Unfortunately, you'll find that there are more than 95% of the posters here that know more about basketball than yourself. This includes gems like Thong and portnoy too, consider!
You lost all credibility in the discussion when you said Foster was an average defender.
Foster an average defender
Your laughing as if he's made an all-defensive team at least one time in his 10 year career.Foster an average defender
So now we are going to use a biased, overrated process to assess defenders?
GMAFB.
Tell me what makes Foster a good or great defender... basically anything above average? He's undersized to handle the big centers of the game and gets dominated by the likes of Shaq, Yao, Z, etc.
He's a decent defender against some of the smaller centers in the league, but looking at who the Spurs have to matchup against in the West if they want to come out - he's never been a good matchup for Gasol. Period. He may have his moments against Bynum but probably more because Bynum is inconsistent and a bit weak minded.
I don't hate the guy, I would take him as a hustle big off the bench who can give a few minutes here and there against good matchups for him. The problem is giving up 2 of the guys the Spurs will need during the regular season to get through limiting the minutes of Duncan and Manu. Bonner and Finley shouldnt get a lot of minutes, but their shooting ability will be needed on certain nights. Getting rid of those two for an offensively challenged center really reduces the amount of shooters available when teams try to pack the lane to reduce Parker, Duncan, and Jefferson/Manu's effectiveness in the paint.
pass.
I wasn't assessing Foster. I was only commenting on Muser's "laughing his ass off" expression on Whiskey Dog's opinion that Foster is an average defender.
Spurs won't ever trade for Foster this year unless Ratliff is hurt for the year and if Blair hits a rookie wall. If Ratliff is healthy Foster will never be a Spur. You can quote me on that.
Last edited by MaNu4Tres; 10-28-2009 at 11:08 AM.
A stiff and a fossil, for a younger stiff? Hmmmmmm.....
I'm curious to hear your opinion:
Spurs have 2 trade offers on the table:
- Finley and Bonner for Jeff Foster.
- Finely and Bonner for Nick Collison.
Foster and Collison have about the same contract and Holt has give the green light for the additional cost.
Would you do one of these trades? If yes, which one?
I'd only go Collison because of the lack of injury threat and hes more athletic.
Not a shotblocking guy and kinda undersized so doesn't really help since you already have one of him in Blair.
I'd go with Collison as well..
Foster doesn't look good to me so far, looks like his back is really bothering him..it could be a serious injury for the season..
I wouldn't trade for either at the moment..
But if you're asking if somewhere near the deadline it comes down to one of these two if the Spurs are to upgrade?
I'd go Foster.
The only reason the Spurs would be looking to upgrade at the big position would be to better match up against the Lakers, Blazers in the West and the Celtics, Magic in the East, and Collison doesn't really help in that quest; he's a solid player, but he's undersized and not going to help the Spurs where they need it most; defensively.
Having said that, I'm not sure Foster does either. A couple years ago, absolutely, but I haven't seen much lately to indicate he'd be that much of an upgrade over Theo. But unlike Collison, there's still a chance he could give the Spurs what they need; how ever small it is at this point.
I'd go Collison. He's younger, and I'm of the opinion that neither gives much in the shotblocking department, but Collison has more heft to his frame and I think he would be able to hold ground against big bodies better than Foster would.
I think our bigger need is for a big that is at least 6'10" for the probable Laker matchup come playoffs. Foster would be the guy.
I like Collison and last deadline I thought Collison would be a very interesting option. this year not so much, Dice and Blair provide most of Collisons qualities.
at this point I go with Foster, as mentioned he would help against the big teams, especially the Lakers.
btw. Foster had some injury troubles in the last weeks, but this might not be the only reason why he lost his spot in the rotation. Pacers obviously go the youth path with Solomon Jones and Roy Hibbert. Foster could become available soon.
Colison has been measured at 6'10" with a 7'1.5" wingspan. He isn't a seven footer but is quite big.
Hansbrough should also be back soon. If he plays well, Foster could be more available.
Just quickly, whats his standing reach, and height without shoes?
Height without shoes: 6'8.75"
Standing reach: 9'0"
Thanks...
Decent size for a PF, but he only has 1.5" on Blair in terms of reach, and a smaller wingspan - so im not sure how useful he would be against true 7 footers like a Gasol or a Bynum. We already have a rebouding PF pretending to be a Center in McDyess, so Collison kind of duplicates that.
So given both have similar strengths, i would probably take Foster, the only true 7 footers on the Spurs are Tim and Theo, and Theo isnt a great man-to-man defender.
Ratliff isn't a true 7 footer either. (6'10'' with long arms.)
btw. I'm not sure that Bonner+Finley are the most logical package, even if it seems right now.
I think currently Spurs would rather put Mason in a package than Finley.
and add Ian instead of Bonner. (unfortunately this is slightly less than necessary to get the number for Foster. after Dec.15th a package of Mason, Ian and Haislip would be enough to get Foster).
I'd probably go with Collison but Foster isn't a bad option either.
But as was stated before we have PFs/Cs with the same skill set as both so getting either guy would be redundant to what we already have.
Then again, if you're looking for a big, who else is out there?
Forget it. He got injured. The Pacers lose him for two weeks.
http://basketball.realgm.com/src_wir...for_two_weeks/
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote