Reply With Quote
Excellent, GrandeDavid. Thanks!
BTW, I was referring to thispego's comments about the Spurs future being brighter than the "pistins". That ought to stir it up.
Personally, it's much easier for the major market media to portray the Spurs as on the decline. They just don't want us to be portrayed as a glamour team. So they do their part in holding the Spurs down.
So in essence, Jim is part of the reason as to why the Spurs are mis-perceived as boring.
WINNING BASKETBALL IS ALL THAT MATTERS.
Excellent, GrandeDavid. Thanks!
BTW, I was referring to thispego's comments about the Spurs future being brighter than the "pistins". That ought to stir it up.
There are so many things wrong with this post it's rather funny...
McDyess played in 102 games last year for the Pistons...
The Spurs have clearly declined into a nasty hole over the last 2+ weeks of really ty, lazy basketball. The embarrassment @DET is only one instance.
A strong season and a strong playoffs being mutually exclusive is part of the Spurs lore so perversely loved by Spurs fans.
The Spurs are to be compared to only one team this season, and the Spurs are losing that comparison. All other Spurs seasons and all other 22-3 starts are meaningless.
Pistons 3L
Spus 7L
Mavs 7L
thispego,
That's great that you support your team and that you have great faith in their ability to remain the best team in the league. I did not write my post to start a smack talking war or to cause a controvery. I was just sharing an opinion from a less subjective and biased point of view. The Spurs are still one of the best teams in the NBA and will remain one of the best teams over the next few years. If you want to believe that the Spurs' future is brighter than the Pistons' future, that's great. I just said try to look at it objectively.
Bruce Bowen is 34. Nick Van Exel is 34. Brent Barry is almost 34. Robert Horry is 35. Michael Finley is almost 33. Those are your top four reserves and your starting small forward. Your franchise has some young talent overseas. Are any of those players GUARANTEED to be steady contributors as soon as two years into the future? The Spurs are hovering around the luxury tax threshhold for next year and the following year. And, in the 2008-2009 season, Tim Duncan, Manu Ginobili, Tony Parker, and Rasho Nesterovic will make $50 million ... just those four players. The salary cap is around $52-53 million currently. It will maybe be around $54-55 million by then, maybe. Those four players will be just a few million dollars away from the salary cap by themselves ... just those four players. The Spurs first round draft pick next summer belongs to the New York Knicks.
You don't have any problems with the Spurs' collective age, salary cap, and roster situation over the next three years? Seriously?
The Pistons have younger bench players who are maturing, developing, and learning from a championship core of players. Carlos Arroyo is 26. Maurice Evans is 27. Carlos Delfino is 23. Darko Milicic is 20. Jason Maxiell is 22. And, the Pistons have two projects in Alex Acker (22) and Amir Johnson (18) to develop over the next few seasons. Over the next two seasons, the Pistons will be over the salary cap but not in the luxury tax. And, in the 2008-09 season, even with Tayshaun Prince and Ben Wallace re-signed, the Pistons will still be just under the salary cap.
You can argue all you want about how the Spurs will be better every year. That's fine. But, to outright say the Spurs have a brighter future than the Pistons is a naive and not very well-thought-out contention.
Take some perspective and some constructive criticism. The Spurs are the defending champions, and they are a great, great team. So were the LA Lakers in 2002, the Chicago Bulls in 1997, the Boston Celtics in 1986. All good things eventually come to an end. And, when Tim Duncan starts to decline, the Spurs' franchise will suffer a down era where they will have to rebuild, despite over-paying three of its current stars on a team with untested, unproven European players.
Again, I didn't post to merely smack talk. Look at the situation rationally and you'll see there are some disheartening facts about the Spurs roster and salary cap situation over the next few years. Really be unbiased about it, and you'll see that my points have definite merit.
i hope DARKO and Ian battle it out for the 2010 finals MVP award
Last edited by Cant_Be_Faded; 12-27-2005 at 01:32 PM. Reason: stooooooooooooopes
I think you discount the start the Spurs had in 2002-03 in an effort to make a point. At the end of December of that season, the Spurs were 19-13; hardly a stellar start for a team expected to win a le. In mid-December of that season, the Spurs lost in LA to the Clippers and fell to 14-10. Obviously, between the end of December and the All-Star Break, the Spurs went on a tear, winning 14 of 17 to build the record that you cite, but games #33-49 are hardly the start of the season.
And that sort of slow start is the historical trend for the Duncan-Popovich Spurs -- 2004-05 and this season are basically anomalies in that time. Here are the Spurs end of December records during the Duncan-Popovich era:
2004-05: 25-6
2003-04: 22-10 (after 9-10 start)
2002-03: 19-13 (after 14-10 start)
2001-02: 21-7 (after 10-4 start)
2000-01: 19-11 (after 13-9 start)
1999-00: 21-10 (after 14-3 start)
1998-99: 6-8 (end of first month of shortened season)
1997-98: 18-11 (after 10-10 start)
The numbers at the end of December every year are good enough, but hardly what has been expected of the Spurs and nothing at all like what they've been at the end of those seasons. In that time, the Spurs are 151-76 in the opening months of their seasons (.665). Carried over a full season, the Spurs would average 54.5 wins (33 wins in a 50 game season). But in reality, they've only had one season where they were below that number (1999-2000, where the Spurs won 53 games)
Given those starts, here are the Spurs' finishes (Jan-Apr.) in each year:
2004-05: 34-17
2003-04: 35-15
2002-03: 41-9
2001-02: 37-17
2000-01: 39-13
1999-00: 32-19
1998-99: 31-5
1997-98: 38-15
That's 287-110 (.723), in those months -- a 59 win pace. Even if the Spurs' starts haven't been "slow" in an objective sense (I think the starts have been relatively slow given what's been expected and what the final results have been), they've certainly shown marked improvement over the last months (50 or so games) of almost every season.
In that same era, the Spurs are 164-63 after the All-Star break (.722). That mark was even better before last season's 18-11 -- a number fueled by Duncan's absence. Take that out, and the Spurs win almost 75% of their games from mid-February to mid-April.
I think "decline" is an inaccurate way of describing it. Yes, Manu and Tim are hurt, but Tim, despite his troubles in recent weeks, he looked like the MVP Tim out of the gate. Not only that but I think the growth of Tony Parker can't be discounted at all. I'm concerned about Manu's injuries, because he's one of those guys who will never slow down until everything breaks down.
As for the bench, yes there are some age issues, but everyone was wondering who would replace Steve Kerr, and we found Horry. Someday Horry will retire but the Spurs will likely find someone new. Some might call it homerism, but I call it recent history. Vets are willing to take pay cuts to get here. As long as Duncan is around the Spurs will be legit contenders and as such are going to be able to get solid ring chasers around him.
At the end of the day I'm comfortable putting my faith in a management team that has pulled off a few incredible draft and free agent steals in the last few years. If one of the many Euros they have signed translates into the a player of Manu or Tony's caliber then they are going to remain very dangerous in the next few years. And , if all of them somehow do (unlikely, I know, but I can dream can't I?) then look out.
I think the worst that could be said is that the Spurs could be on the verge of decline if they aren't careful.
Well put, spurs fan in exile. That was an excellent retort. I can't argue with how you put that. I definitely can appreciate that type of post over one that basically says: "My team's better than your team ... na-na, na-na-na."
Spurs and Pistons future are very similar.
For 2008-2009 : Sheed + Rip + Prince = $35M if you add the Big Ben you reach $45M for four players, not that far from $50M
The pistons first round draft pick next summer belong to Utah too.
Arroyo and Evans are bench player, they're not strating material.
There are every year guys like Evans in FA. It's not something difficult to find.
For Delfino and Maxiell, I don't know them very well but they don't look that great.
For Darko, I don't see Pistons signing him and Billups in 2007 and he looks like a bust.
Johnson is a long term project but Acker not, Pistons even though of cuting him instead of Dupree (his trade for a second round was a good move).
For 2008-2009 season, Pistons will be under the cap if they don't re-sign Billups. Don't tell me you want that ?
Spurs and Pistons are in a very similar situation, none is brighter.
Would the Spurs' future look so much brighter if we had a couple of scrubs sitting on the end of the bench as long as they were young?
tp improving should say they are not on the decline
Bruno,
Those young players on the Pistons--Darko, Delfino, Maxiell, Amir Johnson, and Acker--are exactly why the Pistons have a brighter future than the Spurs', in my opinion. They are ALREADY ON THE TEAM instead of overseas, and they're learning what it's like being in a winning situation on a championship caliber team. And, you might not think very highly of Delfino, Darko, or Maxiell, but at the very least, they can be pieces used to trade for a better player or draft picks. There is always a market on young, cheap talent with great potential. And, the best case scenerio is that they turn out to become real players in this league. Van Exel, Barry, Bowen, and Horry are on their last legs, and I don't see how the Spurs could use them in a trade scenerio.
As for the salary cap situation, it's a little similar with the Spurs, but not exactly. For the 2008-09 season, even if the Pistons re-sign Ben and plan to re-sign Chauncey, they'll just be over the salary cap, but not into luxury tax territory with those five players. But, that is all FIVE STARTERS IN TACT. The Spurs will have ONLY THREE players who make roughly $43-45 million of the payroll. There's a difference between a quality starting five and a great starting three.
While neither team has a first round draft pick next summer, the Pistons drafted THREE last year WHO ACTUALLY MADE THE TEAM. The Pistons contemplated drafting AMIR JOHNSON with their first round pick last year, so in essence, they feel like they have another draft pick for next year, he just came in a year early. Not to mention, they still have Darko to develop. Whether he does or not is another question. The Spurs have stashed a few players over in Europe and maybe they can be solid players. That's not guaranteed. And, the major difference is that the Spurs are not "developing" those players in their own system. Those players are learning different systems under different coaches. Beno Udrih hasn't exactly adjusted well. Fabricio Oberto is an experienced veteran and he hasn't really earned many minutes. Mahinmi is only 18 or 19 years old ... he's years away. Scola may never get out of his contract. Will Javtokas ever become the player he was before his motorcycle accident? Does Viktor Sanikidze even weight 200 lbs yet?
Scola has contract problems. Javtokas is not the player he was when the Spurs drafted him. And, Mahinmi and Sanikidze are still unproven teenagers years away. How are those two different from Maciej Lampe, Nikoloz Tskitishvili, Zarko Cabarkapa, and Darko Milicic? Still sold on the Spurs' talent overseas? If you haven't noticed, the fad of getting the next "Dirk" or next "Pau" has worn off with some of the more recent international talents. Manu Ginobili is a once in a lifetime find. I would be willing to agree with the guess that one of those four international Spurs' players overseas may turn out to be an NBA player, but not all of them, not even three of them.
There are clear differences in the situations between Detroit and San Antonio.
Players in the final year of their contracts are valuable in many trade scenarios.I don't see how the Spurs could use them in a trade scenerio.Wait a second. How much do you think Ben and Chauncey will take to sign and what do you think the cap will be?For the 2008-09 season, even if the Pistons re-sign Ben and plan to re-sign Chauncey, they'll just be over the salary cap.Either pimp Darko or don't.How are those two different from Maciej Lampe, Nikoloz Tskitishvili, Zarko Cabarkapa, and Darko Milicic?
Really, just one trade would change everything for either team - so this is rather academic right now.
Thus the name, ChumpDumper.
Pistons have a solid core of starters, but other than them and McDyess I'd say no one else's future is guaranteed. Darko will not be re-signed. Brown didn't play him, Flip's not playing him, he's obviously not as good as people hoped. Arroyo sucks. He always has. He's going to bolt because he'll want more money and a starting job, because he thinks he's worth it. But he's not. Evans could turn out to be a good pick up, but he's only going to be around for a couple years, and he's a role player. Certainly not more valuable than Van Exel or Finley, that's for sure.
Pistons and Spurs have both put together very good teams in affordable ways. The only advantage the Pistons have is LUCK - their players seem to get hurt a lot less.
I could understand this statement if the Spurs' quality "veteran" bench players were completely outplaying the Pistons' young, inexperience bench players. But, is that the case?
Michael Finley
28.2 mpg
10.7 ppg
3.7 rpg
.409 FG%
.352 3PT%
Maurice Evans
16.2 mpg
6.0 ppg
2.8 rpg
.462 FG%
.356 3PT%
When Finley was strictly a back-up and not starting, his numbers were not even that good. Look at the minutes per game played and the shooting percentages.
Nick Van Exel
16.3 mpg
5.8 ppg
2.0 apg
.400 FG%
.283 3PT%
Carlos Arroyo
14.2 mpg
3.9 ppg
3.4 apg
.380 FG%
0.0 3PT%
Arroyo does not shoot 3-pointers, so Nick has him there. But, wasn't the Van Exel acquisition supposed to be beneficial in large part because of his 3-pt shooting? .28% from the 3-pt line? Aren't point guards supposed to be playmakers that get assists? Arroyo plays fewer minutes and gets more assists.
Brent Barry
18.8 mpg
5.3 ppg
2.0 rpg
.408 FG%
.418 3PT%
Carlos Delfino
10.0 mpg
3.0 ppg
1.6 rpg
.441 FG%
.083 3PT%
Delfino has struggled with his 3 pt shooting, but he shoots much better from the field than Barry.
Fabricio Oberto
8.3 mpg
2.0 ppg
2.1 rpg
.11 blks per game
.529 FG%
Darko Milicic
6.5 mpg
1.4 ppg
1.2 rpg
.82 blks per game
.400 FG%
Darko is looking more and more like a bust. He blocks shots when he gets playing time, but everything else is pretty weak. Weren't there a lot of Spurs fans who thought Fabricio was going to get some quality minutes with his wealth of experience? His numbers aren't that much more impressive than Darko's.
Would you rather have Sean Marks or Jason Maxiell as your sixth big man? Would you rather have projects like Amir Johnson and Alex Acker or ... ummm ... no projects at all?
The Spurs bench players with all of their experience and "talent" are barely outplaying the Pistons' "scrubs." And, if you prorate the statistics, they aren't better at all. The only thing that makes them better are Michael Finley's numbers, and that's only been since he's played as a starter, and still his shooting percentages are not better than Evans'.
So, the better question rephrased, CHUMPDUMPER, is would you rather have what you call "scrubs" at the end of your bench who are young and have the potential to improve or "veteran" SCRUBS who have already peaked and are over-the-hill?
That wasn't the question I asked.
And I can't believe you tried to discount three point shooting on a team with Duncan on it.I wasn't among them.Weren't there a lot of Spurs fans who thought Fabricio was going to get some quality minutes with his wealth of experience?On a team competeing for championships, it matters much less who's bringing donuts to practice. The Spurs' championship window closes when Duncan leaves, period. In the meantime, it's more important to find players who can contribute now -- in the words of the immortal Casper: "Win now, worry later."Would you rather have Sean Marks or Jason Maxiell as your sixth big man?
Would you rather have projects like Amir Johnson and Alex Acker or ... ummm ... no projects at all?
So, you've won the Scrubs with Potential Derby as well as the December championship. Congrats.
JamStone,
Is it better for a young prospect to be on the bench in nba without playing or to be overseas and play consistent minutes ?
You seems to be that being with the team is better but it's not sure.
Has Darko relly improved during 2 years on Pistons bench ?
Pistons don't use the NBDL but other teams does to give playtime to their young prospects.
You don't learn whats's like being on a winning situation beiing on the bench or on the IL. You have too winning situation in Europe and the level of intensity.basketball in euroleague is higher than what you seem to think.
Among Darko, Delfino, Maxiell, Amir Johnson, only Delfino will play no-garbage minutes in the playoff. Johnson and Darko or Maxiel won't even be on the playoff roster.
For our prospect in Europe, Scola contract is not a life long contract, Javtokas play great this year and Mahinmi continues to grow in France.
For the 2008-2009 year, Pistons will spend around $53m for their five starters.
Spurs $50.5M for four starters.
Spurs won't have a SF, but it's the easier spot to fill in nba.
You should realize too that for the 2008-2009 playoff, Sheed and Ben will be almost 35 and Billups almost 33. (they are born in september)
Duncan and Rasho will be 33 and Manu 31.
In ROBERT HORRY's last year of his contract, in the summer of 2007, he'll be 37 years old and will be making $3.6 million.
In MICHAEL FINLEY'S last year of his contract, in the summer of 2007, Finley will be 34 years old and will be making $3.1 million.
In BRUCE BOWEN'S last year of his contract (not counting the team option year), next summer, Bruce will be 35 years old and will be making $3.7 million.
NICK VAN EXEL is on a ONE-YEAR contract and he cannot be traded.
Finaly year contracts are valuable to dump salary. If the Spurs trade ALL THREE (Finley, Horry, and Bowen) they might get something back worth something. But, none make very much to garner much interest and they'll ALL BE OLD.
In the 2008-09 season, Rasheed will be making $13.7 million, Rip will be making $10.6 million, Tayshaun will be making roughly $10-11 million. So the three of them will be making about $35 million. If Ben Wallace is re-signed this summer, I expect him to get approximately $12 million a year. When Chauncey is re-signed, I expect he'll negotiate a contract worth approximately $10 million a year.
The Pistons' starting five's ulative salaries would total roughly $55-59 million for that season. That's over the salary cap, but not yet into luxury tax territy.
I don't pimp Darko. He has not lived up even remotely to expectations. But, he still has worth because he is so young. Look at Primoz Brezec and what he did last year when he was acquired by the Bobcats in the expansion draft. Look at Jermaine O'Neal's first four years in Portland. Kwame Brown had been a huge disappointment in Washington but still got a $25 million + contract from the Lakers. Darko will be worth something to someone because he still is so young and still has the dreaded "potential" to be an NBA player.
Spurs don't have any pieces for a real upgrade trade, except maybe Nazr Mohammed and Rasho Nesterovic. Nazr won't help them if he doesn't re-sign. And Rasho is grossly overpaid. Good luck in finding that "one trade" that will change everything to the Spurs. I'm sure there are plenty of NBA teams that want to do favors for a team that has won 3 championships in 7 years.
Pistons don't really have great pieces for a trade either, but hey have more pieces than the Spurs. And, that's why the YOUTH of the bench is an advantage when looking towards the future of the two franchises.
Who's discounting three point shooting???
Mo Evans is shooting better from the arc than Finley. And, Nick Van Exel has a horrible 3PT percentage for someone who is on a team with Tim Duncan.
The discussion was turned to the topic of the "FUTURES" of the Spurs and the Pistons. I even stated in an earlier post that the San Antonio Spurs were fine for the next couple of years. The thread was whether the Spurs were on the decline. I made mention to the fact that the Spurs' bench is old and it will hurt them in a few years. That's all. I didn't say it will hurt them this year or next year. Stay on topic, ChumpDumper.
The notion that Billups will re-sign for anything resembling $10M per strikes me as fancy, unless Billups has publicly said that he'll take less than his market value to stay in Detroit. As a free agent, Billups will command the max, even if you could argue that he's not truly a max-type player.
In the 2008-09 season, how exactly does that make the Pistons better off than the Spurs?The Pistons' starting five's ulative salaries would total roughly $55-59 million for that season. That's over the salary cap, but not yet into luxury tax territy.
What makes you think that any or all of those kids -- if they truly can play to the level you say they can -- are going to stay in Detroit? Why wouldn't they go elsewhere, seeking more minutes and money? Young players tend to be less altruistic than veterans who are reaching the end of the road. I'd expect that some of the Pistons' bench strength will have evaporated by 2008-09.
At the same time, just as the Spurs have done twice since Duncan came to San Antonio, I'd expect the Spurs to have found a fresh group of players to fill roles off the bench and provide a means for this team to succeed for a few years more. After the 1999 team won, Pop had to replace a bench that looked much like the current bench does. After the 2003 team won, Pop had to deal with bench losses from retirement and free agency. In both instances, the Spurs were able to identify players and develop a bench that fits the Spurs system. That savvy has kept them the lone team to be considered a true le contender in every season since 1999.
You could have made this same point, in principle, last season. The moveable pieces the Spurs had were Rasho and Malik Rose, both of whom were "grossly overpaid." What the Spurs learned, though, is that sweetners -- Luis Scola, anyone -- can make all of the difference in the world in making deals in the NBA. As much as anything else, that's how the stockpiling of young, foreign players may be helpful to the Spurs' future.Spurs don't have any pieces for a real upgrade trade, except maybe Nazr Mohammed and Rasho Nesterovic. Nazr won't help them if he doesn't re-sign. And Rasho is grossly overpaid. Good luck in finding that "one trade" that will change everything to the Spurs. I'm sure there are plenty of NBA teams that want to do favors for a team that has won 3 championships in 7 years.
I guess it depends, Bruno.
If the young players are learning a lot from the coaches even though they aren't getting a lot of in-game experience, it might be better to be on the team instead of overseas or the NBDL. If those young players are learning by playing against Rasheed, Ben, Dice, and Dale Davis in practice, it might be just as good as getting more minutes in Europe with coaching the NBA team has no control over. I think if the players stashed away in Europe are getting very good coaching and getting consistent minutes and learning from their mistakes, sure it's good to be over there. Are the Spurs' players who are overseas getting just that? Who knows.
What do you mean you don't learn what it's like to win from the bench??? You learn how to be a team player, how to handle yourselves in a winning environment, the at ude, approach, and hard work it takes to win. It takes some young players a few years to grow into their bodies and learn from veteran mentors to know how to play, to lead, and to win. Jermaine O'Neal took four years in Portland learning from Rasheed Wallace and he became a very good player. Amir Johnson is 18 years old. He is getting taught by Rasheed, Tayshaun, and Dice how to play in the league. Give him four years like Jermaine, he may have a similar development. Darko is competing against Ben and Rasheed and Dice and Dale Davis everyday in practice. He is still immature and pouts about playing time, but he also has beefed up his body and has become a better shot-blocker. If he can just become mentally tougher, he can be adequate and look at his experience as something that made him better. Delfino will play in the playoffs. Jason Maxiell is learning likewise from the Pistons big men. He doesn't have as far to go as Darko, but he can still get better.
Nick Van Exel and Brent Barry, with all their starter and playing time and playoff experience, have SUCKED for the Spurs so far. So, really, which is better? Fabricio Oberto, with his European success and Olympic experience, can't even compete with a very pedetrian Rasho Nesterovic or a less-than-impressive Nazr Mohammed to make a push for more playing time. Where is that playing time experience advantage there?
By the time Scola gets out of his contract, will he even be worth adding to the Spurs roster? Javtokas had a great year? Link please. News reports I've seen say he's still NO WHERE CLOSE to the player he was before his motorcycle accident.
It really depends on the player as to what is more beneficial for his development.
Catch a clue, nobody cares how old a guy is if they are trying to get his expiring contract. ALL THREE? Give me a break -- yeah the Spurs might be able to pull in a single $13 million contract, but considering how many players were/are let go because of fear of going a few million over the tax threshold, it's no stretch to think a team might find one of those deals useful.Finaly year contracts are valuable to dump salary. If the Spurs trade ALL THREE (Finley, Horry, and Bowen) they might get something back worth something. But, none make very much to garner much interest and they'll ALL BE OLD.Since he's being touted as the top point guard in the league I would expect him to be paid accordingly.When Chauncey is re-signed, I expect he'll negotiate a contract worth approximately $10 million a year.So, to sign ANYONE else, they would go into the tax, to say nothing of any other 1st rounders or the fact you haven't proven the cap will remain static for the next seven years.The Pistons' starting five's ulative salaries would total roughly $55-59 million for that season. That's over the salary cap, but not yet into luxury tax territy.Worth what? To whom? The Pistons? Are you going to sign him to a Jonathan Bender deal based on that potential?Darko will be worth something to someone because he still is so young and still has the dreaded "potential" to be an NBA player.What needs changing? This isn't a lottery team we're talking about.Good luck in finding that "one trade" that will change everything to the Spurs.So you're answer to the question "Would the Spurs' future look so much brighter if we had a couple of scrubs sitting on the end of the bench as long as they were young?" is a resounding YES.Pistons don't really have great pieces for a trade either, but hey have more pieces than the Spurs. And, that's why the YOUTH of the bench is an advantage when looking towards the future of the two franchises.
Thanks.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
