Reply With Quote
They lost a guy good enough to be their backup swing over chump change in the NBA. I am not giving up anything.
I hope for Devin's sake it doesn't happen because I really like him and want to see him succeed, but if he never completely recovers from his back injury, you are going to look stupid.
The only thing we can agree on is that time will tell. If Devin never develops into something more than a 3rd string SG and can be easily replaced for the vet min. or LLE then I am right. If he turns into an All-Star and leader of the Utah Jazz that takes them deep into the Playoffs and commands more than the MLE after his contract is up, then you are right and the Spurs made a terrible decision. The next several years will only prove who is right, but I'm betting that Devin never commands more than the MLE and the Spurs might be better off letting him develop and get playing time under Sloan so they can bring him home in 2 years for less than the MLE to be a solid role player.
They lost a guy good enough to be their backup swing over chump change in the NBA. I am not giving up anything.
If Finley and NVE's knees don't hold up or both leave the team next summer then I guess you'll look pretty stupid.
You started this post with the word, "IF." That says a lot.
Since most of the arguments against retaining Brown center on "if" his back goes out, I think it only fair.
Fine. I'll take my chances with 2 All-Stars with knee injuries vs. 1 unproven role player with a inoperatable back injury.
We'll see who's right.
Not my arguements fella. I haven't assumed that the Spurs were right or wrong on bringing in Finley and Van Exel. I haven't assumed that letting Devin go was wrong or right. I haven't stated anything about Devin's game or his back. All I have been saying is let the season play out and we'll all see. It seems to me you keep trying to argue just so you can add to the 1 million + postings. Maybe you're going for a record.
Fine. I'll take my chances with 2 All-Stars with knee injuries vs. 1 unproven role player with a inoperatable back injury.
We'll see who's right.
Well if they're that good will they stick around for more when the Spurs can't pay them and (presumably) they already have a ring?
I had read the other thread that was locked and tried replying to it as it was locked. I have not read this entire thread yet but I want to make one point for you MB.
The contract was just for 2.5 million like you have said, but it is not just 2.5 when all is said and done and this is a concept that you either cannot seem to grasp or refuse to grasp. It would be Devin's contract that pushes them over the luxery tax limit and thus it would be in essence another approximately 2.5 million in a luxery tax payment because of said contract. It would also be another loss in the lowering of the luxary tax refund or whatever it is called at the end of the year of however much that would be. So we are talking about more than just 5 million for Devin. I know that you keep bringing up Rasho's contract as being a bigger issue to the luxery tax and I say BS. Let me try and put it to you this way, it is like the straw that broke the camel's back. It does not matter that there was straw there before the final one, it just matters about the last starw that did the damage. Thus it does not matter about Rasho's contract because it is already there and nothing can be done about it, but it does matter if the Spurs had signed Devin as his contract would be the one that "broke the camel's back".
Devin is content with the situation that has developed over the summer. Yes, had the Spurs retained his rights, he would remain on a championship caliber team. But, how does that benefit his progress. Yes, Devin would be apart of a very cohesive unit, yet his GROWTH would be diminished due to his role. The situation in Utah is more beneficial to Devin's progress. He will recieve a larger role, which will enable him to develope at an adequete rate under a superb, if not hall of fame coach, in Jerry Sloan. IMO, your assumption of other's finicial greed is over exaggerated.
Senerio: Devin makes remarkable progress while in Utah. He developes into a quality player, averaging 15 points, 5 rebounds, 4 assists per game. His defense continues to progress, but is still in need of improvement. During this time, Utah advances to the playoffs, but fail to avoid a first round exit both times. Devin is offered 6 million by Utah, 8 million by Los Angeles (Clippers), 5 million by the Spurs. Utah is young and making considerable progress, but unfortunately, are far from achieving contender status, similar to a Minnasota team a few years ago. The Clippers, well, their the Clippers. They always have been and always will be. The Spurs have the lowest offer of the three teams contending for Brown's services, but as well, are considered the most capable of winning another championship, hypathetically speaking. Would Devin choose 6 million in Utah, knowing that he may never compete for another championship again, but as well, will be able to pocket an extra million if he chooses to stay? He isn't going to the Clippers, but it was fun while it lasted. Will he choose a Spurs roster, which could use his services, are capable of competing at the highest level, but are only able to offer 5 million, 1 million less than Utah?
Why not pay him the 5 million now? He hasn't developed into a player of that caliber yet, but under Jerry Sloan, and with the proper attention and valuable playing time, he may very well be.
This is Devin's home. I am confident, and was told, that the two parties parted on good terms. Devin understands the situation, which is why he will be back. If Devin had stayed, he would have continued to make 2 million, because his growth would have become stagnant. He would have remained a bench player.
If Devin wishes, but the Spurs cannot afford his services, there is the possibility of a sign-trade. This decision was brilliant. I'm would be surprised if Holt had any influence on this decision, with the exception being financial. Pop and R.C. came up with this are their own. They were unable to find suitors for Brent, Rasho, or both. That being said this was the best available option.
Yes, I am aware that retaining Brown would have pushed them over the lux tax limit, but he clearly would not have been the only contributing factor.
Yes, I am aware that the full economic cost of his contract would have been more than $2.5 mil.
So what? It was a bad basketball decision. Saying that the Spurs would have saved some $ is not a persuasive argument. They can save $ all the time by losing players.
Saying that they don't pay end of the bench players more than the minimum is unpersuasive, given that they have in the recent past.
What matters is the loss in cap and personnel flexibility they will have next summer and the lack of swingman depth this season.
To me, as a fan of Spurs basketball, that is not good.
Just as a side note, I would have liked to keep Devin here because I honestly believe that if his back is completely healed, he will be a really good value to anyone he plays for.
As a fan specifically of Devin's, I think this is the best thing that could have happened to him because he will almost assuradly get a lot more p[aying time than he would here.
Yes, this was probably more of a financial decission than a basketball decission, but the financial side of the house is part of the business of NBA basketball. You only lose that aspect of the business of basketball at the local courst in pickup games.
How about when you are trying to win championships and keep your team at an elite level? That's what I mean by a 'bad basketball decision'. To me, small moves to save a few bucks can come back to bite you over the course of the next few seasons as you are in a prime position to seriously contend for more championships.
With a guy like Brown, you have someone to go to should you lose Finley next summer or he prove ineffective this season. Neither of those possibilities are extreme. If you don't need Brown next summer, then at least you had that option.
Yeah, Brown by himself won't win you a le, but he can definitely help you win some games in the postseason. Also, some here seem to forget that he knocked Barry out of the rotation last season. He's a bit more than just another young athlete.
Win now, worry about Holt Cat's $ later.
Yes, but you also have the possibility of Devin never even getting back to what he was and thus you lose money and per chance flexability. Just for the sake of going there, let us say we did retain Devin. Then next summer we lose Finley and we retain Devin at at least 2.5. Then we try and play him and because of his back and/or due to not getting a lot of playing time behind Manu, Finley, Bruce, and Barry he has not really regained his form. Now we have no flexability and no backups either. You want to play the what if game, and there are so many possibilities to go there.
Trust me, backs are a very tricky thing having gone through and still going through back troubles myself.
Sure, but the difference with Brown next summer vis a vis other players is that the Spurs will hold his Early Bird rights. I'll also say that it isn't going to be as easy as some think to find a young player as good as him.
I'll think they'll stay at an elite level even with letting their 3rd string SG/IR player go.
I bet you'd complain if they let the lockerroom janitor go to another team because it disrupts team chemistry and Holt Cat was being cheap for not bringing him back.
They're going to remain at that level for the next 3 seasons even though Finley and NVE are under 1 year deals?
Who's left, a 35 year old Brent Barry who that 3rd stringer beat out for a rotation spot last season? You seem to have forgotten that.
Jesus, I haven't heard this much pissing and moaning about losing role players since Stephen Jackson and Speedy Claxton left.
"The sky is falling...oh, wait. You mean we won an NBA Championship, anyway????"
Remember when the Spurs lost those guys and then didn't repeat the next season?
So signing Finley and Van Exel aren't good moves to put you in position to win another le? Devin Brown didn't do much in the post season this past year. The Spurs have the same starting five they had last year. They still have Beno, Horry, Barry, and Rasho. They even kept Marks. Its pretty much the same team as last year except for the fact that Devin, Mike Wilks, Tony Mass, Linton, and maybe Glenn are not back.
I'd also say that swingman depth is somewhat important to the Spurs given that Manu has yet to be able to break 30 minutes per game over the course of a season.
Beyond that, we are talking about settling. Why settle? The Spurs have a tremendous opportunity to win more championships over the course of the next 3 seasons. Keep the depth, win and then worry about Holt Cat's $.
You miss the point. Both are under 1 year contracts. You shave a little payroll now to make a little more $ and you weaken your flexibility going forward. They could have had NVE, Finley and Brown.
Win now and...worry later.
Finley and NVE might decide they like winning championships in SA and want to stay for a lesser salary just like Bowen, Tim, and DRob have done. If not, then there seem to be plenty of players that want a chance to experience the Spurs system and try to win a championship and are willing to do so on the cheap. Replacing a backup SG for less than the MLE is not going to be a problem and you seem to be forgetting we have Ginobili. Barry is sufficient being his backup. After all, we won the Championship this year without NVE, Finley or Devin.
Finding a suitable backup and eventual replacement for Bowen is the Spurs bigger issue. Devin is not tall enough to guard the best SGs or SFs on other teams like Bruce does.
Devin could have replaced Barry, as last season showed.
Did you go into a coma the last 2/3 of the season that Devin was unable to play, including the playoffs? He very well could turn out to be more brittle than Vince Carter. The Spurs get to find out for free at Utah's expense.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions