Reply With Quote
I hope we don't reach for Dudley in the first round. That'd be disappointing. Later, maybe, but he's as athletic as Oberto.
DE has us taking Dudley in their latest mock. As I have expressed alreay in this thread, I think he would be a great fit in the Spurs sytem. I know he has some limitations athletically, but I think in the right sytem, he would be a great fit. Good rebounder, can shoot the 3, very unselfish, decent defender, and a great team leader with a great at ude. Although, I still love Byars and bellinelli
I hope we don't reach for Dudley in the first round. That'd be disappointing. Later, maybe, but he's as athletic as Oberto.
Given the Spurs needs, I'd probably take McGuire (Athlete, effective defender, rebounder, size, possible small ball PF, good passing too), Almond (Sweet stroke), Rush (everything but size, but considering what the other Rush brothers [2 busts, kareem and Jaron, both with character questions] have done makes me worry), in that order... I'd stay away from Tucker; he plays like a massively undersized PF. Stuckey is really a PG/SG hybrid. That isn't a hole I like plugging with a rookie, especially, because I am sure that Pop has no interest in anything but a reliable vet at that spot...
Last edited by pad300; 05-14-2007 at 04:58 PM. Reason: Typos everywhere
I'd take Stuckey as a back-up PG if available at 33.
Rush's brothers successes or failures should have nothing to do with his evaluation. I suppose you'd pass on Horace Grant because Harvey was less than good?
Almond, like most shooters, has less than stellar defensive intensity.
McGuire would be good. I'd pick him if Rush were gone (he probably will be).
I wouldn't object to Stuckey there, but if Pop won't ever use him, it's pointless.
My concerns about Rush are character. This comes in part from your home and family environment. We've seen that 2 kids coming from that home and that family couldn't handle the NBA (all 3 are physically gifted enough). I'm not sure I want to bet on the 3ed kid having what it takes.
Almond is iffey, but they said much the same things about Finley, and he turned out real well. Almond can score, and he's not just a shooter - he got to the FT line a lot. He'll either play D, or sit. We have had problems with defensive intensity before - Barry, Finley, Hedon't. Each of them had at least learned to put in the effort (not play defense well, but at least try HARD) by the end of the 1st year...
That doesn't make any sense to pass on Rush for faimly reasons. If we were looking at faimly backgrounds as a factor, then probably 75% would have never been drafted. Rush is going to be a good (not a star) sg on the NBA level. The guy has done nothing wrong while at Kansas and has worked his butt off to become a quality defensive player on that level.
Anyone that lasts until the end of the first round is going to have some flaws...
Rush is passive and lacks consistency
Stuckey hasn't done it on a big stage
McGuire is still developing his shot
And so on and so forth....there are plenty of reasons why the Spurs could go away from any of the players above, but there's also plenty of reasons why I would be perfectly happy with them taking any one of them.
Another combo guard is Gabe Pruitt. I think the idea of drafting a combo guard isn't all that bad because they would get the opportunity to steal some minutes at backup PG, and if they performed well enough at SG, it could open up the opportunity for the Spurs to trade Barry.
Pad, it's not that Pop refuses to play Beno because he's a young guy...it's because he sucks. I think if the PG plays well, he would overtake Vaughn (or whatever veteran FA is signed).
That I have trouble with. Not just this year (06-07), but last year(05-06). In Beno's 1st year (04-05), we had no other back-up pg (Wilks doesn't count). Beno wasn't bad that year, he was still confident and trying. He took a nosedive in the finals, but it was recoverable. Then we brought in Nick "the not so Quick" for next year. We had a veteran back-up PG. Who got the minutes all year (and in the playoffs. I still get sick to my stomach thinking about the Dallas series)- Nick. Who sucked all year - Nick. Who did not suck when he got to play (PER 17.3 as PG) - Beno. As a result - 1) No Championship 2) Beno lost all confidence. This year, we have Vaughn. Who took the position over - Vaughn. Yeah, Beno sucked this year, but Vaughn wasn't that much better
as a PG
Beno Vaughn
PER 12.6 11.7
Opp PER 16.8 16.8
Net PER -4.2 -5.1
Ass/48 7.5 8.7
To/48 3.1 2.7
EFG% 43.1 41.5
Net takeaway - statistically they are essentially the same player. But Beno lost the coaches confidence (and with it his own). And the Vet took over the position. Pop clearly favors veterans at the PG slot. Look at Tony's early years. Pop hooked him out for any error. Pop doesn't believe in letting the kids learn by doing at the PG spot, and its the only way they can. Tony only got enough minutes to develop, because there was no alternative... At backup PG, there is always going to be an alternative, so drafting a rookie into that spot, where he won't develop, is a waste of time.
Beno is not going to get time again as a Spur. He'll be gone this summer. It's not that Pop won't play a young point guard, but that Beno lost all confidence and needs a change of scenery.
Yeah, I certainly think Beno's gone. But I don't think that another young PG will get a fairer shot. Therefore, it's really pointless drafting one...
First news in Pau's local newspaper :
.Ian Mahinmi a formulé le souhait de rejoindre " au plus tôt la NBA " et les San Antonio Spurs qui l'ont drafté. Mais il semblerait que la franchise texane désire le laisser en couveuse douze mois de plus, dans une grande formation européenne
Translation : Mahinmi would like to sign with SA this summer while Spurs would like to let him one more year in a euro top team.
(This thread was 14 pages back!!!)
Anyway, after Game 5, Spurs/Suns, it's apparently Jacque Vaughn is as bad as Nick Van Exel, and that the Spurs badly need a talented big man next to Duncan.
Any reason to look at these positions ahead of a SF?
Yes, yes, and yes. I think the SPurs have enough at the 2-3 at least for next year, but your right, after watching last game, the Spurs def need a back up point, Vaughn is horrible. And our bigs cant board or score, so I think that would also be a great future investment for Timmy, maybe a Fazekas or Gasol
I was the biggest proponent of snagging a PG prior to the trade deadline and was flat-pissed when a deal didn't get done. Vaughn has been effective in spots, but I've NEVER thought of him as more than a third-string type.
I think if a talented combo guard like Stuckey or Pruitt fell to them at 28 or 33, they should pull the trigger. The "other" big situation at least has a few potential options (Butler, Scola, Bonner, etc.), and the combo forward could be addressed with a trade or with the other pick possibly.
I think the Spurs MUST go out and get two things this off-season. The first is a legit combo forward and the second is a legit backup PG. Again, I'm not as worried about the "other" big situation because the Spurs have potential options.
nash cooks up most reserve pgs. not saying vaughn is the answer (he isn't), but... it would be great to have someone more effective offensively.
So you're all hoping that a rookie PG, drafted with a late first or early second, will be able to be a quite good backup PG in playoffs ?
You're very optimistic : PG in one of the hardest spot in nba and PG during playoffs is even harder. If you're not convinced by that, check what Marcus Williams, who has had a good rookie season, does with Nets.
If you want a better backup PG for next year than Vaughn, free agency or a trade is the solution. A rookie PG will likely be as bad/average than Vaughn. I have nothing against drafting a PG but this is more a solution for the 08-09 year and even if Spurs draft a PG this year, they will need to have a reliable PG (Vaughn or someone better).
I agree with Bruno, but not enough to counsel against drafting a PG. He's right that it's unlikely to see that guy do anything in the playoffs. Only a guy like Conley or Law could you expect to weather the pressure, although I wouldn't be surprised to see a guy like Koponen or someone else turn out to handle it fairly quickly.
This all said, it does look likely that Stuckey, Pruitt (if he stays), Koponen, and others will all be there with the 33. Judging by what PG/combo guards will be there versus what big men will be there, I'd judge the PGs possibly better talented. Eh, who knows.
All that said, I don't know what veteran PGs are out there and available. There are the Clippers, Bucks and Hawks that will possibly vaccuum up the more expensive ones (Billups, Mo Williams), but beyond that, I don't know.
http://www.shamsports.com/content/pa...byposition.jsp
There are very few good backup PG available in the free agency this year.
The only candidates are
Charlie Bell (restricted and likely too expensive).
Steve Blake (lot of teams are interested)
Earl Boykins (player option, not sure he will opt out)
Brevin Knight (team option)
Smush Parker
Chucky Atkins
Jannero Pargo
We will see what will happen but it's far from sure that Spurs will have a better backup PG than Vaughn next year.
It's doubtful. I'd take Atkins, possibly Pargo. Rumors have it Chris Duhon is available, but he's not been good lately. Nobody else looks better than Vaughn - I'd just as soon draft a guy in the early second and see if he pans out. We can maybe get by with him + Vaughn one more year, then see if he grows more into it.
Veteran back-up point guard... vanishing breed? Or just a really expensive one, looking at from Derek Fisher to Earl Watson?
We're probably going to try to work a trade for the backup point.
I'm not sure at all that Duhon, Atkins or Pargo are better than Vaughn.
A trade is maybe the only solution to get a good backup PG.
They're more expensive, that's for sure (Duhon/Atkins).
Gary Payton! He'll be available!
Does trading for a back-up make sense? What back-up? From where? Who do we trade for him? I can't envision the Spurs spending too much on a back-up player when they're pennypinching the lux tax as it is. And why trade for a point guard when, all along, Brent Barry could have done it for you (admittedly not that great on defense)?
When was the last time anyone called a Spur trade?Does trading for a back-up make sense? What back-up? From where? Who do we trade for him?
We're 1001 posts into a thread about draft picks, when it's just as likely the Spurs don't draft anyone we've mentioned.
Ah, it wasn't a rhetorical question. I was hoping someone would say it was me.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
