Reply With Quote
Why? Why does there have to be a significant drop-off? Why do fans consistenly doubt Tony's ability to take his game to the next level, to lead a team, to be the focus of defenses? He's 24 yrs old and has improved every year in this league.
That's a pretty cynical take on the future of the Spurs. One that I disagree with, mainly because Tony Parker is still here and young.
There will be no need to trade him for prospects if some of the prospects work out. I'm not saying the Spurs FO will strike gold every time, but they have a decent record of judging talent. Of Scola, Butler, Mahinmi, Javtokas, White, and whomever the Spurs get in 07/08 drafts, some of those prospects have to work out, right? You're not that pessimistic about the Spurs drafts are you? Then there's the cap space. Relax man, the Spurs may not be champions every year, but if the Spurs play it right, they can be in the conversation even AFTER Tim and Manu's decline.
Why? Why does there have to be a significant drop-off? Why do fans consistenly doubt Tony's ability to take his game to the next level, to lead a team, to be the focus of defenses? He's 24 yrs old and has improved every year in this league.
The Spurs can make a minor/short-term trade to shore up one of their problems w/o sacraficing the future cap space and prospects. Williams' contract can net a rebounder (Ely?) or backup PG (Boykins?). If neither deal gets done, Pop is just going to have to motivate guys like Horry, Finley, Barry, and Bowen to give it one last push before they start to collect social security and let the chips fall where they will. The Spurs are capable of playing lockdown defense and shooting lights-out from 3pt. They just have to have a fire lit under their asses. Not saying they're gonna win as presently constructed, but it IS possible.
EDIT: On the topic of "projects". I'd hardly call Scola a project. That kid could come over next year and start alongside Duncan. With him, Butler, and Mahinmi as potential bigs for the future, one of them should work out for the long term. On the wing there's White, and then the matter of four potential picks in what might be the deepest draft of this century....I wouldn't count the Spurs out just yet.
Last edited by AFBlue; 01-11-2007 at 11:38 AM.
Dude did you take the sig out on purpose? That's just wrong!
I think you missed the point. The Spurs shouldn't just "stand pat", but they also shouldn't make rash decisions based on a half-season of less-than-stellar play against top echelon teams. Those rash decisions could condemn any chance of a future post-Duncan.
I see you're point, and TIMVPs and a bunch of others on this thread. You don't want the Spurs to remain idle because of the possibility to contend 5 years down the road when the opportunity to win is staring them in the face. But getting (insert name here) doesn't guarantee anything.
Basically, my point of view is that we could be sitting here in summer of '08 saying "Damn, I can't believe we took on ______ contract, blew our chances of getting ______ this summer, and STILL didn't win a championship the past two years."
There's nothing rash about adding Maggette. He's a better player than either Barry or Beno, he'd be our #2 rebounder the moment he stepped foot on the court, and his contract is up at the same time as Brent and Beno's would have been.I think you missed the point. The Spurs shouldn't just "stand pat", but they also shouldn't make rash decisions based on a half-season of less-than-stellar play against top echelon teams. Those rash decisions could condemn any chance of a future post-Duncan.
We have nine (9) players on our team over the age of 30. We need to get younger. I think it's fairly evident that the youth in Dallas and Phoenix is our achilles heel.
In the past, it typically took a playoff beat down for Pop to get the picture and make changes. And yet that happened, and we did little this off-season outside of signing some project bigs.
Cap space in '08 is fool's gold, the Spurs should have already figured that out from past failed pursuits of Kidd, O'Neal, Webber, etc. They need to make moves through the draft and/or trades.
You've got a team willing to send us a younger perimeter player that is actually pretty good at rebounding and FT shooting in exchange for arguably two of our worst rotation players (come playoff time).
What's the hold up?
It's ridiculous, and a downright insult to the city of SA, Spurs fans, and everyone currently on the team if they are going to sit on their hands for the rest of the Tim Duncan era. That's pathetic.
I agree that getting (insert name here) doesn't guarantee anything, but I can guarantee that us standing pat with this current squad guarantees no ring. Not this year, not the rest of Tim's career, unless some changes are made.
As much as Pop talks about Tim being his guy and all that crap, Pop is doing nothing but selling Duncan out if they are going to go down this road of cap space in '08 (which is probably to sell the team).
Fans worry.
The front office is "concerned." But the reason the Spurs are hesitant to make rash moves is because they understand that the Spurs are still in the discussion. I'm not saying the Spurs won't make a move, just that you're "at all" is a bit of an overreaction.
Aggie Hoopsfan! Dallas's youth is killing us so much that we've lost two games against them by a combined 8 points. We lost a series against them last season which could've gone either way, esp. that Game 7. If that's killing us, then I'm clueless.
And Phoenix, we've played them once this season and we won. Last time we played them in the playoffs we nearly swept them and their killer youth.
Remember folks, experience beats youth in sports, that's a proven fact. Although, too old is never a good thing in sports.
This current Spurs team is good enough to eliminate both Dallas and Phoenix in a playoff series. No need to panic in January. Let's panic if the Spurs are 44-38 after 82 games.
I'm actually a proponent of the Maggette trade, because of his reasonable contract and potential short-term meaning to this team offensively. But you're making two assumptions:
1. The Clips will pull the trigger on Barry + Beno OR Bonner with no draft picks included.
2. Maggette will opt out of his $7M+ contract in summer '08.
Those are two big assumptions.
On the first assumption, my hesitation, and I think the Spurs share it, is giving up a different prospect and/or '07 draft picks.
On the second assumption, if he comes in and plays spectacularly then he'll opt out for sure. But, if he's a dissapointment and injury-prone, he could take the guaranteed $7M+ and chill on the bench at which point his contract becomes an Eric Williams-type deal (much less valuable) and the Spurs miss out on significant cap space.
Not sure if those things happen, but they could. And it's worth taking the time to evaluate the risks...
BTW, there's no need to call me stupid, just because I've got a different point of view.
The smartest post on the Maggette situation. There is absolutely no indication the Clippers would have done the Barry/Udrih trade without a first round pick. That pick could have been a future first, but by all accounts the Clippers were asking for THREE things.
And insisting that Maggette will opt out of his contract in the summer of '08 is ludicrous.
Agree with Marcus Bryant. I've been saying this for a couple years now. The spurs cannot just stand pat because they won a couple years back or lost a close series to Dallas. The other teams won't stay the same and will improve and pass them out with more talent.
Many here did not want many changes and felt the spurs would be good enough to keep the roster basically the same with the exception of a minor change or two but now you are seeing how that thinking was not smart.
Duncan Parker and Manu with not much else around them will not be enough and it will be like the Gervin years all over again for Duncan, good regular season records but not good enough to get to another championship. Then spurs need to try to win as many as they can while duncan is in his prime because the opportunity will close fast after he is no longer a top player in the league.
Tim is not "in his prime" as his numbers have steadily declined over the past few years. He is no longer the dominant PF in the league. Good, but not dominant.
You could say his stats are down because he now has two stalwart sidekicks who take up the slack, but anyone looking at his play knows it has deteriorated. We wouldn't be even a playoff team without their play.
He can still have great moments, and I pray he does so in the playoffs, but he's clearly not the Duncan of 1999 or 2003.
uh, I beg to differ. Tim is still in his prime, hes just bored of the regular season. Big men have their prime in their 30's.
God damn. Marcus might as well walk around Times Square with a sandwich board that says the world ends in 2008. Its the same old story with the ing about it.
In a perfect world, the only goals the Spurs had would revolve around doing what it takes to win a championship. But the reality is that this is a small market with a limited source of incoming funds. And don't forget that Holt is not the sole owner in this franchise. It is an ownership group. That we've had a 3 championships to date and that we're still in the hunt for more is a damn good thing. But when you're dealing with a business of this nature then I can't really fault the ownership for trying to maintain flexibility in the long term.
You don't have to like it. Most of us don't. But it is what it is. The fact is that this franchise will never be run on a strictly basketball basis and money will always play a factor. We're not the NYK, and that self control is probably a good thing with more positive results than negative results. If you think about it, its a lot harder to get out of the mistakes you make when you sign a bad contract, than it is to fix the mistakes you make when you pass on a player.
settling.
T Park, this current roster isn't getting it done
We don't need to blow up the team or do any sort of major overhaul, but a trade is definitely in order.
Granted, it's still January, this team is still a step or two behind Dallas
and unless you're satisfied with a 2nd round exit, we'll need to add another piece
You are given two options:
1. The San Antonio Spurs will be an elite (top 5) team over the next decade, but never win a championship.
2. The San Antonio Spurs will have a 33% chance of winning at least one championship over the next three years, and then will be mediocre for the next seven.
Assume these are the only options available. Which one would you take?
That's exactly what I was saying in my 2nd from last post
I go for 1 championship in the next 3 years, and tur to mediocrity as oppose to 10 seasons of being a top 5 team that always comes up short after strong expectations
The front office may see it more this way:
1. The San Antonio Spurs will be a top team (top 5-10) over the next decade, maybe or maybe not competing for a championship but likely competing for playoffs.
2. The San Antonio Spurs bankroll a fairly risky run for the championship in the next 2 years while sacrificing long-term flexibility, risking a big fall and lottery teams in the next 3-5 years, therefore raising the specter of decreased fan interest and the need to sell or move the team.
Not that I see it that way, but that the front office perhaps does. They are thinking of operations down the road. Would you risk the team having to relocate for a slightly better chance at a championship this year?
I agree with this. The only thing with the Spurs, call it luck, good management, or both, is that when this team has been down it's never lasted too long. The lag between the George Gervin era and the David Robinson era is the only down time in the franchise's history.
I don't see 7 years of frustration in the Spurs future even if they decided to go for it now.
The question for the fan is:
Do you really want to watch a team that doesn't have the chance to win a championship? Do Spurs fans really want to become Texas Rangers fans - cheering for a team that is decent but never great year in and year out? I'd rather the Spurs strive for greatness now, then tank about 3 or 4 years in a row and see what hotshot HS or college kids come along to rebuild off of. Or we could become the Boston Celtics...
The spurs have done nothing in acquiring good talent through a trade in years. The couple of trades they managed to pull off, the players lasted not more than a year or so. And forget about waiting on getting top free agents. The spurs don't have a good track record there either.
They have drafted well and are living solely on their drafts and the lottery luck to get the 1'st pick when Duncan was available. There have been many good players that have been traded the last few years and the spurs haven't managed to get anyone other then over the hill types or unproven projects or players they give up on after one year.
Last edited by rascal; 01-11-2007 at 09:11 PM.
Are we playing horseshoes, or basketball? A loss is a loss. Saying we're close is fool's gold. It's the same stupid ass fool's gold logic that our front office used this past summer.Gummi
Aggie Hoopsfan! Dallas's youth is killing us so much that we've lost two games against them by a combined 8 points. We lost a series against them last season which could've gone either way, esp. that Game 7. If that's killing us, then I'm clueless.
Dallas is *improving*. Avery is in Pop's head. And they've got the confidence of knowing they can come into the SBC and win games that matter.
Maybe it'll take us getting our asses handed to us three times, kinda like the Lakers did, for some folks (including the front office) to get a ing clue...
Same thing, they've improved, and in the playoffs they'd be peaking. Amare is still just getting back.And Phoenix, we've played them once this season and we won. Last time we played them in the playoffs we nearly swept them and their killer youth.
Experience beats youth? Sure didn't help us out when Terry Porter was falling on his ass and we were getting beat by a bunch of young Lakers surrounding Shaq...Remember folks, experience beats youth in sports, that's a proven fact. Although, too old is never a good thing in sports.
Experience beats youth? That's why Dallas won out against us last year, right?
No one's panicking. We are recognizing the pretty damn obvious shortcoming in this squad at a time in the season (prior to the trade deadline) when the front office can do something about it.No need to panic in January. Let's panic if the Spurs are 44-38 after 82 games.
After 82 games it's too late to panic. By then we'll be ed with no way of remedying the problem before going into the playoffs (or the players will already be making tee time reservations at that point).
1. They make a lot more winning a le than 'competing for the playoffs'.
2. This is such bull . Tim is 30. Duncan's got arguably 4-5 more years of great-good ball left in him.
Even looking 2-3 years down the road is dumb. You've got the best PF of all time, and one of the top players of all time. You don't ing pack it in and worry about 2012. that. And anyone who thinks that.
Being in position to win a championship is a rarity. , look how many years it took for the Spurs to win one, and that was with guys like Gervin and Robinson coming along.
It took a lot of luck for the Spurs to land Tim Duncan. There's no guarantee that the Spurs will get another transcendent, first ballot HOFer and bonafide MVP ever again in their franchise's future.
But they've got one now, and should be trying to do everything possible to win in the rest of the Tim Duncan era.
If they're going to pack it in, may as well just trade Tim, Manu, and Parker now and start building for 2016.
, I hate the content ers on this forum. I want people like you competing with my company for business, not being content fans of my sports team that defend a piss poor front office that can't (or won't) step up to do what it takes to try to win a couple more rings before #21 retires.
I disagree #1 is a feasible option. There is no way for the front office to say that they want to be an elite team but that they know that they won't have a shot to win a le. That just doesn't add up.
You know, the Spurs are one Dirk knee injury from once again being the front runners for the le. As it stands, they aren't very far behind being the front runners right now, and they do have a decent chance to win the le this year with the current roster as it is.
Theres no such thing as making a move that makes you a lock to win the le. You can only give yourself a better chance. And while I agree certain moves right now might give them a better chance to win in the next 2 years, I can't fault them for trying to keep long term flexibility in the plan as well. For one, I'm not sure what moves they could have made other than sign a few players like Devin Brown and pay a bit more by keeping a Malik Rose. What moves are they passing up that somehow give us a much better chance to win the le?
Anyhow, I'm moving off my original point that the way you phrased your question was flawed because the front office hasn't choosen to not win championships.
The truth is that the NBA isn't run like a fantasy league and there are considerations outside of basketball. While Marcus and other may disagree, I don't see as accepting that and still being happy that the Spurs are in a position to compete for a le as settling. This is not mediocrity. Have Spurs fans forgotten what it was like before Tim Duncan got here? That was mediocrity.
Prove that statement. That right there is a huge part of your argument and I'd love to see you prove it.
I have a question for you all:
Do you think the Spurs have made more money than the Knicks over the past decade?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions