Popovich had no choice but to play the hand that was dealt. Yes, I clamored for a youth movement and Popovich to take a chance on some ballas. It worked better than I could imagine. I figured we'd just get these guys primed for a run with Duncan and a new star this season.
But you know d@mn well the Holt-ing Pattern would be judged by who we got this offseason.
I'm not impressed... or surprised.
Life goes on. I look forward to watching my San Antonio Spurs 2002-03 NBA Champions DVD next May.
I am looking forward to 10 years of very solid spurs basketball and a few more championship DVDs over that time thanks to them not mortgaging the future for Gary Patyon or another old player in a stupid trade.
Pop played the hand he as dealt? Excuse me if I'm wrong, but isn't Pop also the one dealing the cards? I'd say Pop always has an ace in the hole.
I'm not worried.
Manny, you're a good fan. I like you.
Were you even aware of a two-year, cap-clearing rebuilding startegy?
Or did you think all the Spurs pickups were brought in for a le run last year and not with the express intent of signing a superstar this offseason instead?
Question.
Ghost,
I've been reading your theories on the holting pattern for some time now, I just never used to post at SR.com.
So yes, I knew of the cap clearing plan.
By your logic, because the spurs did not mortgage the future, and had planned for flexibility, they weren't doing everything they could to win a le.
I do not agree with that.
#1 I do not think the trades you have come up with are nessecarily the best way for the team to win a le.
I think the spurs were doing everything to win a le WHILE planning for the future. They did what they had to do to win, and they did it cheaply and smartly. That does not make it an accident.
Tim Duncan didn't start off the season with the goal of being out of the playoffs in the 2nd round.
Manny, I do agree that the Spurs were trying to put the best team on the floor, but within the parameters of not taking on any large contracts that would extend beyond 2003.
That is obviously limiting your chances of adding star talent for the long-term unless you indeed sign a star free agent in 2003.
The fact of the matter is that the Spurs have a championship level team ready to go.
Whether or not they can compete with the the Lakers this year remains to be seen, but they are still a serious cantidate to repeate, even with no other additions this offseason.
You may disagree, I couldn't careless, you're predictions haven't been very good to this point.
Anytime your front office puts you in position to win championships for a window of a decade, it has not FAILED. To think so is assinine. You want to see an example of front office failure? Look at Portland. You want to see an example of how to run a franchise? Look at SA.
Manny, as one of the most high-profile posters in Spurs Fan Forum history, I have been wrong a lot, but my predictions have been right on more times than not.
You can try to spin things any way you would like, but last year was an unexpected championship.
We purposely avoided signing or trading for talent with contracts that would extend beyond this year, because our goal was to sign a superstar to the max this summer.
That is not happening.
The Holt-ing Pattern failed.
Spin that.
k
I want to see your starting line up for this coming season had the Front Office done things YOUR WAY ghost.
if the Spurs had traded for payton, malik and tony would be gone....and there is no gurantee that payton would resign here.
so is your argument that it would be better to have artest and mercer under contract as spurs today instead of having all the cap room?
Would you be upset if we had traded for a star and had him under contract today instead of settling for Nesterovic?
Question.
Hey Casper the Stupid ,
Isn't that what the Poll was about? Don't those numbers speak for themselves?
So much for having aconversation with you, Manny. I indulge all your myopic, biased questions, yet you cower like a skirt at all of mine.
Pathetic.
You are a goof. And a coward. Emmy.
lmao
DUDE.
What was the poll question?
I gave 3 options
the Current situation
OR
Either one of you're 2 star scenarios
It's obvious which one most people picked.
Don't keep asking the same question hoping to a diffrent answer.
"but but, what if this, no on, i mean"
Casper the Babbling Inquisitor.
Your poll did not account for the les we could've won with those stars or the fact that we'd have better talent today than we do now. Besides, I could care less what a bunch of biased homers think as they hide behind a anonymous poll.
I am calling you out, b1tch.
Would you rather have Rasho Nesterovic on this team than traded for a real star over the past two years?
Question.
Would you be upset if we had traded for a star and had him under contract today instead of settling for Nesterovic?
well ghost, that's hard to say since the star is not named.
If it's a star center or power forward.....sure
What star could we have unloaded smith for....
I like star power as much as the next guy, but the star has to fit. If rasho signs as expected and the spurs are somehow able to make a run at brand too....wouldn't that be a good thing? Then, if the Spurs land Brand, we can ship Rasho out to NY later in the year no?
And if/when the spurs can't land brand, they still have cap room to make a run at a good shooter/scorer.
bigzak if we make a run for Rasho and Brand and it results in us getting bRand, I will be thrilled.
I am preparing myself mentally for the worst.
Ghost, you can have your what-if les, I'll keep the real one that we just won.
How the can a poll acount for things that are uncertainties.
The problem is you claim them as certainties. You claim that if we had brought in payton he was bringing in the Larry Obrien in his carry on bag. You also act as though our team has no chance at winning les now, which is actually has a very good chance of. Get ing real.
You're trades gave them an opportunity to win 2 les.
Guess what, so did Pops moves, and it worked for one.
You cannot guarntee they would have won les! I think your trades would have made our team WORSE. That is the crux of my arguement.
So, since you can't seem to understand a point unless I spell it out for you, let me do just that.
I PREFER THE CURRENT TEAM WITH RASHO NESTEROVICH, THAN TO EITHER ONE OF THE 2 SCENAIROS YOU PROVIED.
#1 Payton on this team with no Tony Parker and Malik Rose
#2 Ron Artest on this team.
YES GHOST, I PREFER THE TEAM WE HAVE TO EITHER ONE OF THOSE 2.
Thats even if we dont' sign anyone else this offseason.
You're the only idiot on this board who would consider what you are doing calling me out. I've been saying that godamn same thing for the past 2 days, but because of the fact that I didn't come out and spell out to you in very simple words, I can see where it flew over your simple mind.
Guess what, most of the people here agree with me.
Finally, Manny answered (somewhat) the question.
Now here is my question, would Spurs fans be happier if the Spurs would have won the past two les? Because the Holting Pattern, by your definition, also played a big part in San Antonio's peformance in 2001-2002. By that same token, I can also say that the HOLTING PATTERN failed, because it prevented your team from achieving it's maximum potential to be repeat champions during David Robinson's final years.
Well, duh. That’s why the poll is garbage.”How the can a poll acount for things that are uncertainties.” — Emmy
Last time I checked, 2 is better than 1. And having astar under contract now is better than none.”You're trades gave them an opportunity to win 2 les.
Guess what, so did Pops moves, and it worked for one.” — Emmy
And don’t bring Pop into this. He would’ve avoided the Holt-ing Pattern altogether and let Robinson walk for Webber back in 2001.
Neither of us will know for sure. But we can both agree that trades guarantee you a talent exchange, while cap space guarantees you nothing but the ability to sign free agents.”You cannot guarntee they would have won les! I think your trades would have made our team WORSE. That is the crux of my arguement.” — Emmy
So, since you can't seem to understand a point unless I spell it out for you, let me do just that.
Sad.”I PREFER THE CURRENT TEAM WITH RASHO NESTEROVICH, THAN TO EITHER ONE OF THE 2 SCENAIROS YOU PROVIED.
#1 Payton on this team with no Tony Parker and Malik Rose
#2 Ron Artest on this team.
YES GHOST, I PREFER THE TEAM WE HAVE TO EITHER ONE OF THOSE 2.
Thats even if we dont' sign anyone else this offseason.” — Emmy
No.”You're the only idiot on this board who would consider what you are doing calling me out. I've been saying that godamn same thing for the past 2 days, but because of the fact that I didn't come out and spell out to you in very simple words, I can see where it flew over your simple mind.
Guess what, most of the people here agree with me.” — Emmy
You hid behind a poll and what other simpletons think instead of answering point blank Questions. Thanks for stating your thoughts succinctly… finally.
I disagree wholeheartedly.
And you are a hopeless homer for thinking the Holt-ing Pattern resulted in our le last year and was not about adding a star this summer.
Good day.
GW,
I can't (well actually I can) believe you are bring up Webber once again - you believe Webber was on his way to SA. That truly is delusional.
Lets just say for arguments sake that Webber did come here instead of D Rob. We would have lost the last 2 years in the playoffs cause Webber would have gotten injured both times. I do not see 2 championships, I still see only the real one we won this year.
You say Webber didn't get injured in 01-02 playoffs, but I am in your world and I say IF he was on the team he would have been injured. Now see how delusional your type of arguments are. Ifs are purely ifs, but reality is WE WON THE FUKING CHAMPIONSHIP by not doing what you wanted.
Go Spurs...
Ok, so my poll is garabage, yet your question which does not account for the possible les this team will win is not?
Where the logic in that?
Ghost, you should be a Kings fan. They are the best in the world at pondering their What-If Championships. Meanwhile, the rest of us will enjoy the one we really have.
10 What If les In A Row < 1 Real One
According to Ghost so far management has wasted Tim's first six years in the league (like previous management DID with David) by NOT getting another STAR to join him in the line up. And will waste the rest of Tim's career if we don't get another STAR next to Tim.
We only won 2 championships in that time frame when Ghost thinks we could have won 3. The key words are "Ghost thinks". In the immortal words of the Rock "It doesn't matter what Ghost thinks". The fact is he is mad because we won
1) without need for 2nd star
2) not the way he wanted
3) despite his stubburn opions.
GW, I will say this for you, if you think the planning used by the Spurs was ONLY to get a FA STAR to play along side Tim, instead of trading for aging STAR to play along side Tim, then you are right to think the planning used by Spurs management has failed.
Those of us who think that management did what they did over the past 5 years to win championships, and continue to be a contender to win championships will celebrate the 2 championships won by Tim, Dave and the rest of the Spurs (Non Stars)and look forward to competing with the lakers for more.
Go Spurs...
NO LIMIT 2001 was a failure because all the Spurs did with all their cap space was resign DRob and obtain Steve Smith. Nevertheless, the Spurs were compe ive in 2001-2 (someone please make a 4th quarter shot) and 2002-3 (obviously). Because both Steve Smith and DRob's contracts ended in 2003, NO LIMIT 2003 was launched.
So far, the Spurs have again failed to obtain a star free agent. Nevertheless, we can expect a compe ive team for the next 7 years. The Lakers HOF team may dominate the next year or two, but then they will dive, and the Spurs will remain in the hunt for many years after that.
You need to remember that the NO LIMIT years also had the goal of putting together championship-compe ive teams. The le in 2002-3 was not an accident. The Spurs put together a great team and opened up cap space in 2003; the two goals don't completely conflict with each other. Signing a second superstar is the most obvious, perhaps the best, way of achieving a great team, but the Spurs will be in good shape with improvement from Parker and Manu and good players in other positions.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote