Spurs, Not Pistons, Need Major Retooling

[wildbill2u]

Hollinger is wrong once again. Completely healthy, Spurs >>> Pistons. Hollinger's article reads as if he's saying Spurs = Pistons right now. Give me a 100% healthy Spurs squad and I'm pretty damn confident against anyone.

Secondly, calling Stuckey and Johnson "stars in the making" is a bit of a stretch. I'm a fan of both players and I think they can be really good but neither one is going to be a star in the next few years. By the time that duo comes into their prime, their current real stars will be washed up.

And then when you look at the two teams, I'd say Rasheed is the Pistons' best player and Duncan is the Spurs' best player. Rasheed not only is getting up there in age, he seems to have burned bridges. Without Rasheed, it'd be difficult for the Pistons to be a championship contender. They could pull off a trade and try to turn Rasheed into a comparable part ... but that's not easy.

Truth be told, neither team is in horrible shape. But it's much easier for the Spurs to make the moves they need to do to make another championship run. The Spurs have no chemistry issues. Their best three players are happy and locked up contractually. Finding a scoring swingman, a backup point guard and a perhaps a backup big isn't exactly that tough. Sure, we'd like those players to be young, but they don't have to be young.

The Pistons, on the other hand, have to work in a new coach. Probably trade Rasheed. Find a starting center. The chemistry on the team isn't the greatest. Due to all the deep runs into the playoffs, their main players have a ton of mileage on them. Stuckey and Johnson will help but both will just quality as good bench players next year.

If we're talking about which of the two teams remains in the better position to win championships in the next 2-4 years, it's easily the Spurs. Pistons have a brighter future if you look 5+ years down the line but I don't think anyone really cares about 2013 right now.

I think you misread the point of the article. This wasn't about who could beat who in a game today. It was about who will have the easiest job to retool.

1.He's right that Detroit has some good, if not spectacular, young players to backup their stars while we have nothing but aging vets who are even older than our starters.

2. He's right that the Spurs have no young good players with proven ability if Splitter stays in Europe. Ian is still a crapshoot and we cling to the idea he'll be a Messiah--because we have to. We have no one else.

3. He's right that our Euro 'draft and stash' strategy has crashed due to the change in financial position of the Euro teams vs. the NBA.

4. He's right that most of our backups "is even older than the starters. Michael Finley (35), Kurt Thomas (35), Brent Barry (36), Ime Udoka (who will be 31), and Jacque Vaughn (33) all are likely to decline rapidly, while Robert Horry (who will be 38) is likely to retire and no longer good enough to help if he doesn't." Who among them has trade value to get a good bench player--or to replace Oberto and Finley/Barry as starters if resting Manu continues to be the preferred option.

5. What about our own deep runs into the playoffs wearing our players out? In addition we have at least three players, OBerto, Manu and Tony who continue to put on extra miles as reps for their countries in international play. I'd say you took the bad side of that argument.

6. While neither team is in horrible shape and can rest on its systems and signed stars to keep them in contention during the regular season (barring injuries) and relatively deep into the playoffs, the lack of past good drafts and drafting position is not in the Spurs favor for various reasons.

7. While we have plenty of cap space in 2010, we have too many spots to fill. You wrote that "finding a scoring swing man, backup PG and perhaps a backup big isn't exactly that tough." Not tough? Let me refer you to the failures:

PG: Beno, Stoudamire, NVE, Washington
C/PF: Elson, James White, Bonner, Ely, Scola/Splitter disasters
SF: Sato, Williams, Hedo, all those bums they brought in for a ten day look this year? Udoka's grade is still in doubt. Who else have they found and signed? This position seems to be the toughest of all.

You're overly optimistic. The FO MAY be able to find some FA with talent and a few good years left--but right now we have too many holes to fill to rely on luck and the judgment we've demonstrated lately.

[FromWayDowntown]

If anything, I think the conference finals make timvp's point quite well.

Think about it, each team played with an injured star (Billups and Ginobili). With that being the case, the Spurs group of aged role players was perilously close to winning Games 1 and 4 of that series -- that with virtually no contribution from those players. One could make an argument, I think, that with slight upgrades and the infusion of just a bit more athleticism, the Spurs could be (should be) preparing for the Celtics and the Finals. Upgrading from getting nothing from your role players isn't a very hard thing to do and the Spurs have flexibility to make moves to modify their roster accordingly. Duncan showed again during the playoffs that: (1) the monitoring of his minutes allows him to continue to be at his best at playoff time; and (2) he remains a dominant player on both ends in big moments. There are certainly questions about the possibility of an erosion in Ginobili's health (or at least the delicacy of his body) but those questions can be met, to some extent at least by minute conservation during the regular season. And Parker is truly just entering his prime as a player. That Big 3 might not be all that it once was, but it's still among the elite trios in the association and the ability of those guys to play through just about anything is probably unparalleled in the league at the moment. Get them some consistent help and it seems reasonable to assume that they can be even more effective.

Meanwhile, the Pistons have their youth and athleticism to go along with their veteran core of guys who've been there and done that. The Pistons got production from their youth (at least from Stuckey and Maxiell) during the ECF and still lost. While it's likely that Stuckey and Maxiell and Johnson will show improvement into next season, the Pistons' successes have been built on a core that is showing signs of deterioration. Can Stuckey and Maxiell ever give the Pistons the same sort of production that they got from Billups and Wallace? If not, the Pistons need to upgrade involves finding stars (or at least starters) who can match what they got from the old guard.

I'm not sure that any of this is very clear, but I guess I think that the Spurs can truly believe that with some tweaking of the iden ies of their role players, they're really close to the current incarnation of the Lakers, who seem likely to end up with the gold ball. And the tweaking the Spurs need seems to be quite do-able. I wonder if the Pistons are going to be able to do the same.

There's no doubt that the Spurs need to make some changes, but at this point, it might be more about purchasing new furniture than building a new house.

[TypicalSpursHater]

Since the Spurs got eliminated they will have to make major changes if they want to match up to the lakers

[spursfan98]

Since the Spurs got eliminated they will have to make major changes if they want to match up to the lakers

You're a ing idiot. Who's troll is this?

[1Parker1]

You can argue that as long as the Spurs have Pop, Duncan, Parker, and Ginobili, they'll always have a chance at a le.

You can't argue that as long as the Pistons have Coach X, Rasheed, Billips, and Hamilton that they'll always have a chance at a le. For one, because their coaching carosel continues and it's always hard for a team to adjust to a new coach. Secondly, Rasheed is about as inconsistent and volatile as you can get. His play dictates how the Pistons will do.

[bdubya]

Spurs' core is only 3 guys instead of 5, so it's easier to upgrade. Upgrading from Finley or Oberto without touching the big 3 is doable. But upgrading any Pistons starter without taking a step back at another position or gutting a promising bench is much trickier.

The X-factor is the new fine for flopping. Manu's game is going to take a big hit. The Pistons' big flopper is Rip, and no more flopping will probably make him MORE productive (the refs never buy his anyway, so he might as well give it a rest.)

[timvp]

As of right now, I'd take the Pistons bench over ours easily.

Yeah that is pretty obvious. If this article was solely about how the Spurs have a harder job retooling their bench, then yeah I'd agree. But in terms of total retooling, the Spurs have a much, much easier time. It's a lot easier to sign a couple needed role players than to bring in a new coach and alter the main core like the Pistons have to do.

[Ocotillo]

On Houston radio today they are addressing a rumor about a trade with Detroit.

According to the hosts, it would be Rip Hamilton and Sheed for TMac. Not sure about required filler but those would be the big names involved. I don't think Detroit helps itself with that trade. I like TMac but has he ever put a team on his back and gotten beyond the first round? Can he stay healthy?

Also, they said Battier may be available if the Rockets keep Yao and TMac. There is your Bowen Jr. although the Rockets are probably smart enough not to help out a division rival even if they do owe us one.

If the Detroit trade were to happen, ironically Scola might be available as they would be deep at power forward with Sheed, Landry and Scola.

[timvp]

I think you misread the point of the article. This wasn't about who could beat who in a game today. It was about who will have the easiest job to retool.

I understand that but if the object of retooling is winning a championship, their current state has to be taken into account. Unless the goal is something other than championship, you don't just automatically start both teams out at the same level.

1.He's right that Detroit has some good, if not spectacular, young players to backup their stars while we have nothing but aging vets who are even older than our starters.

Never disagreed with that. That's a pretty obvious statement, though. But a lot of lottery teams have a better bench than the Spurs. That doesn't mean they're closer to retooling for a championship.

2. He's right that the Spurs have no young good players with proven ability if Splitter stays in Europe. Ian is still a crapshoot and we cling to the idea he'll be a Messiah--because we have to. We have no one else.

Spurs had no young players last year and won the championship. Young players are nice but not a mandatory part of winning.

3. He's right that our Euro 'draft and stash' strategy has crashed due to the change in financial position of the Euro teams vs. the NBA.

It's mostly crashed because the players they've drafted weren't good enough. Splitter is the only one that has been affected by the devaluation of the dollar.

4. He's right that most of our backups "is even older than the starters. Michael Finley (35), Kurt Thomas (35), Brent Barry (36), Ime Udoka (who will be 31), and Jacque Vaughn (33) all are likely to decline rapidly, while Robert Horry (who will be 38) is likely to retire and no longer good enough to help if he doesn't." Who among them has trade value to get a good bench player--or to replace Oberto and Finley/Barry as starters if resting Manu continues to be the preferred option.

When is the last time the Spurs made a trade that sent away someone with trade value? The Spurs make trades to either salary dump players or receive salary dump players. I can't even remember the last time the Spurs made a trade in which they sent out someone with value to receive value. That's not the Spurs way, for whatever reason.

5. What about our own deep runs into the playoffs wearing our players out? In addition we have at least three players, OBerto, Manu and Tony who continue to put on extra miles as reps for their countries in international play. I'd say you took the bad side of that argument.

The Pistons' starters have played a lot more minutes during their runs. Pop not only limits minutes but on top of that, the Spurs haven't always made it to the conference finals. The Pistons have always made it and their starters play bigger minutes.

6. While neither team is in horrible shape and can rest on its systems and signed stars to keep them in contention during the regular season (barring injuries) and relatively deep into the playoffs, the lack of past good drafts and drafting position is not in the Spurs favor for various reasons.

It'd be nice to have rookies in the pipeline ready to roll in San Antonio. But it's a hundred times more important to have a successful core and a coach with working knowledge of leading that core to multiple championships. What Spurs fan would trade three or four solid young players in exchange for Pop being fired and one of the Big Three being unhappy?

7. While we have plenty of cap space in 2010, we have too many spots to fill. You wrote that "finding a scoring swing man, backup PG and perhaps a backup big isn't exactly that tough." Not tough? Let me refer you to the failures:

PG: Beno, Stoudamire, NVE, Washington
C/PF: Elson, James White, Bonner, Ely, Scola/Splitter disasters
SF: Sato, Williams, Hedo, all those bums they brought in for a ten day look this year? Udoka's grade is still in doubt. Who else have they found and signed? This position seems to be the toughest of all.

You're overly optimistic. The FO MAY be able to find some FA with talent and a few good years left--but right now we have too many holes to fill to rely on luck and the judgment we've demonstrated lately.

Finding a scoring wing, a backup PG and maybe a backup big isn't that hard. The hardest one is finding the scoring wing but perimeter players who can score are a dime a dozen in the NBA. If you must have a need in the NBA, you'd want the need to be a swingman who can score 9-11 points per game. Those guys are everywhere and it's the easiest thing to get your hands on.

Backup point guard isn't too difficult. You can always find a couple good ones ... even if you aren't offering over the minimum. And heck, if you don't find one you can always use Barry/Ginobili as the backup PG. Even Vaughn could steal some regular season minutes.

The backup big isn't too mandatory either. If the Spurs enter next season with Oberto, Thomas, Bonner, Horry and Mahinmi next to Duncan ... that'd be good enough.

I just don't see the doom and gloom a lot of Spurs fans see. If TD, Manu and TP are healthy next year in the playoffs, the Spurs will have another very good shot. They need to add some role players but all the important pieces are in place. The Spurs know they need to add the role players and I think they'll figure out a way to do it. The full MLE and three draft picks isn't a whole lot to work with but it's the most assets the Spurs have had in a while.

And yeah, I'd take the Spurs' retooling of having to find a couple role players to the alternative of having to replace Pop and trade Tim.

[SenorSpur]

Yeah that is pretty obvious. If this article was solely about how the Spurs have a harder job retooling their bench, then yeah I'd agree. But in terms of total retooling, the Spurs have a much, much easier time. It's a lot easier to sign a couple needed role players than to bring in a new coach and alter the main core like the Pistons have to do.

That's also obvious. Wouldn't it be sweet if the Spurs had their existing core and the Pistons bench depth? Okay, now I'm awake.

[timvp]

If anything, I think the conference finals make timvp's point quite well.

Think about it, each team played with an injured star (Billups and Ginobili). With that being the case, the Spurs group of aged role players was perilously close to winning Games 1 and 4 of that series -- that with virtually no contribution from those players. One could make an argument, I think, that with slight upgrades and the infusion of just a bit more athleticism, the Spurs could be (should be) preparing for the Celtics and the Finals. Upgrading from getting nothing from your role players isn't a very hard thing to do and the Spurs have flexibility to make moves to modify their roster accordingly. Duncan showed again during the playoffs that: (1) the monitoring of his minutes allows him to continue to be at his best at playoff time; and (2) he remains a dominant player on both ends in big moments. There are certainly questions about the possibility of an erosion in Ginobili's health (or at least the delicacy of his body) but those questions can be met, to some extent at least by minute conservation during the regular season. And Parker is truly just entering his prime as a player. That Big 3 might not be all that it once was, but it's still among the elite trios in the association and the ability of those guys to play through just about anything is probably unparalleled in the league at the moment. Get them some consistent help and it seems reasonable to assume that they can be even more effective.

Meanwhile, the Pistons have their youth and athleticism to go along with their veteran core of guys who've been there and done that. The Pistons got production from their youth (at least from Stuckey and Maxiell) during the ECF and still lost. While it's likely that Stuckey and Maxiell and Johnson will show improvement into next season, the Pistons' successes have been built on a core that is showing signs of deterioration. Can Stuckey and Maxiell ever give the Pistons the same sort of production that they got from Billups and Wallace? If not, the Pistons need to upgrade involves finding stars (or at least starters) who can match what they got from the old guard.

I'm not sure that any of this is very clear, but I guess I think that the Spurs can truly believe that with some tweaking of the iden ies of their role players, they're really close to the current incarnation of the Lakers, who seem likely to end up with the gold ball. And the tweaking the Spurs need seems to be quite do-able. I wonder if the Pistons are going to be able to do the same.

There's no doubt that the Spurs need to make some changes, but at this point, it might be more about purchasing new furniture than building a new house.

Exactly








I shouldn't have wasted my typing and just quoted this to begin with

[Spurs Brazil]

Holinger sucks

[JamStone]

As objective as I can be, I think both the Spurs and the Pistons are pretty much close to the end of any championship run with each respective core group of players. I think the Spurs have a better chance of making one more run if they add the right few pieces, but it's possible they don't ever make it back to the top. And, with the Lakers, Jazz, Hornets, and possibly the Blazers and Rockets all becoming bigger and bigger threats over the next few years, I would actually be surprised if the Spurs even make it back to the NBA Finals.

As for the Pistons, I think they're done. I don't think it's time for any tweaking. It's time for major changes. They stopped being a championship caliber after the 2005 NBA Finals. The steep decline in Ben Wallace was followed by lack of focus and a sense of en lement. I think before then, they over-achieved. The last three years, they played right about to their capabilities as a very good playoff team, but not a real threat to win a championship. Now, I think they need to make major change to the front court even if it's just trading Rasheed for nothing and allowing McDyess to retire so the young players can just develop more. If they can get something out of Rasheed in a trade, then that would be even better. I also think they need to trade Tayshaun and replace him with a more physical small forward in the Ron Artest or Josh Smith mold to match up with the likes of LeBron James and Paul Pierce. With Rodney Stuckey, I think a back court rotation of Billups and Hamilton can still be effective for a few more years, especially if they cut down their minutes in favor of Stuckey. But, I don't see the Pistons contending for a championship any time soon over the next 3-4 years if at all with any of the core group of veterans that won a le in 2004.

[Bob Lanier]

Duncan showed again during the playoffs that: (1) the monitoring of his minutes allows him to continue to be at his best at playoff time; and (2) he remains a dominant player on both ends in big moments.

Given that Duncan shot 42% against Pau Gasol (including a 36% outing in Game 7, a game during which he was also outrebounded by Gasol), and that Duncan's poor pick-and-roll defense against Kobe Bryant was a key factor in Bryant's shooting 53% for the series (much like Shaquille O'Neal's poor pick-and-roll defense against Chauncey Billups resulted in Billups winning Finals MVP in 2004), how can this be true in anything but the most homerish of senses?

Duncan's great. I love watching Tim Duncan play. But Tim Duncan was largely ineffective in both the New Orleans and L.A. series, and most certainly not

dominant

in any game in the L.A. series, on either end, much less both.

[Ocotillo]

^^ Tim Duncan three years ago dominates the Laker series and we win. He is still better than 95% of the league but he has a lost a little. That is why we need the weak side shot blocking presence. It might be ok to go against Bynum/Gasol, O-Neal/Stoudamire, Okur/Boozer, West/Chandler back in his hey day but Timmy needs a little help now with more defensive ability than Fab. Hopefully Mahinmi grows by leaps and bounds next season.

[Bob Lanier]

Yes, I agree with that.

[Capt Bringdown]

Given that Duncan shot 42% against Pau Gasol (including a 36% outing in Game 7, a game during which he was also outrebounded by Gasol), and that Duncan's poor pick-and-roll defense against Kobe Bryant was a key factor in Bryant's shooting 53% for the series (much like Shaquille O'Neal's poor pick-and-roll defense against Chauncey Billups resulted in Billups winning Finals MVP in 2004), how can this be true in anything but the most homerish of senses?

Good points and comparison to Shaq's performance against the Pistons.

With the Spurs age and health issues it remains to be seen if we still have a big 3 or not.

[Allanon]

I think the article is pretty spot on. Both teams have a tough road ahead to return back to contention but the Spurs have it rougher.

The Pistons most certainly are ahead of the Spurs because of their bench. Not so much that they can make them champions next year but moreso, the Pistons have tradeable pieces. The Spurs tradeable pieces really are just the big 3, the others would be fillers.

1) Any of the 4 stars can be traded without problems since the Pistons don't really have a singular face, they're a team. Even today I can't tell you who's the star of that team. So they don't have the emotional baggage. Piston fans don't have that much attachment to the Core of the Pistons. Trade Rip? Sure. How about Prince? Done deal. Spur fans on the other hand can't bear the thought of trading any of the Big 3.

2) Their young bench players are valuable trading pieces that can be bundled up with a vet and get an All-Star in return. The Clippers will be the most sought out trading partner. Stuckey & Affalo for Maggette? Stuckey and Sheed for Elton Brand? Chris Kaman for ?

3) The Pistons have an excellent trading mix....solid veterans and talented young players who saw playing time (as oppossed to young bench-warmers).

The Pistons can easily trade one of their top 4 players + young guy for a 2nd tier star (Brand, Vince Carter, Richardson, Monta, Boozer, Carmelo) and still be back in the Finals next year.

The Spurs on the other hand are a loyalty franchise and stubbornly won't part with one of their Big 3 so they will have to rebuild with the MLE and aging role players.

[21_Blessings]

I'm not sure that any of this is very clear, but I guess I think that the Spurs can truly believe that with some tweaking of the iden ies of their role players, they're really close to the current incarnation of the Lakers, who seem likely to end up with the gold ball. And the tweaking the Spurs need seems to be quite do-able. I wonder if the Pistons are going to be able to do the same.

There's no doubt that the Spurs need to make some changes, but at this point, it might be more about purchasing new furniture than building a new house.

You lost 4-1 to a team without Andrew Bynum/Ariza that just incorporated Gasol mid-way through the season. Huuuge stretch there considering the Spurs average age.

[21_Blessings]

As objective as I can be, I think both the Spurs and the Pistons are pretty much close to the end of any championship run with each respective core group of players. I think the Spurs have a better chance of making one more run if they add the right few pieces, but it's possible they don't ever make it back to the top. And, with the Lakers, Jazz, Hornets, and possibly the Blazers and Rockets all becoming bigger and bigger threats over the next few years, I would actually be surprised if the Spurs even make it back to the NBA Finals.

As for the Pistons, I think they're done. I don't think it's time for any tweaking. It's time for major changes. They stopped being a championship caliber after the 2005 NBA Finals. The steep decline in Ben Wallace was followed by lack of focus and a sense of en lement. I think before then, they over-achieved. The last three years, they played right about to their capabilities as a very good playoff team, but not a real threat to win a championship. Now, I think they need to make major change to the front court even if it's just trading Rasheed for nothing and allowing McDyess to retire so the young players can just develop more. If they can get something out of Rasheed in a trade, then that would be even better. I also think they need to trade Tayshaun and replace him with a more physical small forward in the Ron Artest or Josh Smith mold to match up with the likes of LeBron James and Paul Pierce. With Rodney Stuckey, I think a back court rotation of Billups and Hamilton can still be effective for a few more years, especially if they cut down their minutes in favor of Stuckey. But, I don't see the Pistons contending for a championship any time soon over the next 3-4 years if at all with any of the core group of veterans that won a le in 2004.

Imagine if you guys drafted Melo

[SequSpur]

The Spurs are not in the Finals for a reason. They didn't have home court advantage for a reason. This dude is just pointing out the objective obviousness of the Spurs situation and you homers are saying he is wrong. You act like everyone wants to come to san antonio, make less and win a championship. I'm sorry I haven't seen anyone in that category. I seriously doubt that is going to change because Pop is not going to develop outside of Duncan and Parker. Ginobili is a fricking joke and I'm sick of you dip s not calling a spade a ing spade.

Bowen?? Come on.. what a liability.. there is a reason the spurs can't score.

The Spurs need to be completely retooled. They have a solid foundation but there are at least 7 players that need to move out of san antonio quickly. How does that not make this article correct?

The spurs ing sucked this year. They lost because they weren't the best, they got just to where they needed to be. Some of you need to sack up and accept the fact that reality is here and the spurs are done with this group.

.

[SequSpur]

You go into next season with this same team and you can count on an 8th seed at best. Retool this motha.

[NewJerSpur]

Whenever this team doesn't win a championship the entire organization needs to be gutted.... The longest drought we've had between rings the last 9 years has been 3 seasons....and that was amidst the infusion of youth and subtle roster turnovers. I think this team will be okay with a few tweaks because of all in the teams in the West their style of play is the most consistent.

[JamStone]

Imagine if you guys drafted Melo

No championship and they'd be trying to trade Melo just like the Nuggets.

[timvp]

I think the article is pretty spot on. Both teams have a tough road ahead to return back to contention but the Spurs have it rougher.

The Pistons most certainly are ahead of the Spurs because of their bench. Not so much that they can make them champions next year but moreso, the Pistons have tradeable pieces. The Spurs tradeable pieces really are just the big 3, the others would be fillers.

Trading talent for talent usually results in a lateral move. Unless, of course, the team you are trading with is run by an "adviser" who would like nothing more to help out his former team.

1) Any of the 4 stars can be traded without problems since the Pistons don't really have a singular face, they're a team. Even today I can't tell you who's the star of that team. So they don't have the emotional baggage. Piston fans don't have that much attachment to the Core of the Pistons. Trade Rip? Sure. How about Prince? Done deal. Spur fans on the other hand can't bear the thought of trading any of the Big 3.

Luckily Spurs fans aren't responsible for trades.

2) Their young bench players are valuable trading pieces that can be bundled up with a vet and get an All-Star in return. The Clippers will be the most sought out trading partner. Stuckey & Affalo for Maggette? Stuckey and Sheed for Elton Brand? Chris Kaman for ?

3) The Pistons have an excellent trading mix....solid veterans and talented young players who saw playing time (as oppossed to young bench-warmers).

How are these points different?

The Pistons can easily trade one of their top 4 players + young guy for a 2nd tier star (Brand, Vince Carter, Richardson, Monta, Boozer, Carmelo) and still be back in the Finals next year.

Again, those would be lateral moves. Going from Rasheed to any of those players isn't that much of an improvement ... if it is at all.

My point is the Pistons have a lot more holes, including at coach, and while they have more assets, they also have more concerns. The Spurs have just a few concerns that could easily be handled without doing any major reshuffling.

The Spurs on the other hand are a loyalty franchise and stubbornly won't part with one of their Big 3 so they will have to rebuild with the MLE and aging role players.

Spurs aren't that loyal. They were ready to dump Robinson for Webber. They were ready to dump Parker and Ginobili for Kidd. The only player who the Spurs are loyal to is Duncan. Outside of him, anyone is expendable. Spurs fans are clingy but the management doesn't really factor in loyalty at all. The front office has watched players win championships and then let them walk the next summer without batting an eyelash.