Reply With Quote
That list is weak compared with what other teams have done with trades and fa signings.
I believe Tim Duncan was a free agent in 1999. I'm going to have to go with him. By a long shot.
That list is weak compared with what other teams have done with trades and fa signings.
No doubt the spurs tanked to get Duncan. Robinson could have come back from an injury but didn't play the rest of the year.
And I was glad they tanked. I wanted them to lose every game that year.
They win in 2003 without Bowen. Robinson and Duncan were too tough defensively on the inside and there were no great teams that year.
Hypothesis: having large amounts of cap space makes it easier to make big free agent signings. In the Duncan era, the Spurs had Duncan + Robinson, then Duncan + Parker + Ginobili. There was really only one year when we could have signed anyone significant.
Secondary hypothesis: it's easier to sign a bunch of extra free agents if you are completely indifferent to the luxury tax. You just go out and sign a max midlevel deal every year and let the contracts pile up.
Hypothesis: it's easier to make big, splashy trades if you have a roster full of big-name players that fit poorly together -- this is what gives you trade bait other teams want. This is aided by poorly considered free agent signings of flashy players, or by having a lot of lottery picks that produce name players that underperform.
Secondary hypothesis: it's easier to make big, splashy trades if you are completely indifferent to the luxury tax, and don't mind taking on horrible contracts.
The Spurs have rarely been in a good natural position to make high-impact trades and free agent signings. A few exceptional teams have gotten significantly better through trades or free agent signings despite lacking any natural advantages in these areas.
If your point is that the Spurs are not one of these few, exceptional franchises with respect to trades and signings, I agree. They are an everage team with respect to FAs and trades -- no towering successes, no epic disasters. The fact that they are average in these areas and have had remarkable success with consistently horrible draft position has been enough to make them one of the best front offices in basketball.
I imagine that after Duncan retires, the FO will have a much freer hand to demonstrate what they can do when they get lottery picks and have a lot of cap space.
They HAD DRob and Duncan in 2001, and Kobe dunked all OVER their asses. Bad take. But then I expect that from you, weak link.
Robinson recovered from his broken foot, but the injury that originally shelved him, the sports hernia, led to the back problems that dogged him for the rest of his career. He wasn't better in March, he NEVER got better. But then, I think you want to see them lose just to reinforce your negative bull .
And what has that gotten them? New York signs someone EVERY YEAR, and they're trash on a stick.
Hey jackass I wanted them to lose to have a better chance at getting Duncan. But you were such a jackass you were rooting for meaningless wins.
And if you believe Robinson wasn't healthy enough to play your clueless.
Bruce Bowen without a doubt. He was acquired with a relatively low contract, and he has performed at an all-star level, and then he re did his current deal to help obtain FA. Can't beat that. And hopefully he can maintain his excellence for another year or 2.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
