Reply With Quote
Just wait.
It's like the final season of Lost!
Just wait.
Will do.
I think you're missing Bruno's point, though. Regardless of the line-ups we've run the past 5 years, the need to constantly improve on the cheap at every position is a going concern with our and any franchise, and players that fell to us on the cheap have unsurprisingly been busts by an overwhelming margin. Not just busts as Spurs players fighting for minutes on championship rosters, but busts in NBA terms. Busts who often ended up in marginal foreign leagues if they were lucky enough to still play professionally.
So maybe you're right that Hairston was unfairly benched because Pop preferred Bogans/Fin despite their being an obvious liability on the floor, but you have to acknowledge the assumption that Pop would be ok fielding a losing team in Timmy's twilight while deep into the lux tax. Next you'd have to contend with the fact that probability isn't on your side per Bruno's list. Finally, you'd have to grant that you have no more proof to support your su ions than anyone who disagrees with you.
If you're cool with those three issues, then cool. If not, that's cool, too. It doesn't matter anymore. Let's just wish the kid luck and move on. Last season is mercifully over
Pop doesn't trust young players and has way too much faith in vets. This is a fact. George Hill should've of been playing more his rookie year in the playoffs. Look at Blair's inconsistent minutes last year.
Besides kinda disagreeing with this for reasons mentioned upstream, the Hill example ultimately undermines the point Hairston supporters are trying to make because; a) Pop played Hill throughout the regular season (unlike Hairston) whether or not Parker was injured, and; b) Pop realized his mistake and corrected it, which Malikists contend is impossible.
In preseason, Hairston was clearly better than Bogans who was horrible and shoot beyond 10% but it didn't matter. Bogans is a vet with tons of NBA minutes and what he does in preseason doesn't really matter because he was a known quan y. Bogans did this year more or less what he has done his whole career. He wasn't that bad until the playoffs where he sucked which is likely the reason why Spurs don't bring him back.
Spurs and Pop obviously didn't have the same evaluation than you on Hairston. They liked him enough to keep him even if he cost some money with the luxury tax but not enough to give him some minutes. Near the end of the season, it looks like they had more and more doubts about him with the signing of Temple and Gee. They finally let him go this summer.
Spurs evaluated Hairston through the limited minutes he played and they came to the conclusion that he wasn't worth being tried with more minutes or even being kept. Given Spurs track record on these quick evaluations, you had to take a little part of humble pie and admit that you likely the one who is wrong about Hairston and that he isn't NBA material.
Bogans signed with Chicago and is still potentially an NBA player in one team's plans. Malik didn't get an NBA offer and is in Italy.
Temple got some play as a rookie, and even played in the playoffs. Malik Didn't.
Shoulda, woulda, coulda but didn't is pretty definitive.
Teams have also tried the Spurs formula of giving bad fits 40M contracts and we see how that works out.
LOL "my formula". No one is saying Malik or Ian was the savior. But when you are not a contender and the guys in front of them are Bogans, Finley and Bonner, it does not hurt to give them more minutes to see what you have.
Its not about Malik or Ian being NBA material. It is about not really knowing because they weren't given ample opportunity at the expense of a below average Finley (who still has no team) and Bogans.
That is all. It does not make Pop a bad coach. But it is a mistake none the less.
I think people have misinterpreted the reasoning for Hairston being released. I don't think it had anything to do with what the Spurs thought of him and everything to do with them doing him a favor. I'm convinced he was going to take over the Bogans role towards the end of last season: 10th man/backup SF/spot minutes as a pseudo stopper. Was he going to make the difference between winning a championship or not? Obviously not. So they did him a favor, allowing him to make guaranteed money and play consistent, (presumably) at least relatively significant minutes.
Their track record on these evaluations is irrelevant. Each player needs to be looked at as an individual case. Blackjack did a good job of explaining why Hairston's case was unique to almost every player on that list.
I don't think anyone is under the illusion that this was a devastating loss or that this somehow is going to drastically alter the team's fortunes this coming season, but he could have helped.
Is he a surefire NBA player? No. But he's a guy who can, at minimum, play in the league and he's clearly comparable to a guy like Dahntay Jones and players of that ilk. Jones was a fringe player for years until the Nuggets, one of the five best teams in the league in 08-09, decided to not only play him, but start him. Because they had so many talented players, his limitations weren't nearly as exposed as they would have been on a less talented team. Hairston could have played a similar role with the Spurs, only in a lesser capacity. It's not about talent as much as it is about fit. Putting together a team is like putting together a puzzle; all the pieces have to fit. Hairston could have brought something that no other player on this team could have.
People need to get past this stigma of, "well, if he were good enough, he'd have been playing" (not always true) or "if he were so good, then why wasn't he a 1st round pick?" or "he's unproven; Bogans was a proven veteran". I used to think that way, but I came to realize that it's irrelevant. If you know the game and you know the league, you can easily see how a player like Hairston would have fit in on a team like the Spurs.
Last edited by TD 21; 08-08-2010 at 12:41 PM.
If you knew the Spurs, you'd realize a few things. Probably only 20-25% of the league's players would succeed here, so what his chances would be around the league are irrelevant. You'd also realize that a wing player who can't knock down the 3 pointer has no chance in SA. Bogans played because he hit 36% from downtown. Finley, having HIS WORST SEASON EVER, still shot 32% and played in front of Malik.
If you don't shoot the 3 pointer effectively, you won't play for the Spurs on the perimeter, period.
So why did RJ get 40M? RJ shot 25% from 3 in the first round and did not make a 3 in the 2nd round sweep.
He shot 31% during the regular season.
Hairston is the type of player who would fit it with the Spurs. A selfless, hard working, defensive minded player. That's their type. As for his shooting, he never received consistent enough playing time to say definitively he couldn't shoot, say, 30-32% from three. He very well might have been capable of that. It's not like his D-League, Summer League or college numbers suggest that he couldn't shoot the three at all.
Since when is 32% effectively? I'm not convinced Bogans and Finley played in front of Hairston for that reason. I think there was more to it than that. This is pro sports. Anyone who's followed them long enough knows politics often play a role in who plays and who doesn't, among other things.
DPG brings up a good point about Jefferson's three-point shooting (or lack thereof) and him getting $38.9 million.
Last edited by TD 21; 08-08-2010 at 05:04 PM.
Thanks for making my point for me. What did Malik shoot again? I'm not sure what the percentage is, but I'm pretty sure he's made TWO three pointers in sixty-something games over two seasons.
Hairston got 60-something games over two seasons to show SOMETHING from beyond the arc, and epic-failed. I know he shot well in the d-league, but the d-league ain't the NBA. It could be that simple, or it could be that he can't do it on the big stage. He wouldn't be the first.
Your point is that if you aren't a good 3 point shooter, you don't play for the Spurs. Well, RJ sucked and got 40M.
C'mon guys, it isn't that hard. Pop will always play his best 3 point shooters, even if they aren't as good as those of years past. , Garrett Temple literally came out of NOWHERE, knocked down 43.5% of his treys, and got double Hairston's minutes with a few starts thrown in.
It's not that he isn't a good guy. It isn't that Pop hates him. Malik Hairston failed as a Spur because he couldn't knock down the gotdamn three pointer. Period. End of story.
Actually, my point was that Pop will ALWAYS play his best three point shooters, even if they aren't as good as the ones he's had in years past. Richard Jefferson looks like Ray Mutha in' Allen compared to Malik.
Are we talking about a different RJ? The one I remember was so afraid to shoot a 3 in the PHX series he would set up two steps inside the line.
20% in the playoffs for RJ from 3 point land.
Alright, you made me look it up. 16.7% career for Malik. 62 games 478 minutes. That's a bigger sample size than you're using.
So 40M for 20% 3PT shooting in the playoffs for a team that values 3PT shooting and has championship aspirations?
Malik was not being paid 40M.
RJ wasn't signed to that because he deserved it, he was signed to that for tax relief and so that they could bring over Splitter. His cap/tax number was ~ $22.7M, a crippling figure. If you haven't figured it out, that deal was done WELL in advance, before they even announced that they were going hard after Splitter this summer. If you add the luxury tax REFUND that the Spurs will get next summer, what they essentially did, was restructure his contract, pay him some money that would have gone to the league as tax anyway, and extend him for 3 yrs/$15M. Splitter doesn't come over if this doesn't happen.
BTW, Malik would STILL BE HERE if he hadn't ASKED FOR HIS RELEASE.
Last edited by ChuckD; 08-08-2010 at 07:26 PM.
How do you know that?
Because, while the Spurs are willing to go a little bit into the tax, they'll never go a lot. They were already at $64.4 with just 5 players, Tim, Tony, Manu, RJ's old salary, and McDyess.
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)
Posting Permissions
