Reply With Quote
Call up Olivier Hanlan.
If his minutes stay high maybe he will lose weight
Glass half full!
Call up Olivier Hanlan.
The separation between these three and Patty should widen more after tonight.
Murray: 17, 5 and 5
Forbes: 13, 3 and 2
Paul: 15, 5 and 4
Patty is more expendable.
Right now murray is the worst out of all 4. He has the highest ceiling.
Patty is having the least impact after 13 games and its not close.
Even with raw on/off numbers on the season:
Forbes: +10.4
Murray: +8.4
Paul: -6.1
Patty: -12.4
Take out patty, were 4-8. : lmao
The others lack the experience but have produced more in less minutes. I’d like to say at end of this season some of them or all of them will have made him truly expendable and he’s gone in some trade but I can’t see it. Pop loves him and he’s a locker room glue guy.
However, the Spurs will have some tough choices to make if these guys play well and push for playing time and Patty continues a downward trend disappearing again in the playoffs when it counts.
Spurs also have some young players who will be FA. And all of Danny, Tony and Rudy wil also be FA. Patty is the most expendable guy in the team.
And possibly the most likely to return. It would kill me to see us lose any of those guys to enable the team to retain Patty.
The signing of patty was especially stupid when Forbes is basically a younger cheaper mills, I just hope they trade him at the deadline
By himself Patty is untradeable at this point. It would require sweetener to get somebody to swallow that poison pill.
Off season . . .
- Green, Parker re-sign
- Lauvergne likely opts out, then does the same
- Anderson extends
- Ginobili likely retires
- Gay opts out; if the two sides can't find common ground, he goes and Bertans stays
- If Gay stays, Bertans is probably gone
- Forbes is gone
Exactly. How many Gary Neals does one team need?
Need to count our blessings that Gary Neal didn't have the charisma, chemistry, and the culture Patty brings. If so, Gary would probably still be under contract, getting paid 12 million this year.
That sounds very realistic even if mildly disappointing bc I have grown weary of Patty's suck ude. Perhaps he will catch a groove at some point. It's noteworthy that his struggles didn't start when he was promoted to the starting lineup. Murray started a few games and Mills was still sucking badly off the bench. He just didn't work on his game this summer like others did and it shows. It may take him a while to get in a good rhythm. At least I am hoping.
Anyways, I agree with you in general. This one really feels like Manu's last season, though I have said that b4. But this year his stats are down, he's trending into negative impact territory something he's never been in his career and his contract feels like that last season can be his retirement gift a la TimmyD. But I am done predicting his retirement. He can do another season and it doesn't matter except for the roster spot, since he's under contract. And Pop has been finding ways to develop others and reduce his minutes and spare his body when he can afford it.
I also agree with you on Gay vs. Bertans. I like Bertans myself and I thought he'd play more this season. I also would like to see him stay but it doesn't do him well to remain in a team where he's blocked from playing time like he is currently. Spurs haven't necessarily given up on him though and I think they really like him still. I think he will pick up a lot of garbage time minutes when Kawhi gets healthy and will have opportunities to show Pop his improvement.
I'd like to see Forbes stay as well but he's going to get hungry for playing time the better he plays. There is a small chance he's retained IMO bc Pop has shown no restraint playing a Patty/Forbes combo together and I have been surprised that when Pop needs an offensive spark he's looking to Forbes and not to Davis for example. I think they really do like him. One of Davis or Forbes stays too IMO.
Tim had no intention of retiring that last season he was under contract. He would have played it out if it wasn't for his good knee going.
Mills: Maybe or maybe it's just a slump. People love to draw conclusions on players work ethic based on their play, but it doesn't always correlate and the reality is, in many cases we don't know.
Ginobili: That and he mentioned on media day I believe, that "this will be a special season for me".
Bertans: Don't think potentially losing him will be because they've "given up on him". It's just, he's too talented to not be a rotation player and if that path ends up being blocked here, he'll presumably seek it out elsewhere. It's not Spurs style to stand in the way of that. Also, how much money would they willing to invest in a non rotation player?
Forbes: That's with Parker out and it's been infrequent anyway. He's gone for similar reasons Bertans might be, only he's definitely blocked. They're too high on Murray (for good reason; he's the only possibility of raising their ceiling in the near future) and Paul and White, while not as good of shooters, are also shooters, while being or projecting to be better defenders.
What you believe of Bertans and Forbes I used to believe about Anderson. To me he's been rotation quality since the latter part of last season. He just wasn't getting enough opportunities after getting beaten to the spot by Simmons and that was that. Credit must be given to JSimms for his improvement, but Kyle looked the part of a rotation player late last season and in the playoffs when he got playing time. His stats reflect it too.
So, I used to think he'd be gone after this season, bc he came in hungry and already had gained confidence. He'd be blocked from playing time by Kawhi, Lamarcus, Rudy and I thought Bertans too frankly. On top of that, Pop would still find opportunities to play BP3, and other young players that the Spurs want to develop. For Anderson, after doing the same thing in the fringes for 4 seasons, while at the same time showing signs that he's a rotation caliber player; I thought he would want to move on frankly, and he still might. He would reach the point where like JSimms, CoJo, Baynes and other roleplayers, he's paid his due, learned all he could from Pop, and it's time to look for opportunities to play, and get paid by someone else.
But the future we do not know. Spurs do have to retain some of these young guys. Their core is already really old outside of Kawhi. Mills and Danny who used to be the youngest, have already turned 30 or about to, and will be signed for several seasons past 30 years old. They have Murray and White, but have to retain some of their size. This is part of the reason I do not like that Patty contract. Bottom line, he's nothing special, overpaid at his current production frankly, and that contract will make it tougher to retain some of the youth they have developed and I am valuing retaining some of these youth bc the have chosen to stand pat obviously.
Last edited by SAGirl; 11-14-2017 at 08:31 AM.
That's less about him liking Mills and more about him hating Parker with every fiber of his being.
I like mills tbh. But he's a replaceable talent and his contract is going to be a stain for a while. We were already grooming Forbes to be Gary Neal 3.0
That's the difference between Belicheik and Pop.
Have the Patriots ever had any egregious contracts like the Spurs have given out to Mills, Gasol, the TP extension and so on? If not, then I think they've earned the right to have the Spurs compared to them. It used to piss me off when I heard/read people say that the Spurs are the Patriots of the NBA, because the Spurs started their run first so it should have been the other way around, but correct me if I am wrong, I don't think Belichick would give out some of the contracts the Spurs FO has.
I'm saying, the difference is Belichick doesn't give lifetime contacts like Pop. If he's got a cheaper guy that can do the same or better, he cuts the vet lose to make cap room / roster spot for an actually position in need.
Never thought Anderson was going anywhere. Heard long ago that Spurs "love him". Also, in certain ways he fits with the way the game has evolved and isn't going to cost an exorbitant amount.
Joseph and Baynes were casualties of the Aldridge signing; they'd have likely been retained otherwise.
Projected '18-'19 roster . . .
Post prime: Gasol, Parker
Late prime: Aldridge, Gay, Green, Mills
Early prime: Leonard, Anderson, Lauvergne, Paul, Bertans
Pre prime: Murray, White, Milutinov, '18 1st
Included both Gay and Bertans because I'm uncertain which will be retained and Milutinov because he's at least in the future plans. Spurs lack significant players at their peak (late 80s - early 90s), but I don't think that's overly old for a team with championship aspirations. Their internal problem, is they need Parker to be in the 2nd group or Murray to be in the 3rd group.
Spurs run started first and was more impressive because the NBA is the most difficult league to win a championship in. You need 16 playoff wins, not 3-4, as well as a minimum top 5 player, along with 1-2 other future Hall-of-Fame players.
Considering the gargantuan difference in roster size, would imagine one would be far less likely to forge meaningful relationships with players in football, thereby making it easier to cut ties. Also, loyal as Spurs are, let's not forget their cutting ties with the likes of Johnson, Bowen, Finley, Horry, Hill and Bonner, when they deemed it time.
Last edited by TD 21; 11-14-2017 at 06:45 PM.
Uh, you're comparing two different leagues...The NFL has way more non guaranteed contracts because the cba allows. The spurs are actually as crafty as can be. They just historically have more old players.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
