It makes plenty of sense.
What has Tony Parker done to put us over the top?
Gee, do you really think that Payton demands the ball to be effective, timvp? Why would the best point guard of our time need the ball to be effective?
If Parker was so d@mn good, we could try to get him back when he'd become a free agent. No one said we had to give Payton an extension or re-sign him this summer. The Sonics didn't and Milwaukee won't
Payton > Rose + Parker
Smart basketball people know that if you can complement your only star with another star at the cost of an unproven drfat selection and three bench guys, you do it.
Suckas.
Baseline that was a great post. very eloquent. I totally agree.
IF we win the le this year that will be listed by 97% of the people who know basketball as a blessing that it didn't happen (the other 3% had the idea and were too stubborn to admit it). Best possible situation with that trade (although highly unlikely with DRob, MBryant and Ferry guarding Shaq) is we win 2 rings with an ageing team. If we win this year we have a YOUNG team with huge salary space looking like a dynasty.
Gost and Admiral, do you really think the Spurs win a le last year with Mark Bryant and Danny Ferry as their only other bigs aside from Duncan? The way you two underestimate what Rose does for this team is ridiculous.
Payton gave his team 5 more points and 3 more assists than Parker. Is that worth sacrificing the the 10 points and 6 1/2 boards Malik gives the Spurs as well as the team's whole future? Is that worth having Danny Ferry and Kevin Willis as your only other bigs, or paying Keon Clark when they have a shot at Kidd, Jermaine O'Neal, or Odom?
I don't get this whole argument. Everytime I say I want Kidd you about needing a big but now that frontcourt doesn't matter at all to get a guy with 2 more years left like Payton?
If the Spurs have 1998 or 1999 David Robinson you make that trade in a second. The sad fact is that David isn't the player he was 4-5 years ago and he's been a role player sine 2000-01.
Payton + Duncan + DRob for 25 minutes + no bench < Shaq + Kobe + Fisher + Phil Jackson + championship supporting cast
Why do you act like Parker was nothing in 2001. Pop obviously saw that he was going to be a of a player or he would have probably made that trade. Looking back how was he wrong to pass on it? Parker's a top-10 point guard with tons of potential. After he made Rose and Jax into effective players how can you question his eye for talent?
base and pfc, those are great points. We very well may win it all this year without adding that superstar this summer.
I just am an impatient person that saw an opportunity to add a superstar to the Twin Towers duo that got us a le in 1999.
Robinson retires this summer and we wouldn't have to re-sign Payton this summer either.
That would mean even more money off the books this summer than we are slated for now.
Read.Gee, do you really think that Payton demands the ball to be effective, timvp? Why would the best point guard of our time need the ball to be effective?
If Payton and Duncan both need the ball 75% of the time to be effective, how can they both be effective on the same team? Payton is a ball-hawk. Period.
Re-read.
I think it still remains to be seen. But I would rather win now and be in a position to win later than just win now and be screwed after that.What has Tony Parker done to put us over the top?
[qiuote]What has Tony Parker done to put us over the top?[/quote]
Raised his scoring average to 15.5ppg on 46% shooting. Tony Parker is the reason this team won 60 games, and he's the reason this team has a legit shot at a le. He's played the second star since the start of 2003. He's done well against (and outplayed many of ) every elite point in the game except Marbury. After this series I thi,kn we'll see the Tony Parker we saw the second half of this season.
How can someone be so blinded by a fantasy about GP that they can't see what Tony Parker accomplished this season?
Okay, so who would you guys have traded Parker for? Anyone?
You're dying here, Admiral. Your reason for making that trade assumed a superstar DRob, which the Spurs haven't had since 1999-2000. A bunch of good players for a great one is almost always a good deal unless it's for someone at the end of the road like Payton. Do you really think the Spurs could fill a championship roster in two seasons with no money to spend the first, no bench, no SG, and with David injured in crucial periods? Payton and Duncan together aren't going to score 95 a game.
kobe
You're dying here, Admiral. Your reason for making that trade assumed a superstar DRob, which the Spurs haven't had since 1999-2000. A bunch of good players for a great one is almost always a good deal unless it's for someone at the end of the road like Payton. Do you really think the Spurs could fill a championship roster in two seasons with no money to spend the first, no bench, no SG, and with David injured in crucial periods? Payton and Duncan together aren't going to score 95 a game. -baseline bum
The last year I would consider DRob a star would be 1999-2000, when he averaged 18 and 10. However, if it makes you feel better I will not mention him again.
Imagine it's the summer of 2001, and the Payton deal is on the table...
Things you KNOW:
1. By accepting the offer, Payton will definitely be a Spur.
2. Duncan is definitely a Spur for several more years.
3. Malik Rose, Tony Parker, and Antonio Daniels have varying degrees of potential.
Things you DO NOT know:
1. Whether Rose, Parker, and Daniels will continue to improve and fulfill their potential.
2. If Duncan will re-sign when his current contract is up.
3. If Parker will re-sign when his rookie contract is up.
We often read about businesses that go under because they overestimated their potential for success to shareholders. The Spurs had a chance to put their money on something definite. Instead, they chose to gamble on potential and hope for the best despite the tangible assets they had in their possession. From a business standpoint, as well as a common sense standpoint, that was not the right move to make.
It is still amazing how so many Spurs fans assume that every player wants to end his career in San Antonio.
Pop obviously saw something he liked in Parker. How can you call him out for not making that trade when he's been shown to be right by the quality of Parker's play? You act like Parker was just some lucky pick that no one saw developing into a legit player. The front office knew better and they were right.
I agree with a lot of these takes.. I am all about Scoreboard..
I honestly don't care about charities, the off court , the nice guy crap, the bandwagon, the manu mania, etc. etc..
If you can't get it done whether player or coach, then gtfo.. because once you are gone, I probably won't remember you anyway and you will be a flash in the past..
Honestly, Tim Duncan equals at least 50 wins. so anyone around him is going to benefit from him alone. So to get 60+ and win a championship you have to have real players.. not damn potential...
I hate this time of the year sometimes... It seems this series should have been over along time ago if it wasn't for potential....
Word.
Screw the potential then...
Rose + Parker > Payton + no decent big next to Duncan for 25 minutes every game
Admiral, with the rookie contracts how they are, it is pretty hard not to re-sign a player who you want.
Re-signing Parker will not be a problem.
Payton is a good player, but not worth mortgaging your future for.
The point is of course now we have the benifit of hindsight. We know now that TP is a star and possible superstar, we know how valuable Malik is, we see Payton slipping ... If TP had been a bust and Malik also we could look back and say "Why the didn't we make that trade?!?!" or others could say "I was right!! told you so!!!". BUT Everything that the front office assumed would happen did 2 fold -- that's why they didn't make the trade, that's why many here didn't want to make the trade. At least on this one, some people can pretty much say now we were right (that moves to 99.9% if we win the le this year).
No way this team does jack without Rose. Who the F is the starting 2, Jaren Jackson? I'm tired of these damn fantasies. It's a team game mofos.
You Parker Bros. don't realize that the future is now. If we're always looking at a year or two down the road, when will we ever win again?
And I'm sick of the dopes who say Payton is all done. He had his best season as a pro last year. Look at some statistics and read some old articles on Payton before you make absurd comments like that.
And timvp, your insistance that Payton is a ballhawk is ludicrous. Of course Payton demmands touches. That's why he's a superstar. Payton routinely registers double-digit assists that young PArker can only aspire to someday.
No one has answered my question. If you wouldn't have traded Parker plus bench players for Payton, who would you have traded him for? This not a loaded question; I am simply curious to know what value you placed on Parker back in the summer of 2001, given our cap situation, existing players, etc.
Ghost:
Answer and Question.Read.
If Payton and Duncan both need the ball 75% of the time to be effective, how can they both be effective on the same team? Payton is a ball-hawk. Period.
Re-read.
Admiral, there were no other options on the table that would have made sense. Payton was the best player available at the time, but that trade wasn’t logical.
Making up fac ious trades does no good. What do you want me to say … Michael Jordan and a pair of pink boxers from Isaih Thomas' 1989 wardrobe for Parker and company?
The issue is not whether we will be able to re-sign Parker, but whether or not he will WANT to be here. I don't want Kidd - that's how highly I think of Parker - but if Kidd does sign here, Parker would be dumb not to strongly consider leaving.Admiral, with the rookie contracts how they are, it is pretty hard not to re-sign a player who you want.
Re-signing Parker will not be a problem.
Payton is a good player, but not worth mortgaging your future for. -timvp
As for the future, I am thrilled that we have one. The Spurs have done a great job finding diamonds in the rough, and we would obviously not be nearly as good without Rose, Jackson, Parker, etc. I really like these players, but still have a hard time understanding why we turned down the Payton deal back then, not knowing what we know now.
I don't agree with taking the present for granted just to possibly have a bright future. Trading for Payton was a guarantee. Free agency is not.
Admiral...timvp speaks for me. Also see my previous Ferarri/Corvette/truck analogy.
Parker is a guarantee. Payton is one the backside of his career.
Just because you didn't know the upside of a player like Parker, doesn't change the factors of the trade back then. The Spurs knew they had something special. So did the Sonics. That is why they wanted Parker so badly.
I'll repeat -- the Spurs can keep Parker no matter what. Nowadays it's almost impossible to get out of the rookie contracts because the players become a restricted free-agent at the end of the term.
If Payton was not logical then, then I really don't see how signing Kidd with our hard-earned cap room is logical now.Admiral, there were no other options on the table that would have made sense. Payton was the best player available at the time, but that trade wasn’t logical. -timvp
By the way, this board is SO much better than WOAI! We actually have intelligent discussion going! Thanks again Kori and timothyvp for bringing back the old school spursreport.com style board and making it even better.2
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote