Trade for Ron Artest Right Now

[FromWayDowntown]

Yeah, um, so they made moves.

So, trade Parker to get a guy who's like Parker, only different, just to say we made a move!?!?!?

Oh, to be like the Jazz of the 1990's!!!!

[Holt's Cat]

So maybe the Spurs become like the Bulls, Pistons, or Celtics, years of struggle after years of plenty. Such is life in the NBA. It's a bit much to expect to continue to contend after the greatest power forward in NBA history retires. Selectively keeping draft picks can help you contend today and do a little better than you would expect tomorrow. One could certainly have made a case for dealing that pick in 2001 instead of using it on a 19 year old guard from Paris Basket Racing in favor of 'win it all now'. That was certainly the thought process that saw the Spurs deal the '03 pick instead of using it on a Wake Forest product. Sure, if what would land a Mike Miller is the pick, then you have to think about moving it. But, as is often the case in the NBA, what seems to be down is up and what's up is down. Standing pat often has its rewards, especially when you are talking about a core group that has brought home 3 of the last 5 NBA championships.

[Ghost Writer]

FWD, they traded J. Malone on the downturn of his career to bring in a new third star in Hornacek.

You feeling okay, today?

You're off your game.

This point is that it is possible to extend the viability of your team via free agency, trades and shrewd moves.

You don't always have to get sh1tty to get good.

The Jazz took two years off.

Big whoop.

[Holt's Cat]

Clearly 25 year old Tony Parker's career is coming to a close.

[Ghost Writer]

Dense.

Once again, your take a valid point and bend it into nonsense.

Hypothetically, the Spurs may be forced with trading some of our top players as their careers wind down.

Not now, dummies. Later.

Like the Jazz did with J. Malone.




Phoooo.

It's one thing to be argumentative, but don't play dumb.

it's unbecoming and a fvcking waste of time.

Especially you, FWD. Your game has been garbage today!

Follow the thread. Don't embellish.

[Holt's Cat]

Parker's career hasn't hit the midway point yet. Why are the Spurs dealing him?

[FromWayDowntown]

FWD, they traded J. Malone on the downturn of his career to bring in a new third star in Hornacek.

You feeling okay, today?

You're off your game.

This point is that it is possible to extend the viability of your team via free agency, trades and shrewd moves.

You don't always have to get sh1tty to get good.

The Jazz took two years off.

Big whoop.

Of course it is, but once Stockton and Malone called it day, the Jazz had to go backwards, regardless of the shrewd moves that they made to mix-and-match pieces when Stockton and Malone were in their primes. You seem to want to ignore it, but the Jazz did have to get sh1tty to get good; it took them a top-of-the-lottery pick to even sniff the playoffs again.

You can extend the viability of your team while your superstar(s) are still active, but it's your superstars that make your team a contender. The Jazz made some nice moves, but weren't particularly considered a le contender between 2001 and 2007.

I also don't see the comparison on the Jeff Malone-for-Hornacek deal. At the time of that deal, Malone was 32 and Hornacek was 30. The Spurs don't have a third star who's on the downturn of his career at this point -- you've already balked (seemingly, I can't keep straight who you're willing to trade anymore) at the idea of trading Ginobili, so that leaves Parker, who's (as Holt's Cat pointed out) 25 years old and seemingly improving every year (with 2 All-Star nods from the coaches already on his resume).

[FromWayDowntown]

Dense.

Once again, your take a valid point and bend it into nonsense.

Hypothetically, the Spurs may be forced with trading some of our top players as their careers wind down.

Not now, dummies. Later.

Like the Jazz did with J. Malone.




Phoooo.

It's one thing to be argumentative, but don't play dumb.

it's unbecoming and a fvcking waste of time.

Especially you, FWD. Your game has been garbage today!

Follow the thread. Don't embellish.

Yeah, I thought we were supposed to win now and worry later. Now you're talking about whether the Spurs should deal Parker and/or Ginobili a few years from now?

Can YOU even keep your arguments straight anymore? It's impossible to engage the merits of your arguments when they keep changing and don't stay focused on any particular principle.

[Ghost Writer]

WTF?

Is it that hard?

We were tlaking about trading for Artest and then you went on a tangent, trying to disprove that teams could stay good and rebuild on the fly. I brought up the Jazz and how they extended their playoff run through trades and free agent signings.

I hope the Spurs consider all options before tanking it.

You disagree?




Now = 2.19.08

Trade cap space and a pick for a star-quality player named Artest.

Future = 2012+

That's when tough decisions about Duncan and Co. should start to be thought about.







Follow the bouncing ball, FWD. You can do it!

[Holt's Cat]

I thought we were supposed to worry about the "future" now. Or was that only in another thread?

[FromWayDowntown]

WTF?

Is it that hard?

We were tlaking about trading for Artest and then you went on a tangent, trying to disprove that teams could stay good and rebuild on the fly. I brought up the Jazz and how they extended their playoff run through trades and free agent signings.

I just acknowledged, when someone else mentioned it, that there will be a rebuilding process in San Antonio post-Duncan. Just as there was a rebuilding process in Salt Lake City post-Stockton and Malone.

I hope the Spurs consider all options before tanking it.

You disagree?

I think you're making up arguments to be argumentative, frankly. I didn't realize that this thread had become a discussion about what the Spurs should do in 2011 or 2012. I mentioned here (and elsewhere) that the notion of remaining a le contender with a seamless transition to a post-Duncan era of dominance was unlikely without obtaining a high lottery pick in the interim. You're now suggesting that by revamping their second and third stars three or four years from now will permit that kind of transition. I fundamentally disagree.

Now = 2.19.08

Trade cap space and a pick for a star-quality player named Artest.

Future = 2012+

That's when tough decisions about Duncan and Co. should start to be thought about.

I can see the point in Artest, but only if it can be done without sacrificing Parker and/or Ginobili and, even then, I have reservations because of who the target might be. But even if the Spurs were to acquire Artest, I don't think that such a trade suggests that the Spurs are going to (or should) dump Parker and Ginobili in 2010-11 to get younger star players when that time comes, mostly because I think there's very little chance (barring a miracle of some sort) that the Spurs would consider themselves to be anything other than fringe playoff contenders when Duncan's time comes to an end.

If you want to assure that you'll be relegated to long stretches of mediocrity, the best bet to do so is to keep acquiring mid-level stars who will keep the program respectable in the standings while assuring that you don't ever land the big fish in the lottery.

[Ghost Writer]

Whatever, dude.

I just realized that you have knee-jerk reactions to certain posts out of context of the flow of the thread, which explains some of your off-the-page reactions.

I've made it as succinct as possible for you to catch up.

I challenge you to actually read the posts. All of them.

Again, if we're talking now, you trade non-essentials for Artest.

If you are talking 3-5 years from now, you need to look at extending the longevity of the team's contention -- even if it means perhaps moving one of your Big Three as the Jazz did.

I have no desire to get bad for an extended period of time to get good again, and Manu and Parker are not enough to be contenders as Duncan approaches retirement.

[Ghost Writer]

Parker's career hasn't hit the midway point yet. Why are the Spurs dealing him?

Phooo.

They are not.

And no one is suggesting that.

FWD drifted off into "fantasy argument" again.

[Ghost Writer]

I thought we were supposed to worry about the "future" now. Or was that only in another thread?

Win now. Worry later. Forever.

[Spurminator]

Wait a minute, if the concern is where the Spurs will be when Duncan is done, why are we talking about Hornacek? That move didn't help extend the Jazz's relevance after the Stockton/Malone era.

[Holt's Cat]

In 5 years Duncan's on a beach in the VI.

Out of the big 3, TP is the 2nd least likely to be moved. Manu is the 1st, but I don't see the Spurs moving him due to his capabilities in big games.

If Duncan isn't good enough to make the Spurs a contender then you might as well start rebuilding whenever that is, but I don't see that. His game is geared towards longevity.

The Big 3 will remain together until Duncan retires. Manu will likely retire at the same time. So then you start rebuilding around Parker.

[duncan228]

The Big 3 will remain together until Duncan retires. Manu will likely retire at the same time. So then you start rebuilding around Parker.

Don't forget that Pop probably goes when Duncan does.

[Holt's Cat]

Once Stockton and Malone were gone the Jazz sucked, regardless of what they did with the other Malone. So you rebuild.

Plus I don't see how a Spurs team in the lottery post-Duncan doesn't start doing deals. The reason we haven't seen many over the last 5 years is that there hasn't been the need to land a top player. It's odd how the Spurs, with their top 3 in place, are compared unfavorably to a Celtics team that wasn't in such a position and was forced into making moves.

Sure, it'd be great if the Spurs could contend forever. That somehow Ian Mahinmi turns into a dominant post player.

Spurs fans have it good. If someone had told me back in 2002 that someone would be ing about the Spurs after 3 les in the next 5 years I would have guessed that it was Ghost...

[Ghost Writer]

Wait a minute, if the concern is where the Spurs will be when Duncan is done, why are we talking about Hornacek? That move didn't help extend the Jazz's relevance after the Stockton/Malone era.

Jeezus, Spurm, not you again.

Aren't you afraid to pick a bone after being destroyed yesterday?

You alleged that the Mavs were built primarily through their drafts, yet come to find out, only Howard was drafted by them, as pointed out right away by yours truly.

The point about the Jazz is that you can be a playoff team for a very long time and then get back to the playoffs without rebuilding for many years.

[FromWayDowntown]

Whatever, dude.

I just realized that you have knee-jerk reactions to certain posts out of context of the flow of the thread, which explains some of your off-the-page reactions.

It's never occurred to me that linking ideas in one thread with ideas mentioned in another thread is somehow controversial. In fact, it seems to me to be a far better way to have an informed discussion -- otherwise, you end up with a bunch of disjointed discussions that have no connection at all. That's particularly an odd idea to me where all of those discussions involve the same idea.

I've made it as succinct as possible for you to catch up.

Trust me, I'm caught up. You think that Artest can (should) be had for scraps and that anyone who challenges you on that idea is a homer.

I challenge you to actually read the posts. All of them.

The fact that I disagree with you or challenge portions of your arguments without dealing with every single sentence you've written doesn't mean I don't read your posts (or those of others). I actually resent your suggestion that I'm not contributing anything to your discussions just because I try to challenge your views or suggest that there's no real philosophical point to your incessant cries for a trade -- any trade -- by the Spurs. Pardon me if I think it's best to have some focal point to ground a philosophical view about how a franchise should be run. I don't think it's a particularly sound idea to say "Well LA and Phoenix and Dallas made moves, so we'd better make one too." If it makes sense, do it. If it doesn't, don't.

Again, if we're talking now, you trade non-essentials for Artest.

Says you. Obviously, many here disagree with you.

If you are talking 3-5 years from now, you need to look at extending the longevity of the team's contention -- even if it means perhaps moving one of your Big Three as the Jazz did.

I'll worry about that 3-5 years from now.

I have no desire to get bad for an extended period of time to get good again, and Manu and Parker are not enough to be contenders as Duncan approaches retirement.

Cool. It's not as if I'm rooting for the Spurs to get bad; I'm just presuming that there's a reality out there and that the choices are to accept it and make the most of it or to relegate this franchise to a cyclical time of constant mediocrity. We can take this up again when it matters in 3-5 years.

[Holt's Cat]

Don't forget that Pop probably goes when Duncan does.

Right. So all bets are off. It will be a different Spurs team then, likely full of young ballas and the Spurs making trades and pursuing top free agents left and right. Ghost should cream himself just thinking about it.

[Ghost Writer]

Don't forget that Pop probably goes when Duncan does.

That's a shame. I wanted to see him actually coach.

[Ghost Writer]

FWD, all I ask is that you take issue with what I actually post.

Thanks, man.

Nice talking to you.

I'm going to pick up my discourse with the others.

For all of our differences, at list Holt's Cat and I stay grounded in our discussions.

[Ghost Writer]

Right. So all bets are off. It will be a different Spurs team then, likely full of young ballas and the Spurs making trades and pursuing top free agents left and right. Ghost should cream himself just thinking about it.

That's a cheap shot.

You know d@mn well that I would no sooner want the Spurs to be like the Nuggets than I would the Knicks for that matter.

If Duncan or Manu are cool with it, maybe you trade them for picks towards the tail end of their careers.

I don't think you make Parker your franchise player moving forward, either.

That's a reach.

But who knows what the team looks like or who's playing what level of ball in 5 years?

[Holt's Cat]

That's a shame. I wanted to see him actually coach.

He does now.