Reply With Quote
spurstalk is awesome
if ther's a year to tank is this one...there are at least 5 players that should be immediately able to contribute from then start in a starting role.
And with our limited cap we can not compete next year in the free agents market...so, we need the low salaries (for at least four years) that a draft choice takes.
So, imho, the draft is the only way to effectively improve our roster in the future...and give to Kawhi the future teammates for his future as the next spurs veteran leader.
spurstalk is awesome
I should have used the blue font.
Mills was better last season, so I doubt Spurs signed him with the intention of him getting complacent, coming in fat to lead a tank.
As for Gasol, I'd like to believe had JSimms agreed to join the Spurs back, Gasol's contract would have been smaller, but JSimms shunned the Spurs to pursue greener pastures and thus Gasol got lucky and ended up overpaid. ^ This reason is why I don't begrudge the JSimms thing. Had he been offered Mills' contract, at 12:01 maybe he'd be back, but he wanted a different environment and is happy with his choice, so I don't begrudge him. Anyways, Spurs ended up overpaying Gasol bc of it.
Kawhi getting injured for this long just got me in a sarcastic mood is all.
I just don't get overpaying a guy who had only played 62 (I believe) games with the team before he opted out because of loyalty, or simply because he had to wait a month for a new deal. And this is the same guy who shunned them years before when he could've actually been a game changer.
It was a bad move no matter how you look at it, imo, and still makes no sense to me.
Assuming Kawhi is back and at 16-17 levels and LMA is still a 20 and 8 player, I think we'd be the second best team in the league whether record or seed reflects it or not.
The Spurs didn't offer Simmons a contract and in retrospect it was clear that they weren't interested in bringing him back, they even explored an S&T with Phoenix for Chandler.I should have used the blue font.
Mills was better last season, so I doubt Spurs signed him with the intention of him getting complacent, coming in fat to lead a tank.
As for Gasol, I'd like to believe had JSimms agreed to join the Spurs back, Gasol's contract would have been smaller, but JSimms shunned the Spurs to pursue greener pastures and thus Gasol got lucky and ended up overpaid. ^ This reason is why I don't begrudge the JSimms thing. Had he been offered Mills' contract, at 12:01 maybe he'd be back, but he wanted a different environment and is happy with his choice, so I don't begrudge him. Anyways, Spurs ended up overpaying Gasol bc of it.
Kawhi getting injured for this long just got me in a sarcastic mood is all.
I think they penny pinched him but yea, the interest wasn't there in bringing him back with priority and he also had his own desire to move on.
Lol no
After kawhi and marsha we have a bunch or borderline nba players and nbdl level players
After hthose 2 we have easily the 3rd or 4th worst team in the league
I am fine with that decision. Gay and Paul, overall have been fine with a chance to both improve as the season progresses
Forgot to remember not to take you seriously. That's on me tbh
This take is going to be unpopular with the Murray fancrew but I looked up the bench To and a bunch were caused by Curry or someone else drifting off Murray so far, that they played passing lanes and caused TO. That allowed GSW to gain momentum and get back in a game in which they were getting blown out by the starters and couldn't defend them or get anything going early. Murray, with his complete lack of shooting and reluctance to shoot is going to be tough to fit in. He also lost Curry off screens a bunch. Overall, another forgettable game from him.
Yeah and I don't want to hear this "that was the deal for his opting out, if they couldn't sign Paul". The deal should have been to reimburse him for the $16.8M he opted out of or at worst something like 2/$25 M (basically, what he opted out of plus the MLE, which is probably his true market value) not tack on what they did. If that was going to be what it took to get him to opt out, then they should have attempted to salary dump him into Timberwolves' cap space instead. They wanted him in '16 and probably would have taken his one remaining year instead of overpaying Gibson for two.
Watch methis. You guys are looking at this all wrong and without the bigger picture in mind. These contracts are very calculated. You guys can't even give benefit of the doubt to the best run organization in all of sports for the past 2 decades. Some of yall deserve to be a Knicks fan and no what a real run org does.
Pau and Patty's contracts are players we want. PATFO would rather have players they want than overpay for players they don't want. Think about this for a second, we are a small market with little incentive to play here outside basketball, so how can you creatively attract players that can win elsewhere with bigger roles. The Spurs have decided to do it with class, by being a first rate organization that has a reputation for taking care of it's players. When you think Spurs, you think class and family and that's a culture they have created. We are like the Mercedes-Benz of the league. LMA, Rudy and Pau are examples of that coming to fruition. Not the names you want but names that have come due to reputation of this org. Otherwise who'd come here? Someone would have to get paid to take up cap. That's where true bad contracts come in, like the Mozgov's, Dieng's, and Crabbe's of the world. Like they said, they know Pau can play as well, but the same is true of Rudy. Rudy could of easily gone to OKC but he chose us and it's because of the minutes management and rep, the same rep you guys are indirectly criticizing. You guys act like we can get anyone we want.
I agree about Simmons, but letting Manu ride into the sunset while compe ive with the same team is unheard of. Yeah we could sell out but that contradicts the class reputation the team has built. While I too wish we had Simmons, moved on from Patty, not resigned Pau; I understand why they did it. They are being true to the culture.
That's a commendable trait that I guarantee 90% of y'all don't have the sniff of discipline to commit to. We have something special here and it won't last forever. I'd enjoy it.
No, I'm looking at it like all right; you're looking at it like an apologist. I didn't mentioned doing anything shady or underhanded to Gasol, just not giving him virtually all the leverage, which they clearly did.Watch me
Pau and Patty's contracts are players we want. PATFO would rather have players they want than overpay for players they don't want. Think about this for a second, we are a small market with little incentive to play here outside basketball, so how can you creatively attract players that can win elsewhere with bigger roles. The Spurs have decided to do it with class, by being a first rate organization that has a reputation for taking care of it's players. When you think Spurs, you think class and family and that's a culture they have created. We are like the Mercedes-Benz of the league. LMA, Rudy and Pau are examples of that coming to fruition. Not the names you want but names that have come due to reputation of this org. Otherwise who'd come here? Someone would have to get paid to take up cap. That's where true bad contracts come in, like the Mozgov's, Dieng's, and Crabbe's of the world. Like they said, they know Pau can play as well, but the same is true of Rudy. Rudy could of easily gone to OKC but he chose us and it's because of the minutes management and rep, the same rep you guys are indirectly criticizing. You guys act like we can get anyone we want.
I agree about Simmons, but letting Manu ride into the sunset while compe ive with the same team is unheard of. Yeah we could sell out but that contradicts the class reputation the team has built. While I too wish we had Simmons, moved on from Patty, not resigned Pau; I understand why they did it. They are being true to the culture.
That's a commendable trait that I guarantee 90% of y'all don't have the sniff of discipline to commit to. We have something special here and it won't last forever. I'd enjoy it.
Spurs were more than likely Gay's 3rd choice. He lives in Miami and there was mutual interest, but they choose Olynyk. There was also mutual interest with Thunder (rumor was he was close), but they choose Patterson. That left Spurs, who could easily outbid them at that point.
I specifically said in another post, where I defended the Aldridge extension, that they can't get anyone they want, but that went for stars. Not role players, like Mills and Gasol now is.
What "we" have here, is a front office that started drinking their own Kool-Aid post '14 and ed up royally in recent years, more than likely destroying any chance of Leonard having a legit shot at a championship for the foreseeable future. It's possible they may even lose him because of this inep ude.
Sounds like your mad that they stayed true to the culture. I guess you know best. And what inep ude are you referring to? Pau and Patty's contract, which they already said was to preserve the culture. I'm sorry but if they feel that was what's best for the franchise I'm gonna lean with the Org that managed to somehow keep Duncan and surround him with the talent to win four more. Doing the right thing isn't the most popular thing to do, but it's preservation and legacy, things that most immature people can't comprehend. If they feel the culture was that much in danger, than they would know. You can't sacrifice everything you worked for to sell out and be like every other franchise and distant yourself from what makes you stand out. The culture is like a baby and I understand that you can't put a price on that. Scoffers underrate the players this year. We could easily win this year if healthy.
Edit: OKC didn't choose Patterson over Gay, they didn't want to wait and lose out on both, so they picked the sure thing. They would of rather of had Gay.
Watch me
Pau and Patty's contracts are players we want. PATFO would rather have players they want than overpay for players they don't want. Think about this for a second, we are a small market with little incentive to play here outside basketball, so how can you creatively attract players that can win elsewhere with bigger roles. The Spurs have decided to do it with class, by being a first rate organization that has a reputation for taking care of it's players. When you think Spurs, you think class and family and that's a culture they have created. We are like the Mercedes-Benz of the league. LMA, Rudy and Pau are examples of that coming to fruition. Not the names you want but names that have come due to reputation of this org. Otherwise who'd come here? Someone would have to get paid to take up cap. That's where true bad contracts come in, like the Mozgov's, Dieng's, and Crabbe's of the world. Like they said, they know Pau can play as well, but the same is true of Rudy. Rudy could of easily gone to OKC but he chose us and it's because of the minutes management and rep, the same rep you guys are indirectly criticizing. You guys act like we can get anyone we want.
I agree about Simmons, but letting Manu ride into the sunset while compe ive with the same team is unheard of. Yeah we could sell out but that contradicts the class reputation the team has built. While I too wish we had Simmons, moved on from Patty, not resigned Pau; I understand why they did it. They are being true to the culture.
That's a commendable trait that I guarantee 90% of y'all don't have the sniff of discipline to commit to. We have something special here and it won't last forever. I'd enjoy it.
Cry havoc.. that you?
No, I'm confused as to why they inexplicably gave Gasol virtually all leverage, when they didn't have to. I don't want to hear this culture nonsense, with a guy who'd been here one season and is among the most arrogant players in the game.
They got lucky to keep Duncan and lucky with Ginobili, Parker and Leonard. Where they've thrived is with the diamond in the rough types, but even then, it only all mattered because of an all-time core that, as talented as they were, were even better than the sum of their parts.
Preservation and legacy?Culture comes from your best player(s). Spurs culture was because of Robinson, Duncan, Parker, Ginobili, for the most part. There's some remnants of it in Leonard, but he's a little different and Aldridge is a lot different, so naturally things are different. Trying to cling to what was or recreate it, is a fools errand.
The overall talent isn't the issue, but the lack of so much as a competent starting PG, as well as the antiquated style, is. Some of the latter is due to personnel, but it's also due to a lack of emphasis on pace and space.
Whether Thunder would have preferred Gay to Patterson, is irrelevant. Point is, there's ample evidence to believe Gay picked Spurs because they had the MLE to offer, while Thunder only had taxpayer MLE, a 1st year difference of about $3.21M. Gay also has a PO for about $3.1M more than Patterson's 2nd year, which has no option.
All this talk about antiquated and we were still up 23 on the warriors last year. I think that is anything but.
The FO is ok in running it back. The addition to RG is gonna show in the PO even more.
It was one game, Warriors were clearly rusty from long layoff and not used to being tested and Spurs were clearly riding high after annihilating Rockets sans Leonard and getting him back. They probably hold on with Leonard (wouldn't have been shocked with a repeat of game 1 of the '08 WCF, though) and find a way to take one of games 3 or 4 at home before suc bing.
Gay was a nice pickup, but doesn't solve the PG issue or archaic style of play. Warriors averaged 116 a game last season and 120 so far this one. Even if Spurs can hold them to 110 a game, they have no chance of generating more than that through glacial pace and low volume 3's and free throws, against an elite (when they stop coasting) defense.
I don't buy that. Think they did it because they essentially gave up on trying to do better and concluded good was good enough.
Sure, they deserve some credit (Ginobili was damn near a finished product when he came over though), but it was mostly luck those 3 becoming as good as they were or are.
No, you don't have to agree with them; you're allowed to have an original opinion. It's okay.
It is and they contradicted themselves by signing and extending Aldridge, as well as signing Gay. Aldridge isn't a typical Spur in game or personality (other than him being quiet) and Gay isn't in at least game either.
Typical apologist and loser talk and the last 20 years are irrelevant, when I clearly was speaking specifically about the past 3.
Last edited by TD 21; 11-04-2017 at 07:00 PM.
(1) Well there definitely be nothing to come of this conversation after that, especially when that is why they did it.No, I'm confused as to why they inexplicably gave Gasol virtually all leverage, when they didn't have to. (1)I don't want to hear this culture nonsense, with a guy who'd been here one season and is among the most arrogant players in the game.
(2)They got lucky to keep Duncan and lucky with Ginobili, Parker and Leonard. Where they've thrived is with the diamond in the rough types, but even then, it only all mattered because of an all-time core that, as talented as they were, were even better than the sum of their parts.
Preservation and legacy?
The overall talent isn't the issue, but the lack of so much as a competent starting PG, as well as the antiquated style, is. Some of the latter is due to personnel, but it's also due to a lack of emphasis on pace and space.
Whether Thunder would have preferred Gay to Patterson, is irrelevant. Point is, there's ample evidence to believe Gay picked Spurs because they had the MLE to offer, while Thunder only had taxpayer MLE, a 1st year difference of about $3.21M. Gay also has a PO for about $3.1M more than Patterson's 2nd year, which has no option.
(2) When your known around the league for ability to develop, I'd say it was more than luck. Even if you can't admit it, many people in the business will.
(3) Well obviously PATFO feels different and I have to agree with them. Patty has been a perfect embodiment of the culture and they felt he was important. Time will tell.
(4) Preserving culture that is worth it is no fool's errand. It's actually very important and the iden y of the franchise.
Overall though, it's like you think you can run the team any better. Maybe more transparency could help you understand, but they have their intimacy practices or family practices and I understand that. But yeah just sounds like your a spoiled Spurs fan. 48 days of a losing record since Duncan came I believe the stat was, so I'm sorry but I think the Spurs have done just fine and we have consistently overachieved.
A healthy well rested team got their ass raped.
An injured Kawhi was owning them.
To not run it back is ing re ed.
Last edited by dabom; 11-04-2017 at 07:19 PM.
Pretty much this. I feel a lot of spur fans can't admit that the spurs got robbed last year with Zaza injuring Kawhi. I feel a lot of them say "Well we would have lost in 5 or gotten swept" as a re ing coping mechanism to deal with the pain of Kawhi not playing in that series. It's like how some rape victims cope with rape by saying "Well I deserved it."A healthy well rested team got their ass raped.
An injured Kawhi was owning them.
To not run it back is ing re ed.
(1)That is your opinion but I understand because you say number 2
(2) Just because you can have an opinion doesn't mean it's right. It's just a perception of your reality. The Spurs org has 20 years of excellence that I'm referring to while you are just spitting your opinion I guess, which is known around these parts to be pessimistic and come off as crying as most here long enough would know.
(3)And more reason to explain why Patty was signed. Thank you.
(4) Ok last 20 is irrelevant I guess, how about the last 3 years? How many days under 500? Won 60 games 2 seasons out of 3. I guess your gonna reference playoffs and I would say we were Leonard injury away from winning it all. I'm sorry I'm an actual fan and you my sir are a pessimistic critic who thinks he's a realist. If the Spurs win it all, don't even show your face here tbh. That negative nancy stuff is old. We need more fans here and less critics. Everyone thinks they know better than the Spurs constantly doubting them yet the success achieved is unprecedented. These fake fans need to gtfo and let the real ones take over. But speaking for the real fans, they don't need to constantly voice their opinion cause they actually believe. So no surprise the troll and critics run rampant here.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
