Monroe: Pop Says To Get Over Ginobili

[SenorSpur]

The reason why you don't understand it, is because you think that it is a philosophy.
Most of what you think are choices, aren't.

You are acting like Spurs have spend multiple lottery picks on foreigners. Spurs picks were at best late first round pick and it's damn hard to get a good player that late in the draft.

Spare me the "Spurs can't get a good pick because they're perenially drafting at the end of the first round" complaint. While it's true some drafts are deeper or more shallow than others, good players slide to the lower rounds in just about of every draft. Perhaps you remember a guy named Josh Howard?

Spurs have spend 4 late first round picks on international players :
- Parker : 3 time all star.
- Udrih : it didn't worked with Pop/Spurs but he is still a starting PG paid more than $5M.
- Mahinmi : Call him a bust if you want, I will still wait before doing that.
- Splitter : one of the best player in Europe. I don't see how you can blame Spurs for Splitter changing his mind about his priorities (money over NBA).

I'm not knocking the strategy in theory, just the fact that it was not well-balanced. My point is when they did draft, they seemingly sold out to that particular strategy. I admit that having a promising prospect develop on someone else's dime is a good strategy. It is the minimal attention paid to the domestic market, and the fact the FO didn't "hedge" themselves by diversifying their approach, is where I take issue. It's never wise to put all your eggs into any single strategy basket.

It isn't a strategy. It's just that getting a good 25 years old player is damn hard.

You selectively left out the fact that there were several second round picks were spent on international players. Most of which will likely never see the inside of an NBA arena. You've also conveniently forgotten the years in which they traded away their pick or traded out of the round, for whatever reason. So don't try and act as though the Spurs were just "dabbling" in the Euro market. In case you didn't know, getting a good 25 year old player can be had via the draft or through free agency.

It makes 3 years that Spurs have tried to get a good defensive player.Their first target in last year draft was Batum and Spurs have tried to grow a lot of players as Bruce's successor (James White, Marcus Williams, Bobby Jones, Malik Hairston...).

There is a world between noticing a weakness in a team and being able to fix it. If you think that Pop and Spurs FO has decided to keep flaws in their team on purpose, you are just way off.

You can wax poetic about what a great job the FO has done all you want. The fact of the matter is still this: the vulnerabilities with this team are the same as they were 3 years ago. In fact, with the decline of Bowen and the precarious injury situation that has limited Duncan, means this team is considerably worse defensively. The fact that there is nothing in the rotation today to help augment this decline is the result of poor choices and poor planning by the FO. This is a "what have you done for me lately" business. The compe ion gets better every year. If you're not getting better, you're staying the same or getting worse. Eventually, the compe ive cycle catches up with every team. If you think this team is poised to extend its championship window, it is YOU who are just way off.

[mytespurs]

I don't think anyone disagrees that we won't be able to get past LA without Manu.

But we should still be able to get past Dallas without him, and you're really pulling a TPark by trying to defend Pop's coaching last night by pointing out the obvious that Manu wasn't suited out...

Get past LA???!!! We may not, no make that, probably won't even make it that far!

Back to pops and "get over manu"....Manu mentioned in his blog that he was traveling w/the team during the playoffs. If Pop wants the team to get over Manu, do you think he minds that manu will be w/the team during their road playoff games?

[pjjrfan]

I agree that Pop's timing on not having Manu is way late. He should have said that from the get go and moved on. Still, this team is good enough to beat Dallas, but they have to match the Mav's "hunger" as Carlise called it. Will Hill help? I don't know how badly his confidence has been shaken by Pop's loss of confidence in him. Will sitting Bonner help? I think so, and why not let Gooden play more minutes, and let him try his hand at Dirk.

And really what's sad is that Pop is setting his team for failure by going the "get over Ginobili" rout and setting Manu as the scapegoat. Something that has been building up IMO by Pop and coaching staff since the olympics.

[Bruno]

Spare me the "Spurs can't get a good pick because they're perenially drafting at the end of the first round" complaint. While it's true some drafts are deeper or more shallow than others, good players slide to the lower rounds in just about of every draft. Perhaps you remember a guy named Josh Howard?

Odds to draft a good player are lower with a late first round pick than with a lottery pick. And throwing one name won't change that.

I'm not knocking the strategy in theory, just the fact that it was not well-balanced.

This summer Spurs plan was to draft Batum, an international prospect.
With your logic, Spurs' FO should have follow this logic: "we shouldn't draft him. We have drafted enough international players in the past and we had to balance our draft by taking an American player."

Your whole "balancing" theory makes simply no sense. You draft one player at a time.

You selectively left out the fact that there were several second round picks were spent on international players. Most of which will likely never see the inside of an NBA arena.

Second round picks ?
It's even a more longshot than a late first round pick. Spurs have drafted good international players with late second round picks (Ginobili and Scola).
And Spurs have also drafted American players with second round picks. Sato, Wiliams and Hairston have done nothing in NBA so far.

You've also conveniently forgotten the years in which they traded away their pick or traded out of the round, for whatever reason.

What the link between trading a pick and drafting international ?

In case you didn't know, getting a good 25 year old player can be had via the draft or through free agency.

And it's way more complicated without lottery picks or the financial power to overpay players.

You can wax poetic about what a great job the FO has done all you want.

RIF.
I have never said that Spurs FO has done a great job.

In fact, with the decline of Bowen and the precarious injury situation that has limited Duncan, means this team is considerably worse defensively. The fact that there is nothing in the rotation today to help augment this decline is the result of poor choices and poor planning by the FO. This is a "what have you done for me lately" business. The compe ion gets better every year. If you're not getting better, you're staying the same or getting worse. Eventually, the compe ive cycle catches up with every team.

You're way off.
I don't disagree with the fact that Spurs have troubles.
I wholly disagree with you when you say it's the result of philosophy:
- Not having a successor for Bowen isn't because Pop went away of his defensive philosophy. It's because Spurs haven't been able to get a good one.
- Pop hasn't "elected" to have a team of shooter. Spurs haven't been able to get a good perimeter slasher other than Manu and Tony.
- Not getting young players hasn't been a philosophy. It's just than getting these players isn't easy at all.

The only thing you can call a philosophy is drafting foreign players and Spurs have been quite successful at doing that.

Spurs have weaknesses. I know it, you know it and Spurs' FO know it better than us. Your idea that Spurs' FO has decided to ignore these weaknesses is ridiculous and makes no sense when you look at what Spurs have try to do.

Spurs' have tried to fix these weaknesses and they have mainly failed. Part of the failure is because it was damn hard to do. Part of the failure is because Spurs haven't been lucky lately. Part of the failure is because Spurs haven't been good enough to find the jewel in the rough.

If you think this team is poised to extend its championship window, it is YOU who are just way off.

I have said in this thread that Spurs will need to add some quality via FA/draft/trade to get another championship.

[ManuTim_best of Fwiendz]

I agree that Pop's timing on not having Manu is way late. He should have said that from the get go and moved on. Still, this team is good enough to beat Dallas, but they have to match the Mav's "hunger" as Carlise called it. Will Hill help? I don't know how badly his confidence has been shaken by Pop's loss of confidence in him. Will sitting Bonner help? I think so, and why not let Gooden play more minutes, and let him try his hand at Dirk.

And really what's sad is that Pop is setting his team for failure by going the "get over Ginobili" rout and setting Manu as the scapegoat. Something that has been building up IMO by Pop and coaching staff since the olympics.

That's true. Manu shouldn't be singled out. Injuries happen. Suns dealt with injuries better when they were contenders. In 2006 they did not let Amare's season ending injury dispirit the team. To a lesser extent the Lakers both in 2008, and 2009 had a better focus on looking at their assets. It's easy with Kobe. But the Spurs have no excuse because they have Tim frickin' Duncan to look to when the going gets tough. A big man who's won a le at less than 100 percent...

This season proves to me Pop is a great coach for maintaining stability, but still can make mistakes, and errors in respect to that stability. The way he's handled team chemistry despite the team's season record leaves a lot to be desired in 2009.
We've made it past 50, but not since 2007, have we routed teams and built the right momentum at the right time. I think Pop's micromanaged so much, that it's thrown him off his game now that the other shoe stopped dropping for him.

[roycrikside]

That's true. Manu shouldn't be singled out. Injuries happen. Suns dealt with injuries better when they were contenders. In 2006 they did not let Amare's season ending injury dispirit the team. To a lesser extent the Lakers both in 2008, and 2009 had a better focus on looking at their assets. It's easy with Kobe. But the Spurs have no excuse because they have Tim frickin' Duncan to look to when the going gets tough. A big man who's won a le at less than 100 percent...

This season proves to me Pop is a great coach for maintaining stability, but still can make mistakes, and errors in respect to that stability. The way he's handled team chemistry despite the team's season record leaves a lot to be desired in 2009.
We've made it past 50, but not since 2007, have we routed teams and built the right momentum at the right time. I think Pop's micromanaged so much, that it's thrown him off his game now that the other shoe stopped dropping for him.

Pop has a history of making Manu the scapegoat. In '07 the whole mantra was "if not for one stupid foul..." In '09 and '10 the mantra will be "if not for Manu's bad ankles..."

[timvp]

Bruno is right on the money in this thread. The Spurs have been good for a long time, which doesn't allow them the rebuilding tools (lottery picks, cap room, big maneuverable contracts, etc.) to easily retool. And given their situation and looking at it from the broadest sense, the front office has done a fantastic job. Now other team in NBA history completely rebuilt a championship core on the fly like the Spurs did from going from the 1999 team to the 2005 and 2007 teams. That's simply never been done before without having downtime to rebuild.

And in the last ten years, the Spurs drafting has been wildly successful. I don't think Spurs fans realize that getting a halfway decent player late in the first round is a huge longshot. IIRC, 75% of late first round draft picks never get a second contract. Second round draft picks are obviously even longer odds. Going by the odds, the Spurs have had one of the best drafting past decades of any team in history. Yeah they've missed on a few picks as of late but that shouldn't cloud the big picture.

I wish it were as easy as Spurs fans think it is to just find a young swingman who can step in and be a championship quality piece but that is hard. It's even harder to find a young bigman piece with the means the Spurs have at their disposal.

The three-point shooters the Spurs ultimately go with aren't around because they were the top options that the FO went after. The Spurs just know that if they are going to get an attainable specialist role player to fit around their Big Three, a three-point specialist has a good chance of fitting in on at least the offensive end.

Overall, I see nothing wrong with the philosophy by the front office. Individual decisions have been questionable but the fact that they've kept the team at a championship level for so long, while always keeping financial flexibility, has been a first in NBA history.

All that said, the Spurs need to tweak the philosophy in the coming years since the Duncan Era is coming to a close. We've seen some evidence that they'd be willing to adjust but beyond 2010, financial flexibility doesn't hold any value. I think (and hope) that the Spurs front office realizes that. Going the Jerry Krause route and trying to cut the winning years short to usher in a new era would be extremely dumb.

[Obstructed_View]

I have a whole lot more problem with the decisions of the coach than I do the decisions of the front office. The Spurs got three guys that could have contributed this year in the draft. The decisions to send them to Europe, cut them and bench them for no reason are the ones that are questionable.

[Laker-fan-in-SanAnto]

I didn't know manu was gay!