Reply With Quote
Ideal would be Ariza, but i'm still very happy with RJ.
I tought INSTEAD of Richard
nvm
Ideal would be Ariza, but i'm still very happy with RJ.
And where is Theron Smith?
He can dunk. But I didn't see he was great at attacking the basket.
James White can dunk and....... yeah thats about it.
Reading all the possibilities you want to say Ariza.
That being said is ARIZA > Jefferson + McDyess?
The answer to that is no.
So, all the options, all that was available, while not the best player out of all of them, Jefferson will end up being the best fit + chemistry fit.
Jax, only because we wouldn't have to be BS'ing with this "learning the system" stuff with him. Granted, it's been 6 years since he played for us, so I'm sure things have changed somewhat + he'd have to get reaquainted with the system...but the mark of any new guy on the Spurs is that they're scared to take shots at first. Jax has no fear when it comes to getting his shots.
All that matters to me are ..who is the most efficient of them all? Who among them is the most durable, that can help a injury hit squad? Who, among them, can accept a reduced role and try to flourish within it, and is willing to reduce flaws and learn on the role as the season progresses?
Hindsight is always 20-20, but Richard Jefferson seems to answer the questions best among the others. RJ continues to be the best choice. He hasn't performed more than adequately, but his endurance, durability, and willingness to cut his mistakes have helped and will continue to help in the long run.
stephen jackson. but only because ginobili has been unable to regain his status as a scorer. the only two on that list that can let fly whenever they want is vince carter and sjax. the only one i trust on the spurs to chuck some shots is jackson, a former spur. his defense is pretty good too.
And where is Theron Smith?
I didn't put him on the list because I wanted a compe ive vote. Theron would have won it in a landslide.
Sjax for me boys....he's a Stud!
I wanted Jackson as well, but this is all true.
GS was salary dumping, but it was Jamal Crawford who was available and dumped right after the Jefferson trade. It took Jackson 4 more months of being a total cancer to finally get the Warriors to trade him, and the Spurs had the Oberto-Bowen contract deadlines to deal with.
Under "Pros" for Jackson, I know it has "championship mettle" but I think it could be expounded upon with how clutch Jackson is. Playoff time, Jackson never backed down. All anyone remembers from the 2003 WCF game 6 was Kerr, but without Jackson knocking down just as many 3s to get the Spurs close Kerr doesn't get a chance. , in 03 in the 1st round, WCF and Finals Jackson was ridiculously clutch in all the clinching games 4th quarters. And in game 6 against the Mavs with the Warriors, same thing.
Jack is easily my answer. Here's something I wrote over the summer, before the RJ trade:
As I said there, I really don't mind Jack's contract. Yes, it's long, and it's not chump-change, but it's not exactly $15 million a year either. I also feel like a lot of his negative attributes go away or are strongly dampened when he puts on a Spurs uniform.
However, the thing is, Stephen Jackson wasn't available when the Spurs were looking to make their trade. He was still supposedly happy in GS and GS was supposedly happy with him; he had signed an extension just 7 months before I typed those words above, so I don't really think he was available.
All this being said, Jefferson is a close 2nd on this list. He fits with the Spurs personality perfectly, and the fact that his contract expires after 2010-11 gives the Spurs more flexibility. They can choose to resign him at the relatively-young age of 31 (likely at a much lower price), or go a different direction for the post-Duncan era.
Also, they were able to get Jefferson for expiring contracts and, amazingly, zero draft picks or other talent. Would that have been the case with Captain Jack? As I said over the summer, probably not (at least not until he blew up on them). Is RJ + RMJ > Jack? Hard to say, but I think we can all agree that all of these swingmen are not necessarily apples to apples comparsions, and the first word of the thread le is dead-on: all of this is pure hindsight.
What about Tyrone Nesby?
I would have voted for Ariza (primarily due to his age) if Dice could have been signed but since that couldn't happen then I went with Sjax but RJ was close second. Maybe there would have been a chemistry issue with Sjax and the Spurs but maybe not. That's a "what if" type of scenario IMHO.
I don't believe that VC would have fit very well into our system and we all know what happens to Marion come playoff time. Just stick a good defender on him and he vanishes. Anyway as Timvp stated he is in steep decline and therefore not an option. As for Ron Ron its the same as with Ariza - having to use the MLE to get him thereby losing out on Dice.
So I also conclude that Ron Ron < RJ + Dice, too.
I believe that getting a quality big is just as important as getttng an athletic wing. With the current situation we have both.
Battier.
I'm fine with RJ and Jax would be my 2nd option
Jack...for many of the reasons that lurker23 pointed out.
Your mom
Pros
- She dribbles the balls well
- Could have signed her for the bare minimum
- Takes great direction
- Not afraid to get down and dirty
- Never lazy on the D
Cons
- not very loyal
- has a wandering eye (not really her fault though because she was born with it)
- Can't be trusted around the towel boy
- Age is a huge factor
lol not directed at you timvp so don't ban,pink, or give me the stink eye lol
RJ is the perfect mix of role player/star player that we needed, and quite frankly the only one (along with Ariza actually) that seemed to fit the bill. I don't think we coudl've made a trade for a big as useful as Dice, so spending the MLE on Ariza wouldn't have been the best solution IMO.
RJ is the best fit for the spurs
Jackson would have been my first choice.
I think the "at ude" association with Jackson is overhyped. His salary is not that much different than Jeffersons and...having been in this system once before...I think his transition would have been smoother. That plus Jackson plays much better D IMO.
I like Jackson's "passion" for the game though he probably would have never been considered after snubbing the Spurs once before for a lesser contract at the time.
I guess one would have to question his "loyalty" for a team over his loyalty to himself...but to me...Duncan's window is small and Jackson on the team would have been a better option to helping secure the team and Duncan to get at least one more le within that window.
We'll see.
Raise the bar as much as you want, ! will always get over it...
John Salmons?
ok, not as exciting as the others, but he was definitely on the Spurs radar last year and he is definitely on the trade block right now.
Hard to choose. The Spurs wanted some stability and a guy who can play all 82 games of the season and the playoffs. So, Vince Carter, who has gotten injured this year, is out of the equation. Ron Artest would have only gone to the Lakers. Stephen Jackson's percentages, I never really liked them when he was on the Spurs, usually in the low 40s.
I would take Trevor Ariza if we did not acquire Keith Bogans. This one is RJ, the Spurs made the correct move if they wanted a guy who can play all 82 games at a solid level.
RJ is slowly learning to fit into this team. His occasional ferocity when dunking has been a very pleasant surprise for Spurs fans, and I love it when he gets aggressive and starts attacking the hole, but his jumpshot always makes me cringe a little. And his D is choppy.
Give me Jax back in a heartbeat.
Ariza would have been my choice in hindsight, but I'm still happy with the RJ acquisition, especially for what we gave up..
Our offense is 4th in the NBA..RJ has contributed to that, but not enough that it would severely hurt the ranking if we had Ariza instead..the offense has been great this year since we have so many weapons, but the D has been just above average..
Ariza is one of the best 1 on 1 defenders in the NBA..he would give us our first long defender to start at the 3 in a while, and it would also allow Mason to start since we wouldn't need a defender at the 2..
Ariza has also proven to be arguably the best defender against Kobe this year, which would obviously help us if we meet them in the playoffs..
I like McDyess, I think he could be one of the best bench bigs in the NBA, but using the MLE on Ariza would have forced the FO into trading the rest of the expiring contracts for a big man and also would have probably been forced to give Ian a shot earlier too..
It's all in hindsight though..
I'm happy with RJ and I hope the FO can bring in the final piece.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
