997.
Put Batum instead of Leonard this season and we won't be in the WCF.
As someone said earlier, I'd take Batum out of the draft because the spurs would have developped him better.
IMHO Batum probably would be a different type of player today. Remember that Grantland piece two or three days ago? There was some truth in assuming Leonard wouldn't be as good if the Wiz drafted him and Vesley may at least be something with the Spurs.
Head to Head I have to agree that Leonard is the better defender and that he fits better with the Spurs. But if we would have drafted Batum he might have become just what Leonard seems to become and I'm not sore if Batum has a better upside.
Batum !!!!, he's better than Leonard in every single way : defense assists FTs and he plays with Diaw, TP and De Colo with the french team
Leonard has a toughness both physically and mentally that makes him a better fit for this team than Batum.
Batum's got a more polished game offensively, but this team needs the grit and versatility that Kawhi brings.
Batum would, most likely, become a more consistent player in the Spurs' system. He and Leonard have pretty similar skill sets, but Kawhi is better by a margin. It would be great to have both.
I'd rather have Kawhi. 3 Frenchies is plenty tbh.
I'd also have rather Green than Hill when factoring in fit on this team. Green and Kawhi's length is a big reason for our improved perimeter defense. George is a good player and solid defender but the positions he can defend are more limited than Danny's. If you throw CoJo in there as well then Green/CoJo over George is a no-brainer.
Leonard's a better defender, an elite rebounder, and scored more points this year. Free throws were a wash, he's much better at generating steals, and he doesn't turn the ball over as much. This is playing three fewer seasons in the NBA. Unlike Batum, he still has upside.
Aside from Leonard simply being a better player, Kawhi will get paid, on average, $9 million/yr less than Batum over this and the next 3 seasons.
I don't know why but it looks like every time Batum plays the Spurs, he plays angry or with a chip on his shoulder. He was taken early, we all know management would haven taken him instead of Hill. I'd take kawhi over Batum. They are very similar players. You couldn't go wrong with either one if healthy.
I'd rather have Green. He'll never be anywhere close to the offensive talent Hill is, but this team has tons of offensive talent and thus Hill's skills give strongly diminishing returns on this team. But the real reason I would much much rather have Green is because of pick and roll defense. Green has looked pretty good dealing with screens while Hill is one of the worst pick and pop defenders this team has had in a long time. It's no coincidence he got lit up over and over by Nash in the 2010 WCSF when he would start the game against him (one of the biggest bonehead moves of Pop's career IMO). Hill just doesn't fight over screens well and anyone who likes to shoot off the pick is going to light him up. In the wrong matchup he was a defensive liability on par with 2001 Derek Anderson since you could just pick and pop Hill to death. That's the reason I was so glad the Spurs weren't the ones who ended up paying his second contract.
Batum is probably better than Kawhi, at least right now, as he's had more time to develop. I haven't looked at the stats, but Kawhi looks like he's a better rebounder (offensively and defensively), which I think is a huge plus for a small forward, especially if everything else is close to equal.
I've always liked Batum, but I'd take Leonard without even having to think about it. He's already better and he's been in the league three less years.
Not to hijack your thread, but to me the real question is, Leonard or George?
I'd take Leonard, based solely on character, focus and willingness to improve.
George went at 10, and James Anderson went at 20. Not exactly like the Spurs ever had a shot of him falling that far.
What does that have to do with what I said? I meant, the real question is, is Leonard better than George or would you take him over him for the next ten years.
Honestly, I think I'd rather have Batum for those extra 3 years.
Nicolas Batum in 2008 means never having Richard Jefferson. Having him for all those years could have made a difference.
If you're asking me if I'd trade Leonard for Batum or if they were both available in 2008 who would I take, it would be Leonard hands down. However adding Batum in 2008 would have given us an excellent 4th piece around the big 3 for longer, and maybe we'd have won a le.
Why the would you compare Leonard to a player the Spurs had no shot of getting? Or are you talking about George Hill, the guy who was going to leave in free agency at the end of last season and the Spurs were going to lose for nothing?
This. For example, Leonard probably would be a much worse shooter for a lottery team, because the Spurs are well known for Chip being able to help guys sort out their shot mechanics.
Of course, the other thing to remember is that a lot of players with potential would never develop better with the Spurs, because the Spurs screen for guys that they think will work from a cultural standpoint. Bismack Biyombo is one heck of a physical specimen, but I'm not sure he and our program would have been a good fit.
Wow, that's right. I'd take Batum for the chance to dodge the RJ bullet alone.
And then we'd have had RJ's cap figure to spend on someone who's actually good at the game of basketball.
It's impossible to say how things would have turned out, but it would have totally changed the makeup of that team during the lost years (a.k.a. the RJ era).
Chill bro...I think he's comparing them because they're both young SFs with high ceilings. Why do we have to limit comparisons to just guys the spurs had a shot at? It's not like we had the chance to draft Batum and passed on him. It's just fun.
Shockingly, timvp says something smart.
In general, people get too wrapped up in all the abilities a player has, as though it's a video game where having athleticism and offensive skill makes you perfect. Leonard isn't as athletic as Batum(He's freakishly long and a good athlete relative to most of the Spurs, but he's not prime Dwight/Nate Rob/Jeremy Evans as an athlete) but he doesn't make mistakes. For his career, he only has 5 more fouls than steals, a TOTAL of 106 Turnovers and has a career TS% close to 58%, Slightly higher than Batums.
In the PER world that favours high usage guys, Kawhi was ahead of Batum last year, and crushed him in WS48(.166 to .099). Batum has had better seasons by both Metrics in the past, but the fact that Kawhi is ahead by both, and is 3 years younger means it's not close.
It's entirely possible that Batum would be better had he played with the Spurs from the Start, but Portland will also have a staff of professional coaches. A large part of Kawhi's improvement can be traced to his own work ethic.
Green's getting better at initiating offense. That pass to Kawhi in the 1Q was pretty good and kind of Ginobili-like.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
