Reply With Quote
Oh yeah.
Question.
Oh yeah.
I encourage posters to begin listing the events of misfortune that have blighted our offseason thus far.
unlucky?
I wouldn't call the inability to add talent to the roster "unlucky" this FO has been crap since they signed Bowen.
For what they paid, I'd call it a steal.Here's another bit of info on him that is very interesting-- stats as a starter: (you can find these on nba.com: underneath the player profiles, click on "season splits")
Roger Mason
9 games started
37 mpg
17.4 ppg
3.4 apg
3.0 rpg
52.6% FG
43.1% 3PT
90.1% FT
I realize this is a small sample size, but you can definitely argue that when the opportunity presented itself, Roger stepped up big time.
I didn't expect a whole LOT of movement out of the Spurs front office. The fact that we were even IN the Maggette sweepstakes was a surprise. And ending up with Roger Mason could end up being a nice little coup.
However, I think losing Tiago Splitter to Tau, coupled with Manu's continued ankle injury, coupled with a lack of development compared to other teams, all adds up to one of the worse Spurs offseasons in a while.
Oh, and Barry went to Houston.
Oh, and Finley came back instead of Horry.
Oh, and our draft picks sucked, but that's just part of being a Spurs fan. If George Hill or Malik Hairston pan out at all, expect them to end up with the Rockets or Suns.
BTW I guess I should say it was meant to be implied that if you say nah brah, you should mention which offseason was the most unlucky.
ineptness does not equal unlucky
the front office has some many massive -ups, you can't call it bad luck.
Losing Splitter was unlucky.
I gotta say I agree with letting Horry go. His production last year was smaller than Bonner's. He was a great guy to have the past few years, but I think the run was over.
I think Barry still has something left, but he is also older and spent most of last season injured. He had a great game against the Lakers in the playoffs, but otherwise underperformed. A great guy... but if the mantra is get younger and more athletic, it makes sense to let him go and create minutes for Mason, Udoka, and to look towards the future.
Finley was the youngest of the three vets, and played the most minutes last year of the three. I just think it makes sense to keep him, especially at a cheap price.
So, it turns out Maggette wanted to make more money and Denver was ready to match any offer for Smith. I wish Gist had stayed, but overall I think the FO chose wisely.
Barry was washed up. So was Horry.
We got a great role player in Roger Mason. The verdict is out on Mahinmi. We brought back Thomas who was virtually free to begin with and signed him cheap.
Good off season to me. Not great but it never is.
In terms of what we could do, the only "major up" I saw was made on Draft Night. But the jury's still out on that one ...
If the jury is still out, how can it be a major up?
Answer this honestly: before the Spurs made an offer last off season to Mason, was he on anyone's radar? And then he goes and has a breakout year, posting the best scoring numbers and shooting percentages of his career, to go along with his already scrappy defense and versatility... isn't this an example of really good talent scouting?
This offseason was just dandy.
I think the spurs are great talent scouts, signing and keeping players is another thing. My problem is that they have failed to draft, keep and develop young talent so that we dont have to pray someone we want signs with us.
We have drafted well from John Salmons, to Barbosa, Scola , Manu and Parker ect..... But Im not sold on Hill yet as a pg. I think he would be much better suited to give us mins at the 2 with tony on the floor to help with the ball handling.
I think Ian was a good pick who could be a 16 - 10 guy in a few years. I still dont think passing on Greene and the Center form Tex a&m for hill was a wise move. Letting Gist walk was not a good idea even though he will likely be back in 2010. Hairston was a complete bust, he is not an NBA player right now and they could have had Walker instead of him.
no
You mean, generally?
no what?
It was only unlucky that so many people we targeted had better offers, other than that, not so bad.
Ironically, the Spurs have been victims of their own success. By always winning, they always pick late in the draft, and by having established veterans, they often didn't have much room for rookies. The Pistons have had a similar situation the last five years, don't you think?
I agree on Gist-- wish he had stayed. I don't like the idea of every Euro GM having a front seat to his talent and development...
I'd guess Hill was picked as a combo guard who, thanks to his 6'9" wingspan and desire to play D, could be developed to both relieve and play alongside Parker-- just like Mason. It's a nice move IMO because Parker is our youngest star and figures to be here a long time, so surrounding him with versatile combo guards makes sense-- they can get more minutes without taking too many away from him directly.
Don't forget about....that...that....front office guy....that left!
The jury can always be out, even on minor ups, which is also what George Hill could end up being.
The contract they gave to Finley shows inep ude to some degree, or if not that, then desperation. I don't see how anyone can make a great case for Finley. The best argument seems to be that he might not play much. Or that we know what we're getting. What we're getting is an ineffective player. It was bad enough to let Gist go but to then sign Fin for two more years! That is insane.
Mason might be a steal. Let's hope so.
The Splitter issue at first seemed like bad luck but I'm wondering now if they should have even drafted him. In other words, could this scenario have been avoided? It's hard to say, but I don't think the FO should be completely off the hook for not knowing what kind of situation they were getting involved in.
And the Corey situation - yeah, it would have been cool if he had come here but was he anymore of a team player than JR? They both seemed like me first players except that Corey is older and somehow, "safer". To me, JR was a better prospectl. I still think we should have offered a contract to JR right away before they were able to deal away Camby to clear space.
I'm sure everyone has a different opinion. That's fine.
If Manu had skipped the olympics, he'd have ed up his ankle in November and would have been out for most of the regular season when the West is really deep. That pretty much makes this as lucky an offseason as the Spurs have ever had.
The most unlucky off season that I can remember was '99. We lost a two time All Star lock down defender, got stiffed by an agent and his player (Murray) who would have at least filled the offensive void, and got matched by the Clips on Nesby.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
