Reply With Quote
Or does it signal the opposite - that they don't feel this season is worth investing in, and that it's okay if the team sucks?
Does this signal that the ownership can't afford a tank?
Or does it signal the opposite - that they don't feel this season is worth investing in, and that it's okay if the team sucks?
Knew nothing about this guy, so read around a little bit. I understand it was a money transaction, but is there truly no chance for him to sign with the Spurs next season? Some Warriors fans seem genuinely pissed that their team let him go. Really wondering why as I thought he was just some end of the bench scrub. They apparently want their team to sign him again (one suggested a 3 year deal) when he becomes a free agent. I'm sitting here and asking myself why?
https://www.reddit.com/r/warriors/co...m_source=share
Not sure what all the fuss is about and makes me think if Lyles had been let go, it wouldn't have the same reception.
Fat chance the trade was anything more than a money deal, but if Marquese is a decent player as what others indicated, could the Spurs use this time he has with the team to court him and get him acquainted with the players and staff? Anything to replace the wretched Eubanks as a backup big next season.
Thanks
Last edited by Dejounte; 03-26-2021 at 05:36 AM.
Found this interesting read on Marquese:
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/vie...5568&start=280
He was arguably the Warriors best player last season as a 22 year old. The Warriors made him the starting center in late January, and he excelled in that role. He'd be fantastic as a backup C and could develop into a high quality starter. However, acquiring him now gives the Spurs no advantage to signing him this offseason so there's no reason for this move other than money.
Yes, I'm aware the Spurs won't have bird rights nor will Chriss be a restricted free agent. In the end, it's up to Chriss where he signs and my question is if his time becoming familiar with the Spurs' program will give him more comfort to sign with them instead of another team.
Apparently the guy is loyal and if he likes where he is at he is willing to take a pay cut. He will be rehabbing with the Spurs and eventually being a part of the practices of not already. There is an advantage to acquiring him to resign him. He also knows DJ pretty well too.
He has posted several photos with DJ during their Washington days since being traded.
Further proof how insufferable Warrior fans are. They ing about having Wiseman
because the Warriors have as many dumb fans as the Spurs do...people ing about 3rd rate players in a year where we'll probably wind up with the 10th spot in the conference...
So the Spurs could keep Chriss in the building and rehab him and all that after waiving him. There's still not a basketball reason to do this trade. The "sniffer" point of view should be to just hope this was a one-off rather than trying to dress this trade up. It happened. Now we just have to try to move forward with the team.
I'm trying to look at the bright side here. Seems like a good dude, if the plan was to get him over here and convince him to stay for cheap then its not as bad as it looks at 1st. He has NBA experience and is young enough to fit with our timeline, a little polish and he could be a serviceable LMA replacement next year. The fact that him and DJ played together in college is a bonus to team chemistry.
I do like him and hope he stays... But most likely wont
And the Spurs end up with the corpse of Marquese Chriss.
Why are people freaking over this? You cannot expect a for-profit organization (which the Spurs are), to pass on free money.
Chriss's salary is covered by insurance. The Spurs got paid. Cash considerations, could be up to $5 million. This is saving the warriors something on the order of 20 million in lux tax, see the table at the bottom here This. The warriors are $40M + over... if they can save $20M by paying $5M, they'll do it too.
Does it hurt the Spurs as a basketball team, NO. They still have a roster spot (LMA has been bought out) to check out D leaguer's and 10 day guys... And given LMA gave some money back, enough salary cap space to do something if they want to.
Chriss was on my pre-season list of guys to watch. After three seasons of terrible advanced stats (see: Lonnie Walker), he actually had a bit of a positive showing last season-- at age 22-- and it was the first hint that he could possibly develop into a real player.
Still, I have to agree that the Spurs as an organization are looking pretty bad at the moment. Players & agents reading about Aldridge (& listening to Richard Jefferson do analysis) will see that he was never very happy in San Antonio. Players looking at the Kawhi saga will likely feel skeptical. Stars hoping for an all in approach from ownership are going to feel like this is a team more concerned with saving money than making great basketball moves. The aura of the Spurs being a little smarter than everyone else has probably also taken a hit too I think, with many people watching in wonder as the idea of emphasizing the mid-range game or having mediocre/poor defenders like DeRozan/Forbes/Mills on the floor at the same time became commonplace, against all conventional wisdom.
Before all this hoopla happened, I had been hoping for the Spurs to pursue a g-league player (namely Renfro) and not a magical Euro player like Donatas Motiejunas or a washed up vet that gets bought out (though Dieng would be nice). Wasn't expecting much from a 15th man at all.
Marquese mentioned it himself that he's come to the realization that the Center spot is better suited for his skills, so that may be the reason for the increased production.
I think like Chinook said: it's time to look forward. We all know nobody's going to stop being a Spurs fan anytime soon. Let's all look at players who might be a good fit for the team this upcoming free agency. Chriss might be one.
Stars are looking for an opportunity to 1. Team up with other Stars and or increase the value of their brand. They are not and never have looked at SA as a destination. The Spurs have had only one significant free agent signing- LMA.
I doubt players and agents will look at the LMA saga and think negative about the SPurs as they really have treated him well even at the end.
The Spurs are and will be continued to be hampered by market and ownership.
They are hampered because SA is a small market-
22nd in population, 32 in GDP
Ownership-
This is a little fuzzy- but the Spurs do not have multi-billion worth owners who are willing/able to go significantly into the luxury tax when need be.
The Spurs have been hosed in the past by players before Nephew and LMA. Think Derek Anderson, Lamond Murray
My only critique currently is they are trying to thread a needle- rebuild while making the playoffs.
We'll see what happens over the summer
So let me explain it this way:
Let's assume two things: 1) The price of vodka in the US is fixed and 2) The Spurs, instead of being a basketball team, sold vodka
All right, so the Spurs are selling vodka, and they have a great rep doing so. Critics by and large considers their product to be one of the best in the US. But they don't have the same outreach as richer brands who can afford the higher advertising, have celebrity spokespeople, whatever. So the Spurs remain in business by carefully controlling how much vodka they make. During great years, they might exceed their quota, but by and large they stay within their limits. Then they ownership of changes and you see a report that the Spurs are putting small amounts of water in each bottle so that they can sell more bottles while making the same amount of alcohol. The amount of water is probably so small that it doesn't make a functional difference to the effectiveness of the alcohol, so the product legit getting worse is probably not the result.
But does that mean that it wouldn't affect consumer confidence? Obviously not. The rep for good, pure vodka is the reason why the product sold. Marketing is marketing. If the Spurs were doing things like Fiesta vodka or military appreciation vodka, that's fine. If the Spurs paid to have their vodka show up on stupid shows or commercials, that's fine. If the Spurs tried diversifying their portfolio and selling ty beer in addition to the vodka, that's fine. All that is just business. , even changing the process of making the vodka because you think consumers would like it more but ing it up is business. But watering it down? That's not just business. That's business compromising the product for no other end but to make a tiny bit more money. Even if it's not yet noticeable in the strength of the drink, it's alarming.
That hypothetical Spurs can't afford to be known for making ty vodka. Anyone with a brain on the business side should know their product is sacred, and the production can't be a source to extract a bit more money. The wall between production and finances has to be kept intact, because the latter depends on the former. The same thing is true for the real Spurs. They can't afford to be a team with ty meddling owners who constantly take functionality from the front office to squeeze a bit of profit. If they lose their rep as a first-class organization and instead become a team with ty, short-sighted and frugal management, they'll lose the very thing that allows their product to exist. They'll be right back in the same spot they were in before Duncan. Even Robinson wasn't enough to keep the Spurs from leaving due to having a ty owner. , Dave was almost sold off himself. They look to be heading right back there now. The reason why the Vegas or Seattle comments didn't have weight before was because we could expect the ownership and management to figure out a way to make the transition process work. Now, we can't even trust them to not game their roster for pennies.
the only area in which the spurs still hold some high regard is in regards to the development of younger players and the draft but that window is growing smaller. how this young core looks over the next two seasons will tell us whether the spurs model of development is one of the best or not. of course, how they use their cap money this summer, in regards to bringing in additional players that would blend well with this team (because DDR and Gay are not ideal fits), may impact the ability of this younger core to realize its maximum potential.
The Spurs should make their money off marketing their product, not off cheapening their product to make quick cash. Their consuming their seed stock. This one move isn't enough to ruin their harvest forever, but it's troubling.
I'm just waiting for the off season to see where the organization goes from there.
Outlook isn't favorable at this moment, the backlash will be legendary after the draft and free agency. This place might just implode with the diarrhea whine takes.
Should be interesting to see the response.
These are the little things the Spurs do that opposing GMs understand but Spurs fans don't (until things work out, for some apparently lucky reason, and they all start waiving their pennants).
GS got Wiseman and no longer had any reason to patiently nurse Chriss back to health. Kerr is clearly doing Pop a favor -- relationships do actually matter, at times.
This is a typical no risk possibly high return Spurs move. Emphasis on the no risk.
You make enough of those moves over time and you end up ahead. And no one knows why.
interesting, seems like has improved a lot from his Phoenix days. I always thought he was worth taking a flier on and he's certainly better than Eubanks, but I can't get over the broken leg thing.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
