So if Hill doesn't perform, it's Vaughn's fault?
Because of the limitations of the salary cap, the appeal of the team to free agents (or arguable lack thereof), and the at ude preferences of the FO, the rotation of the PG position behind Parker has been composed primarily of rookies and/or older vets the past several years.
That's why the Spurs have been in the habit of carrying three point guards. The respective limitations of rookies and/or aging vets pretty much require that the team have an 'insurance policy' on hand if the primary backup is not having a good game or if Parker is injured.
If you're going to about the current situation, you might as well be as angry with Parker for not being indestructible as you are with Vaughn.
Or with the Big Three for taking up so much of the cap space.
Or with those free agents who don't find San Antonio an attractive destination.
Or with Udrih for not providing what the Spurs needed.
Or with Pop and the FO for being what they are.
Because laying it all at Vaughn's doorstep is frankly ridiculous.
Then research on such prospects. Look at how much they make, their contract status.
Look as well at the Spurs' salary cap situation. How much can they offer? Given the seeming emphasis on the 2010 plan, how long a contract can they offer without screwing that plan up?
Back up your takes, instead of just bringing the same over and over.
Case in point.

Reply With Quote
