Reply With Quote
You're stupid and you missed my point. Trades do matter. If you don't realize that, I'm sorry for your re ation.
My bad. I must have forgotten that the Spurs only won 18 games last season and haven't been truly compe ive in years.
You're stupid and you missed my point. Trades do matter. If you don't realize that, I'm sorry for your re ation.
Why do major trades matter for a team that has won 3 out of the last 5 NBA championships with a roster not built on such trades? And you're referring to others as 're ed'?
Meltdown in progress.
That's easy to explain. The Spurs core isn't going to be traded. The Spurs core wins championships. Other teams are willing to trade their core players because they can't win a le.
As Holt's Cat already said, if the Spurs put Duncan, Parker, Manu...or Bowen on the block they'd definitely get takers.
It's hard to make a "major trade" when all you're dangling as bait is Francisco Elson or Jackie Butler.
For the third time....you don't fix what isn't broken. Ghost must be teaching 'Spurs fandom' classes somewhere online.
I'm sorry -- you had a point?
You have to give something to get something. Typically blockbuster trades require giving up one or more of the following:
1. A star player. Which of the Spurs big 3 are you willing to part with?
2. A high draft pick. Not many of those to be had when you're consistently a top 3 team.
3. A big expiring contract. Since, aside for a few exceptions, the Spurs have not been known to overpay, there haven't been many options here. And it's very rare that blockbuster trades can be made by giving up only expiring contracts.
1. What is broken?
2. What great move have the Spurs not made that involves moving players outside of the Big 3?
3. When was the last time you had intercourse?
Those guys are relying on the lucky lottery ball that is Duncan. Pop/Rc will not or cannot get top players through trades. I guarantee after Duncan this franchise is finished if Pop/RC are stil running the show. They have not proven they can make the type of deals that LA, Dallas Detroit or Boston can.
Did not the Spurs win the le last year?
How'd they acquire Ginobili and Parker? You're worried about 5 years from now?
Being a legitimate le contender for 18 of the last 19 seasons is really insufficient -- a team should make a big trade every now and again to legitimize its status as a dominant club.
I can see the point that it's silly to think that the Spurs will make a big trade, but the reason that's a ridiculous thought is that there's been no realistic way for the Spurs to make such a trade without risking their greatness.
pass what you're smoking man, it must be some good
-Mars
People should really kill the Bulls more for having acquired Michael Jordan through the draft.
I guess we'll see once it becomes an issue worth our concern.
Sigh. A classic example of an unarmed man participating in a battle of wits.
The fallacy here is the belief that the spurs can only win with one set of players. As long as the spurs have Duncan the surrounding players are interchangable and there are many combinations that can lead to championships. The belief that the spurs can't win if they traded Manu or Bowen is thinking in a closed box.
Prove that the Spurs can get equal value for Manu and I'll listen. But you're absolutely right about one thing -- I do think that the Spurs chances to win multiple les have depended on players like Parker, Ginobili, and Bowen surrounding Duncan. I'm not sure how you can prove that to be a fallacy, though.
Why break up a proven winning combination??? Just so you can say you did?
The Spurs have three players that would be considered franchise players on any other team. These three guys co-exist with virtually no clashes of egos, no striving to be 'the man' on the squad, no salary, playing time, or other ripples in the fabric. To top it off they either win the championship or contend for it every year.
It's a dream team in more ways than one.
But's let's break that up just so we say we did/could have. Fvck. Spurs fans confuse me sometimes.
But, but, the Spurs could have Sam Dalembert!!Why break up a proven winning combination??? Just so you can say you did?
The Spurs have three players that would be considered franchise players on any other team. These three guys co-exist with virtually no clashes of egos, no striving to be 'the man' on the squad, no salary, playing time, or other ripples in the fabric. To top it off they either win the championship or contend for it every year.
It's a dream team in more ways than one.
But's let's break that up just so we say we did/could have. Fvck. Spurs fans confuse me sometimes.
No major deals in the past 10 years but...at the time, the Antonio Daniels trade for Felipe Lopez and Carl Herrera was pretty sweet. Daniels was a nice contributor to their first Championship in 1998-99.
Two distinctions....
1) Ron Artest and Mike Miller, while more talented than who the Spurs have gotten in the past few years, are not "major". The Spurs already have the right mix of "major" talent, so they don't need to trade for "major" player.
Also keep in mind, Artest and Miller are at the top end of the trade talks regarding the Spurs. Most fans and columnists would be happy with and not suprised to see Kurt Thomas or Jeff Foster....and I'd hardly call that "major".
2) This is a different environment than any of those other years....
So AI got traded last year...big deal. The Nuggets gave up their only pure point guard to get him and all he added was scoring, which they were already good at.
This year, on the other hand, KG and Allen were traded for a buttload of draft picks and young (a.k.a. not ready) talent. Then Gasol to the Lakers for cap space and some young (a.k.a. not ready) talent. Then Shaq. Now Kidd to Dallas for a young (a.k.a. not ready) PG and some expiring contracts.
Again, the compe ive environment is different.
Bottom Line:
Is a "major" deal going to happen? Probably Not.
Is a "major deal needed? Probably Not. Though a minor one couldn't hurt!
But are these fans and writers idiots for thinking there is pressure on the Spurs to at least try to keep pace and get something done? Absolutely Not.
mike mitchel, artis gilmore, terry mings
The spurs only have one franchise player, Duncan.Why break up a proven winning combination??? Just so you can say you did?
The Spurs have three players that would be considered franchise players on any other team. These three guys co-exist with virtually no clashes of egos, no striving to be 'the man' on the squad, no salary, playing time, or other ripples in the fabric. To top it off they either win the championship or contend for it every year.
It's a dream team in more ways than one.
But's let's break that up just so we say we did/could have. Fvck. Spurs fans confuse me sometimes.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
