Let's Talk Rebuilding

[GSH]

The system is designed such that there is a constant talent drain that has to be replinished through the draft. It's a combination of escalating salaries, the salary cap, and the aging process. The Spurs organization has done a fantastic job of finding good players. Aging but still serviceable vets, talented and hungry castoffs, overachieving late draft picks, etc. And all of those things have allowed them to extend the lifespan of this team. But that's not the same thing as re-building.

There are a few big market teams that might be able to re-build through acquisition. But even the Lakers are going to much the same thing as the Spurs, in terms of talent drain due to an extended period of high draft picks. It's hard to over-estimate what it meant to the Lakers to get No.1 pick Magic Johnson, followed by No.1 pick James Worthy three years later. Even Miami wouldn't have been able to put together their team without already having a lottery pick (Dwayne Wade) in his prime.

Anything short of getting a talent infusion from the draft is delaying the inevitible. The Spurs FO is better at delaying than any other in the league. And if all the matchups all fell just right, they might actually squeeze out another Finals appearance. (And once you get there, anything can happen.) But that's not re-building. To do that, they Spurs will need a talent infusion from the draft. Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili were draft miracles. But you have to ask the question: Even with those two draft steals, how many trophies would the Spurs have without the No.1 pick of Tim Duncan?

I think the Spurs can remain a perinneal playoff team by doing what you suggest. But to become legitimate playoff contenders in the future, it's going to take a lottery pick.

The Jazz landed Carlos Boozer and Memo Okur shortly after the Stockton/Malone era.

If the Spurs had Parker, Splitter, Leonard, Boozer-esque player and Okur-esque player ..... that ain't bad.

I could point out that the best player on the Jazz was still Deron Williams - a No.3 draft pick. But Tony Parker is as good as a lottery pick, even if he went later in the draft. Yes, that lineup ain't bad.

But then again - that Jazz team got their asses kicked pretty soundly by the Spurs. I still think it takes draft picks to legitimately re-build.

[timvp]

Duncan can stick around, but not for that money.

So if Duncan asks for $40 million over two years or he's going to walk, how many of you are going to let him walk?

Personally, I would give him the $40 million over two years.

1. He's earned it.

2. If he would have come out of school one year earlier, he probably earns $100 million more in his career. Why punish him for waiting for the Spurs to suck enough to draft him?

3. Do you really want to push him into a Raptors Hakeem scenario? That was just embarrassing for Hakeem and the Rockets. And it didn't help them in their rebuilding efforts at all.

4. Internet Spur Fan was willing to throw David Robinson away in the summer of 2002. How stupid does that look in retrospect? If the Spurs would have actually landed Chris Webber that summer, the Spurs don't win championships 2, 3 or 4.

5. David Robinson being able to retire a Spur and unquestionably always being tied to the Spurs was worth every penny. Compare that to the Hakeem/Rockets embarrassment and does anyone really want to look back 20 years from now and be like, "Good thing we kicked Tim Duncan to the curb so that we could throw money at JaVale McGee! We didn't win anything anyways but it was worth it!"

6. If the Spurs are ever going to attract a max free agent, they have to sell the "Spurs family" aspect. If a player can look and see that the Spurs took care of David Robinson and Tim Duncan their whole careers, that'd be worth something. On the other hand, it could hurt future negotiations if a player realizes this team gets rid of you the moment you might not be worth your contract any longer even if you bring four championships to the city.

7. The 2012 free agent market sucks anyways so even if it takes $20 million per year to get Duncan to eventually retire as a Spur, it's not like the Spurs will be missing out on someone awesome this summer.

[timvp]

Our greatest gains, ever, were to have two ty seasons and acquire 1st overall picks on years that two of the greatest players of all time would go 1st. Almost any years between those two and we could still be ringless. Pretending we can re-manufacture that with sentiment and scouting is wishful thinking.

Those were two huge flukes though. Tim Duncan and David Robinson are the last two number one overall picks to win a championship with the team that drafted them. It's not like tanking and landing a top pick is a surefire way to rebuild. It looks that way to Spurs fans because it happened so easily but other teams have wasted hundreds of combined years by simply banking on the draft's magical powers.

[DPG21920]

So by that logic why would you be against trading for Okafor if he potentially helps upfront and is better than who the Spurs will get in free agency anyways?

[timvp]

If the team is worn to ground by mid-April again, I trade Tony and Manu on draft day and try to stockpile picks like Presti did in Seattle. Then I hope I can draft the next Durant reasonably soon. I put it in RC's hands to find the next Westbrook and Ibaka. I don't hold onto Ray Allen to the bitter end.

Does San Antonio really survive a scorched earth scenario, though? Spurs fans have become so spoiled that if you go from championship contender today to 15-win team tomorrow, you could disenfranchise the fanbase. Spurs fans wouldn't understand and the AT&T Center would be empty until the Spurs are a playoff team again ... and that could take a long, long time.

The Bulls could survive scorched earth because of their market size and huge fanbase. If you scorch earth the Spurs, you could inadvertently start a chain of events that has the team leaving the city in the next 10-15 years, tbh.



P.S.

And Presti ended up trading Ray Allen for what turned out to be Kendrick Perkins. Not exactly a model I'd want the FO to follow if they are going to trade TP...

[DPG21920]

I also don't get why, considering you just changed your mind, you seem to be bashing the draft strategy by saying things like "drafts magical powers...". I don't disagree entirely with your new premise, but with how great the Spurs draft, you'd have to imagine they'll do well with high picks.

[5in10]

I think we should make an offer at batum. The guys has turned it on recently and has the effiency required for the spurs system. If Tiago develops a jumpshot this summer he will be one of the best big men in the league.

[GSH]

So if Duncan asks for $40 million over two years or he's going to walk, how many of you are going to let him walk?

Personally, I would give him the $40 million over two years.

Duncan and Splitter together are a pretty damned good big man tandem. They haven't been dominating on the floor together, but I think a training camp could fix that. The Spurs won a Championship with Avery Johnson, who was nearing the end of his career. Nobody, as far as I can remember, wins it all without top notch bigs. If you're not going to blow the team up, you pay Tim until he decides it's over.

[vander]

spurs should have started rebuilding 3 years ago and been done and contending again now

back then TP and manu had great trade value, TP has resurrected his value somewhat, but he's still got a ton of miles on him.



and for TD, he's been getting paid for past performance already for 2 years now, if he wants to keep playing for the spurs it's 10 mill a year TOPS, if you can't get out of bed and play some BBall for 10 million, then bye bye

[timvp]

Timvp, what do you think the Spurs plans would be for this summer? Assuming RJ gets amnestied, the 1st round pick traded away and Blair or CJ salary dumped that could create more than $17 million in cap space.

I think their first step should be to hand Duncan a blank contract and tell him to fill it out. Then go from there.

As far as specific free agents, tbh, I haven't put much thought into it yet.

[timvp]

Anything short of getting a talent infusion from the draft is delaying the inevitible.

Most likely true. For the Spurs to rebuild into a championship contender, chances are high that it will have to be via the draft.

But what are you willing to get to that point? Without a scorched earth scenario in which the Spurs sell off all their assets, they could be quite a bit away from a point in which they naturally get a high lottery pick.

[mountainballer]

I agree the Spurs should try to re sign either Tim and Manu for 2 more seasons, but (like other posters) I don't agree to the "at any cost" policy. Tim will have crossed the 200 M mark this season and manu will be close to 100 M, when his contract is over. the "underpayed" tag is getting a bit old, Tim has always been payed max, or close to the max and Manu, who was kind of underpayed in the first years got a very generous extension in 2010. I think, at the end of the day, the business part of the realtionship of both players with the Spurs can be called "fair" on both sides.
that said, reasonable contract extensions for Tim and Manu are crucial for the franchise near and longer term future. reasonable IMHO means 8 M per for Tim and 6 for Manu. this would allow the Spurs to work the FA market in 2012 and 2014. if Spurs give Tim more than the mentioned 8M, they won't be a player 2012. simple maths.

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

spurs should have started rebuilding 3 years ago and been done and contending again now

lol which was the last small market team to blow it all up and contend within 3 years? Or even 5 years? Or even 10 years?

[letmk]

All good points, LJ. Hypothetically, however, if Holt is wealthy enough or is willing to spend (big if), I think stacking "bad" contracts might be a good way to keep the Spurs good.

When was the last time an established or quasi-all-star player came to the Spurs? We got Bowen and Jackson cheap, Finley too. The biggest contract was Barry at mid-level exception, whom you don't need to have a cap space to sign.

All in all, free agents chose not coming to the Spurs not because Spurs can't pay more, but because they don't want to play in a small market, and/or partly because of the reputation of Pop being strict and tough.

But if Holt can spend like Cuban, besides franchise player like Dirk, you keep other fat contracts with various years left, like some in 1-year, some in 2-year, some in 3-year, etc. left. Then you can always flip one into another as long as you would like to pay. Look at what Cuban did all these years. They even got Chandler with Dampier.

We literally hit the lottery once with Tim, then twice with Manu and Tony. But lightning can't strike twice, can it? And since Holt would/could not spend as Cuban, to be honest, after Tim/Manu really go down, we have no chance at all. I'm that pessimistic.

So what we say here are all moot point. Prepare for the down time for a long time. And things happened in Sacramento might happen in SA in 10 years, although they got a happy ending yesterday.

[timvp]

So by that logic why would you be against trading for Okafor if he potentially helps upfront and is better than who the Spurs will get in free agency anyways?

Okafor trade isn't happening for a variety of reasons, tbh. Him not being worth his contract is one such reason.

I also don't get why, considering you just changed your mind, you seem to be bashing the draft strategy by saying things like "drafts magical powers...". I don't disagree entirely with your new premise, but with how great the Spurs draft, you'd have to imagine they'll do well with high picks.

I've always thought that Spurs fans overrate how easy it is to rebuild through the draft. Over the years, even in the championship years, Spurs fans have had the at ude of "we should tank this year so we can get the next Tim Duncan and then we'll be set for the future" as if it's a birthright to land David Robinsons and Tim Duncans whenever your willing to tank.

It's not quite as simple as saying "BRB playoffs, getting a Tim Duncan this year, see you next year ".

Spurs fans underrate the ugliness and lengthiness of rebuilding, tbh.

[timvp]

Spurs fans underrate the ugliness and lengthiness of rebuilding, tbh.

spurs should have started rebuilding 3 years ago and been done and contending again now

[Dex]

spurs should have started rebuilding 3 years ago and been done and contending again now

Yes, because a year separated from a championship and coming fresh off a Western Conference Finals run that got partially derailed by injuries and a fluke airplane malfunction is definitely the time to blow things up and start rebuilding.

[timvp]

reasonable IMHO means 8 M per for Tim

So you let Duncan walk if he wants more than $8M to stay?

Just curious.

[K-State Spur]

I also don't get why, considering you just changed your mind, you seem to be bashing the draft strategy by saying things like "drafts magical powers...". I don't disagree entirely with your new premise, but with how great the Spurs draft, you'd have to imagine they'll do well with high picks.

i'd argue that the Spurs drafting strength is in finding guys later in the draft who are as good as players being drafted in the latter half of the lottery.

i don't think that means they could draft in the middle of the lottery and find guys who are worthy of being #1 or #2 overall picks. The magic doesn't translate there as there just aren't many of those guys available.

for tanking to be worthwhile from a draft perspective, your pingpong ball needs to come up #1 or #2 AND it needs to happen in the right year.

You could make an argument that the 2 best careers drafted, regardless of slot, from 1999-2002 were Tony Parker & Manu Ginobili. Pau Gasol and Amare Stoudemire (whose knee will explode any minute now) offer the only legit arguments against.

[vander]

Yes, because a year separated from a championship and coming fresh off a Western Conference Finals run that got partially derailed by injuries and a fluke airplane malfunction is definitely the time to blow things up and start rebuilding.

and have the spurs won anything since?

[vander]

Spurs fans underrate the ugliness and lengthiness of rebuilding, tbh.

yes, when you wait until your team has no tradeable assets left, it's long and ugly.

that's a big part of why I wanted to start 3 years ago

[GSH]

Most likely true. For the Spurs to rebuild into a championship contender, chances are high that it will have to be via the draft.

But what are you willing to get to that point? Without a scorched earth scenario in which the Spurs sell off all their assets, they could be quite a bit away from a point in which they naturally get a high lottery pick.

Well, one thing is for certain. The Spurs have provided a small market (us) with first rate entertainment, at a budget price. If they go the route you're talking about (and they likely will), they will continue to do that for a lot more years. And if they go the scorched earth route, they do run the risk of years of disappointment. God forbid they should draft another Len Bias, for instance. And to get one of the obvious draft picks, you have to be lucky as well as bad. It's possible to do everything right, and still wind up with mediocre results.

As usual when I disagree with you, I definitely see your logic and could almost swing the other way. Honestly, the two biggest problems this team has are R.J., and the unavoidable fact that Manu spends a lot of time injured. As much as I love Manu, if we could spend that $22 million (from him and RJ) some other way right now? We could contend with anyone for another trophy. When I think about it that way I get, like, optimistic and stuff.

[letmk]

When the Bulls stunk for more than 10 years (Chicago!!), you know we should try to be good as along as Tim and Manu can still play.

[timvp]

yes, when you wait until your team has no tradeable assets left, it's long and ugly.

that's a big part of why I wanted to start 3 years ago

If they traded Manu and Tony three years ago, it's highly unlikely they would have gotten a return that was even equal to what Manu and Tony have been worth over the last three years ... much less exceeding that level of play.

And either way, the Spurs would still be dealing with a declining Tim Duncan, which is 99% of the reason why a rebuild is necessary.

[Cant_Be_Faded]

6. If the Spurs are ever going to attract a max free agent, they have to sell the "Spurs family" aspect. If a player can look and see that the Spurs took care of David Robinson and Tim Duncan their whole careers, that'd be worth something. On the other hand, it could hurt future negotiations if a player realizes this team gets rid of you the moment you might not be worth your contract any longer even if you bring four championships to the city.

Bingo. I have thought about this subject a lot lately. Because I'm a pessimist at heart, I sincerely worry about the actual existence of the franchise once the big three are retired or gone, and spurs are potentially only winning twenty games a season. How long does this franchise stay in San Antonio?

Baseline bum has an excellent point about both free agents and over paying for role players that we draft. However, our only real shot at keeping those role players and landing any free agents could friend on the spurs one characteristic that separates us from most franchises: the family and loyalty cultivated by the Robinson era and continued by the Duncan era. If we blow the team up, the support for that mentality goes down the drain, and the franchise is near dead bottom in terms of overall viability. It will be more difficult to keep draft picks and snag free agents. The family mentality is our only advantage and by getting rid of the big three e will have given up our only advantage in acquisitions.