I would think that he could return on the 2nd at home against Dallas. It would 20 days without Parker playing in a Spurs game.
Yeah I think Parker needs more than a week and a half off which is what would have been his return against Detroit. Like Mel has said, the Spurs don't really need Parker for this upcoming stretch. Patty and Joseph have been great enough replacements. March 12 against Portland sounds good. Parker would almost have had a month off.
Damn, Leonard's hand is still bothering him? That's concerning. As for Tony, keep him out as long as possible.
Parker just said on his radio show that he was out for Wed game and that he hasn't talked with Pop about when he could come back. The groin injury is his most serious issue.
So, it looks like Parker will still be out for quite some time.
The only real issue with Parker being out is that the team only has two Healthy PGs on the roster. To me, that increases the chances of them using the 15th spot on a guard instead of a forward.
If they were concerned about going with two PGs through this Parker-less stretch then they wouldn't have traded Nando tbh. If the Spurs are perusing the buyout market then it's most certainly for a forward, otherwise they'd be making a HUGE mistake.
The Spurs would pretty much have to have an epic collapse at this point to not end up with a Top 5 seed in the West (they're 6 games up on Golden State for the 6th spot); obviously, it's preferable for a lot of reasons to be #1 or #2, but this team seems to almost play better on the road and in some ways, even if they fell as far as #5 by season's end, if it means that Parker is fully healthy and has saved some additional wear-and-tear on his body, the seeding might not be as big a deal as some would suggest. Resting your key guy for a long stretch of the regular season, even at the cost of seeding, has worked out for other teams in the past (1995 Rockets, for instance). Whatever chance the Spurs have to win the West (and a le) depend significantly upon Parker's health and I'm sure the organization would sacrifice seeding for a healthy All-Star point guard in a heartbeat.
At this rate, Daye will probably play before Leonard.
100% agree
They traded De Colo because he wanted to leave. And they had Brown. They may well be content to keep him. I'd rather them run with Beli and Manu as the back court, since that's what they may have to do for stretches in the playoffs.
Maybe on a 10-day, but surely not for the rest of the season.
There may noy be a huge difference. The buyout market should be sorted out in 10 days.
Nando wanting out was surely a factor but if the Spurs were really worried about only having two PGs while Parker is out, then they could have just as easily kept him. Teams usually don't really feel compelled to trade away an end of the bench player just because he requests a trade.
I just don't think they're out there looking for backcourt help for the final roster spot. I very well could be wrong and they could go ahead and target Ben Gordon or just keep Shannon, but it'd be a huge mistake IMO. A move like that would justify all the complaints/concerns about the FO moves since the Finals and their overall talent evaluation tbh.
Much less expensive to waive a guy on a 10-day, but you know that. I just can't see them signing a guard for the rest of the season unless they pass/whiff on all the available forwards.
Of course, they could be of the opinion that they don't need anybody better than Daye to fill the role that TMac filled in 2013. We'll know soon enough.
Any chance the Spurs try to pick up a forward (Granger, Clark, the Peace formerly known as Artest) and Udrih while letting Brown's 10-day expire and releasing Baynes (or Daye)?
Sure, but I'd rather keep Brown than bring back Beno.
I agree it would be a mistake, but it could happen if Parker is out more than another week or so. Pop had five (5) players he played at PG last season. I just can't see him going to two. It depends on what he thinks about Daye/Green/Diaw and their ability to back up Kawhi.
That...probably puts you in the minority on this site
I just brought up the Beno idea because of Parker's continued absence. Does Pop trust Joseph and Mills enough to get 48 minutes out of them combined for the next 2-3 weeks?
Parker needing more than 2 weeks off is a bad sign. I wouldn't have worried if he just SAT out that last leg of the RRT, but needing even more time? I know it's an old argument but how is that fair to the Spurs if they have to pay for TP to rest because of non Spurs activities?
Also, beyond that, 2 weeks off for "non-injuries" is a good chunk of time. Needing a month? That's the concerning part & it will be interesting to see if TP can elevate his play after this rest. If not it surely raises a lot of questions considering the Spurs window.
Not concerned about the time off. He needs to rest. The longer the better. What Parker "needs" and what the Spurs want to give him are provably completely different.
That...probably puts you in the minority on this site
I just brought up the Beno idea because of Parker's continued absence. Does Pop trust Joseph and Mills enough to get 48 minutes out of them combined for the next 2-3 weeks?
My preference for Brown is not an endorsement of his skills, it's just that I never want to see Beno in a Spurs uni again. At least Brown is in shape.
Anyway, if the problem is a lack of Pop's trust, Beno can't be the solution.
He was out for 3 weeks last March and returned to play 10 games before the playoffs. If he takes a month off and returns on March 12th, there will 19 regular season games left on the schedule (15 if he never plays in a B2B).
He was out for just purely "rest" last March? Also, last year he was playing MVP level basketball before the rest..
By the way, I am all for players having the right to play for their country. But with TP's level this year and the injury concerns, it makes you have a few questions..
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
