Reply With Quote
I hope he doesnt play. That being said, you cant cut a guy making that much when you dont have anyone to replace him. It just doesnt make sense.
It sucks. Its not like the Spurs are actually competing for a le anyway.
I would package Manu/Blair for a young frontline player. I would have traded manu a few years ago when he had higher value but he still has some value left. The Spurs have Anderson who can eventually be a good starting 2 option.
Trading parker will create another hole on the team. You won't get any better starting TJ Ford. Replacing Manu with Anderson won't hurt the team as much.
I hope he doesnt play. That being said, you cant cut a guy making that much when you dont have anyone to replace him. It just doesnt make sense.
It sucks. Its not like the Spurs are actually competing for a le anyway.
Who is the supposed "high quality big" that the Spurs should disrupt their current construct for? Regardless, keeping RJ should tell you this FO is gonna roll with what it's got.
True, TJ or Neal couldn't hold that PG position too well. Manu would get worn out playing that position/role. But Manu is a SA favorite and the FO knows that. I don't think the FO has the balls to trade either TP or Manu anyway and that' why we always stand pat and eventually fizzle out. Dam.
Has nothing to do with balls and everything to do with winning. Tell me who the Spurs get for TP or Manu that doesn't kill their chances of competing this year? In the off-season, yeah there's a chance one of them gets traded, but to do so now make absolutely no sense.
Dunno, a healthy LaMarcus Aldrige or Pau Gasol? Not big time defensive players but can score. Better than Blair or Bonner I'd say. I like Blair but he's just too undersized.
I agree with the OP. Although RJ's run with the team has been overall, a failure, he's absolutely the best fit for this team considering how much Pop values Corporate Knowledge.
We all know how each of the Big 3 score. And as long as they are here, the offense belongs to them. RJ will be a spot-up 3-point shooter (for the most part), and we will all be dissatisfied. We also all knew that he wasn't a great defender before he played his first game here. He never was, and never will be a "fit" for this team.
If you think about it, RJ's situation here is almost identical to Finley's, except Finley was older by the time he got here. If this Spurs team had been as good as the 06-07 team, people would talk about how RJ had "contributed" to a championship, just like they did with Finley. And when that Spurs team didn't repeat, the complaints about Finley were almost identical to the ones about RJ now.
It's about as bad of a "fit" as you could think of. And everyone is stuck with it because of the contract and the cap.
Put it another way - bring the 06-07 Finley to this current Spurs team, and people would be saying almost exactly the same things about him as they say about RJ. He's not a fit because the coach believes in defense first, and he's not a defense-first kind of player. He's not a fit because he's a scorer who has to play the role of a shooter. He was one of the best in the league at getting to the FT line, but he doesn't get the opportunity to take advantage of that ability.
There's some truth to that I'd say. So what's the biggest difference between 06-07 and 10-11? The 1st big difference is no Bowen or Horry who played with balls and could defend. 2nd one is there is not enough help on the front line. 3rd is obviously the big 3 have gotten older. Obvious fix is get a younger big that can defend and score some, but that's easier said than done unfortunately.
If you look closely at the financials datas, waiving RJ didn't save a lot of money to Spurs. So, even if RJ has been a huge disappointment, keeping him was indeed the best thing to do.
I'm pleased to see that Spurs didn't of use the amnesty on Dice's contract because this amnesty exception could be damn useful in one or two years. Keeping it is a wise move.
Spurs next deadline is now Monday when Dice's contract becomes guaranteed.
I agree with a lot of what you're saying, but don't sugarcoat it - Jefferson was brought in to help compensate for the decline in the big 3's scoring. I know there was a smokescreen of talk about his defense while in NJ, but his purpose was to be a scorer too. Like you said - he just doesn't fit and why did the FO think he would based on Pop's desire to keep the SF tucked away in the corner?
There's a big difference in the expectation of bringing in RJ vs that for Finley and their salaries reflected that. Also, I'm not so sure Pop is really defensive focused these days.
So what do you think? Is Dice going to be back in a Spurs' uniform? They're going to pay half of his salary, no matter what, so that money isn't even part of the equation. Is there a better option, for what the other half of his salary will cost?
If he's up to it, and wants to play, I think he'll be back.
Keepiing and using RJ is double edge sword. While it's feasible to see RJ with his expereince and corporate knowledge being an advantage over using our young draft picks , Leonard and Anderson , especially if your goal is to win regular season games. The drawback again is if we will be preparing our rotation to be ready for the playoffs. giving RJ minutes now over Leonard and Anderson will hurt us in the long run in the playoffs. You can't expect Leonard and Anderson to play significant impact minutes in the Playoffs if you don't start using them significantly now.
I'm hoping RJ minutes would gradually be reduced from 20 minutes at start of the season to less than 10 at the end of the regular season. And the reverse happens for Leoard and Anderson. (from 10min moving up to 25 min)
Knowing Pop i have my doubts this will happen. if we go by the principle of prove your self first to earn your minutes. Moving RJ to the bench when he is beating up on unorganized teams early over Rookies with all their early mistakes , is a hard call to justify.
I think that Dice won't be back because he wants to retire. Spurs will try to trade his contract either in a salary dump trade or in a trade to improve the team. If they can't find a deal, he will be waived.
Hopefully the Spurs could trade Dice for a big, but I don't see it happenning.
When Dice decided to retire last season, I thought the Spurs shoud give Jeff Foster a shot, but now Foster has stayed with Pacers.
Bet my life that doesn't happen............................................ ....
or $100 dollars....
or whatever you're willing to bet.......?
Good post. Putting things in the right perspective.
...and RJ thrives much more when paired with a pass-first PG, as opposed to an offensive-minded, shoot-first PG, like Parker.
It does make you wonder why would Pop go to so much trouble bringing in a player like RJ. A player who isn't an ideal fit for the Spurs offensive system. You would think Pop would devise some plays to take advantage of RJ's skills, rather than turning him into a floor-spacing, spot-up shooter.
As most have said, RJ isn't as bad a player as he's looked ina Spurs uniform. He's simply miscast into onto team that doesn't suit his style of play.
The nets had no inside presence. The spurs can win if they run but only if they had some good interior post defenders which they don't have.
The Showtime Lakers proved that you could win with a great open court running team. They won because they had Abdul-Jabber who was still a good low post player.
If the spurs could add a couple of true low post players then they have enough athletes who could run. Hill would have been great on a running team, Parker, Manu, Neal, Jefferson, Anderson and Leonard are solid options on a running team. Pop just doesn't play that style so it won't happen.
that Laker team of the 1980s would always look first to make the outlet pass to start a fast break and Abdul-Jabber would be the last player down on offense. Many times they would score quickly on the initial break and if they decided there was not an easy lane to the basket they would set up the offense and by then Jabber who was last down the court would be in position to be part of the offense.
Part of the problem for Jefferson is trying to fit into an offensive system that wants the SF to camp on the 3 point line, a la Bruce Bowen. A sure sign of this for me is the fact that Jefferson had the best 3 pt% shooting season of his career by far last season at 44% but also registered his lowest scoring average since his rookie season. He averaged 3.8 attempts from the 3 pt line in 30.4 minutes per game last year-- compare this with his best season offensively ('08), where he averaged 2.6 attempts in 39 mpg and scored over 22 ppg. In the '08 season, 18% of Jefferson's shots where 3 pt attempts, but last year 48% of his shot attempts were. I don't know exactly how often his direct assignment from Pop on the offensive end of the floor is to spot up and stay away from the paint, but clearly he is trying to change his approach and strangely enough is succeeding in terms of becoming a much more efficient 3 pt shooter... unfortunately, this takes away his best attribute as a slasher/scorer as opposed to a jump shooter. Part of the problem as I see it is that the Spurs as an organization have fallen in love with the 3 point shot and moved away from their "Defense first" philosophy. They want more three point shooting (they led the league last year in team 3 pt%) and keep guys like Bonner around because of it. The ironic thing is Pop doesn't want Parker shooting threes because he wants Tony to focus on his strength as a slasher/penetrator... but does the exact opposite with Jefferson.
If RJ makes the AS game, Bonner will win the MVP.
If he's going to be here, then he better work on spacing out to the corner 3. In last year's playoff, he kept turning that corner 3 into a shorter 17 foot jumper. It made it much easier for effort defenders to challenge his shot and then bust tail to get to the interior to dig down.
Bowen was such a threat out there, but even with a crappy FT%, he knew that driving to the hoop would sometimes be a better option. Recognition of when is a key factor of what made Bruce a legit threat, even as a 4th or 5th scorer. With RJ, you see uncertainty or lack of confidence. Hopefully, between RJ & James Anderson with lots of Kawhi Leonard mixed in, we'll see a SF by committee group that makes other teams defenders think they are going to be in for a long night, as opposed to salivating because they are about to dominate playing 5 on 4 because the SF is weak.
RJ is way overpaid for what he's delivering and for that reason alone we should cut him, whether there was a clear immediate spend or not. I can understand the reasoning of not letting him go to another WC team (by retaining him ), but outside of that, SA had the right idea at first by amnestying him. I'd rather the team have a hole at SF, patched in by waiver-wire type players, than pay this dude who perpetually mails in games big money and tainting our team. His presence is an illusion, in that we won't be able to depend on him for what we need (relentlessness, reliable shooting, intensity, etc). So, we couldn't get Butler or Howard, big deal... doesn't mean we shouldn't make some drastic changes. Hopefully we can trade him. Otherwise, our current roster outside of a player or two looks all too familiar to last season's and the season before that.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions