Reply With Quote
It's always funny when people try to use unconventional "big" words to seem smart but either use them incorrectly or spell them wrong. You succeeded in doing both of those things.
Also, you're an idiot.
No. At 19 this kid is un athletic and UN explosive. A couple of years playing on France's bench will not change this. He has no upside.
also; Pop's having traded George Hill was an admission that George was not a true point guard and not an alpha male 2 guard, who had his blemishes.
It's always funny when people try to use unconventional "big" words to seem smart but either use them incorrectly or spell them wrong. You succeeded in doing both of those things.
Also, you're an idiot.
Listen, buddy, re-read my first post.
What good will our team be in a few years without the big three and Pop there possibly? We need to build-up.. but this team will be different in years. Our best chance for a while is NOW.
Can_you_read?
LOL.
Well I feel sorry for you that you consider "contribution" a big word.
And I'm the idiot LOL
george hill was traded because kl is better and hill contract needed to be exteneded and pacers imo over paid him
I mean even RC's biggest draft mistake ended up playing some high quality minutes in winning a le on the road.
In summary, we drafted a guy to shoot 3s and provide D, and he did that well. Then we traded him for a much higher pick where we drafted our best new player since Manu -- and that just proves what a failure the pick was?
What part of me using the word unconventional and quoting "big" don't you comprehend?
You: I personally would love to see someone come in immediately to boost the chances of one last run with the big three.
You: We got Tony Parker for the 30th pick, we can definitely find someone right away.
You: Again, Tony Parker 30th pick... Manu 57th pick.
In context, the only way that post makes sense is if you're using Manu as an example of how we can get someone who can help us right away even with a late pick. So either you lost the plot and forgot what point you were arguing, or you intentionally responded in a way that directly undercut your whole point about the importance of getting a guy who can help us now. Oops.
No, that's not true.
You'd be hard pressed to find where I stated Manu came in and did well right away. I never said that. I was using that in context that it is possible for players to be good coming from late in the draft.
I didn't about drafting Hill, and didn't about trading Hill for Leonard.
However, this french guy I am ing about because he will likely see zero minutes on court with Duncan. I expected Spurs to draft someone to help now, not be looking ahead to life after Duncan already when we just got to game 7 of the Finals and Duncan's still playing.
A point no one ever disputed here. The whole premise behind drafting Jean-Charles is that we think he can be good coming from relatively late in the draft.
The only point you were trying to make in this thread was that we should be about to get someone who can help right away. Then in your next response, you name dropped Manu, which only makes sense if you thought he was an example of someone who can be good right away. But feel to argue that you simply weren't making any sense instead.
I want Zach Lowe to retract his Hill-Kawhi story. Pacers got hosed.
Unlike the fans, the organization does have to plan for life at(after Tim)..add a piece or two through fa..
Imagine what would have happened if they had been serious about getting a PF years ago. They drafted Tiago in 2007 but he never really played till this year.
Imagine if you actually thought before you posted.
CBS Sportsline graded the Spurs pick a D-
GH was not a true PG or an alpha male 2. But he has easily proven to have been the best backcourt player available at 26 in that draft (actually the best guard/wing taken later than 7), and - along with Peckovic & Asik - one of the 3 best players overall in that draft taken later than 25.
It was a great pick - a very solid player on both ends (unfortunately, Indiana's backcourt is so rough that they continually ask him to be more than that).
Every post draft grade is based on one single criteria - where was that player picked compared to where the writer's mock draft had him going?
I like HPBasketball, but there's a reason nobody is banging down his door to make him a GM.
what was the grade when they picked manu and tp
Spurfan expecting every pick to be the second coming of Tony or Manu. It's what Spurfan does tbh.
I don't think there's anything wrong with being disappointed that the team decided not to draft someone who could help this season. We've seen some many young players step up over the last two seasons, that it's tempting to think any rookie the Spurs bring stateside can be a valuable contributor next season. But this team is built on development foremost, and getting a player who will be really good in three years is more important to them than getting a player who will be decent now but would probably sit on the bench for rest of his career.
If Jean-Charles has the potential to become a starter at either forward position, drafting him makes sense. Over the next couple of years, he'll either bulk up or learn perimeter moves. By the time the team needs him, he'll be ready to contribute. Until that happens, he's saving the team a lot of money that suggests they will go hard for an outside free agent. Remember, they could have re-signed everyone AND still added a $5 Million player. So it seems like they're going to at least try to do better than that.
The one thing I really wanted from this draft was for them to get a cheap scorer to replace Neal. Turns out they did that at 58 while also getting some additional height. Jean-Charles is just gravy.
Obviously they do. Unlike the fans though, they appear to not care as much about winning while Duncan is still around.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
