$7 mil will probably be the average player salary then.
It took TD and Manu in their primes to win the last two les. History only records championships. No one gives a about when you had a great regular season record and lost in the Finals, unless you live in Salt Lake City or DFW.
Take your best shot now. 2010.
History doesn't pay the bills.
Once TD's gone that's a $20 mil bill off the books.
Fisher has forgotten more about being clutch than Watson will ever know.
Manny, citing the guy who thought putting Marbury and Francis on the same team was a great idea probably isn't the best way to win an argument
I was refering to his playing days AHF.
Isaish had Joe Dumars, Bill Laimbeer, Dennis Rodman, and Vinnie Johnson. Zeke was the leader but he had a lot of help.
So all the Spurs have to do is find a Hall of Famer and the leagues best defender/rebounder to play along Parker. (Not to mention it's unlikely that Tony Parker will ever be another Isaiah Thomas.) If they do that, then yeah, I'll agree they should have a pretty good team. It still won't be as good as what they could have over the next three years.
Oh, and don't forget that Pop won't be around to coach them.
Thats not nessecarily a bad thing depending on who you ask.
I'm going to bump this thread in 2010 when the Spurs finish 15-67.
Sweet, maybe we can talk Greg Oden into staying in school for four years?
I hope the Spurs do finish 15-67 once Tim retires. The only way to get good in this league is to draft talent.
The team might as well be in Phoenix. Getting to Anaheim from West LA (during rush hour) to make a 7:30 tipoff can take as long as a drive from San Antonio to Houston.
Yeah that's really helped the Hawks these past few years....
Great players can be found later on in drafts just as easily as lottery picks can be busts. Drafting high doesn't guarantee anything. Making smart draft-day decisions no matter where you stand improves the possibility of building a solid foundation around great players. The Spurs already have one great player to build around. They have Scola, Butler, and Mahinmi as possible good/great players. AND, they have 3 or 4 picks in the upcoming '07 draft that if used wisely can address immediate needs (long athletic SF, backup PG) and get potential stars for the future.
Bottom Line: Great franchises are about more than drafting a "player of the century"
What great players have the Hawks drafted? There has never been a Duncan, James, Shaq, Jordan, etc available when the Hawks had a pick high enough to take them.Yeah that's really helped the Hawks these past few years....
I can think of two franchise players to get drafted later than #5. Dirk Nowitzki, who was picked at 7 because no one thought Euros could play in the NBA, and Kobe Bryant at 13 because no one wanted to waste picks on high school kids. Both of those backdoors to landing top talent are long since closed.
If a Greg Oden is coming out, drafting #1 guarantees you get him. Building your team is all about getting lucky enough to have a truly great player come out the year you really stink and have a draft pick high enough to get him.
Yeah.. the guy they drafted at #1 after tanking the season.
Great players?
So Luis Scola and Ian Mahinmi have any chance of being the next Shaq, Duncan, Jordan, Bird, Magic,...?
You can get lucky and get a Parker or an Arenas there, but you ain't getting Shaq or Jordan, or anyone else who is going to be someone you build a le team around.
Jerry Krause had a similar philosophy.
So how many banners would be up in New Orleans Arena for the Spurs had they not landed the #1 pick in '97?
Exactly two teams since 1980 have won a le without a 'player of the century' first-ballot hall of famer who did not go #1-5 in the draft. I don't count the Celtics with Bird, since he went 7 because of a loophole (since closed) allowing the Celtics to draft a sure #1 or #2 (only because Magic was coming out) a year early. Still, McHale went #2
The two teams? The 1983 Sixers, led by two legends who joined the ABA because they were too young to be allowed into the NBA... and the 2004 Pistons... so really, one team in 27 years that backs up your argument.
1980 Lakers: Kareem (#1), Magic (#1)
1981 Celtics: Bird (#7), McHale (#2)
1982 Lakers: Kareem (#1), Magic (#1)
1983 Sixers: Dr. J (ABA), Moses Malone (ABA)
1984 Celtics: Bird(#7*), McHale (#2)
1985 Lakers: Kareem (#1), Magic (#1), Worthy (#1)
1986 Celtics: Bird (#7*), McHale (#2)
1987 Lakers: Kareem (#1), Magic (#1), Worthy (#1)
1988 Lakers: Kareem (#1), Magic (#1), Worthy (#1)
1989 Pistons: Thomas (#2)
1990 Pistons: Thomas (#2)
1991 Bulls: Jordan (#3)
1992 Bulls: Jordan (#3)
1993 Bulls: Jordan (#3)
1994 Rockets: Olajuwon (#1)
1995 Rockets: Olajuwon (#1)
1996 Bulls: Jordan (#3)
1997 Bulls: Jordan (#3)
1998 Bulls: Jordan (#3)
1999 Spurs: Duncan (#1)
2000 Lakers: Shaq (#1)
2001 Lakers: Shaq (#1)
2002 Lakers: Shaq (#1)
2003 Spurs: Duncan (#1)
2005 Spurs: Duncan (#1)
2006 Heat: Wade (#4), Shaq (#1)
The teams to win without drafting their 'players of the century'?
The 1983 Philadelphia 76ers, who stole Dr. J from a Nets team that had to sell him to be able to make the merger to the NBA... never gonna happen again, and not even allowed anymore.
The 1980s Lakers, who still drafted their best player #1 and had their second best force a trade to LA because he wanted to be in a large market.
The 00s Lakers, who enticed Shaq as a free agent with a large market. Now the rules make getting free agents impossible.
04 Pistons
06 Heat
Was Phat Tony owned?
I think so . . .
I miss battle blogs
I disagree. You have the highest book value while you have the most dominating team and/or have just won a championship--and there are prospects for more.
If Tim's play continues to decline (along with the Spurs fortunes) and he retires in a year or so, then a prospective buyer would be picking up a franchise in a very small market with their salad days behind them. No fan interest= no income from sales of tickets and accessories.
If Holt wanted to sell, the time was after the last championship. He may have mis-timed the moment, thinking that the team would continue its success without interruption.
Our most dangerous period will come in the next few years if the Spurs go into a decline and no longer even make the playoffs. Then the revenues will plummet like they did before and we will be in danger of losing the team to another city like before. Except the price will be higher and the possibility of obtaining SA investors will be harder.
Fair points all-around, though your most convincing was the les won, or lack theirof, by teams w/o a top 10 pick. Still I have to clear a few things up....
Exactly my point! Even if the Spurs tank a season, it's not a "given" that they end up in a position to draft a "franchise" big. So why not attempt to stay in the Championship conversation?
Amare Stoudemire?I can think of two franchise players to get drafted later than #5. Dirk Nowitzki, who was picked at 7 because no one thought Euros could play in the NBA, and Kobe Bryant at 13 because no one wanted to waste picks on high school kids. Both of those backdoors to landing top talent are long since closed.
I was talking about Tony Parker. He may not be a "franchise big", but he's dominant and young enough to keep this team in the conversation provided the Spurs can keep him surrounded by a decent low-post presence.Yeah.. the guy they drafted at #1 after tanking the season.
Speaking of decent low-post players.....I wasn't suggesting that those players could be SUPERSTARS, just that they could compliment Tony's game. Scola has been dominant overseas for years and Butler has shown promise at this level....so they could fit that "good" or "decent" level.Great players?
So Luis Scola and Ian Mahinmi have any chance of being the next Shaq, Duncan, Jordan, Bird, Magic,...?
What about two or three Parkers? The way I see it, the Spurs already have one Parker and with the load of prospects/draft picks, it's not inconceivable that they could keep themselves in the Championship conversation.You can get lucky and get a Parker or an Arenas there, but you ain't getting Shaq or Jordan, or anyone else who is going to be someone you build a le team around.
Again, good point about the Franchise big, but I'm not giving up on the Spurs chances not to suck in the future....call me an optimist.
The team with the highest book value in professional sports is the Washington Redskins.
Third is the Houston Texans. (The Cowboys are second.)
In the NBA, the top three are the Lakers, Knicks, and Bulls, then Mavs, Sixers, and Celtics.
Book value has nothing directly to do with championships. Championshps are nice, but not necessary if people are buying the tickets anyway.
It has to do with the fan base how many season tickets and boxes you are selling (and for how much), how much you are getting from concessions and paying in stadium rights, how much you are getting from local broadcast rights.
And how much you are paying out in salaries.
If the Spurs can maintain their strong current inflows and get away with keeping the payroll at a just-less-than-championship level, they'll make more money.
If Peter Holt in 2008 wants to sell a 55-win team with only a $30 million payroll on the books, he'll make more money than selling a 55-win team with $60 million on the books.
It also has to do with team assets. The Redskins are number one because of Fed Ex Field, which they own.
The Warriors definetly got a better deal for Murphy than anything the Spurs could offer. The question is will the Spurs go after Jax now?
too bad the internet as we know it won't be around by then
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
