Reply With Quote
Up to you, but I encourage you to join in with "the meme" at least. Cracks me up!
I wasn't necessarily talking about trading Anderson - although, like you, I am not opposed to one IF it brings value in return. Trouble is, his rookie contract won't really bring much in return to help this season. Frankly, I wonder if some combination of Bertans, Garino and Lapro would make both Simmons and Danny expendable. Dump Simmons and trade Danny for real value.
Up to you, but I encourage you to join in with "the meme" at least. Cracks me up!
This! The more the merrier.
Lol sorry cooking at home and lost track of the conversation...
Forgot that it was only the Mavs' decision whether to re-up Lee. Even so, Dallas at least doesn't have the habit of letting good role-players go to chase max free aganets.
Getting better value on Danny's contract will be hard in the current market, I think.
Wait, so you're suggesting after his best play in years as you put it, and in a role that seems to suit him, Lee then turned the mavs down to spend a month in limbo waiting on a minimum deal from someone else?
And with your second point, it's completely meaningless in this scenario. He had zero impact on trying to sign max players. They got their max Barnes, and had no problem paying for their own role players like Powell or Williams.
They probably opted not to re-sign Lee because they played him a center. With Bogut in town and Mejri improved play. it's safe to assume that they were looking at a Dirk-Bogut-Mejri-Powell-Barnes as they're main big rotation.
The only problem with that is Bogut is so Injury prone and Mejri just underwent surgery and Missed some games with Tunisia...not to mention it's hard to gauge Mejri proness to injury since he only started getting relevant minutes by the later half of the season last year.
Imagine Bogut and Mejri down..That Bigs rotation is gonna look awful.
You mean better value for $10MM/year than Danny, himself? True enough. I thoroughly expect both Danny and Patty to have great bounce-back seasons. But I was just thinking in terms of team needs - especially in light of the young guys' skills and who they might be able to step-in for who is also a trade possibility. (Whew, lots of factors!) It seems clear that PATFO will not move LMA, Kawhi, Tony or Manu. That doesn't leave many contracts that will match any potential trade partner in numbers - if not value.
I think he wanted to sign with a contender. This was the off-season of cap space. Worse players than him got deals.
Barnes was not plan A. They wanted Whiteside and finished as runner-up for him. With Zaza in Oakland, they needed a starting center and got Bogut. After also getting Barnes, that's really where their cap space went. Of course, you're acting like it would've made sense to pay Lee, Bogut and Dirk in the same off-season without getting a starting PG. But I'm not there with you on that.And with your second point, it's completely meaningless in this scenario. He had zero impact on trying to sign max players. They got their max Barnes, and had no problem paying for their own role players like Powell or Williams.
The stats just don't support a theory that Lee was some negative that Dallas learned to stay away from. BBRef loved him while 82games considered him to be Dallas' third-best player behind Dirk and Parsons. I'm not guaranteeing his success in SA at all. But the idea that he can't play center is inaccurate. He can do it an put up great numbers along the way.
As a comparison, among SGs, Green is the 19th highest paid player this year:
1. Wade ($23.2M)
2. Beal ($22.1M)
3. Batum ($20.9M)
4. Crabbe ($18.5M)
5. Butler ($17.6M)
6. Matthews ($17.1M)
7. Fournier ($17M)
8. Thompson ($16.7M)
9. Turner ($16.4M)
10. Middleton ($15.2M)
11. Ginobili ($14M)
12. Crawford ($13.3M)
13. Afflalo ($12.5M)
14. Gordon ($12.4M)
15. Lee ($11.2M)
16. Ellis ($10.8M)
17. Evans ($10.2M)
18. Burks ($10.2M)
19. Green ($10M)
Not right now. He's playing a very selfish brand of basketball at 20 years old and he is not nearly effective enough to be green-lighting himself for contested shots in the paint so often. I like that he has good timing in making a pass if he's stopped bc they help off the big. It seems easy watching others do it but seeing guys like JSimms and others getting trapped on the PNR, and TO the ball or pass to the other wing side for a 3 that's not quite open 90% of the time tells me that the timing on that play is tough. Dijon has made many such passes already to the big, which tells me he has some talent passing, but he lacks a lot in other areas as a PG. For example, he's impatient, he often doesn't wait for the play to develop or for the guy that's going to be open to get to his spot bc he's going at 100 velocity all the time. He doesn't have as much hesitation or craftiness to his game so sometimes, very often in fact, he gets somewhere b4 his partner in the play is in position, at which point, you guessed it: he will chuck. Ultimately I don't know if he can be a PG if he doesn't add to his game, but if we have doubts so does Pop, which I suspect means a mixed diet of dleague and garbage time with the occasional appearance for a rest game. He's got too much to learn to really be able to help in a positive impactful way.
I think Pop wanted Lapro heavily bc of this, but now it looks like they need Anthony too.
^ Then it will be up to Pop to figure that out too. So far he's sticking with some weirdness.
"Wanting to sign with a contender" is code for no one else wanting him. Besides, Lee himself said at the end of the mavs season he wanted one more deal for 3-4 years.
It's not like any non contender wanted to sign a faded, flawed old big who was cut by one team last year that took off once they benched him, and his second team didn't bring him back. If it wasn't for the Spurs giving him a minimum he might be in China with Boozer
Thanks for the data. As far as Danny's value relative to the salary is concerned, I think even most ST posters would agree that Danny is on one of the great contracts in the league. I tried to explain to BillMc that wasn't really the judgment I was trying to express. I think I consistently defended Danny last season. And I expect him to have a great bounce-back season. I really like the guy, but if the team were to contemplate a trade in order to improve, the assets that PATFO would even consider trading are very few.
Not sure that Anthony is the answer. But the Spurs may not find the answer until the cut deadline - if then. It just seems to make Simmons that much more vulnerable.
You know... First Ayres, now Deadman...(some would add DWest) Seems like PATFO need to change something about their process for evaluating bigs.
Unknown on J.Simms. I think Pop keeps him for depth. He's on thin ice, but I am not ready to let go of him and I bet Pop is still hoping, but he definitely needs to turn his game around or he could be gone midseason.
I found this review on twitter. The best review I have read of this game. I had shared another one with some 5 observations that really didn't say much but this one was interesting:
Of interest:
Aldridge:
"finished with 14 points in 21 minutes, after he displayed his tool box of scoring methods both inside and out, while defensively, he also showed that even though Tim Duncan retired, Aldridge will still be a force opponent’s will have to get through in order to make it to the rim."
Pau:
"Looked a little tentative and out of place at different times... he connected with Aldridge on a high-low sequence, the way Duncan used to do with Aldridge."
Leonard:
"one interesting method where the Spurs used him midway through the game in the second quarter was at the shooting guard position. Using two different lineups – Parker, Leonard, Kyle Anderson, Aldridge, Dewayne Dedmon, and then swapping Gasol for Dedmon, Leonard played some minutes at the 2 and it showed how much more versatile the team could be offensively. When Leonard was playing the two, he had a smaller defender (Tim Hardaway Jr.) guarding him, and the Spurs quickly attacked the mismatch on multiple possessions. Though it’s just one preseason game, it will be interesting to watch going forward if Leonard and Anderson share more minutes together this coming season."
We saw them some time together in the past, limited opportunities but Anderson was usually a 4 at those times. Him playing the 3 with Kawhi at the 2 is a good experiment. Supersize lol
Tony:
"Finished with a game-high 15 points in 20 minutes. What’s interesting was that Parker wasn’t even that aggressive, but instead, he did his best to play defense, facilitate the offense and mainly push the fast break when the window opened, as 9 of his 15 points came in transition."
Patty Mills, Manu and Kyle all 3 ran PnR when the bench was in, which is something we didn't know. Manu ended up with some nice passes to Dedmon that resulted in him getting fouled.
Lee -- "played in some of Boris Diaw’s familiar areas in the offense, mostly at the low block using dribble hand offs, or by constantly being a pick-and-roll option."
Bertans--He was the story in the deep bench players.
Another interesting note was how the Spurs used some 1-3-1 zone sets on defense with different lineups during different possessions. Intriguing.
The purple highlights are mine. It's a nice review. Still doesn't answer many questions we have about the team, but it seems overall that guys played better than we thought just looking at stats, and there was a lot of experimentation going on, which is nice.
Next game is Monday against the Pistons and Boban. Huge test for Deadman.
Last edited by SAGirl; 10-09-2016 at 10:10 PM.
This is probably the best part of the game for me. Hopefully Parker can settle into a groove to orchestrate and play an all-around game.
He might've said that. And Anquan Boldin said after the 2012 SuperBowl that he'd retire a Ravens, but he had no interest in reworking his contract only a couple of weeks later, leading to his trade to SF. Players say a lot of things. But acting like older players don't sometimes sign for less with contenders is silly. Maybe you have it in your head that ring-chasers are actually just min guys, but it's really easy to argue that's false.
Yeah, faded meaning he had an Indian summer post-ASB last season, flawed in a way that a lot of players are flawed and old as in younger than any rotation big the Spurs had last season except for LMA. No creative interpretation going on there at all.It's not like any non contender wanted to sign a faded, flawed old big who was cut by one team last year that took off once they benched him, and his second team didn't bring him back. If it wasn't for the Spurs giving him a minimum he might be in China with Boozer
Maybe not zero, but very close, IMO. It's not like Gino didn't have to earn a spot on the team too when he was a youngster and he wasn't sent to park in a corner and wait there. He practices with these guys every day, he's spoken highly of Kyle and his game, but ultimately, the guy that puts the ball in Manu's hands or Kyle's hands is Pop and the coaches. We're not talking dumb players here, when there's a mismatch, they go right to it. The question is more about Kyle becoming a mismatch than actually going there.
We shall see. I was more surprised at the number of shots Ginobili took coupled with his comment of feeling important and maybe I made a huge issue of it and kicked the hornet's nest. Obviously nothing I expressed about it was based on the "actual game" since I didn't see it. Sometimes guys do end up with shots due to smart cutting or even as the result of a play by someone else. He took 4 3s for example. I am choosing to believe those were not the result of a step back crazy 3 and were rather the result of something else by someone that ended up in him taking the 3. In the context of the game, I can't say anything bc I didn't watch it. Kyle was involved in the PnR for example, something I didn't know and looking at his chart he took 2 midrange shots that he missed. Those could easily have been shots he attempted off a pick.
Overall, it does seem the coaches are experimenting. Also for purposes of this game, it was later made clear to me in reviews that Ime and Borrego were coaching, so Pop wasn't even looking at X and 0 or strategies and are looking at player performance.
Ginobili is in good shape, Kawhi, Tony and LMA seem ready. Patty apparently played well. Bertans can shoot. Other than that, the bench bigs are a project and the Spurs are insistent on experiment on the PnR with a lot of perimeter players beside Ginobili. That can only mean, they are looking for ways to 1) develop others, 2) get them ready so that in the playoffs they can have the ball and it all doesn't fall on Ginobili.
You have a good point as far as I am concerned bc I took the comments in absentia of context or anything else. (something the very patient brooklynfan was pointing out to me, and cheers to him, he's a gentleman!)
By the way, I can change my tune. I am often persuaded by others. lol
No soy una terca
Also, as an aside bc it is only marginally relevant, Manu came in pretty much a finished product. The Spurs youngsters are much more undeveloped at this point. Kawhi took several seasons to reach this level himself and some youngsters like Dijon hopefully grow exponentially the coming seasons, there is going to be some growing pains all around once you get to guys 8-15 and you are not talking about the known, albeit limited quan y that is D.Lee.
Last edited by SAGirl; 10-10-2016 at 12:15 AM.
I learned a long time ago that what's discussed here has zero bearing on what the Spurs do. Obviously, I don't know what the plan is for the bench, and we'll get to see that as the season unfolds.
But I do know who makes those plans, and he's a guy that definitely has the authority to change things if he doesn't like what he sees. That, I'm fairly sure about.
I totally agree with you, which is why I get on Pop so often (and not just about Kyle things, though a lot about Kyle things lol)... I do like to read others bc often I am persuaded or see something from a different light. Sometimes I am not though, and that is fine... but this one, I saw things some way initially that without really having watched the game, there wasn't context.
Pop wasn't even coaching this. It might have been a little bit of a free for all (specially if they wanted to evaluate player performance like it seemed), and a time for the other coaches to experiment with their own ideas... which may even defer from Pop's since he wasn't coaching, again.
I'm still waiting for him to make a thread saying Warriors will win +73 games/4-0 in the Finals, then I'll be sure that the Spurs has a shot at dethroning them in the WCF.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
