Hey look at it this way, at least we didn't make this trade with the Mavericks. I can understand Butler, but I'm kind of curious to find out their reasoning for all of the sudden dumping the Scola project.
Instead of the experienced int'l big and the young bigman prospect who will cost at least a combined $6 mil per season they went with the experienced int'l big and young bigman prospect who will cost $1.5 mil per. That's what happened.Hey look at it this way, at least we didn't make this trade with the Mavericks. I can understand Butler, but I'm kind of curious to find out their reasoning for all of the sudden dumping the Scola project.
I was pissed when I first heard about this trade.
Then I took some time to really think about it.
Butler was reported (I believe by ludden, saw it on a quote posted) to be complaining about playing time HERE. He is still a project, because:
1) His D is still lacking, the most important thing we need from a bigman,
2) His rebounding is still not great, the 2nd most important thing we need from him,
3) We don't really need him. He is NOT, repeat, NOT going to give us more than Oberto this year, given his minutes. Or next year. Maybe more points, but do you really want him taking touches in the post over Duncan?
So Butler was a cheap young big. We traded him for money now. If we get a good swingman to replace our vets for next year, mission accomplished.
The same can be said for Scola on just about every point above. He is a proven scorer, so yes that is an asset that goes beyond Butler's flashes of offense and "potential". But Scola still:
1) Was never going to work next to Duncan. He can't rebound, he can't score from outside, and would clog the lane for Duncan's inside game. He is not a great defender, either.
2) He has at ude about the Spurs, which is evident from his agent. Resentment. He would have been a cancer.
3) Market value was evidently low for him. Sure, we could let him stay in Europe, but why not get some $ now for him, which we can use for a sf now?
IF we get a sf with the jack we just got, I think we are ahead. Jackie was not going to get any playing time this year, and so his trade value would not go up. I think it is more likely than not that he does nothing in the league anyway. Scola is great on your team if you don't already have a low post scorer. Otherwise, his game will be limited here with bigger players. His scoring is negated by his limitations in rebounding and defending.
IF we don't get somebody this year, or spend some serious bank next, I'm pissed. Even if we wait for next summer to spend our rainy day money on going over the cap, I'm pissed because we didn't maximize our chances for a repeat with this aging team.
People seriously over-valued Scola and Butler, that is why this seems so bad. Considering the above, we got money to spend that makes acquisitions possible for players that would have never hit the floor for us.
This isn't happening.
Oh well, this is a good weekend to head out to the coast, kick back on a beach with a cold one in hand, fire up a Cohiba, and relax.
Thanks, smart guy. I've never heard of economic theory before -- thank god you enlightened me.
If we can depart from the theoretical world where every market valuation is by definition perfect for a moment, there are generally a range of potential market values for an asset, depending on how things transpire. If you're trying to sell your house and you advertise "desperate seller -- must close within 30 days," expect to get a rather different price than if someone comes up to you and tries to convince you to sell it even though you technically don't have it on the market.
Everyone knew we were desperate to ship Scola out before time ran out with Tau on the 15th, and they saw us coming a mile away. Even second round picks have degrees of value -- one from a likely perennial playoff team is a pretty lousy return compared to, say, a pick from the Celtics. Also, all we got for Butler was his pure contract liquidation value, which is pretty weak, as well.
I don't have any illusions that Scola is a gigantic asset. But IIRC, even the front office said earlier that they wanted more than a second rounder. I'm not one of those people who always blames the front office for not signed every single sleeper the league has known. Most of the time, I think they do a really good job. But this just sucked, and I think you're delusional if you think otherwise.
Ludden is a lap dog for the front office. It's typical standard operating procedure when cutting costs and getting rid of a player for them to float a story about the player jettisoned either 1) complaining about playing time or 2) being a locker room cancer.
It's usually reported weeks or months in advance so that when it happens the E-N can say 'see, we reported this a while back'.
All that's left is for the article stating that White thought all Hispanics wore sombreros...
The Spurs have turned their investment in a couple of prospects into an investment in the Toros to sift through lesser prospects to find the one who sucks the least.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
