Why do we need to trade Rasho?

[easjer]

I have read a lot of the proposed trades, and so many of them of center around Rasho.

Why the hate? I truly don't understand. He's slower than we'd like, I give you that, but he's good defensively (better than Nazr) and has a decent J, so he's not clogging up the paint. Their points are comparable.

Nazr was great, but we haven't seen him in a full season yet. He froze in the playoffs. So why does everyone desparately want to keep him before seeing him for a bit longer.

And I know Scola's supposed to be good, but why do people feel we don't need a legitimate back up center? We've been hurting for awhile without one.

I'm not picking at things, I just truly don't get it.

[TMSKILZ]

I have read a lot of the proposed trades, and so many of them of center around Rasho.

Why the hate? I truly don't understand. He's slower than we'd like, I give you that, but he's good defensively (better than Nazr) and has a decent J, so he's not clogging up the paint. Their points are comparable.

Nazr was great, but we haven't seen him in a full season yet. He froze in the playoffs. So why does everyone desparately want to keep him before seeing him for a bit longer.

And I know Scola's supposed to be good, but why do people feel we don't need a legitimate back up center? We've been hurting for awhile without one.

I'm not picking at things, I just truly don't get it.

it's not about hate on my part, it's about improving our team @ the sametime shaving off wasted talent & salaries.
For what we're paying Rasho, he's not living up to & producing what his contract would indicate.
He was demoted to bench warming, yes partly due to the injury, but mainly b/c he wasn't producing & Nazr did better. That is why the Spurs made the trade for Nazr, to get consistent production from the C spot.
You have guys making just about the same salary as Rasho who are better, so why not entertain possible trades? Don't you want to improve your beloved Spurs team to keep the le run going for years to come?

[easjer]

Only if we get a legit, full size center. I haven't seen an actual workable option yet that doesn't involve sliding a PF into the backup C position. Which we did with Malik, but he's gone.

Additionally, we are still uncertain about Nazr. The center isn't our #1 option, so why do we need to lose the defense? Can't we at least be certain Nazr can improve to what we need before dumping Rasho?

It's not that I'm in love with the guy, but if it ain't broke . . .

[Kori Ellis]

For what we're paying Rasho, he's not living up to & producing what his contract would indicate.
He was demoted to bench warming, yes partly due to the injury, but mainly b/c he wasn't producing & Nazr did better. That is why the Spurs made the trade for Nazr, to get consistent production from the C spot.

Rasho was close to living up to what the Spurs wanted from him before he was injured. They want defense and rebounding out of that position. Nazr was brought here to get rid of Malik's contract and provide some height off the bench. He got the shot at the starting job because of Rasho's injury only. And I'm sure if the injury had happened earlier in the season, then Rasho would have been given a shot at winning his job back-- but it was too late in the season when he got healthy.

Nazr was great, but we haven't seen him in a full season yet. He froze in the playoffs. So why does everyone desparately want to keep him before seeing him for a bit longer.

And I know Scola's supposed to be good, but why do people feel we don't need a legitimate back up center? We've been hurting for awhile without one.

Other people have the same concerns. That's why the Spurs might not even look to trade Rasho. He provides some security and they can always look to move him midseason if necessary. There's no guarantee Scola will even be in a Spurs uniform next season and there's definitely no assurances that he'll be able to produce immediately against NBA compe ion.

All that being said, if the Spurs get offered something good for Rasho, I don't think they'll pass it up. But that's probably true for nearly any Spurs player outside the big 3 and Bowen.

[BigDaddyMatty]

The Spurs were on pace to break the All-Time points differntial with Rasho starting. They were beating teams down by like 13 pts a game. That shows you how good the Spurs can be with Rasho starting. I say let him and Nazr battle it out in camp, and if Nazr wins see what you can get for Rasho. If Rasho wins keep Nazr around as the backup and let his contract expire. I don't like trading 7 ftrs just because. It will be a lot easier to find a 3 than a ctr.

[boutons]

"That is why the Spurs made the trade for Nazr, to get consistent production from the C spot."

So the Spurs traded Malik to go from Rasho's 6 and 7, to Nazr's 7 and 7?

hmm, wasn't it do get rid of tweener PF Malik's salary in return for legit (backup) big C (who turned out to be a starter)?

[SWC Bonfire]

I don't like trading 7 ftrs just because. It will be a lot easier to find a 3 than a ctr.

Good point. Us keeping both keeps one out of the hands of an adversary. There is a definate lack of even mediocre big men in the league compared to small forwards.

[Marcus Bryant]

At least the virtual GMs stopped trying to trade Tony Parker...

[ChumpDumper]

Why do we need to trade Rasho?

We don't, really - and I can't think of a very good deal outside of some kind of Battier for Rasho thing to shore up the SF position. Even that trade is iffy -- maybe we get what we want, but our division rival gets exactly what it needs.

Given that an Nazr's contract status, relative cluelessness in too many floor situations and injury history, I'm not against keeping Rasho at least one more year.

[Marcus Bryant]

The only reason the Spurs will move Rasho is if they don't want to spend the money to have some real frontcourt depth.

[easjer]

I don't think we need to trade for a 3 - I think LJIII will fit the bill perfectly, especially if he can start reliably hitting jumpers and even better, three's. So I truly don't understand the reason to trade a something reliable that we have for something we don't need all that much. Bruce will be fine for another couple of years, I think we can afford to giveup one on change for LJ and see how he develops.

[spurster]

The Spurs don't need to trade Rasho, but we expect the usual Spurs miser/frugal policy, and having $5M/year and garbage minutes is a prime candidate for moving, especially when another bigman (Scola) is expected.

[easjer]

The only reason the Spurs will move Rasho is if they don't want to spend the money to have some real frontcourt depth.

MB, is there a better thing to spend $ on? Seriously? I don't know enough about the offseason and cap stuff to feel informed, but it seems to me we are pretty good on everything for the moment.

And good news about TP.

[Solid D]

Dilemma:
Rasho sets great screens, doesn't miss many defensive assignments, blocks shots, catches, passes and shoots relatively well but is not very physical and almost never considers dunking an option.

Nazr is an excellent offensive rebounder and is very long, he can play physical and he loves to dunk but he has elephant feet for hands (the reason you don't see more catch-and-shoot scoring elephants in the NBA).

Long-term which is better?

[Marcus Bryant]

Both.

[1Parker1]

At least the virtual GMs stopped trying to trade Tony Parker...

I actually think that Rasho would be great off the bench. I said it at the begining of the year, I didn't think we'd get very far with Rasho as our starter and with not having a legit backup for him.

Though Nazr looked like crap at times against the Detroit series...almost every Spurs player did at one game or another. He did play pretty great basketball the first few rounds, however. It just pissed me off how many EASY passes he fumbled from Parker and Ginobili.

Rasho is great on the defensive end of things and really understands the Spurs system--my only fault with him is that he is NOT a good offensive player.

Rasho has what Nazr needs to work on and Nazr has the qualities that Rasho needs to work on. I like the idea of having someone like Rasho on the bench when Nazr gets into foul trouble or has a bad game.......it's just up to Pop to use him.

I actually LOVE our roster right now and don't want to trade anyone at this point. The only person I may consider trading for is a good backup PG for Beno, but I doubt that will happen.

Aside from that, I expect BRENT BARRY to rip next season and once again be #1 or #2 in 3pt made.

[SWC Bonfire]

(the reason you don't see more catch-and-shoot scoring elephants in the NBA).

Here's the only one I could find:

[1Parker1]

SWC, God I hate that guy....

[easjer]

I bow to your speed and agility with the wordplay (and pictures do speak 1000 words), SWC.

I actually LOVE our roster right now and don't want to trade anyone at this point. The only person I may consider trading for is a good backup PG for Beno, but I doubt that will happen.

Yes, my fellow exile, I completely agree with you.

[Marcus Bryant]

The Spurs don't need to trade Rasho, but we expect the usual Spurs miser/frugal policy, and having $5M/year and garbage minutes is a prime candidate for moving, especially when another bigman (Scola) is expected.

Indeed. That seems to be where things are headed at this point.

[CosmicCowboy]

I am personally witholding judgement till Nazr goes through a full training camp and season...I suspect a lot of the "bad hands" rap was just not yet knowing the system/players and not expecting the ball in those situations...remember that the guy has never played on an unselfish ball movement oriented team like the Spurs...If he steps up his game to another level in 2005-2006 Spurs MIGHT consider dealing Rasho next summer...until then I think he will be a Spur no matter what...Rasho's contract is very reasonable for a servicable center...

[Marcus Bryant]

Soon enough I expect comments to bubble up in the local SA media about how the Spurs can't afford Rasho's contract and what not. The M.O. never changes.

[whottt]

CC, Nazr has bad hands and it isn't gonna change, it never did for Malik, it never has for anyone...he also has no feel for the basket.....he had those problems in NY too.

AHF and others are fond of pointing out that Nazr has a low TO per game average...it's not that low when you consider the Spurs offense only gives him about two touches per game outside of his o rebounds.

I am surprised no one noticed how many times Nazr missed his help assignments on baseline penetration...when Barry is having to tell him where he needs to be on D you know he's not exactly acing his D assignments.


Which one is the keeper is definitely up to debate...and I kind of agree with those that want to keep both. I don't see a good reason to be in a hurry to dump one...unless you think Nazr is going to leave and want to get value for him...though in that case we'd probably be trading him to a playoff contender...

[WalterBenitez]

I won't go behind $$$ argument, but Rasho is pretty good defender, the only point is he trends to be soft is some games ...when you need an explosive dunk or sth like that

In those games I'd love to see Nazr

But please, please ... talk to TP and MANU to send an email to Nazr before sending the ball, this Nazr has my mother-in-law hands after doing the dishes

[Rasho Fan 88]

I dont know why everyone wants to get rid of Rasho. So what he had a bad year. He sprained his ankle twice. You cant expect him to be great after spraining his ankle. I seem to remember him having a pretty good year last year. And he has VERY good Defense. Nazr doesnt.