Reply With Quote
I'm guessing that had they made the same offer, he picks them, for all the obvious reasons.
1. What's truly broken? The guard rotation. Was still relying on Tony Parker & Manu too much and found out that Mills, while a quality back up who can open games up with his shooting/energy is not a viable starter. Secondly, it would be wing depth and versatility. SA still had a tremendous defense anchored by LMA/Kawhi/Danny, but against teams that truly matter (meaning the talent is close to equal to SA) it becomes an issue with how they play.
- Solutions: TP is injured and Manu may be retired. SA did not appear to be that interested in spending large on the PG position with who was available (CP, Lowry, Hill, Jrue, etc...some of which like Jrue were not truly available). It appears the plan for now is add to the youth/versatility at guard (give Murray more time, bring in a defensive minded guard in Hanga, draft a combo guard in the Hill mode with White, bring back Simmons). Is this truly their long-term plan to go with this group and spend elsewhere? Not sure. Could be they wait until next year for a guard they think works long-term better and/or give Murray the one year to see how he develops with TP naturally coming off the books.
2. What does it mean for prognosis next season: At this point, it's a big question mark. Depending on what other moves they make, it appears that having more money in easier fashion (not forced to trade anyone to open up space) is a viable plan. But if they sign a few guys that eat into 2018 money that becomes a bit more cloudy. With how regular season TP was and how little Murray played, I think what they have now: Murray, Mills, White, Hanga (assumption), Simmons (assumption), Forbes & Danny is probably an upgrade. With no other improvements but there, while it may lead to some regular season bumps and bruises (unless Forbes and White and Murray all really bust which is possible but not likely imo) the team could actually have a *slightly higher ceiling and now have a major hole filled with no need to commit crazy money.
3. Who exists in FA: This is the tough one this season because this question is not just about who's available to help, but what SA would have to do to get to the point to make an offer for said person. Is LMA truly unhappy and what can you get for him in a deal. That question right there is the biggest concern/variable for this 3rd question. If SA could get some pieces that are actually decent while opening space, they could re-tool in a fashion more conducive to the style of play that might beat a GS. I do think with prices falling, a combo guard like Hill over Mills would have been better this year and appears that LMA would not have had to been moved for that type of cap space. But cap space is not just for free agents although that is the path of least resistance. Cap space is also for absorbing trades and so it's not just about who's a free agent, but who's available via trade as well (Jimmy Butler, Paul George, etc..)
4. Spurs don't really seem too concerned with PR other than maintaining the structure they built where loyalty plays a large role in what they do. Dumping TP, even though most of us knew was a long shot, was likely never going to happen. It's ok because like in question 3, there does not appear to be a free agent, that minus TP/LMA and added them truly grows the team all that much.
They need to add to Kawhi/Danny with a true 2nd star and maybe a third or fourth and hopefully Murray can fill one of those voids.
I'm guessing that had they made the same offer, he picks them, for all the obvious reasons.
Lamarcus fouled the pool this summer. Bummer.
Not much to be done, sadly.
I'm glad some of the posters aren't in the Spurs FO.
The team would be run into the ground, much like Phil Jackson did with the Knicks.
I'm glad PATFO fluffers don't either. This team would look like the Austin Spurs, oh wait it already does without Kawhi
Honestly, standing pat and giving Murray & Bertans more minutes is looking like the best option at this stage (maybe add Hanga). It's a weak FA class & an undesirable destination so our chances of landing anything which is going to put us in contention is very unlikely. Murray is going to need another year before he's a difference maker, if at all. The only player I'd be taking a flyer on is Tiago. He'll probably be chronically injured because he's had calf and leg injuries chronically related to his hip surgery but he'd still be an effective role player if he could stay on the court. I'd say he'd be available for the minimum.
Exactly. We're not pissed about missing Butler, PG13, Millsap, or CP3 (maybe a little), we're pissed about overpaying a scrub and still having a bunch of other deadweight on the roster.
LMA and Green are toxic, and need to be moved in order for the team to improve. This is a league for wings that can score, which has made Green a negative value regardless of his defense. LMA is a head case, worse than Rodman.
^ What happens when people start believing in hyperbolic shticks.
He's right.
^ What happens when people start believing in hyperbolic shticks.
^ what happens when people truly believe a D-Leaguer with a broken shot is "irreplaceable"
WCF is a great feat but lets put some context into the equation. The NBA and the West was watered down compared to other years. Houston was the only decent threat and Spurs struggled to get past Memphis.
So based on the results of beating Memphis & HOU in 6 games, that means everything is just great as is? Complacency with re-signing parts that dont move the needle will be the reason this team doesnt progress -- all while most other WC teams are doing everything they can to make gains on the Warriors.*
Spurs standing pat and overpaying (overpaying due to context of crowded PG situation) to keep an expendable piece because of culture, while others are relentlessly trying to climb will be the reason other teams leap over the Spurs in the West the next 1-3 years.
Spurs should never be content or satisfied, but it seems to me they overvalue continuity and culture. It worked when they had 3 hall of famers in the prime of their career always steering the ship, but those days are long gone.
Well yeah the simple math is with Green getting starters minutes and averaging 6 ppg, it puts too much scoring pressure on our other high usage players who aren't kawhi.
As soon as replaceable becomes toxic, you'll have a point.
Green was the lowest-paid starter last season (counting Pau in that role because that was the plan) and the only one who was defense-first. There should be more pressure on guys like Pau, Parker and Mills to score more.
Austin Spurs would win tbh. They show more heart.
The Spurs have always acted in a way that was best for the long term. Last year the e in the salary cap temporarily skewed the market for role players. The salary cap jumped 34% from the 15/16 season to the 16/17 season. But because teams had to spend to at least 90% of the threshold and more because most GMs don't have the job security that Buford has they massively spent on guys who weren't even starters much less stars--Crabbe, Mozgov, etc. Role players weren't paid 34% more they were paid in some cases 300% more. Now the salary cap is moving up more slowly as it had in the past. Last year's spending spree set expectations for this year unrealistically high and while there was a bit of a final blow off for lesser talent for the most part it is over. Many players that were expecting massive paydays will settle for 1 year deals or much smaller long term deals--Red , Hill, etc. Just because the Spurs FO elected not to get swept away in the hysteria doesn't mean that they were paralyzed it simply means that they are patient. Not dropping LMA for a bag of peanuts as some would have them do was prudent. So many GMs are herd thinkers. Whatever happened most recently will continue ad nauseum. When LMA goes through a nice stretch during the season his value will skyrocket and the Spurs will make a trade if they are so inclined. I think Popovich will work to get LMA more success this year and that will make his value higher and his at ude better. This board is the epitome of impatience so to some patience is mistaken for being paralyzed.
[QUOTE=Chinook;9075217]Green was the lowest-paid starter last season (counting Pau in that role because that was the plan) and the only one who was defense-first. There should be more pressure on guys like Pau, Parker and Mills to score more.[/QUOTE
very reasonable. We need better passing and scoring from other positions to facilitate Danny on offense.
1,000% this. The NBA as a whole, West included, was hammered dog last year. No OKC or LAC as legit threats, just GSW and HOU. HOU did the typical D'Antoni thing and folded like a cheap suit in the playoffs, leaving just GSW, who swept us and probably would have beat us in 5 or 6 games even with Kawhi.
Spurs are going to be even weaker next year (no Dedmon or TP; an older Pau) and every one else will be better: GSW is going to play with better cohesion now that Durbeta has been in the system, OKC has PG13, Houston has the second best backcourt behind GSW, the TWolves are stacked, and a healthy Memphis will give the Spurs fits. People are in for a rude awakening if they think this team is gonna win 60 games and stroll into the WCF next year. Six seed at best.
Spurs will finish somewhere in the top 4 in the conference depending on health and team chemistry. The Grizzlies lost ZBO who won them 1 game in the series against the Spurs. Without ZBO the Spurs sweep or beat the Grizzlies in 5. GSW can not play any better than they did last year granted I still have them getting the 1 seed in the West barring injures. Only way they can top this year is by winning 70 plus. I can't see the Twolves being a top 4 team this upcoming season since they are still very young and inexperience. Young teams that haven't gone to the playoffs tend to not make great leaps of suddenly becoming a top 4 team. Adding Jimmy Butler propels them in the 6-8 spot. GSW,Rox,OKC all 3 of them can end up winning more games then the Spurs but I can't see any other teams doing better record wise.
I still believe the Spurs can beat OKC and Rox in a 7 game series. Spurs were always compe ive against Durant-Westbrook and should have won against them in '16 if it wasn't for the refs botching up calls in literally the final 2 minutes of game 2 and 5. Westbrook-George is a lesser version of that duo and is very beatable. The Rox are a D'Antoni team and even with CP3 will still go down like a typical D'Antoni team does come playoff time. Spurs will win somewhere around 55-60.
You don't even know what the Spurs end up looking like. It's a marathon, not a sprint. You give credit to other teams for better team cohesion, but the Spurs are a year older. There are a number of scenarios that still work for the Spurs. 5th or 6th seed. I'd bet you $500 the Spurs finish 4th or higher. Kawhi alone will get you that.
I don't understand why the Spurs don't move to a more equal opportunity offense like the Warriors. Everyone has to be a threat to score to compete against a team like the Warriors. Otherwise they just focus on the best scoring options. That's why the Mills/Green backcourt was so ineffective. Green couldn't really punish the Warriors for putting Curry on him and it allowed them to put Klay on Mills and make him ineffective.
Defense......
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions