Reply With Quote
How many minutes has Sanders played thusfar? You still have Manu playing when he should be resting.
He worked in SA. Enough to supplant the Almighty Barry in the rotation.
eh, I'm not a Saints fan, unless they move to SA. So try another angle. Nice attempt at the diversion though.I don't know why people fight with New Orleans on this board - that kid is miserable - and will continue to be miserable - he is a Saints fan. Have you seen that team ? Aaron Brooks might be the worst QB in the league - he can only make one pass - a bullet straight down the field - dont ask him to throw a touch pass or a screen -- just deep balls - bullets straight down the field. Let this man be in his sorrow. I heard they lost this week and they had a bye -
How many minutes has Sanders played thusfar? You still have Manu playing when he should be resting.
and now Charlie's dad is your father's predecessor. It all comes full circle.
Signing Melvin Sanders at the start of the season = Hertz Renters Insurance.
How many of you check and initial that coverage when you rent a car?
How many of you would go on a cross country trip on 4 tires with little tread left and no spare?
Ginobili, Bowen and Barry = very little tread left? Okay Kenny Smith.
that is funny -- you told me in an im discussion that you were a saints fan. -
The swing rotation is old. How much longer is Bowen going to play at this level? Ditto for Barry and Finley. Now you have Manu playing heavy minutes when he should be resting.
As it stands only 2 of those 4 are playing at the moment. Critique and posit analogies all you want, but it was not a wise decision to go into this season with no depth at those positions.
I did no such thing.
8-12 and 28 pts is not too shabby.
Well the need for a Bowen replacement has been stated many times before, but you, yourself, have claimed that Brown is no Bowen replacement. With no draft pick next year, barring a trade, this is a question that will need to be answered soon, especially in 2 years after Finley leaves. I just don't believe the answer is Devin Brown. If you have a better answer than Devin Brown, I'm all ears.
One man's "little tread left" is another man's (or, in this case, every other man's) "favorite to win the NBA Championship".
I will state why I miss Devin again and I for one would have loved to have around as an "insurance policy".
1) He was an athletic and physical player in a league with it seems more and more huge or muscular guards and SF; and for those concerned re his back = lots of players have back injuries, and to this date there is no evidence of a congenital reason.
2) He was always a compe or and wasn't afraid to step up. I remember the 2003-04 playoff series vs. LA when it seemed he had the "only pair on the team" in one game and he scored at will vs. LA to almost pull out a game. In bursts, he also showed potential considerable talent on both sides of the ball. Other than Bowen and Manu he was surely the best quard/swingman defender on the team and also quarded at times tall players with effect.
3) He never complained about minutes when he could have (at least openly)
4) Cost-effective, he would have stayed for any reasonable offer most likely.
To be fair = Belatedly on this site and others we heard comments about him being late and not hardworking in practice from some sources, but it was wierd we never heard that prior to his release.
If they are healthy enough to play.
And of course there are, you know, seasons after this one. If you kept a Devin Brown around at least you would have that option.
Sure, he's a compe or. But that doesn't change the fact that he'd be better off resting at the moment instead of forced into the action.
And the there's the fundamental question: Would Devin have stayed with the expectation of playing 5th swingman off the bench type minutes (what's that anyways? If everybody is healthy, 5 minutes?)
He wouldn't have had much of a choice. Beyond this season, the Spurs would've had his full Bird rights.
I really liked Devin. Loved his home-town boy story and his hustle. At one time I thought he could replace Bowen in the near future. As he played more, I realized he probably couldn't start at SF but could be a valuable role player for the minimum.
Then, he was injured. Rotten luck, but everyone knows that back injuries are usually chronic (ask Dave Robinson). It wasn't surprising that so many teams failed to take a chance on him, but I was glad Utah gave him a shot. So far, he hasn't done anything and he got DNPs the other night. I hope it wasn't because of the back.
I wouldn't put Devin on this roster if he were available right now.
Question A) Do you miss Devin Brown?
My Answer A) No, not really.
Question B) Does Marcus Bryant ever have a salient, valid point backed up with evidence?
My Answer B) No, not really.
Marcus we get that you think Holt is cheap. You never miss an opportunity to harp on. But as much as you attack other posters for 'not backing up' their claims, you never do either - you simply resort to barbed attacks on other poster's critical thinking abilities.
Condescending, hypocrytical rant in 3...2...1...
I have backed up my points.
Welcome to the discussion.
Uh oh, someone's mad.
Thanks, you proved my point.
Back it up, MB. Do you offer anything but a retort? No. You know full well that I've been around here for months. I've read every post in this thread, and I've read most of your posts.
You are trying to get me riled up and focused on that, so I'll come back annoyed or insulted and offer up a retort of my own, which you will then attack as not being critical or backing up my point or good enough.
You thrive on stirring up controversy, but you rarely offer anything substantive. I'm on to the game, friend. Bring the proof.
Right, you can't. Because it is only your opinion. You are welcome to it. But at least your detractors can point to the three trophys you like to disdain so much.
you back your points up with thoughts - your thoughts and your perspective - same as everyone else on this message board that you critique.
You can't argue with the results - You think Holt is cheap and that the Spurs should spend money to "develop" people who won't get any minutes on this team. some people, including Holt - disagree with you and they win championships. Why should the Spurs invest money on a young talent with say a 3-year deal to "develop" him on the bench and in practice and then see him go elsewhere? - those types of players you have mentioned are available every summer and in trades all the time -- and with this salary cap structure it will always be that way.
Blah blah blah blah. I've made my case. You obviously have not been paying attention. Here, to help you out...
The Spurs knew they had an old perimeter rotation coming into this season. They have never carried only 4 players to cover the 2 wing spots. The cost for depth at those spots, using proven players was minimal (1 year, minimum contract).
Again, welcome to the discussion.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions