Reply With Quote
Forbes and Whites development have been some of the major bright spots of the season. This thread sucks.
Three weeks ago, a bunch of people were saying the Spurs needed to tank the entire season because they were obviously so bad.
Now all they need to do is trade Forbes for a young SF from a 13-30 team and they'll have a shot at a le.
Forbes and Whites development have been some of the major bright spots of the season. This thread sucks.
(one of the) cheapest productive guard in NBA: therefore you don't get anything of same quality if you trade him.
Since White has come around playing decent point, he can play shooting guard. He is doing an excellent job at it. Next year with Murray and White, his height won't be a problem -this year it is, he can't play together with Mills.
Absolutely no reason to trade him, in my opinion.
Lakers forum downstairs.
This is just supreme level of delusion and arrogance on your part.
To start, Prince is worth way more than a 1st and forbes sorry op. Thats unrealistic.
While Prince has shown the lack of willingness to defend after 15 games, when he's diald in he's a very competent tall defender.
Ptince for Forbes is more than just what you would call a housekeeping move. It's an improvent in all facets. Bryn offers one thing and one thing only. Shooting. Thats replacebale wiyth Belli, Mills, Amd Bertans around.
The Spurs have been losing games simply because they cant rely on gimmicky defense for too long. They need tall player. Thsts what they need. They're defensively challenged ( per pop).
Adding Prince not only improves the defeneive potential, but it it does so wuthout giving away offensive potency. Nevermind that prince is going tp rebound better.
Getting rid of forbes for prince isnt exactly changing the current tactics either. Rather just improving in its overall potential.
Bryn is really just a redundant non-nba caliber athlete that can shoot. He needs to go.
I've been saying this forever... He is a streaky undersized SG that is horrible on defense... You don't keep him simply because he has a few decent regular season games... Judge him in the playoffs... Where he has consistently shat the bed and walked around with his head hanging
For the money the Spurs are paying Forbes to play in the starting lineup, he's a BARGAIN.
Before we complain, you've got to ask if there are any comparable bargains out there in the league.
The reason why the Spurs are losing games in that stars like DD, LMA and Gay aren't showing up. Don't blame the underpaid scrub for the loses. He's on the court to spread the court so that DD, LMA and Gay can do their damage... unfortunately they are MIA in too many games.
triggered
I agree. We have too many combo guards and not enough true SFs for defense. Forbes stock is high, and if we can get something serviceable I would do it...
hard to believe Walker can’t take his minutes.
You aren't making an argument where that would be fallacious, so no.
Good defense isn't about gimmicks. Yes, any time you can confuse your opponents you can get an advantage, but the foundation of good defense is discipline, and it's that attention to detail that has led to team making big gains. Yeah, the Spurs aren't likely to be an elite defense without some elite defenders. But they're an offense-first team now, and their D only has to be good enough to support that. Bringing in a rotational SF isn't going to turn the team into a defensive juggernaut unless that player is himself a top defender. Besides that, it's going to be down to chemistry with the starting unit, something that already exists or will again once Gay returns to the lineup.
People aren't thinking this through. DeRozan guards small-forwards better than he guards two-guards. You get a guy like Prince and start him, and you aren't any more likely to do anything against GS. If DeRozan is bad on Durant, he's also going to be bad on Thompson. Indeed, he'd probably be worse, because DeMar's off-ball D is worse than he on-ball D. So if you put him on Durant and Prince on Thompson, why the did you do the trade in the first place? Then you have a team like Portland with two dynamic guards, and you end up DeRozan at the two struggling to check McCollum, or you play him at the three and put in a guard, and ... well you're right back to wondering what the was the need to pick up a small-forward then.
If people can actually come up with legit examples for when the Forbes/White/DeRozan/Gay/Aldridge lineup found itself losing games due to lack of size at the wing, I'm willing to listen. Instead, it sounds an awful lot like folks are worried (or I guess whining if you're the OP) over nothing. The team is much more likely to lose because the offense goes to than they are because of the defense. Dude plays poorly in a loss, and the misguided assumption is "Wow, this guy is losing games," rather than, "Wow, this team really depends on him shooting well". Probably the biggest reason why ST can't handle a loss well at all.
Forbes is a player we need to keep. he's a bargain and it's not like trading him is going to get us a first rounder anyway so there's no point to it. If anybody needs to be traded it's Gasol or Mills. What we need is patience for the future. We have great defenders in White and Murray that cover up a lot of DeRozan's defensive weaknesses. A Murray, White, DeRozan line up should be really effective if Murray develops like we hope. We have Lonnie who by all accounts has all the talent in the world, it's just a matter of molding him into a smarter and more effective player. Honestly if Gay can just stay healthy for an entire season, then we are a championship level team next year.
I was making the argument that Forbes is a bad player because his defense is too bad to justify his offense so, yes.
I think the gist of the thread is more correct than incorrect
Forbes probably has more value now with 1.5 years left on his cheap deal than next year with only 1 or 0.5 at the deadline.
Mills and Marco probably are not going anywhere for a variety of reasons that make them less movable than Forbes.
Hill was moved in part because they couldn't afford to keep him after re-signing Jefferson. If it wasn't for Kawhi it probably would have been for someone else.
Forbes' future is probably limited if the team makes a healthy, expected transition to a future 3-guard rotation of White-Murray-Walker with Mills still hanging around another 2 years to get minutes and DeRozan still available at the 2 for minutes if needed.
Now if there's a setback with Murray or if Walker is a non-factor in the future that changes things. But if the expectation is that the Spurs will run a backcourt mix of the 3 recent first round picks plus Mills plus DeRozan plus Marco as soon as next season ... Forbes might be more valuable in a trade
I'm not so sure about a Prince deal or if that's viable. And I don't know if he would be valued in other deals and be what gets a deal done like with Covington or Porter. But the general thrust of the argument is probably right.
Spurs themselves didn't even expect to play Forbes that much this year and they paid him accordingly. Starting backcourt was supposed to be Murray-DeRozan with White-Mills off the bench. Forbes was a 5th/6th guard who has surpassed expectations. Capitalizing on that seems reasonable enough.
Nah, you were wondering why so many folks defend him, despite him being a bad player (even though he's been demonstrably good this year). You also likened him to Bonner, whom you hate because you apparently work harder than him. Seems completely appropriate to assume your vitriol comes from the same place for both guys.
LOL, show me the metrics that prove he's been "demonstrably good" this year, especially in regards to defense. Yes, I was wondering why people defend him on the basis that his defense has been DEMONSTRABLY horrendous this year that doesn't justify the small positives his offense brings. And while you continue to put words in my mouth, your reference to the work harder bull is in reference to another ad Hominem you used on me because I had questioned Bonner's work ethic (as the lack of results on the floor, especially in the playoffs, gave me the right to question it). You're better than that Chinook.
The logical thing when faced with a situation where a lot of folks disagree with you is reevaluate your view, not just assume a bunch of folks are stupid. You, though, have already demonstrated that you'll just hate players for reasons beyond how well they do on the court. Could show you stats on stats showing that he was a good or at least competent NBA player, but none of that would have a chance in the face of your opinion that he didn't work hard enough to be in the league. That's its own thread though, but the main reason why it's relevant is because a) You directly connected Bonner and Forbes with your first post and b) You only care about supporting stats if they agree with you.
Full disclosure here: I'm not happy with NBA.com's stats right now. They used to have defense broken down by play type (isos, PnR, etc), but now they have a lump "defensive impact" category. The DFG% in there has Bryn as the third-worst on the team at 75 percent. That would be horrible, but the reason why I am unhappy is that the site has every Spur from this year has unspeakably horrible in that stat, and they have every Spur from LAST YEAR as horrible in that stat. That doesn't make sense, as the Spurs were an elite D last year and could have been so if everyone individually was a turnstile (including Murray, Anderson and Green). I'm ignoring those and just posting the general D stats:
https://stats.nba.com/players/defens...mID=1610612759
Those have Bryn as an average defender whose numbers are hurt mostly by him not being a front-court player. The same thing is true for BBRef's btb; rebounding dominates those stats. ESPN's DRPM has him at 71st for two-guards, but once his offense is factored in, he moves up to 21. Add in his minutes, and he moves to 15. That's not bad. If you were to consider him a PG, the D would put him at 57. He's move up to 32 with the O, and he'd be 27 with minutes factored in. Of course, RPM doesn't change very easily, so Forbes is fighting the team's poor start and an abysmal ranking from last year. A single-year version of the stat probably has him as being better.
To keep it topical with the thread, Forbes' RPM blows Prince's out of the water. Taurean is grading out as a major negative on both ends.
So anyway, yeah, Bryn's not a bad player. He doesn't deserve the hate you throw him. The Spurs could upgrade, but not just with any old wing off the street. He's not an immediate anchor for the roster. He doesn't "have to go."
He just seems to always be wandering around the 3-point line with his hand up looking for someone to pass it to him so he can chuck it up, or he's on the fast break and pulls up for a ill-advised brick.
-At Gay at SF. I'm not yearning for another s bag, I'm yearning for a competent SF. It's not too much to ask and not me nor probably anyone with common sense, is going to stop harping on it until it's resolved; miserable, delusional apologists be damned.
- No one in this thread claimed they'd be contenders with this or a similar move.
- I'd guess the Hawks wouldn't do it, mostly because the Spurs 1st looks like it could be 20ish and this trade could easily push it a few spots lower. I'd also consider both 1sts as part of a larger deal.
- Some would freak over that, but really they'd just be hoping to get a player with his tools with one of those picks. Then they've got to develop them for a few years, hope Aldridge and Gay are still in their prime, that no key player suffers a career altering injury, that the league is as (relatively) open as it is now, etc.
- I don't care about random regular season games where this team got away with something that would more than likely cost them in a playoff series or Prince's metrics, in a limited sample size, playing an outsized role, on a bad team. Other than the very best, it's always about context in this sport and he's already shown that he can succeed in the role he'd have here. He's nothing special, but good luck finding someone who checks as many boxes (for different reasons, Covington and Porter are pipe dreams).
You're free to talk Spurs. I just figured you'd want to know where the talk for your favorite Lakers is. Wouldn't want you to get bored of Spurs talk.
Nope. I accept that you're a Lakers fan. What inspired you to make the change of allegiance?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
