I know every poster in this forum follows the so-called "Spurs system" repeatedly and almost religiously, but a ball-dominant player is something that would actually complement the Spurs. Every role player on the spurs cannot create their own shot (maybe with the exception of Belinelli). The role players tend to do a good job with the floor spacing and the 3's, but a ball-dominant player can create floor spacing just as well (commanding mismatches and double-teams).
There's a reason people have been so disappointed with the Spurs not running plays for Kawhi; it's because Kawhi is not a playmaker, simply put. I think having another ball-dominant player on the Spurs can really lessen the offensive load of Parker and Ginobili, especially when posters get so mad when Ginobili turns the ball over.
Because we desperately need depth a the 3 now. Maybe you like watching Green, Manu, Belli and the three guard lineups but then again you also like Ayers out there too.
A one year rental actually makes more sense because I don't see enough minutes for what Turner and Leonard really merit long term.
Good point on his lack of an outside shot.
I think you're concatenating ball-handlers with ball-dominators. Turner needs the ball in his hands a lot to be even decent on offense. It's not like Beli and Manu who can split the workload. It would be like starting two Parkers. Turner is an inefficient scorer and an inefficient play-maker. He can drive to the hope, but he can't get his own shot otherwise and is garbage off the ball. I don't see the fit at all.
That's different than a ball-handler like Chandler or even Earl Clark who can get their own shots while also being able to make others better.
Not happening. Moving on.
With KL back, that good % inside could prove helpful.
Well, like I said before, I don't watch 76ers games enough to know how Turner really plays like, but I'd imagine Michael Carter-Williams is the ball-dominant one and Turner just gets stray buckets here and there without actually dominating the ball.
Article says both teams "could" be which in many cases means that they are.
You like arguing alot dont you? lol
Probably would be too much to pay for a backup SF. We could have Bertans and LJC coming over next season, both SFs and for much cheaper. Sometimes it's better to be patient.
bad fit?
maybe.
worse fit than...,well, who?
if they can't get a player who is in fact a better fit, Turner is a no brainer.
Spurs need dephth at 3 and while he might not be the athleticand tall SF we dream about, he isn't exactly undersized for a 3 either.
he is a decent defender and a good ball handler and he can pass the ball. last time I checked this attributes didn't rule out a player from being a good fit with the Spurs.
after the season Spurs can decide if they let him walk, or make him a RFA. and he accepts the QO, his contract would expire 2015, what fits with the cap/rebuilding situation.
Spurs would only offer their 2014 pick (plus some trow ins) anyhow, so this would be worth the price. and I really doubt the Spurs can get a better player than him at the deadline, considering their possible offers.
Anything is better than Shannon Brown at this point. Bring him in I say.
I saw turner play alot in college and a few times as an nba player, his real problem is that his middle of the road nba first step, was a very good college first step. Where that was regularly beating people in college it only sometimes works in the nba and often times people can recover. This makes a bunch of what was open in college or only lightly contested really challenged in the nba.
Turner as aa replacement for Manure?...I'm all in.
Evan Turner sucks. Even on a team almost void of talent he can't put up numbers. For the kind of contract he'll get I gotta pass unless Philly just wants to give him away, as I wouldn't want him for anything more than a rental.
He's putting up pretty good numbers in Philly.
A ball dominant player isn't going to want to come to SA to play in that system because he won't get the shots he's getting elsewhere. Bret might convince him otherwise, but I doubt it.
Good size but the kid can't shoot tbh.
Spurs are interested tbh
would rather have love
Evolution of an ST trade rumor thread
1. Original article by the NBA writer for USA Today contains the following quote: "One rival executive mentioned the San Antonio Spurs and Charlotte Bobcats as possible destinations via trade, though both teams could also wait until the offseason to see if they could simply sign him then."
2. Realgm picks up the article with this headline:"Spurs, Bobcats Could Be Interested In Evan Turner"
3. OP starts thread led: "Spurs interested in Evan Turner"
4. Many pages of discussion follow based on the thread le as if it was actually a fact.
He's putting up volume shooter numbers.
Trade aint happening. Only 2 pages in 21 hours.
Sure. I just wanted to point out that he is putting up numbers in that system when you said he wasn't. That's the concern - he is putting up good box score numbers which is upping his value both in trades and FA.
Evans 13.5 PER quite reflects his low efficiency.
Yup - plus he's on a bad team. It's hard to be a net positive in that situation. His value comes not in his ability to score, but handle the ball, pass and create.
I am not a fan of Turner. I wouldn't mind if the Spurs got him for nothing, but I don't see him helping.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote