What if West is simply "done"?

[TD 21]

Yeah, I don't think that makes sense at all. You need to space the floor to have post players. That a guy is a roller, rebounder or glass-cleaner doesn't make him any better at spacing the floor. A guy who can shoot from outside spaces the floor, and that's it. Long-twos absolutely do space the floor if the guy who's taking them is elite at doing so. Anyway, I totally expect to see West shooting threes next year with pretty much any team he joins. He has potential there, clearly.

You missed the point. The point was, West doesn't really space the floor, nor do center things, so he fits neither description of the type of player they need next to Aldridge. He also said something to the effect of he's not looking to become a three-point shooter.

I think this just demonstrates a complete lack of understand in what I and especially SAGirl posts about the old guys. It's an open debate whether the Spurs are better with Duncan and Manu opting in next season. But as far as them being able to do so or the team "wanting them to", that's not controversial. It's just a completely irrelevant point of argument. And of course, I don't want the Spurs to keep the other old guys -- especially not at giving them cap space. But a team under the cap usually lacks depth, and when you're talking about room-exception or min guys this summer, you're not going to be talking about complete players. And unfortunately, some questionable players are likely to be in the rotation.

Bull . You two either only became Spurs fans semi recently or you're just that cold. It's one thing to want to move on (I get that sentiment and I'm not necessarily opposed to it), but it's another to take shots.

That's really the antiquated view. There's no archetype for bigs anymore. The goal is to figure out how to maximize the production of your talent. If the Spurs manage to rope a Gasol, then yeah, LMA is a PF. If they find a way to get someone like Millsap (hypothetically, obviously), then LMA will be a center. You just make it work. The Spurs didn't last season. But had Diaw not been so horrible, like probably win that series, and this size issue has little traction.

There is, it's just different, especially for power forwards. Of course, if they could get a talent like Millsap, they would/should do it in a second; but they can't. We're talking role players here. Again, it's not about size, so much as it is about style. I don't know why it's so difficult to comprehend that Aldridge is a 4.5, which means the second and third bigs need to essentially be co-second bigs, the way Splitter/Diaw were, depending on match-up.

I know you want the Spurs to essentially be Memphis 2.0, but that's just not going to work. The team will have to rely on being able to defend the best players on the other teams and to be competent defensively. But they won't make it without a better offense. This year showed that. Pace is a big thing, but spacing and talent were bigger things. The team needs scorers and facilitators over defenders. For god's sake, why is that not obvious by now? The team is relying on non-natural scorer Kawhi and LMA to carry the offense. Parker and Green are incredibly inconsistent. Mills is at best inconsistent. Diaw is done. They need to fix that, and that's going to cost money. Will they have money to get the defensive big they should have as well? Not likely. Or they get the big and not the guard, and they'll still be disappointing, but this time, they'll have a lower ceiling. The Spurs have to fix their core before they focus on role-players.

That's not at all what I want. I want versatility, while you want to attempt to mimic the Warriors, when this team has no realistic path to that. All I'm saying is, they can't forget about the defense just to spruce up an offense that's still going to fall short of the other elites no matter what they do.

People don't want to hear this, but Parker IS still part of the core. Of course the back court needs an upgrade, but the reality is, three of the four rotation guards are likely to return, while one of the rotation bigs is, so by default, it is the more immediate need.

[SAGirl]

I mean, that's how you end up with a David West. Spurs should be looking for the best talent they can add to Kawhi and LMA (and hopefully Green) this off-season. That will likely not be a center. If that's the case, you have the room exception, the min and MAYBE some cap space to find the rest of the big-man rotation. Let's say you have West, some decent, but not great center like Plumlee, and some young guys like Lalanne, Ndoye, Bertans and LJC. How does that rotation shake out? If you think it's not with West starting, I don't know what to tell you except that unless he's the super-sub third big, he's going to be out there at tip-off.

We can complain about it all we want, but in a world where the Spurs get a KD, Conley, Batum or any other marquee free agent, bargain-bin West may be the second-best big on the roster.

I don't think personally we get a guy like that and have said that in other threads, though several spurs fans continue to delude themselves that we will. Not once will you see me making an argument for a guy like that bc we'd need to be bare the last remaining shreds of depth we have for a guy who has redundancies with our stars.
I am not sure who they go after, but I have said they are likely to make moves around the edges to fill holes like Timmy would be leaving and D west is not the answer. That's just me obviously.

[dabom]

SAGirl with some sensible posts.

[Chinook]

You missed the point. The point was, West doesn't really space the floor, nor do center things, so he fits neither description of the type of player they need next to Aldridge. He also said something to the effect of he's not looking to become a three-point shooter.

I didn't miss your point. I just said it's irrelevant in my opinion. West thusofar hasn't been a three-point shooter. The Spurs need a three-point shooter as a big. It's not going to help their offense to have guy who can't shoot but can do other things, not unless they get the ball out of Leonard's hands. I think he will become a three-point shooter, though. There's really no reason to not project it, as his shot looks good. I think he'll do whatever the team asks of him. So long as he can knock down open shots at an efficient TS%, I think he's fine. Not ideal by any means, but fine.

Bull . You two either only became Spurs fans semi recently or you're just that cold. It's one thing to want to move on (I get that sentiment and I'm not necessarily opposed to it), but it's another to take shots.

It's a ing game, man. I know it, they know it. You should know it. I want to watch the Spurs win. If they keep Manu and Tim, that's cool. I'll chat about ways they can win with those guys. But if they don't, they don't, and I have plenty of ideas about where I'd like to see them go from there. If you ask me right now, I think it's best that they go. Dunno what you mean about me taking shots, though.

There is, it's just different, especially for power forwards. Of course, if they could get a talent like Millsap, they would/should do it in a second; but they can't. We're talking role players here. Again, it's not about size, so much as it is about style. I don't know why it's so difficult to comprehend that Aldridge is a 4.5, which means the second and third bigs need to essentially be co-second bigs, the way Splitter/Diaw were, depending on match-up.

This is just an attempt to twist out of your old position. LMA being a 4.5 was never controversial. You were the one saying that as a result of that, he needs a center next to him. My stance this entire time is that they need to add the most talented big they can next to him, regardless of position. If it's Pau, then LMA would play as a PF. If it's Millsap, or Terrence Jones or whatever, then Aldridge would be a center. And yes, I agree that the third big being the opposite of the second big would be nice. Seeing as we've been talking about third bigs like Plumlee and Aldrich, it seems like getting a PF with the second-big salary slot is wise. There aren't many examples of cheap PFs out there who are good enough to play in the short rotation of a contender.

That's not at all what I want. I want versatility, while you want to attempt to mimic the Warriors, when this team has no realistic path to that. All I'm saying is, they can't forget about the defense just to spruce up an offense that's still going to fall short of the other elites no matter what they do.

I think you're off your rocker if you think the idea of having LMA play PF is a GS idea. It's not. There are just too many damned examples out there of teams that aren't playing two traditional bigs nowadays. That includes a number of playoffs teams. And I'm not even talking about pulling like Animu at the four. We're talking about legit bigs here. LMA/West is hardly a GS-inspired front court. And LMA/Sullinger is significantly less so.

People don't want to hear this, but Parker IS still part of the core. Of course the back court needs an upgrade, but the reality is, three of the four rotation guards are likely to return, while one of the rotation bigs is, so by default, it is the more immediate need.

I mean, they have exclusive control over three of their top-five bigs. And they are extremely likely to be able to keep a fourth. It's not very hard at all to figure out how to get the other guys if they want to go that route. But just as with Diaw, Parker and Mills are question marks. Unlike with Diaw, there is no one who is playing their position who can score better. Finding guys who can role and score isn't hard. Again, the Spurs have one in Europe right now. But they've have like no success finding guys who can drive and create mismatches. The priority has to be fixing that glaring flaw and finding a new guy to fill their sixth-man roll.

As far as Parker goes, he needs to be part of the Spurs' core the same way Haslem is part of the Heat's core. They can't rely on him, so if they keep him, they're going to have to improve around him and take his good games as gravy.

[Chinook]

I don't think personally we get a guy like that and have said that in other threads, though several spurs fans continue to delude themselves that we will. Not once will you see me making an argument for a guy like that bc we'd need to be bare the last remaining shreds of depth we have for a guy who has redundancies with our stars.
I am not sure who they go after, but I have said they are likely to make moves around the edges to fill holes like Timmy would be leaving and D west is not the answer. That's just me obviously.

I don't like the idea of trying to patch the holes up around LMA and Kawhi and just giving it another go. If Tim and Manu leave, they HAVE to start rebuilding their core with a big signing and their depth through getting young players on their roster. It needs to be both unless the team is okay with sacrificing a season or two. I'm not sure they are.

As far as the signing costing depth, it actually does do that much harm. If the Spurs trade Parker for nothing for example, they can waive Diaw (which should happen no matter what, honestly) and sign Durant (for example) while still having $7 Million in cap space and the room exception. That's enough to bring over the young guys and sign two mid-level players. Or to keep Boban and sign one mid-level player along with the young'uns.

The depth chart could look like so:

PG: Mills, Miller, Murry (29)
SG: Leonard, Green, Simmons
SF: Durant, Anderson, Bertans
PF: West, Bass (mid-level guy), Lalanne
C: LMA, Boban, Milutinov

And you can sprinkle in whatever Parker netted on top of that. It certainly could be better in the front court, but it's still great depth. All three layers look like they can be fun.

[MaNu4Tres]

I didn't miss your point. I just said it's irrelevant in my opinion. West thusofar hasn't been a three-point shooter. The Spurs need a three-point shooter as a big. It's not going to help their offense to have guy who can't shoot but can do other things, not unless they get the ball out of Leonard's hands. I think he will become a three-point shooter, though. There's really no reason to not project it, as his shot looks good. I think he'll do whatever the team asks of him. So long as he can knock down open shots at an efficient TS%, I think he's fine. Not ideal by any means, but fine.

So much I disagree with in this post, I don't even know where to start.

Let me let you in on some basketball knowledge, Chinook.

Even if Leonard has the ball in his hands, Spurs don't need two big men who can shoot to open up the offense. Apparently you have no idea what skill-sets are needed in order for the motion offense, or Spurs offense in general, to become efficiently optimal.

Spurs need a solid diver in PnRs to open up shots for Danny and other weak-side shooters or open up more opportunities around the basket -- the best shots in basketball ( layups/ dunks or wide open 3s).

This past year, the Spurs had no divers and it killed the Spurs offense vs. the elite teams when Leonard, Parker or Manu had the ball in PnRs -- teams gave the open pass to the big who would pick and pop ( Diaw, West, Duncan) and the best shots in basketball became hard to create in the halfcourt offense.

As for the Pick N Pop options, as we all saw, Diaw had zero confidence getting the ball in that area, same with Duncan and later on ...same with West. The weak-side defense was able to stay at home w/ the weak-side shooters and any action was easily defended because the weak-side perimeter defenders didn't have to rotate -- as the defenders involved in the Pick and Pop were "giving up" the worst shot in basketball -- the mid-range jumper from West or giving up an ineffective/clock killing dribbling handle off/reset from TD/Diaw. Not having a diver in PnRs is a big reason why you saw Danny take zero shots in long stretches of games and its a big reason why he did struggle as his shots were contested more often than they had been in the past.

Back when we saw the effective ball-movement motion offense from 12'-14', Spurs had two great divers in a healthy and spry TD/Splitter and one of the two would always be in the game. Weakside perimeter D would have to rotate towards the strong side whenever there was any PnR action involving Splitter/TD and the weakside action or shooter was always open. Having a diver in PnRs was a huge reason why Neal, Mills, Green, Manu, ect all were able to get off and have HUGE games.

Spurs need a diver again in PnRs-- that is why Plumlee would be such a great value pick up for SA -- he will cost a fraction of most of the big men on the market and his skill-set is EXACTLY what the Spurs need for a 18-22 minute role. Plus he is a strong/mobile rim protector and rebounder.


In regards to your David West take... you think West will just now become a 3 point shooter in his 14th year in the NBA?? That is absurd. One of your worst takes I've read this week.

[SAGirl]

I don't like the idea of trying to patch the holes up around LMA and Kawhi and just giving it another go. If Tim and Manu leave, they HAVE to start rebuilding their core with a big signing and their depth through getting young players on their roster. It needs to be both unless the team is okay with sacrificing a season or two. I'm not sure they are.

As far as the signing costing depth, it actually does do that much harm. If the Spurs trade Parker for nothing for example, they can waive Diaw (which should happen no matter what, honestly) and sign Durant (for example) while still having $7 Million in cap space and the room exception. That's enough to bring over the young guys and sign two mid-level players. Or to keep Boban and sign one mid-level player along with the young'uns.

The depth chart could look like so:

PG: Mills, Miller, Murry (29)
SG: Leonard, Green, Simmons
SF: Durant, Anderson, Bertans
PF: West, Bass (mid-level guy), Lalanne
C: LMA, Boban, Milutinov

And you can sprinkle in whatever Parker netted on top of that. It certainly could be better in the front court, but it's still great depth. All three layers look like they can be fun.

If Tim and Manu leave I agree with you that they need to make some additional moves, but I think at this point the team has some holes that need filling and Manu and Tim retiring just add to that. I would rather pick up Milutinov and spot him as C if they can do no better than Dworst bc he's 7 ft tall with a 7'3 wingspan and is a real center, who rolls to the basket and sets picks, in addition to really contesting shots. Maybe he's not ready to start but I would give him a chance like Pop's did with Boban. Maybe they start Boban even, Pop's did try that pairing in the RS.

But in addition to issues of fit, I have since come to think they will not make the drastic moves this off-season. The only player that is worth it really is Durant (not Conley, not Al Horford, etc), but Durant is not a seamless fit, and he presents redundancies, which means that there are diminishing returns to what he brings, and I have my doubts he comes over. Regardless, call it a hunch, but I doubt we get a significant FA this offseason and ppl will be disappointed. So yea, I don't think they will trade off Tony for one, not this offseason at least, and although I thought initially that Manu and Tim retire, if they don't, I expect them to opt in for the rest of their contracts, not to come back for the vet minimum. In that case, all they can do is to make moderate upgrades.

Its fine and entertaining to discuss possibilities, realistic and remote, but in terms of what I am expecting, nothing drastic really, maybe sadly. I only hope that Tim and Manu know when its time and if they return they can still play and don't pull a Kobe. That's really all I am hoping.

Edit: If they do go after a big fish and don't land him, they must have some plans B and C. Even if they do go after the big fishes it's quite possible they are not able to add anyone better than LMA and Kawhi already and must go for quality roleplayers. Which IMO could be a better move for the team in the end.

[SAGirl]

So much I disagree with in this post, I don't even know where to start.

Let me let you in on some basketball knowledge, Chinook.

Even if Leonard has the ball in his hands, Spurs don't need two big men who can shoot to open up the offense. Apparently you have no idea what skill-sets are needed in order for the motion offense, or Spurs offense in general, to become efficiently optimal.

Spurs need a solid diver in PnRs to open up shots for Danny and other weak-side shooters or open up more opportunities around the basket -- the best shots in basketball ( layups/ dunks or wide open 3s).

This past year, the Spurs had no divers and it killed the Spurs offense vs. the elite teams when Leonard, Parker or Manu had the ball in PnRs -- teams gave the open pass to the big who would pick and pop ( Diaw, West, Duncan) and the best shots in basketball became hard to create in the halfcourt offense.

As for the Pick N Pop options, as we all saw, Diaw had zero confidence getting the ball in that area, same with Duncan and later on ...same with West. The weak-side defense was able to stay at home w/ the weak-side shooters and any action was easily defended because the weak-side perimeter defenders didn't have to rotate -- as the defenders involved in the Pick and Pop were "giving up" the worst shot in basketball -- the mid-range jumper from West or giving up an ineffective/clock killing dribbling handle off/reset from TD/Diaw. Not having a diver in PnRs is a big reason why you saw Danny take zero shots in long stretches of games and its a big reason why he did struggle as his shots were contested more often than they had been in the past.

Back when we saw the effective ball-movement motion offense from 12'-14', Spurs had two great divers in a healthy and spry TD/Splitter and one of the two would always be in the game. Weakside perimeter D would have to rotate towards the strong side whenever there was any PnR action involving Splitter/TD and the weakside action or shooter was always open. Having a diver in PnRs was a huge reason why Neal, Mills, Green, Manu, ect all were able to get off and have HUGE games.

Spurs need a diver again in PnRs-- that is why Plumlee would be such a great value pick up for SA -- he will cost a fraction of most of the big men on the market and his skill-set is EXACTLY what the Spurs need for a 18-22 minute role. Plus he is a strong/mobile rim protector and rebounder.


In regards to your David West take... you think West will just now become a 3 point shooter in his 14th year in the NBA?? That is absurd. One of your worst takes I've read this week.

Good explanation of why Plumlee fits in. I like it.

[DrSteffo]

So much I disagree with in this post, I don't even know where to start.

Let me let you in on some basketball knowledge, Chinook.

Even if Leonard has the ball in his hands, Spurs don't need two big men who can shoot to open up the offense. Apparently you have no idea what skill-sets are needed in order for the motion offense, or Spurs offense in general, to become efficiently optimal.

Spurs need a solid diver in PnRs to open up shots for Danny and other weak-side shooters or open up more opportunities around the basket -- the best shots in basketball ( layups/ dunks or wide open 3s).

This past year, the Spurs had no divers and it killed the Spurs offense vs. the elite teams when Leonard, Parker or Manu had the ball in PnRs -- teams gave the open pass to the big who would pick and pop ( Diaw, West, Duncan) and the best shots in basketball became hard to create in the halfcourt offense.

As for the Pick N Pop options, as we all saw, Diaw had zero confidence getting the ball in that area, same with Duncan and later on ...same with West. The weak-side defense was able to stay at home w/ the weak-side shooters and any action was easily defended because the weak-side perimeter defenders didn't have to rotate -- as the defenders involved in the Pick and Pop were "giving up" the worst shot in basketball -- the mid-range jumper from West or giving up an ineffective/clock killing dribbling handle off/reset from TD/Diaw. Not having a diver in PnRs is a big reason why you saw Danny take zero shots in long stretches of games and its a big reason why he did struggle as his shots were contested more often than they had been in the past.

Back when we saw the effective ball-movement motion offense from 12'-14', Spurs had two great divers in a healthy and spry TD/Splitter and one of the two would always be in the game. Weakside perimeter D would have to rotate towards the strong side whenever there was any PnR action involving Splitter/TD and the weakside action or shooter was always open. Having a diver in PnRs was a huge reason why Neal, Mills, Green, Manu, ect all were able to get off and have HUGE games.

Spurs need a diver again in PnRs-- that is why Plumlee would be such a great value pick up for SA -- he will cost a fraction of most of the big men on the market and his skill-set is EXACTLY what the Spurs need for a 18-22 minute role. Plus he is a strong/mobile rim protector and rebounder.


In regards to your David West take... you think West will just now become a 3 point shooter in his 14th year in the NBA?? That is absurd. One of your worst takes I've read this week.

Excellent post, thanks.

[J_Paco]

Players who need to go:

Duncan
Manu
Bobo
West
Bonner

I'm on the fence about Miller and Martin.

I understand they are probably past the point of being productive players, but in no world should a "loyal" Spurs fan pick Andre Miller and Kevin Martin overr Duncan and Ginobili. Even if a player of Miller's skillset is badly needed as either a starter or backup. That doesn't change the fact that he hasn't played enough or done enough in a Spurs uniform to be given preferential treatment over two all-time greats.

Martin is/was complete dog this past season and should have never been given a roster spot. Butler may have been old and possibly "washed up" too, but at least his frame, skillset and mentoring (for Anderson and Simmons) of younger players is something the team needed.

Who knows, he may have had a "Steve Kerr" esque moment for us in him but the front office was in love with bringing in a skinny, frail, one-dimensional choke artist instead.

I do agree that most of those players (with possibly Manu and Timmy included) should be gone before the start of next season, though.

Taking a flier on Miles Plumlee and maybe Meyers Leonard (gotta hope Portland let's him walk and doesn't offer a QO) next to either Duncan and/or Boban would automatically help the team's terrible center position depth. They need to think outside the box a little and go after cheap, "untapped potential" players and stay far, far away from an old, washed up veteran like David West.

West is only two inches shorter (6'9" vs. 6'11") with longer arms (7'4" vs. 7'1" wingspan) than Enes Kanter, but he routinely and continually got out worked and embarrassed on both ends and especially on the glass. He needs to move on to the next phase of his career else where and not in a Spurs jersey. Anyone suggesting he should start next to Aldridge next season, which proved to be a poor pairing on defense and rebounding wise, needs get off whatever high dose of drug their on.

[Chinook]

So much I disagree with in this post, I don't even know where to start.

You're getting to the point that you're just a broken record.

Let me let you in on some basketball knowledge, Chinook.

What an arrogant line from someone who's going to make a lot of mistakes in the rest of the post.

Even if Leonard has the ball in his hands, Spurs don't need two big men who can shoot to open up the offense. Apparently you have no idea what skill-sets are needed in order for the motion offense, or Spurs offense in general, to become efficiently optimal.

There isn't any single "Spurs offense". The Spurs run whatever they think will work best for their personnel. They ran through the post when it was Tim as the head dog. They started running PnR when it was Parker and Manu. Now they are back to the post with Kawhi and LMA. This wasn't some accident. They wanted to do this. They don't have the guys to run a PnR because they don't WANT the guys to run a PnR. A Parker/Plumlee PnR takes the ball out of both Kawhi's and LMA's hands. They are relegated to third and fourth options on the play you want to be the staple of the offense. That's simply not going to happen. And it shouldn't.

Spurs need a solid diver in PnRs to open up shots for Danny and other weak-side shooters or open up more opportunities around the basket -- the best shots in basketball ( layups/ dunks or wide open 3s).

Nope.

This past year, the Spurs had no divers and it killed the Spurs offense vs. the elite teams when Leonard, Parker or Manu had the ball in PnRs -- teams gave the open pass to the big who would pick and pop ( Diaw, West, Duncan) and the best shots in basketball became hard to create in the halfcourt offense.

Or maybe the Spurs didn't actually want to roll. All of those guys know how to roll and just didn't. Maybe it had something to do with the Spurs' guards not being effective penetrators and needing the easier pass off the PnP to create offense? But thinking that the Spurs' offense struggled due to not being able to run an effective PnR is silly. It struggled because it relied on iso scoring. That was a choice on their part, not a limitation.

As for the Pick N Pop options, as we all saw, Diaw had zero confidence getting the ball in that area, same with Duncan and later on ...same with West. The weak-side defense was able to stay at home w/ the weak-side shooters and any action was easily defended because the weak-side perimeter defenders didn't have to rotate -- as the defenders involved in the Pick and Pop were "giving up" the worst shot in basketball -- the mid-range jumper from West or giving up an ineffective/clock killing dribbling handle off/reset from TD/Diaw. Not having a diver in PnRs is a big reason why you saw Danny take zero shots in long stretches of games and its a big reason why he did struggle as his shots were contested more often than they had been in the past.

Back when we saw the effective ball-movement motion offense from 12'-14', Spurs had two great divers in a healthy and spry TD/Splitter and one of the two would always be in the game. Weakside perimeter D would have to rotate towards the strong side whenever there was any PnR action involving Splitter/TD and the weakside action or shooter was always open. Having a diver in PnRs was a huge reason why Neal, Mills, Green, Manu, ect all were able to get off and have HUGE games.

I really wouldn't have much of an issue with this except that you seem to think that the Spurs really wanted to run pick plays with Parker and were just unable to. The Spurs' offense just changed. In 2014, Parker and Manu were the team's leaders in USG%. In the playoffs, those numbers were 28.3 and 26.2 respectively. Four of the top five players in that stat were guards, with the only exception being Tim. Contrast that to the playoffs in 2016, where the top two players were Leonard and LMA. Parker and Manu posted USG% scores of 21.6 and 15.6. You want to know why the "Beautiful Game" didn't work this season? Look at the guys who have the ball in their hands.

As for Green, you can see that he got his touches just fine the playoffs when the PnR was mostly gone. He's definitely getting his touches in different ways, but he should be able to adjust to that and knock down his shots again.

Spurs need a diver again in PnRs-- that is why Plumlee would be such a great value pick up for SA -- he will cost a fraction of most of the big men on the market and his skill-set is EXACTLY what the Spurs need for a 18-22 minute role. Plus he is a strong/mobile rim protector and rebounder.

Your confidence in Plumlee is misplaced. We've talked about him enough to where you know that I don't dislike him. I've just repeatedly said that he's not the answer. He's just not proven, and even you wanting him for a 18-22 mpg roll supports that. The Spurs need a starter next to Aldridge, and that player can't play less than half the game. And his defense is being massively overstated. He has a block-to-foul ratio of .54. That's not horrible. But it's not anything other than a foot note.

Biggest issue with your take is that you aren't even disagreeing. You're just going off on a random tangent. "How does the team fix their center rotation?" "Plumlee." "So he's going to be their second-best big?" "No, but he would be great value as he's sucked most of his career but has the skill-set we need." "Okay, but what are they going to do with the rest of the big rotation?" "Uh..."

You get Plumlee. All right. So now you have him, LMA and nobody, with little cap space to get other bigs. Or you add him to LMA, West and Diaw. How does that rotation shake out? You have Plumlee starting and West and Diaw being Turd Towers 2.0, or you have one of them starting (and West makes the most sense), and you have something that would hopefully be like the bench when Splitter played there.

For the tl;dr crowd: The Spurs don't want to run plays without Kawhi and LMA getting the ball in their spots. That makes the need to get a roll man for the first unit vastly overstated. Back when the Spurs were guard-centric, that made sense. But the offense has moved on, for better or worse (likely for worst). Getting a guy like Plumlee isn't enough, and since it's not enough, it doesn't make sense to start him. You need to get two centers if you want one in the starting unit, because the bench needs one much more with LMA being an almost ideal starting center for the personnel they have now.

In regards to your David West take... you think West will just now become a 3 point shooter in his 14th year in the NBA?? That is absurd. One of your worst takes I've read this week.

Don't you think your 's getting old by now?

[Chinook]

Good explanation of why Plumlee fits in. I like it.

He'd fit into an offense where Parker or Manu created for everyone else. But when you replace Tim and young Leonard with LMA and current Leonard, you go from getting role-players shots in good position to marginalizing stars. As some of the KOFs can tell you, I'm a fan of letting Kawhi play off the ball in favor of someone else creating. But the Spurs don't seem to want that. And I'm not at all a fan of paying LMA $20 Million to be the third option on most plays.

The simplest solution is just to have LMA roll more. He can do it. He's big with long arms, good hands and plenty of athleticism and touch near the rim. Pop could just ask him to do it more, but that hasn't happened. But once you start adding another big to run PnR with, you aren't running PnP with LMA as much as you need to, as that's his most efficient shot (out of the ones he takes usually).

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

So much I disagree with in this post, I don't even know where to start.

Let me let you in on some basketball knowledge, Chinook.

Even if Leonard has the ball in his hands, Spurs don't need two big men who can shoot to open up the offense. Apparently you have no idea what skill-sets are needed in order for the motion offense, or Spurs offense in general, to become efficiently optimal.

Spurs need a solid diver in PnRs to open up shots for Danny and other weak-side shooters or open up more opportunities around the basket -- the best shots in basketball ( layups/ dunks or wide open 3s).

This past year, the Spurs had no divers and it killed the Spurs offense vs. the elite teams when Leonard, Parker or Manu had the ball in PnRs -- teams gave the open pass to the big who would pick and pop ( Diaw, West, Duncan) and the best shots in basketball became hard to create in the halfcourt offense.

As for the Pick N Pop options, as we all saw, Diaw had zero confidence getting the ball in that area, same with Duncan and later on ...same with West. The weak-side defense was able to stay at home w/ the weak-side shooters and any action was easily defended because the weak-side perimeter defenders didn't have to rotate -- as the defenders involved in the Pick and Pop were "giving up" the worst shot in basketball -- the mid-range jumper from West or giving up an ineffective/clock killing dribbling handle off/reset from TD/Diaw. Not having a diver in PnRs is a big reason why you saw Danny take zero shots in long stretches of games and its a big reason why he did struggle as his shots were contested more often than they had been in the past.

Back when we saw the effective ball-movement motion offense from 12'-14', Spurs had two great divers in a healthy and spry TD/Splitter and one of the two would always be in the game. Weakside perimeter D would have to rotate towards the strong side whenever there was any PnR action involving Splitter/TD and the weakside action or shooter was always open. Having a diver in PnRs was a huge reason why Neal, Mills, Green, Manu, ect all were able to get off and have HUGE games.

Spurs need a diver again in PnRs-- that is why Plumlee would be such a great value pick up for SA -- he will cost a fraction of most of the big men on the market and his skill-set is EXACTLY what the Spurs need for a 18-22 minute role. Plus he is a strong/mobile rim protector and rebounder.


In regards to your David West take... you think West will just now become a 3 point shooter in his 14th year in the NBA?? That is absurd. One of your worst takes I've read this week.

This would have all been true ( except for the entirely unnecessary 2nd paragraph ) if the current Spurs had the same offense as the 2012/14 teams, but they don't, not in the slightest. They create offense entirely differently, the guys with the most usage rate are entirely different and the style is not dependent on PnR, rolling, penetrating, passing because the personnel has changed. Parker can no longer collapse a defense, Manu is no longer a magician PnR player. Post ASB Tim couldn't do layups.

The offense revolves around 2 iso, post players. They're both top 15 NBA players, you have to either go with the style they excel at, or trade them for a slasher PG, a rolling big man and a shooter. When a team is trying to initiate offense using a wing post up player, then you defnitely need bigs who can shoot and spread the floor, rather than bigs who can roll, unless you're willing to base your offense around the 3rd/4th, etc best offensive players on the team and downgrade your two 20 PPG scorers to secondary options, which makes zero sense to me.

[Chinook]

If Tim and Manu leave I agree with you that they need to make some additional moves, but I think at this point the team has some holes that need filling and Manu and Tim retiring just add to that. I would rather pick up Milutinov and spot him as C if they can do no better than Dworst bc he's 7 ft tall with a 7'3 wingspan and is a real center, who rolls to the basket and sets picks, in addition to really contesting shots. Maybe he's not ready to start but I would give him a chance like Pop's did with Boban. Maybe they start Boban even, Pop's did try that pairing in the RS.

Boban is a bad fit for the SL. Dude is a black hole on offense. He'd be much better off the bench where he can be the main guy.

But in addition to issues of fit, I have since come to think they will not make the drastic moves this off-season. The only player that is worth it really is Durant (not Conley, not Al Horford, etc), but Durant is not a seamless fit, and he presents redundancies, which means that there are diminishing returns to what he brings, and I have my doubts he comes over. Regardless, call it a hunch, but I doubt we get a significant FA this offseason and ppl will be disappointed. So yea, I don't think they will trade off Tony for one, not this offseason at least, and although I thought initially that Manu and Tim retire, if they don't, I expect them to opt in for the rest of their contracts, not to come back for the vet minimum. In that case, all they can do is to make moderate upgrades.

Worth what? The Spurs will have about $19 Million in cap space just by waiving Diaw, assuming the oldies retire. This isn't last off-season, where a bunch of guys with NBA futures were free agents. If you mean letting those guys go, then I will say that this is a whole different discussion if they exercise their options. If they do, the Spurs may have no cap space at all and not MLE. The only thing they could do is trade guys at that point.

If you mean worth their salary, we're going to have to get used to a new paradigm. Batum is getting a ton of money this summer. Probably at least $100 Million. DeRozan too. They aren't going to be overpaid by doing so. That will just be what guys of that talent level are worth. So the Spurs spending $19 Million on some guy who is a notch below LMA and Kawhi is just something they'll have to live with. The guys you see making $8 Million or so a year aren't going to be the guys who will be that cheap next come next month.

Its fine and entertaining to discuss possibilities, realistic and remote, but in terms of what I am expecting, nothing drastic really, maybe sadly. I only hope that Tim and Manu know when its time and if they return they can still play and don't pull a Kobe. That's really all I am hoping.

What I'm hoping is that they will have it when the team needs them to have it. For the roster, I just hope Pop realizes it's time to develop guys instead of keeping ring-chasers.

Edit: If they do go after a big fish and don't land him, they must have some plans B and C. Even if they do go after the big fishes it's quite possible they are not able to add anyone better than LMA and Kawhi already and must go for quality roleplayers. Which IMO could be a better move for the team in the end.

They are almost certainly not going to improve on Kawhi and LMA. They should rather being looking for a third player who can grow with them. Sullinger or Clarkson aren't supposed to be better than those two, but they are supposed to replace the production Parker is currently supposed to bring. I don't think that duo is going to get much better, honestly, so rather than doubling down on them, they have to give them the help they need. That won't be cheap.

[SAGirl]

^^^worth gutting the roster to get him in--meaning you trade whomever it takes but Kawhi/Aldridge and dump Tony, Danny and Diaw. Like I said I doubt highly they do that. I am not in the let's get Durant camp bc I am a nonbeliever in that plan. If SA gets him and dumps everyone else (including Danny to get better at positions of need or to complete Durants salary), fine, I can understand why it makes sense, but I doubt they do that.

I would classify Clarkson and Sullinger or Collison and Koufous and several suggestions as role players filling needs and that is what they will likely do IMO. Like you I'd hope they develop too. I'd like to see Nikola join the team specially if we don't get a center in, but he has 2 more years in his European contract and Spurs will be spursing with their stashes. I don't want to see more Dworst as C. That set him up for failure. And for small ball when LMA will be the center D west doesn't fit as he can't guard wings or perimeter players one on one. In those cases I suspect we see Anderson or any other wing they add this summer (if they add anybody at the wings).

[Chinook]

But there's an ocean between sacrificing everything they need to to have a max slot and having no cap space. The Spurs could keep Diaw and have $13 Million. They could cut him and have $19 Million. They could cut him and trade someone else to have a max slot and more. Whatever they choose, they just need to get the best player they can with the money they have. That's what I'm saying. They shouldn't worry about getting guys like Plumlee because he's "only" going to cost $6 Million unless that's all they have. If they have more, they should spend more.

Spurs fans have gotten too used to paying under-market value for players. Their core is dying off. They'll need to spend like everyone else has to to bring in the guys they need to fix it.

[mo7888]

I'm a fan of letting Kawhi play off the ball in favor of someone else creating. But the Spurs don't seem to want that.

That is the only part that matters about this whole discussion. How do we play Kwahi...if he's going to play off the ball he has the ability to catch and shoot or catch and drive out of motion. In that scenario you need a PG that can get to the rim and finish making him a threat to pass to spot up shooters and a big that can play PnR to get it started....If Kawhi is the guy with the ball and he is going to facilitate you need a pg who can spot up and play good D and you need a Big that can stretch the floor and leave LMA alone down low. So the answer to what we need starts and ends with how we want to play Kawhi..

[SAGirl]

He'd fit into an offense where Parker or Manu created for everyone else. But when you replace Tim and young Leonard with LMA and current Leonard, you go from getting role-players shots in good position to marginalizing stars. As some of the KOFs can tell you, I'm a fan of letting Kawhi play off the ball in favor of someone else creating. But the Spurs don't seem to want that. And I'm not at all a fan of paying LMA $20 Million to be the third option on most plays.

The simplest solution is just to have LMA roll more. He can do it. He's big with long arms, good hands and plenty of athleticism and touch near the rim. Pop could just ask him to do it more, but that hasn't happened. But once you start adding another big to run PnR with, you aren't running PnP with LMA as much as you need to, as that's his most efficient shot (out of the ones he takes usually).

Well I like diversity in the offense and I think Spurs do too, bc they like sometimes to start the action from somewhere else even if their same. 2 guys finish the play. They did run PNR sometimes with Tim, sometimes Kawhi was the ballhandler, sometimes Tony, Tim just couldn't finish for crap until his retirement game and those weren't PNR, he got several baskets in transition.

Dworst is just another PnP guy who doesn't add much to the starters in any category. His offensive skills are redundant with Kawhi and LMA. If you want to PNP LMA is better, he would be better posting up too, in the paint, in transition, rebounding, etc. The only thing that LMA doesn't like is to roll so to pair him with a traditional center complements him and gives the team variety.

The most damning to me is that Dworst defense stats are misleading. He cannot defend a PNR to save his life and the man just fails at boxing out. DWorst doesn't bring anything to the SL they need but a body, and his passing. I suppose if they gut the roster to get a big fish and can do no better then fine, but I don't think that's what they will do or that it's ideal.

[Chinook]

That is the only part that matters about this whole discussion. How do we play Kwahi...if he's going to play off the ball he has the ability to catch and shoot or catch and drive out of motion. In that scenario you need a PG that can get to the rim and finish making him a threat to pass to spot up shooters and a big that can play PnR to get it started....If Kawhi is the guy with the ball and he is going to facilitate you need a pg who can spot up and play good D and you need a Big that can stretch the floor and leave LMA alone down low. So the answer to what we need starts and ends with how we want to play Kawhi..

Damned strizzle. To a similar extent, the same is true for LMA. He can't have his current game if the Spurs are going to run the PnR with someone else. Again, just have LMA roll. It's by far the easiest way to add that back into first-unit offense. , you can even have Kawhi and LMA play the PnR together if you do that.

[mo7888]

Damned strizzle. To a similar extent, the same is true for LMA. He can't have his current game if the Spurs are going to run the PnR with someone else. Again, just have LMA roll. It's by far the easiest way to add that back into first-unit offense. , you can even have Kawhi and LMA play the PnR together if you do that.

Exactly

[MaNu4Tres]

What an arrogant line from someone who's going to make a lot of mistakes in the rest of the post.

A lot of mistakes? Yet you think West would be better suited to start and become a three point shooter and base your premise on that ridiculous take. It's not my fault that you're in either denial or don't understand the game as much as you think you do. I know you have a high post count and respond to everything 24/7 but that doesn't mean much tbh... I'll give you the information on the cap but all that takes is research if you have the time on your hands -- which you obviously have a lot of.

There isn't any single "Spurs offense". The Spurs run whatever they think will work best for their personnel. They ran through the post when it was Tim as the head dog. They started running PnR when it was Parker and Manu. Now they are back to the post with Kawhi and LMA. This wasn't some accident. They wanted to do this. They don't have the guys to run a PnR because they don't WANT the guys to run a PnR. A Parker/Plumlee PnR takes the ball out of both Kawhi's and LMA's hands. They are relegated to third and fourth options on the play you want to be the staple of the offense. That's simply not going to happen. And it shouldn't.

Spurs run many sets, MANY of them being PnR's with Leonard as the creator. They run action or secondary motion off those initial sets and also run different creative types of side PnR w/ dribble hand offs from the posts featuring Parker/Leonard or another guard. But the reason why the weak-side motion off those sets featuring Leonard didn't work optimally or create the highest +EV shots is because the big that was setting the screen usually Popped because he was unable to effectively dive and convert attempts in traffic -- the good teams WANTED THIS and induced the Spurs to take these shots while weak-side action created zero looks most of the time.

Sure they run many sets with Leonard and Aldridge in ISO but they don't run that every time down the floor and a lot of times they had to go to it because of the ineffectiveness of the secondary motion offense with their personnel this year (against the good teams who defended the sets right). In the playoffs, Pop actually tried to get motion offense going and couldn't -- as they passed ineffectively to guarded players because of the four bigs who were all pick and Pop guys ( 3 ineffective ones)

Or maybe the Spurs didn't actually want to roll. All of those guys know how to roll and just didn't. Maybe it had something to do with the Spurs' guards not being effective penetrators and needing the easier pass off the PnP to create offense? But thinking that the Spurs' offense struggled due to not being able to run an effective PnR is silly. It struggled because it relied on iso scoring. That was a choice on their part, not a limitation.

There's so many wrinkles to the Spurs offense -- yes even the motion offense they ran last year with Aldridge and Kawhi. Their problem was they didn't have a true diver in PnR's to open up the weak-side secondary action. I love how you always think players can just all of a sudden become three point shooters and solid divers in PnR's if Pop just asks them to do it -- "All those guys know how to roll" -- that is the one of the most ridiculous things I've heard. You have to have an effective diver that's a threat to finish inside at a high clip off any creative motion action that involves some type of PnR in order to create the BEST looks in the half court offense. The best looks are not long 2's. Even if its only for 18-22 minutes a game and even if most minutes are with the second unit -- it can make a huge difference in the overall offense for 48 minutes and make the Spurs overall punch on both ends that much more deadly.

I really wouldn't have much of an issue with this except that you seem to think that the Spurs really wanted to run pick plays with Parker and were just unable to. The Spurs' offense just changed. In 2014, Parker and Manu were the team's leaders in USG%. In the playoffs, those numbers were 28.3 and 26.2 respectively. Four of the top five players in that stat were guards, with the only exception being Tim. Contrast that to the playoffs in 2016, where the top two players were Leonard and LMA. Parker and Manu posted USG% scores of 21.6 and 15.6. You want to know why the "Beautiful Game" didn't work this season? Look at the guys who have the ball in their hands.

As for Green, you can see that he got his touches just fine the playoffs when the PnR was mostly gone. He's definitely getting his touches in different ways, but he should be able to adjust to that and knock down his shots again.

You couldn't be more wrong. Spurs ran more PnR's than any other set -- go back and watch the games. Even with Leonard, they ran tons of PnR's with him and Aldridge and Aldridge even dived successful on rare occasion with the starters. Spurs need another diver though -- one that won't pop out 80% of the time like Aldridge. One that can stagger w/the 2nd unit. The second unit had a hard time getting going because they lacked a true diver to open up the offense for the weak-side motion. Teams were giving up the pass to West every time he popped off a PnR or a side dribble hand off -- it prevented the Spurs ever getting weak-side looks.

Your confidence in Plumlee is misplaced. We've talked about him enough to where you know that I don't dislike him. I've just repeatedly said that he's not the answer. He's just not proven, and even you wanting him for a 18-22 mpg roll supports that. The Spurs need a starter next to Aldridge, and that player can't play less than half the game. And his defense is being massively overstated. He has a block-to-foul ratio of .54. That's not horrible. But it's not anything other than a foot note.

Biggest issue with your take is that you aren't even disagreeing. You're just going off on a random tangent. "How does the team fix their center rotation?" "Plumlee." "So he's going to be their second-best big?" "No, but he would be great value as he's sucked most of his career but has the skill-set we need." "Okay, but what are they going to do with the rest of the big rotation?" "Uh..."

You get Plumlee. All right. So now you have him, LMA and nobody, with little cap space to get other bigs. Or you add him to LMA, West and Diaw. How does that rotation shake out? You have Plumlee starting and West and Diaw being Turd Towers 2.0, or you have one of them starting (and West makes the most sense), and you have something that would hopefully be like the bench when Splitter played there.

I've never once said Plumlee is the answer to ALL the Spurs problems and with him Spurs will be favorites like you're implying. I simply said Spurs desperately need someone with his skill-set in the rotation for 18-22 minutes. Whether he start and gets subbed out early like Elson, Oberto, Splitter did, or if he comes off the bench early. Spurs need a player with his skill-set in order for the offense to generate great or better looks (wide open 3's from best shooters, layups-dunks at rim). His skill-set is a lot more needed than David Wests' skill-set -- who virtually doesn't do anything positive for the offense or defense and you're wanting David West to start because you believe he can become a three point shooter in his 14th season. Just... wow.

For the tl;dr crowd: The Spurs don't want to run plays without Kawhi and LMA getting the ball in their spots. That makes the need to get a roll man for the first unit vastly overstated. Back when the Spurs were guard-centric, that made sense. But the offense has moved on, for better or worse (likely for worst). Getting a guy like Plumlee isn't enough, and since it's not enough, it doesn't make sense to start him. You need to get two centers if you want one in the starting unit, because the bench needs one much more with LMA being an almost ideal starting center for the personnel they have now.

Leonard ran the offense in the PnR's more than the Spurs posted up Aldridge or Leonard -- go back and watch the games. Some initial PnR action led to secondary action which was when post up plays for Aldridge were developed. During the 2013/14' runs, the same thing occurred at times but with Duncan or Diaw posting up off of the secondary action-- go back and look at those games.

Sure this past playoff run, Spurs called 4 down for Aldridge as the first action more than they had done in 13'/14' to a degree but they ran PnR's much much more. If you don't believe me -- then just go back and watch the games.

[Chinook]

Well I like diversity in the offense and I think Spurs do too, bc they like sometimes to start the action from somewhere else even if their same. 2 guys finish the play. They did run PNR sometimes with Tim, sometimes Kawhi was the ballhandler, sometimes Tony, Tim just couldn't finish for crap until his retirement game and those weren't PNR, he got several baskets in transition.

You can keep saying the Spurs played a diverse offense, but they didn't. It was almost all Kawhi and LMA. Sure, they had other actions, but those were mostly to get one of those two the ball. A 1/5 PnR with Parker and Plumlee isn't designed to get anyone but Parker or Plumlee the ball. Sure, other players would get it at times. But you don't relegate the top two players on your teams to options for Parker to pass to. The biggest thing as I said is just that this is what the team wanted. Unless they go away from it, they'll have to get guys who fit this style, not the style people wish they still played.

Dworst is just another PnP guy who doesn't add much to the starters in any category. His offensive skills are redundant with Kawhi and LMA. If you want to PNP LMA is better, he would be better posting up too, in the paint, in transition, rebounding, etc. The only thing that LMA doesn't like is to roll so to pair him with a traditional center complements him and gives the team variety.

That ruins spacing and makes the team a LOT less versatile. If they want to have the option to roll again, just have Aldridge roll. He does it, I swear. , have 1/3 PnRs and let Kawhi roll, too. GS rolls their perimeter players at times. Why can't the Spurs?

The most damning to me is that Dworst defense stats are misleading. He cannot defend a PNR to save his life and the man just fails at boxing out. DWorst doesn't bring anything to the SL they need but a body, and his passing. I suppose if they gut the roster to get a big fish and can do no better then fine, but I don't think that's what they will do or that it's ideal.

They don't have to gut the team to not have cap space to spend a lot on a center. They simply have to use ALL of however much they have on another position. Let's say everyone in the rotation put Tim and Manu come back and the Spurs spend the money on Gordon and Boban. That's entirely realistic. So how is that rotation going to shake out? It'll probably be West starting, since why would you curse the bench with TT2?

[MaNu4Tres]

This would have all been true ( except for the entirely unnecessary 2nd paragraph ) if the current Spurs had the same offense as the 2012/14 teams, but they don't, not in the slightest. They create offense entirely differently, the guys with the most usage rate are entirely different and the style is not dependent on PnR, rolling, penetrating, passing because the personnel has changed. Parker can no longer collapse a defense, Manu is no longer a magician PnR player. Post ASB Tim couldn't do layups.

The offense revolves around 2 iso, post players. They're both top 15 NBA players, you have to either go with the style they excel at, or trade them for a slasher PG, a rolling big man and a shooter. When a team is trying to initiate offense using a wing post up player, then you defnitely need bigs who can shoot and spread the floor, rather than bigs who can roll, unless you're willing to base your offense around the 3rd/4th, etc best offensive players on the team and downgrade your two 20 PPG scorers to secondary options, which makes zero sense to me.

Go back and watch the games. Sure Spurs ran 4 down again at times like they used to, but Spurs ran a lot of the same sets -- they just created different shots because of the different personnel the Spurs had this year ( TD was no longer an effective diver since he had no knees -- he became a dribble hand off option, LA popped more often than rolled because thats who he is, West has never been a diver -- he's a popper who became unguarded as playoffs went along, Diaw became unconfident and was just a dribble hand off option after he popped from PNRs). Leonard had more PnR's called for him as the initial action than any ISO play for him or Aldridge. Most of the ISO plays just developed within the motion offense because no good looks were being generated from the motion offense -- so they just went to the ISO in the desperate second and third action. Go back and watch the games. Not having an effective diver hurt the Spurs' overall offense this year -- it hurt the bench more so because they couldn't generate offense for themselves or create for one another -- having a diver would have opened up better opportunities -- there's no doubt in my mind about that.

[SAGirl]

A guy I would love but is a pipedream is Willie Cauley Stein. /sigh

[objective]

Nobody is seriously promoting the idea of West as a starter, are they? That would flush the season down the toilet.