Reply With Quote
The Spurs need to milk their contacts and those of their international players for all they're worth. The Oberto signing is one indication of that. The drafting of Mahinmi is another.
The Spurs may be the first team ever to have nothing but international players on their active roster in the next few years once Horry and Bowen are gone. Wait. I forgot about Barry and Brown. They have all these rights to players from other countries they selected in the second round and the guy they just drafted this year in the first round.
The Spurs need to milk their contacts and those of their international players for all they're worth. The Oberto signing is one indication of that. The drafting of Mahinmi is another.
Maybe the foreign players are just better now. What American ctr would you have wanted the Spurs to sign? It is just a mixture of the Spurs drafting so deep into the first round, and the better bargains being foreigners.
Skill and talent are not the subjects at hand. What matters is that the Spurs seem to have an easier time getting international players to want to play for them.
I agree with that, but I think it has more to do with the Spurs being able to sign players with similar athletic ability for less money. If the Spurs found an American player they wanted they would go after him just as hard as a foreigner they wanted.
A foreign free agent will always be less expensive then an NBA free agent, and that is why the Spurs dominance in foreign scouting has payed huge dividends.
I think there's one more facet to the San Antonio story as a NBA market.
Don't forget that we've had a some very serviceable veterans who've come here to get their rings (Big Dog, Barry, Ferry, etc) before they end their career and some others who've expressed interest (SAR being the latest) even if the deal never worked out.
If we keep this winning tradition going with Duncan and company for the next few years, we'll probably see more second-tier vets attracted to the Spurs because of their organization.
I don't think the Spurs have made a consience effort to go the foreign route just because they were burned by a few free agents.
It had more to do with the Spurs realizing that they were going to continue to be drafting with low picks, that the talent overseas had risen to a sufficient level of quality, and that as a small market franchise that expected to be a serious contender they needed whatever edge they could get, especially with SA not being the ideal destination for American-born players.
Sure, the cost differential is nice, but you have to first get the player to want to join your team. That's the key issue here.
It's fairly clear to me that this is an instance of necessity being the mother of invention, as Marcus initially posited, compounded by the realization that early cleverness could be a solution to the need.
I hadn't made the link, but it strikes me as a fantastic observation, and it's likely a correct statement of how the Spurs have arrived at this point.
For me, the biggest thing is that the Spurs have the best track record in the NBA at foreign scouting, so naturally it makes sense to run with it.
The FO has done some solid trades (e.g. Malik for Nazr) and found some solid guys in free agency (e.g. Bowen), but I wouldn't say we're any better at either than other good front offices like Detroit, Indiana, Denver, etc.
You can win with American players, and in a way where the egos don't get in the way of the team. Go call Joe Dumars for more details. Having won a le that way, Dumars is demonstrably the best in the league in finding guys who have been through the wringer and are ready to settle down and be part of a winning team. So for Joe, when he's trying to improve his team, Option A is to look around for more guys like that, because he knows they'll probably work.
Likewise, if you're RC and Pop, you know you can win with guys like TP and Ginobili, because you already have. So the first option is to scout around for the next international guy you can bring in affordably who can take his game to the next level in the NBA. If they can find an American kid who's willing to come in and work his butt off, that's terrific. But they're probably looking first at the foreign guy, because they know they have better international scouting than other teams, and they can turn up good players more easily.
Great points. Gotta stick with what butters the bread.For me, the biggest thing is that the Spurs have the best track record in the NBA at foreign scouting, so naturally it makes sense to run with it.
The FO has done some solid trades (e.g. Malik for Nazr) and found some solid guys in free agency (e.g. Bowen), but I wouldn't say we're any better at either than other good front offices like Detroit, Indiana, Denver, etc.
You can win with American players, and in a way where the egos don't get in the way of the team. Go call Joe Dumars for more details. Having won a le that way, Dumars is demonstrably the best in the league in finding guys who have been through the wringer and are ready to settle down and be part of a winning team. So for Joe, when he's trying to improve his team, Option A is to look around for more guys like that, because he knows they'll probably work.
Likewise, if you're RC and Pop, you know you can win with guys like TP and Ginobili, because you already have. So the first option is to scout around for the next international guy you can bring in affordably who can take his game to the next level in the NBA. If they can find an American kid who's willing to come in and work his butt off, that's terrific. But they're probably looking first at the foreign guy, because they know they have better international scouting than other teams, and they can turn up good players more easily.
in the words of dusty
KiDD to SA ... It is a LOCK
Just wanted to point out that while san antonio is the 8th largest city in the us, its considered one of the ten ?Megatropils? in the us. Running the I-35 stretch. No only that, but if i remember right, all of them except northern california have more NBA teams that they have to support.
The only right you have to call yourself small market is either because;
1. there are 15 people that live in each house
2. No one owns a TV
3. People have better things to do.
Since you have the ability to charge whatever you want for suites, tickets, etc... and KNOW people will come, is it REALLY that small of a market?
Did you drop this smack at your most recent "Flat Earth Society" meeting or something?
Do you need another lesson in market size?Just wanted to point out that while san antonio is the 8th largest city in the us, its considered one of the ten ?Megatropils? in the us. Running the I-35 stretch.
Give links for your tv market "research" or stfu.
A far better measure of market strength, in addition to households and/or population is per capita income. I'm sure SA is under the league average for that statistic.
Pittsburgh is considered a small market for basball but the steelers are considered a large market. They were talking about that on ESPN radio in regards to Mark Cuban.
As for this:
Do you need another lesson in market size?
Give links for your tv market "research" or stfu.
Thats's basic knowledge that SA is not only among the largest cities but areas as well. It was in a AP story.
But i'm sure since apparently no one has any TV's down there they wouldn't read the papers either.
The city size means very little. What really matters is the total metro size, the SA MSA is pretty small relative to NBA markets except for Salt Lake City and New Orleans.
For example, the Minneapolis-St. Paul MSA dwarfs SA, from what I recall.
Link the AP story.
Here's mine.
Again.
http://www.nielsenmedia.com/DMAs.html
Here's another:
http://www.demographia.com/db-usmet2000.htm
See a trend here?
I think to a certain extent in terms of television viewership you need to combine Austin with San Antonio when it comes to the Spurs. However, in terms of the endorsement money that can be made outside of your basketball contract locally and nationally the attractiveness meter goes way down in San Antonio.
I think not. Only a handful of games are actually shown up here -- quite a few Maverick games make it on FSW as well. Austin is an island onto itself with UT dominating any other sports interest. After that, its pro sports loyalties are given to Dallas and Houston as much if not more than San Antonio.I think to a certain extent in terms of television viewership you need to combine Austin with San Antonio when it comes to the Spurs.
If you are going to include them there, then you start doing things like including the whole state of Minnesota for the Wolves, for example. It would be tough to draw a map showing viewership that way, but Austin would definitely be split between Dallas and SA.
Last edited by ChumpDumper; 07-16-2005 at 01:52 PM.
I see the trend is that SA gained a greater percantage of population than MPS.
Like i said, the amount of people that have a tv is pretty weak in san antonio. Outside of the metro area, what's Mps got? Towns of 2000, 600, etc.. If you go outsied of the metro area, which accoriding to the AP story i read san antonio is among the largest, your still in Spurs or wolves country even though its not "listed"
Tell me oh great one, which has a higher population? Austin or Brainerd minnesota?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
