Probably not given NY's regional and local broadcast contracts. I don't know.Do you think the Spurs have made more money than the Knicks over the past decade?
It depends on how far before Duncan you go. In the 8 years before his arrival, the Spurs averaged 50 wins a year, 55 if you take out the year before TD when half the team was hurt. The six years prior to David Robinson's arrival, they averaged 32 including 5 of the 6 losing seasons in franchise history. There is your mediocrity....it happened once...it can happen again. Enjoy this era of Spurs basketball while you can.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.
Probably not given NY's regional and local broadcast contracts. I don't know.Do you think the Spurs have made more money than the Knicks over the past decade?
Depends what you include. Are you including the rise in the value of the franchises or strictly cash flow?
What the is a content er? I was simply saying what the FO's thoughts may be. Thay may see this franchise as a few losing years away from having to find new digs. Man are you incoherent sometimes.
I don't see what you guys mean by being "content" or "settling" either.
Just what the are you going to do? Vote Holt out of office?Stop watching?
Stop going to the games?
![]()
I guess in Marcus' case the answer is to from now until the end of time, but if thats the only thing keeping him from "settling" then I'll be happy to "settle".
TBH, I didn't think about a rise of value being factored in, but if you want to go that route I guess we'd have to factor in the total value of a franchise as opposed to just the rise in value.
Also, the rise in value for the Spurs would probably have occured largely after the first championship because thats when they got the new areana and the new practice facility. Other than that I'm not sure the last 2 championships had a great impact on the value of the franchise.
I think rings help value of the team
Why
because players want to go to teams that have a chance at a le when they get older
I'm a basketball fan, not an investor in Spurs Sports & Entertainment LLC or whatever. I could give a less what their distributions look like for this year and beyond.
As for the vehemence of my opinions, I'm sorry that it has made some here blush. Might as well shut down this forum and set up a redirect to spurs.com if stringent views are too tough for some of you to take.
You're a real tough guy, alright. Everybody's pretty impressed with you.
http://www.spurs.com if it's not in your bookmarks.
THIS IS THE FUNNIEST I HAVE EVER READ.....ALL 4 PAGES......You guys worry too much about the future....A true sports fan roots for his team win or loose....Like Aggies.....Yeah, you know what, we stink it up sometimes....but I'll still be standing....That right there that's a fan....Root for this team as it is now, not for what is going to be. If not then what is the point of truely enjoying a championship season if you can't have the highs and lows. Every championship year we have had a low point, but yet we prevailed. It was when everyone was taking notice of San Antonio did we faulter.....But looky looky NOW....The ES have turned their heads.....And you know what we're gonna do...WIN....We can worry after we've finished polluting our Crusty, Nasty Ass, but sitll OUR ING RIVER, with confetti from the BIGGEST, BADEST, IN CELEBRATION to have ever occured in the great state of Texas......And you know what....MARK CUBAN....you're not INVITED.
You should have stopped right there.
Well thats great. But it doesn't change reality one bit.
Too tough?As for the vehemence of my opinions, I'm sorry that it has made some here blush. Might as well shut down this forum and set up a redirect to spurs.com if stringent views are too tough for some of you to take.What the is "tough" about your view? If you believe so damn hardcore that the Spurs are doing the wrong thing and you're not going to put up with it, then stop watching the Spurs. Boycott them. Of course you won't, so there goes your "toughness".
Dude, you're not tough. You're a whiny who has been repeating the same lame take for the past 2 years while ignoring reality. Tough. HA.
Who's been whining about my "whining" lately? Hmmm....
Deflection.
Anyone, since I'm bored, list me the moves that the Spurs passed on that would have made this team much better but were not made due to money.
You're right. I guess I need to fill up this space with clubby gibberish about God knows what.
Thats not what you're doing?
You think your posts are so great and profound, its funny. You're becoming the Spreewell of the Spurs forum.
Anyone, since I'm bored, list me the moves that the Spurs passed on that would have made this team much better but were not made due to money.
Nah, I think my posts are voicing my opinion, which apparently is not alone in this forum.
If you are looking for "profound" statements in this forum, well, stand back from the laptop.
Anyone, since I'm bored, list me the moves that the Spurs passed on that would have made this team much better but were not made due to money.
it - trade whoever you have to and get high enough to draft kevin durant
Howard, Josh. For starters. The Spurs have opportunities to improve this team if they are willing to take back a contract.
In addition, my complaint is specifically about avoiding contracts for players in the supporting cast that extend past the 2007-08 season. Hence the subject of this thread, "Screw 2008".
Howard had to do with Kidd and nothing to do with 2008. Next.
Which contract would you have wanted extended past 2008? Who would have come here had they been offered a long term contract which they weren't offered?
Spurs might've had Pietrus if they took on Adonal Foyle's contract.
There are players out there you can have for expiring contracts (like say a Troy Murphy) that only make sense for championship contending teams who don't care if they are paying too much money for someone in 2012.
The Spurs should feel like that, but they don't. Is it because they want to win after Tim is gone ... or is it because they are on orders to keep the value of the franchise as high as possible?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)