Spurs Youth Is Overrated

[TD 21]

You are such a clown, man.

Start backpedaling and moving the goal posts once someone calls you on your bull .

We get it, the Spurs never do anything right, you are always right & the sole reason they've accomplished 20+ years of success is Tim Duncan.

Now, saying the young players are "overrated" (who is rating them?) is speaking about Murray only and isn't meant to mean something negative? Cause people refer to things as overrated as a good thing or compliment.

This is the sort of made up nonsense I expect from you and people of your ilk.

No, it isn't meant to mean bad. I'll give you an example: Until advanced stats became main stream, Bryant was highly overrated historically . . . but he was still one of the best players of all-time.

Just going to wait for you to link one of the many podcasts were people have called Murray a sure thing future star. I mean the hype is crazy around Murray, which is why he settled on such a cheap extension.

Like I'm sifting through hours and hours of podcasts to find this (over a year ago, Lowe said, to paraphrase, someone from the Spurs told him their could be a new big 3 as soon as this season and Tim MacMahon talked about it recently on the Hoop Collective) and pacify you. What would I have to gain by making this up?

Yeah, we think that because the FO has a history of drafting well that they've continued to do. Thats ing crazy of us, right? I mean the fact that the Spurs took 3 hall of famers outside of the lottery shouldn't give anyone confidence in the upside of the current crop of players at all. Just to be clear, I'm not saying that any of the current players will turn into a hall of famer but I'm also not saying they can't.

They're prospects. Maybe they turn out good, maybe they don't. But to say they're overrated is saying that they're not even prospects which is laughable. You can't find an NBA team that has drafted better than the Spurs and you're calling a lot of promising players overrated why exactly? Based on what? Dejounte could turn out to be nothing more than what he is now and he'd still be worth his contract. How the is that overrated? He's ALREADY excellent on defense. Derek White is ALREADY an above average guard. You haven't even seen Luka play.

Its just ing idiocy for god knows what reason. I guess so that if they don't pan out you can turn around and say I TOLD YOU SO. NO ONE has said that Murray is a lock to be a star yet you're making that claim because its the only way to make your bull seem legit. I forgot all the preseason all NBA projections we say for Murray. I forgot all the think pieces we say saying he should get a max extension. Missed the MVP Murray talk.

Again, you've spun this to suit your agenda. This was not about the front office's ability to draft/develop . . . now resume worshipping at their altar with the rest of your cons uency, apologist.

[Dejounte]

He reminds me of that episode of South Park with the people of San Francisco sniffing their own farts and always thinking they're right......

But, be careful he'll call us "apologists" and say how right he is about everything in his next post.

*Sniff* *Sniff*

LOLOLOLOL

Holy you called it. This is predictable as .

[MannyIsGod]

Like I'm sifting through hours and hours of podcasts to find this (over a year ago, Lowe said, to paraphrase, someone from the Spurs told him their could be a new big 3 as soon as this season and Tim MacMahon talked about it recently on the Hoop Collective) and pacify you. What would I have to gain by making this up?

Again, you've spun this to suit your agenda. This was not about the front office's ability to draft/develop . . . now resume worshipping at their altar with the rest of your cons uency, apologist.

I can't tell you how many prominent national media I've heard on podcasts over the past few years, act like he was a definite future star

Apparently you're right, you can't tell us.

What would you gain from making it up? I don't know, what do you gain out of making such stupid threads? You tell me man. You're the one making the claims here. Even on the examples you provide, Lowe is talking about what someone from the Spurs told him that COULD happen. Its not his claim, its the person attached to the organization and they didn't say it was a definite thing. The Spurs do have a possible big 3. All 3 of their guards have all star potential. Will they probably all get there? No. But its laughable that this is your evidence that the're overrated.

Uhhhh, one time Lowe said someone thought they might be a big 3 this year.

LOL. Ok. Great point.

[ElNono]

The rotation and lineup choices by Pop are something that everyone, including myself, have been upset about, yes.

But, stating that a team that has drafted in the 20's for better part of two decades "could have done better" is being a revisionist. The chance of finding a Superstar like Giannis, Nephew or Kobe outside of the lottery is rarer, if not pure luck.

What the Spurs have done is find plays that they can cultivate and supplement the player of their (former) elite talent. Clearly, their draft strategy will need to change and they'll have go for more "reachs" than previously.

But, again whining about their recent draft history is complaining just to complain (which is your thing, so sorry). Especially when they've found numerous NBA talent in the late 1st, 2nd and in the undrafted FA market as well as acquiring 3 - which is really 4 including Nephew - future HOF'ers.

Except that wasn't my argument at all. My argument comes from some posters in other thread(s) lamenting that RC might not be involved in the draft process anymore.

And thus, the question I asked is was he really that good? And I backed it up with a list of the past 10 season's picks, which, IMO, it's not really all that impressive.

The bolded is the prototypical nonsense response about the team draft choices. If you're going to bring that up, at least have the decency of picking from the actual draft picks (which are on the list I posted) who are these 'numerous NBA talent'. You'll be hard pressed to find any that's still in the league.

I mean, 10 draft selections is a pretty god damn huge sample size. And if you gotta go back 20 years, then you're basically acknowledging they've been fairly poor the last 10+, which matters, because the Spurs have been in some sort of rebuilt-reload mode for the past 3+ seasons.

Look, I get that when Duncan and Manu were around, finding talent in the draft was difficult. I acknowledged that much. I also give them credit for targeting and trading for Kawhi even though Indiana beat them to the pick (which also brings another question, which is why the reluctance to trade up for a better pick, something I don't think I've ever seen the Spurs do in 20 years).

So the question is closer to: was RC that great when it comes to the ballclub draft strategy in recent times? I look at that list, and I'm not sure I can agree.

[RC_Drunkford]

you can question their draft choices during the Big 3 era, but to be fair ever since Duncan retired they have drafted extremely well. Murray, White, Walker are starter material. Keldon and Samanic look like future starters and even their 2nd rounders (Metu and Weatherspoon) look like they have a chance to become rotation guys. Can't really do much better tbh

[Sugus]

And thus, the question I asked is was he really that good? And I backed it up with a list of the past 10 season's picks, which, IMO, it's not really all that impressive.

Look, I get that when Duncan and Manu were around, finding talent in the draft was difficult.

The problem with this view of yours, Nono, Is that you completely fail to address the fact that the Spurs have been one of, if not the worst picking franchise from a # perspective. Sure, you can randomly take a look at the Spurs' and other team's drafting records and say "see! The Kings have drafted many more players that are still in the league, therefore they draft better!!" but it completely ignores the fact that the Kings, like almost every other team besides maybe the Blazers, have had multiple years of picking in the lottery or near it - which exponentially increases the chances of the player being successful/having a long career.

Lonnie Walker at 19th was the franchises' highest pick in what, 10+ years? and already showing signs of being an excellent choice. Why don't you make the exercise of making a list for other franchises' 20-25th picks over the last ten years, and then compare that to the Spurs' list? I bet you'll see surprising results. Drafting is always a crapshoot, but there's a much lower bust/success ratio when you're picking top 3 for 5+ years than taking 22-25 every year.

[spurspl]

you can question their draft choices during the Big 3 era, but to be fair ever since Duncan retired they have drafted extremely well. Murray, White, Walker are starter material. Keldon and Samanic look like future starters and even their 2nd rounders (Metu and Weatherspoon) look like they have a chance to become rotation guys. Can't really do much better tbh

yes, they could tank for higher picks and draft a waaay better prospects or already made star.

[TD 21]

Apparently you're right, you can't tell us.

What would you gain from making it up? I don't know, what do you gain out of making such stupid threads? You tell me man. You're the one making the claims here. Even on the examples you provide, Lowe is talking about what someone from the Spurs told him that COULD happen. Its not his claim, its the person attached to the organization and they didn't say it was a definite thing. The Spurs do have a possible big 3. All 3 of their guards have all star potential. Will they probably all get there? No. But its laughable that this is your evidence that the're overrated.

Uhhhh, one time Lowe said someone thought they might be a big 3 this year.

LOL. Ok. Great point.[/COLOR]

The gist was that, with the possible exception of Walker, they probably don't have a potential star to build around. Your master even agrees with that sentiment. Idiots like you think they have 3 guys with All-Star potential.

The larger point that you unsurprisingly missed was, if and when they get a high pick in '20, they need to look to select the best player available and not think they're set in the back court.

I know it's not his claim, genius. I said, both the media (Windhorst and Tjarks are two others I recall) and the organization has talked him up. Obviously, the latter fed into the former. By big three, the insinuation was that Murray would join Aldridge and DeRozan.

You don't even know what you're arguing about.

[RC_Drunkford]

yes, they could tank for higher picks and draft a waaay better prospects or already made star.

I said draft choices, not long term strategy of the franchise

[phxspurfan]

oof, OP. Not your best take

[itzsoweezee]

He did permanent damage to their playoff aspirations and overall seeding for sure. It was pretty clear Walker had that type of performance in em, as anybody except Popovich has advocated for him to get playing time. Even Rudy Gay said that publicly.

Notice how they're moving the goalposts now? Before the season, it was, the Spurs could be fighting for the 5 seed. Now, it's, the Spurs were not going to be championship contenders anyway, so who cares.

Popovich ed this off-season and early part of this season, in more ways than one, but all you'll hear are excuses.

[ElNono]

The problem with this view of yours, Nono, Is that you completely fail to address the fact that the Spurs have been one of, if not the worst picking franchise from a # perspective. Sure, you can randomly take a look at the Spurs' and other team's drafting records and say "see! The Kings have drafted many more players that are still in the league, therefore they draft better!!" but it completely ignores the fact that the Kings, like almost every other team besides maybe the Blazers, have had multiple years of picking in the lottery or near it - which exponentially increases the chances of the player being successful/having a long career.

Lonnie Walker at 19th was the franchises' highest pick in what, 10+ years? and already showing signs of being an excellent choice. Why don't you make the exercise of making a list for other franchises' 20-25th picks over the last ten years, and then compare that to the Spurs' list? I bet you'll see surprising results. Drafting is always a crapshoot, but there's a much lower bust/success ratio when you're picking top 3 for 5+ years than taking 22-25 every year.

I don’t fail to address it, I’m just pointing out that when people talk about the drafting prowess, hopefully it’s closer than 20 years ago. And unless somebody wants to advance that the Spurs suck at developing talent (I wouldn’t agree with that), then it’s quite the indictment that despite the fact they’re good at developing talent, they still can’t seem to be able to turn that talent into NBA players.

Then there’s the whole euro situation that apparently nobody here wants to really touch.

I’m also not stating that they suck. The Kings suck, because they have both bad choices and ty development. So it’s not like that, either.

[Sugus]

I don’t fail to address it, I’m just pointing out that when people talk about the drafting prowess, hopefully it’s closer than 20 years ago. And unless somebody wants to advance that the Spurs suck at developing talent (I wouldn’t agree with that), then it’s quite the indictment that despite the fact they’re good at developing talent, they still can’t seem to be able to turn that talent into NBA players.

Then there’s the whole euro situation that apparently nobody here wants to really touch.

I’m also not stating that they suck. The Kings suck, because they have both bad choices and ty development. So it’s not like that, either.

I don't think the Spurs have "lost" drafting prowess, or at least haven't yet seen enough proof of anything definite pointing to it. When was the last time a Spurs pick truly busted, compared to the spot they were drafted at? You seem to think any player drafted by the Spurs in the 19-30th rank must have an NBA career just by virtue of being drafted by them. In reality, anything outside of the lottery is a crapshoot, and most franchises don't even hope to turn out rotational players out of every single pick.

And yet, in the last few consecutive drafts, the Spurs have drafted Dejounte, White, Lonnie, three excellent starting caliber young players with high ceilings, two of those with 29th (!) picks. Keldon and Luka, though it's way too early to tell, also look like they will be good contributions to the team. That's what, five picks in a row that'll turn out into serviceable players at the least? Going back, you have Nikola (good player but too expensive to bring over), SloMo, and then the first pick I'd call a bust, Livio Jean-Charles, the 28th (!) pick in '13. I'd love to hear your theory of how they can't turn their picks into NBA players, since the records kind of show the opposite - and once again, grab any other teams' mid-to-late first round picks history, and see how many of those players are still in the league. I'd be surprised to see any one of them having a better record than the Spurs in the last 10 years or so.

[jjktkk]

I don’t fail to address it, I’m just pointing out that when people talk about the drafting prowess, hopefully it’s closer than 20 years ago. And unless somebody wants to advance that the Spurs suck at developing talent (I wouldn’t agree with that), then it’s quite the indictment that despite the fact they’re good at developing talent, they still can’t seem to be able to turn that talent into NBA players.

Then there’s the whole euro situation that apparently nobody here wants to really touch.

I’m also not stating that they suck. The Kings suck, because they have both bad choices and ty development. So it’s not like that, either.

This makes no sense whatsoever. In the past several years, the Spurs have drafted and developed George Hill, Leonard, Cory Joseph, and Kyle Anderson. just the past 3 years they drafted White and Murray. All of these players were drafted in the late 1st round, that's quite impressive.

[J_Paco]

This makes no sense whatsoever. In the past several years, the Spurs have drafted and developed George Hill, Leonard, Cory Joseph, and Kyle Anderson. just the past 3 years they drafted White and Murray. All of these players were drafted in the late 1st round, that's quite impressive.

I don't think the Spurs have "lost" drafting prowess, or at least haven't yet seen enough proof of anything definite pointing to it. When was the last time a Spurs pick truly busted, compared to the spot they were drafted at? You seem to think any player drafted by the Spurs in the 19-30th rank must have an NBA career just by virtue of being drafted by them. In reality, anything outside of the lottery is a crapshoot, and most franchises don't even hope to turn out rotational players out of every single pick.

And yet, in the last few consecutive drafts, the Spurs have drafted Dejounte, White, Lonnie, three excellent starting caliber young players with high ceilings, two of those with 29th (!) picks. Keldon and Luka, though it's way too early to tell, also look like they will be good contributions to the team. That's what, five picks in a row that'll turn out into serviceable players at the least? Going back, you have Nikola (good player but too expensive to bring over), SloMo, and then the first pick I'd call a bust, Livio Jean-Charles, the 28th (!) pick in '13. I'd love to hear your theory of how they can't turn their picks into NBA players, since the records kind of show the opposite - and once again, grab any other teams' mid-to-late first round picks history, and see how many of those players are still in the league. I'd be surprised to see any one of them having a better record than the Spurs in the last 10 years or so.

He is a troll attempting to make an argument that doesn't exist. Complaining that a team that has drafted outside of the lottery for 20 years has missed a lot of picks is stupid. Of course they do, anyone drafted (even in the lottery) has a strong chance of not panning and being out of the league by the end of their rookie contract.

No, let's that James Gist, Livio Jean-Charles & Nikola Mulitinov didn't pan out when many players have here or elsewhere.

[duncan2k5]

So Lonnie's game proves my point... Pop benching him didnt suddenly make him good... He was always good, but was benched for games on end based on a bad 5 minutes... A bad stretch that EVERY young player goes through... , even vets... Pop simply has his favorites, and Lonnie isn't on that list

[My Fault]

So Lonnie's game proves my point... Pop benching him didnt suddenly make him good... He was always good, but was benched for games on end based on a bad 5 minutes... A bad stretch that EVERY young player goes through... , even vets... Pop simply has his favorites, and Lonnie isn't on that list

Oh boy you guys are something else.. What game did you watch? He didn’t look good in this game which further proves that one game you’re clinging on to as proof is just that, ONE game. This is the NBA where scrubs have one good game all the time, Lonnie hasn’t proved anything. He had one good game against a terrible defense and some flashes but that’s all. Still some of you are ready to award him the MVP because you’re so desperate for any hope of a superstar

[ElNono]

This makes no sense whatsoever. In the past several years, the Spurs have drafted and developed George Hill, Leonard, Cory Joseph, and Kyle Anderson. just the past 3 years they drafted White and Murray. All of these players were drafted in the late 1st round, that's quite impressive.

Can I refer you to post #28 in this thread? https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/sho...=1#post9997308

George Hill was drafted over 10 years ago. Leonard was drafted by Indiana, then traded on that night (for George Hill, but I do give the FO credit for targeting him)

That leaves Cory Joseph, Kyle Anderson, and White and Murray now (and too early to tell if Kyle will survive in this league, tbh... DeJuan Blair also had a swift stint..)

I don't mind people stating they disagree with me, I'm just asking for the sniffers that love to fluff the FO draft prowess to grab that list and explain what they like about them. All those Euro guys that have a relatively decent career in Europe, we've been told here on every draft that they're not scrubs, and have yet to see an NBA floor.

I also don't know why some posters claim I'm trolling, tbh. I didn't lie, I didn't make those picks nor made up that list. Not even sure why they want to make it personal, tossing insults around... silly too, like anybody is falling for that.

[duncan2k5]

Can I refer you to post #28 in this thread? https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/sho...=1#post9997308

George Hill was drafted over 10 years ago. Leonard was drafted by Indiana, then traded on that night (for George Hill, but I do give the FO credit for targeting him)

That leaves Cory Joseph, Kyle Anderson, and White and Murray now (and too early to tell if Kyle will survive in this league, tbh... DeJuan Blair also had a swift stint..)

I don't mind people stating they disagree with me, I'm just asking for the sniffers that love to fluff the FO draft prowess to grab that list and explain what they like about them. All those Euro guys that have a relatively decent career in Europe, we've been told here on every draft that they're not scrubs, and have yet to see an NBA floor.

I also don't know why some posters claim I'm trolling, tbh. I didn't lie, I didn't make those picks nor made up that list. Not even sure why they want to make it personal, tossing insults around... silly too, like anybody is falling for that.

Thts what they do when they have no argument

[acoelho1]

So Lonnie's game proves my point... Pop benching him didnt suddenly make him good... He was always good, but was benched for games on end based on a bad 5 minutes... A bad stretch that EVERY young player goes through... , even vets... Pop simply has his favorites, and Lonnie isn't on that list

It's not about favorites. Pop always plays the long game when it comes to young players with the 1 exception being Duncan. You must not recall Parker and Ginobili being benched at various stages early in their career. Look at Patty as another example, he was glued to the bench, towel waving before he got his opportunity. Having said that, do I agree with Lonnie not playing more minutes, no but let's not pretend Pop doesn't have a plan in mind to get Lonnie to flourish. You can disagree with his strategy but Pop still wants the same end result.

[jjktkk]

Can I refer you to post #28 in this thread? https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/sho...=1#post9997308

George Hill was drafted over 10 years ago. Leonard was drafted by Indiana, then traded on that night (for George Hill, but I do give the FO credit for targeting him)

That leaves Cory Joseph, Kyle Anderson, and White and Murray now (and too early to tell if Kyle will survive in this league, tbh... DeJuan Blair also had a swift stint..)

I don't mind people stating they disagree with me, I'm just asking for the sniffers that love to fluff the FO draft prowess to grab that list and explain what they like about them. All those Euro guys that have a relatively decent career in Europe, we've been told here on every draft that they're not scrubs, and have yet to see an NBA floor.

I also don't know why some posters claim I'm trolling, tbh. I didn't lie, I didn't make those picks nor made up that list. Not even sure why they want to make it personal, tossing insults around... silly too, like anybody is falling for that.

GTFO, you're trolling. WTF are you exactly expecting with PATFO perennially picking in the bottom of the 1st round year after after year? And I'll gladly wear my sniffer badge. You're wannabe Mav Krew would get laughed at endlessly in public for the you and your cyber pals spew on here.

[rascal]

Most Spurs have always been overrated on this site.

[rascal]

A good list will list all the players passed over for who they chose to draft instead. All the missed opportunities on draft night.

[JeffDuncan]

A good list will list all the players passed over for who they chose to draft instead. All the missed opportunities on draft night.

The first name there is Matisse Thybulle, who's playing this year, about 16 min per game for the 76ers, a better team than the Spurs.

[ElNono]

GTFO, you're trolling. WTF are you exactly expecting with PATFO perennially picking in the bottom of the 1st round year after after year? And I'll gladly wear my sniffer badge. You're wannabe Mav Krew would get laughed at endlessly in public for the you and your cyber pals spew on here.

I personally didn't expect much, but I sure as don't expect somebody to tell me they're exceptional at drafting either, which is what I was calling out.

Suddenly, if you said they're not not all that great picking, you're trolling and a mav krew? Why, because they lucked out with Manu in the 2nd round 20 years ago?

No takers yet from the fanbois to grab that list and defend those picks.