Reply With Quote
You win in the NBA by turning under-valued players into good or great ones (ala Kawhi, Danny, Darymond, etc). MCW is ripe for the Spursing.
I understand all that, but is he going to leave 20m+ on the table? Unlikely. He's not 35 like West.
Also, then what do we do about C? We have no space to sign anyone.
You win in the NBA by turning under-valued players into good or great ones (ala Kawhi, Danny, Darymond, etc). MCW is ripe for the Spursing.
You guys aren't getting it. He has a 2.4m salary, so you give up basically nothing to see if the Spurs can unleash his talent.
And other options are even longer shots or cause us to spend a lot more, which means ignoring our glaring need at centre.
It's basically a free shot at turning him into a good player, and I believe the Spurs can do it, just like they have with so many players in the past.
In case you didn't know, Parker couldn't shoot for when he got here. Seems chip helped him out too. Seemed to help Bowen? And I'm sure there are more.
Who doesn't torch Parker at this point.
Spurs will trade Parker if Conley is signed ( Conley sign and trade for TP males sense for MEM). Makes no sense to pay 35 mil a yr for two PGs. RC is never that undisciplined. By trading Parker and letting Diaw go, SA could still have 15-18 mil to spend in FA to fill in other areas.
If not Conley, I rather Spurs trade Mills/ Diaw for Teague. SA could still have 15 mil to spend in FA ( if TD/ Manu retire).
No to MCW.
Last edited by MaNu4Tres; 05-18-2016 at 12:18 AM.
For everyone who doesn't want MCW at 2.4, I'm almost positive are the same people who didn't think the offense this year was
It's amazing how some are so afraid of change.For everyone who doesn't want MCW at 2.4, I'm almost positive are the same people who didn't think the offense this year was
You don't know whether his poor shooting is a confidence thing (some people are just poor outside shooters) or if it is something mechanical that can be corrected. I haven't heard anything about him going to a "shot doctor" or shooting coach to improve. It could be he is just not confident or is just a poor outside shooter.
Thinking that coach Chip can repair every player's shooting touch is ludicrous, TBH. Chip can help the one's willing to learn (Kawhi & Tony) or that have a mechanical flaw, but that won't transfer to every player that puts on a Spurs jersey.
Carter-Williams is terrible in a half-court set offense, people. His game is much better in a transition based offense where he can see the floor due to his superior height (for a PG), but as soon as the game slows down (think playoffs) he'll revert back to trash on offense.
Why the are some of y'all so enamored with Conley? He is coming off a serious injury, has steadily declined in production since '14, he's nearly 30 years old, he is poor finishing at the rim (54% from 0-3 ft in '16/ 57.7% from 0-3 for career compared to Parker at 61.5% from 0-3 ft. in '16/64.9% from 0-3 ft. for career) and is slightly undersized in comparison to the elite PG's.
Neither of those two are the answer. Either they should stand pat while grooming a project PG (least desirable move), swing a trade for some other team's project PG (Toronto, Minnesota, etc.), trade for a solid PG like Jeff Teague (most desirable move) or just sign another (young) veteran PG to battle Parker/Mills for minutes on the cheap.
Wasting assets on acquiring a subpar starter (who is no better than Parker) or signing a fading veteran PG won't do the trick. It might help everyone feel good for the short term, but they will be right back whining about the same thing next offseason.
Last edited by J_Paco; 05-18-2016 at 01:15 AM.
On the money.
Your right. And you don't know it either. But why not see? You know you are getting a long defensive PG that is also a pass first guy. So fixing his shooting even marginally makes it worth it. Especially for the price.
MCW got benched at times last yr for Jarod ing Bayless.
MCW has regressed and doesn't know how to win. He's due 3.1 next yr , not 2.4 then he'll be a restricted free agent.
I would much rather Spurs use Mills in a package to get a better point guard who is still young, has been in the fire in big games, can shoot, and create -- like Jeff Teague.
That's also with Jason Kidd as a coach. I wouldn't much against him with that guy making decisions.
Like Jeff Teague has a rising stock of his own, getting benched by Dennis Schroeder of all players in the playoffs. Smh
Spurs need a point guard that doesn't need year(s) to develop.
They need a seasoned PG, in their prime that doesn't need to learn how to shoot a basketball.
If SA was in rebuilding mode, I'd be for it -- different cir stance.
Look at the teams MCW is playing for. I'd like to see what he could do under a short leash from Pop. Not saying he comes over and starts, but ing dump bonner and let this guy be our 2014 Cojo.
I think MCW is a terrible idea and there's literally no chance Pop would get a Robertson-like shooter as a PG, unless it's in a reserve 10 mins per role.
No . I say we get Tony Allen and turn him into a decent shooter.
Everybody needs to score in 2016.
He's never been a great defender.
Not very good, his FG% from 0-3 feet in the last couple of years is about .550 and 3-10 is .430. Even a broken down Parker has been significantly better in the last couple of years.
Doesn't matter - Spurs PGs get back for trasition D, they don't crash the O boards.
He really really can't.
There should be more. With the offense running through Kawhi and LMA the Spurs need a totally different type of PG than MCW. Patty is much closer to what the Spurs need right now than MCW.
You are really stretching to find things wrong with MCW to build up Teague.
MWC would be just fine. And would grow in the system. He's not as far off as you want to make him.
Dooms days warrior here!
How does TP make sense for the Grizz? He doesn't. Sign and trade for Conley is magical thinking.
I love Conley, he'd be a great fit, I just don't see us getting him, and if we do how do we plug the frontcourt holes?
I like Teague too and think he's a good option. Or Darren Collison. But I'm intrigued by what MCW might become in a strong development environment.
Dude, Michael Carter-Williams sucks. Point blank. He isn worth trading for when he's only marginally better than Patty Mills. The Spurs could scrap the FA pool and find a point guard of similar ability. The kid got benched for Greivis Vasquez and Jerryd Bayless, yet will somehow be the "saviour" of the much better San Antonio Spurs?
Kid would fall apart in a deep playoff run and look terrible against the elite PG's. He'd look worse than TP, IMO.
I would much rather the Spurs pick up a stop-gap at PG like Darren Collison (although, I hate his lack of size), Langston Galloway or someone else to replace Patty. None of these guys people are mentioning, minus maybe Jeff Teague, is good enough to be the long-term solution. And Conley will continue to regress and get injured while Spurs fan will refer to him as "Richard Jefferson 2.0."
You're basically saying you don't think the Spurs could develop him. Maybe you're right. But I see it as a low risk high reward gamble to have a go and see how he works in a disciplined system with a supportive environment.
Patty was absolutely useless against the Thunder. I love the guy, but he's had his time here, and sacrificing him for a high upside gamble isn't much of a loss.
Btw, I know how the Spurs play. But if we had a PG who was good at crashing the boards we'd introduce a new wrinkle, wouldn't we? Westbrook killed us on the boards. I'd like to see what happens if we had a good rebounding PG changing things up.
You are assuming our development guys and disciplined culture can't improve him. I think it could. He's still very young.
Also, please explain your solution for filling glaring holes at C and PG with 12m capspace.
MEM will still have win now pieces without Conley. In the short term, there's not really any better alternatives on the FA market once Conley is off.And a Sign and Trade would guarantee them a decent replacement for two yrs ( nothing in FA is guaranteed). Also, paying Tony for only 2 years gives them a starting PG piece that fits with their win now pieces and allows flexibility the next two Summers ( Parkers expiring will be an asset in 17') -- which is better than paying Rondo 4/60 or Collison 4/ 50.
Last edited by MaNu4Tres; 05-18-2016 at 12:57 AM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions