1) i like finley and manu a lot more shooting the ball then barry
2) if J.R. Smith doesn't work out ... it's perfect cuz he's one of a trading asset ... a lot more then Barry...he's worth more then Barry and more teams will be interested in him plus we get to dump Barry's contract
3) so this is a win-win situation for the spurs all the way...
young guy could with chip learn the three ball
look barry,horry are not going to be around for ever
yes tp said he was going to work on his three point shot but until I see it I am not going to say it is good enough
barry might even be gone for him that takes his three point shooting with him
mike and bowen are still here
if he could hit the three now spurs would have no chance at him
Bring him in with Arvydas Macijauskas and maybe some picks for Brent and Rasho.
Steve Kerr was never known for his defense yet he was able to get by against a Dallas Mavericks team playing small ball two years ago, even on several occassions where because of switches he ended up on Dirk Nowitzki.Macijauskas is an epically bad defender, but I suppose that doesn't matter, because we have a system, and players don't actually matter.
Your idea of who we should acquire this offseason is Steve Kerr without the Finals experience or rings?Steve Kerr was never known for his defense yet he was able to get by against a Dallas Mavericks team playing small ball two years ago, even on several occassions where because of switches he ended up on Dirk Nowitzki.
I guess I don't see our needs the same way.
Where did I say that? I said given the most likely combinations of players NO would like to send us, I'd rather take a Smith/Macijauskas combo than some of the other stiffs mentioned in this thread.Your idea of who we should acquire this offseason is Steve Kerr without the Finals experience or rings?
I guess I don't see our needs the same way.
Man you are dense.
Maybe when you compared Macijauskas to Kerr.
Um, I'll type this really slow.
People were saying Maci is too slow and small to play defense. I was merely pointing out that Steve Kerr, who's even shorter than Maci, managed to get by defensively, even when he had to guard a seven footer.
Nowhere did I say that Maci is the clutch Finals winning type like Steve Kerr, merely that the complaining about his size as a limiting factor to his defensive capabilities is a reach.
I like when people are arrogant while they are so clueless about BB and Spurs needs.
His size, his speed, his complete lack of athleticism.
Steve Kerr was an incredibly weak, though certainly willing, defender. His mitigating factor was his proven ability to hit clutch shots in the playoffs, and the rings.
When you take away the clutch factor that Kerr had, for the life of me, I have trouble seeing why Macijauskas can help us.
Look in the mirror Bruno. And show me where I ever said that Maci filled a need. The guy would be trade filler that would have potential to hit a three for us here and there.I like when people are arrogant while they are so clueless about BB and Spurs needs.
People are talking about us getting Marc Jackson and Marcus ing Fizer as trade filler earlier in this thread. I'd much rather take a gamble on Maci than some of that .
JR Smith would be the prize of any trade with NO, I just like the potential of Maci being a spot minutes shooter for us over 86 year old Marc Jackson or super scrub Marcus Fizer.
As to strangeweather, no one really knows what Maci is capable of because Lord Byron won't give the guy any run.
Given that SG is probably the position we need the least help at, I don't think we should take back any cap filler to get JR Smth.
Well, he's unlikely to get taller, faster, or more athletic no matter how much run he gets.
Right, it's not like Finley and Manu didn't spend time on the IL this season, and that Finley's got a good 8-10 years left in him.Given that SG is probably the position we need the least help at, I don't think we should take back any cap filler to get JR Smth.
We were down to Brent Barry at SG at one point with Pop flipping a coin as to whether Beno or Nick would be backing him up. Not exactly my idea of depth.
The thing I don't like about you isn't that you are clueless but it's that you insult people when they are disagree with you. You say that people are slow, stupid and moron.
I know that I'm not the more knowledagable guy about BB on this board. Guys like Fromwaydowntown, Whott, Timvp, Kori have a better BB knowledge than me but I don't insult everybody.
Courtesy and respect aren't bad thing.
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showthre...ron#post995239
I rather trade Barry for a trade exception than for Smith+Macijauskas but you will call me again a moron.Our needs:
Youth at the SF and SG spots, more shooters to space the floor for TD, an athletic big man, and a backup PG.
Smith and Maci address two of our four needs this off-season.
Well, you're talking about keeping Manu and Finley and adding Smith and Macijauskas. How many pure shooting guards do you want to carry?
We potentially have lots of options at SG. If we find the SF we're looking for, Bowen can spend time at the 2, or even start there, if we get a rash of injuries. Likewise, depending on the SF we find, that guy may be able to split time there as well. If we get a backup point, he may also be able to play 2 guard.
When Nazr leaves, our big man rotation is down to Duncan, Rasho, Horry, and Oberto. Not exactly a murderers row after Duncan. If we trade Barry and NVE retires, the only guys we'll have that can play point are Tony and Beno. Not the best backups there either. Bowen and Finley, neither of which has ideal size, are our only guys who can play SF -- Smith would add another undersized guy to that depth chart.
So why is landing two shooting guards more important than our other needs?
strangeweather, Finley plays the 3 as well. Are you telling me you consider him a 'pure' SG?
This is more than a one year fix (hopefully). Finley won't be around forever, you know, and Bowen is no spring chicken either.Bowen and Finley, neither of which has ideal size, are our only guys who can play SF -- Smith would add another undersized guy to that depth chart.
I'm not going to call you a moron, but what makes you so sure that New Orleans is ready to just eat some cap space and not expect us to take back another player?I rather trade Barry for a trade exception than for Smith+Macijauskas but you will call me again a moron.
JR Smith would be a good backup 2. He's not the long athletic forward the Spurs are looking for. They are likely looking for a guy who is primarily a small forward but can play power forward too. JR Smith is like 6'5 or something.
I haven't said I will do the trade with Hornets.
Barry has been quite good since the ASG, I don't think he has a negative trade value. Utah and Charlotte are two teams that I can see do a Barry for TE trade.
Finley's natural position is the 2, but there's no question he can be effective at the 3. But like our other undersized guys who play the 3, we don't get the rebounding we would get if we had a rebounding forward with good size out there. I think SF is the higher priority.
Granted. And I don't just want quick fix guys. But there's only 15 spots on the roster, and probably only 13 or 14 given that we're up against the luxury tax again this year. If we carry 4 SGs, none of them at minimum salaries, that means fewer roster spots and less cap to go elsewhere on the roster.
PG: Tony, Beno
SG: Manu, Finley, Smith, Macijauskjas
SF: Bowen
PF: Duncan, Horry
C: Rasho, Oberto
That's 11 spots right there. We can obviously move Finley over to the 3, but that either means we don't get the long 3 everyone wants, or if we do, it means he, Finley, and Smith are all fighting for minutes, mostly at two positions.
And Macijauskas probably doesn't get significant minutes under any scenario -- he's the 5th swingman even if we don't get anyone else. He might not even be active for games, which means he's being paid over $2M a year to show up and wear a suit.
Another possible Utah deal would be McLeod + TE for Barry. That would give us another inexpensive guy to compete with Beno for the backup spot at the point.
I think barring a trade that the long three issue will still be unresolved at end of summer. Which is why I'm thinking about things like Fin at the three.We can obviously move Finley over to the 3, but that either means we don't get the long 3 everyone wants
I hope not -- even if we can't get premium guys like Jeffries, I'd like to think we could at least get a guy like Jumaine Jones. But you could end up being right.
But again, even with Fin at the 3, I'm not sure Macijauskas can stay active for games.
I think Utah would have to renounce too many decent players to get under the cap any worthwhile amount..Another possible Utah deal would be McLeod + TE for Barry. That would give us another inexpensive guy to compete with Beno for the backup spot at the point.
Has anyone had the misfortune of seeing Macijauskas in a game? If he were good enough to make the Spurs' active roster that would be a horrible indictment of Buford and Presti.
Maybe so, but they have an uphill battle finding FAs who want to be there. I figured that they might stay under just enough to work a deal like that.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote