Page 5 of 20 FirstFirst 12345678915 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 125 of 491
  1. #101
    Machacarredes Chinook's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Post Count
    30,994
    You were right son. Dante Cunningham and Quincy Pondexter. Just an ocean full of those types of players to choose from.
    They are a dime-a-dozen. PATFO literally just avoided picking up anyone good. Toronto had like five or six just lying around, but instead ... Poeltl

  2. #102
    ಥ﹏ಥ DAF86's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Post Count
    44,754
    You didn't have to be a ing genius to realize, last season, that the Spurs' wing future was looking bleak. We added a fricking 6'7" all-star and we are still at least 3 capable wings away from having a good roster.

  3. #103
    Machacarredes Chinook's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Post Count
    30,994
    That happens when you trade away or let go of their three best defensive wings and replace them with minus defenders or guys who can't defend the position they're playing. Like people thought the wing situation was bad when the team was an elite D despite missing their DPOY. Now they can see what it really looks like to have a ty wing situation. If they had Green, Anderson and Murray this year, they'd again be fine.

    As I said in this very thread, they needed to replace the guys they lost with vet wings or at least top prospects who could be counted on to play roles. I was VERY happy they used 18 on Walker and didn't reach for the next available forward. I was less happy about letting Anderson go for Bertans and Forbes. I was annoyed at them using their MLE on Beli. And I was livid over them including Green along with Kawhi and not getting back a defensive wing.

  4. #104
    ಥ﹏ಥ DAF86's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Post Count
    44,754
    That happens when they traded away or let go of their three best defensive wings. Like people thought the wing situation was bad when the team was an elite D despite missing their DPOY. Now they can see what it really looks like to have a ty wing situation. If they had Green, Anderson and Murray this year, they'd again be fine.
    You are missing the point son. Last season, every smart Spurs fan realized that there was a very good chance that we would lose the players we lost. The rumour of Kawhi wanting out was already floating and Anderson and Green were free agents. That's why many of us were worried about this position.

    Also, many people also thought that Green and specially Anderson weren't good enough; so yeah, even if those guys would have stayed we still needed more wings. In today's NBA you can't have too many wings, just get that through your head once and for all.

    A perfect NBA roster today would consist of 3 or 4 bigmen and the rest all wing players. Midget PG's (unless super-talents like Curry) are unnecesary if you have the most important type of player in today's NBA, which is a playmaking wing.

    You have a playmaking wing that works as the defacto PG and surround that guy with 3 wings that can defend and shoot and a bigmen. That's it, that's what you need.

    Or do you not think that a lineup of say:

    DeRozan, Green, Ariza, Gay, Aldridge

    Wouldn't be better than:

    Forbes, DeRozan, Gay, Aldridge and Poeltl?

  5. #105
    ಥ﹏ಥ DAF86's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Post Count
    44,754
    That happens when you trade away or let go of their three best defensive wings and replace them with minus defenders or guys who can't defend the position they're playing. Like people thought the wing situation was bad when the team was an elite D despite missing their DPOY. Now they can see what it really looks like to have a ty wing situation. If they had Green, Anderson and Murray this year, they'd again be fine.

    As I said in this very thread, they needed to replace the guys they lost with vet wings or at least top prospects who could be counted on to play roles. I was VERY happy they used 18 on Walker and didn't reach for the next available forward. I was less happy about letting Anderson go for Bertans and Forbes. I was annoyed at them using their MLE on Beli. And I was livid over them including Green along with Kawhi and not getting back a defensive wing.
    Two of those players can't shoot, and the other can't dribble. No, we wouldn't have been fine. Sure, our defense would still be good but we would also be an extremely flawed offensive team. DeRozan wouldn't be having the offensive season he's having next to Murray and Anderson, tbh.

  6. #106
    Machacarredes Chinook's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Post Count
    30,994
    You are missing the point son.
    Nah. You missed the point I made toward the end of this thread's original run. The team drafting an SF at 18 was not important. Such a player wouldn't have closer to a rotation spot than Walker. It doesn't help that guy the time SA got to draft, there wasn't even a decent forward in the range. The Spurs failed to address the position in free agency.

    Also, many people also thought that Green and specially Anderson weren't good enough
    And they were wrong. That's what this year should be teaching people. The Spurs badly need good guard play last year. They finally have a top guard again, but now they let their wings go. The Spurs were a tremendous defensive team last year, but "smart" folks constantly shat on them. Now their gone, and it turns out that they weren't that bad after all. , OP (who is a perfectly good poster) even got his top guy signed in Beli, and it still looks like an abortion.

    A perfect NBA roster today would consist of 3 or 4 bigmen and the rest all wing players.
    This is where we still disagree. It's not like the Spurs have a bunch of good players, but they're not wings so it's not working out. They have a bunch of ty players. When you don't have talent, it doesn't matter what position you play. You add Derozan instead of Leonard's injured ass last year, and the team probably makes the WCF. That's not because of them being a modern team or whatever. They just literally had no one last year who could do anything on the perimeter. , even 2013 Parker would have made the Spurs a top-level team.

    Or do you not think that a lineup of say:

    DeRozan, Green, Ariza, Gay, Aldridge

    Wouldn't be better than:

    Forbes, DeRozan, Gay, Aldridge and Poeltl?
    This is disingenuous as . You're asking if Green and Ariza are better than Forbes and Poeltl. Yes. Obviously if Danny plays the way he seems to be playing this year. This is setting aside that Ariza signed for way more than SA could offer and that Green was a part of the DeRozan trade. It's also overlooking that Forbes was forced into the starting unit because of injuries. Have a couple unknown, cheap wings in there instead of guys with many years of good or great service. I don't know if it is better or not. I do know that an elite 6-2 player is much more helpful than a mediocre 6-7 player. If you have a chance to get the elite talent, you do it. You don't worry about modern trends. The good players use their differences to their advantage and don't let generalists dictate the tempo. An elite big doesn't let a 6-8 guy hold him down in the post. An elite guard doesn't let a slower wing keep him from the rim. Mismatches go both ways, and the specialists have the advantage in a stable environment.

  7. #107
    Machacarredes Chinook's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Post Count
    30,994
    Two of those players can't shoot, and the other can't dribble. No, we wouldn't have been fine. Sure, our defense would still be good but we would also be an extremely flawed offensive team. DeRozan wouldn't be having the offensive season he's having next to Murray and Anderson, tbh.
    He doesn't need to be great. The team was three wins from the three-seed as they were, and that included an insanely bad record in close games. Just having a reliable perimeter player down the stretch would have made the difference in some of those. They won 47 games despite folks acting like they were the tiest team ever. They were fine last year. Adding an elite guard would not have made them worse. It's plum absurd to argue it would.

  8. #108
    Veteran r0drig0lac's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Post Count
    14,486
    tyreke evans, wilson chandler and mario hezonja would be a good addition to the depth
    .

  9. #109
    Veteran r0drig0lac's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Post Count
    14,486
    You are missing the point son. Last season, every smart Spurs fan realized that there was a very good chance that we would lose the players we lost. The rumour of Kawhi wanting out was already floating and Anderson and Green were free agents. That's why many of us were worried about this position.

    Also, many people also thought that Green and specially Anderson weren't good enough; so yeah, even if those guys would have stayed we still needed more wings. In today's NBA you can't have too many wings, just get that through your head once and for all.

    A perfect NBA roster today would consist of 3 or 4 bigmen and the rest all wing players. Midget PG's (unless super-talents like Curry) are unnecesary if you have the most important type of player in today's NBA, which is a playmaking wing.

    You have a playmaking wing that works as the defacto PG and surround that guy with 3 wings that can defend and shoot and a bigmen. That's it, that's what you need.

    Or do you not think that a lineup of say:

    DeRozan, Green, Ariza, Gay, Aldridge

    Wouldn't be better than:

    Forbes, DeRozan, Gay, Aldridge and Poeltl?
    this

  10. #110
    Hope springs eternal. SAGirl's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Post Count
    27,774

    You mean to say that Bryn is not a SF?

    And neither is Bertans?
    Last edited by SAGirl; 10-25-2018 at 07:17 AM.

  11. #111
    ಥ﹏ಥ DAF86's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Post Count
    44,754
    He doesn't need to be great. The team was three wins from the three-seed as they were, and that included an insanely bad record in close games. Just having a reliable perimeter player down the stretch would have made the difference in some of those. They won 47 games despite folks acting like they were the tiest team ever. They were fine last year. Adding an elite guard would not have made them worse. It's plum absurd to argue it would.
    Let's say Murray wouldn't have got hurt and Anderson would have been resigned.

    Do you really think a lineup of Murray, DeRozan, Anderson, Aldridge and Poeltl would have done much better than the 47 wins we had last year?

    Anderson worked the last regular season because he was kind of the perimeter playmaker of the 1st unit. On that role, his lack of shooting was mitigated. He wouldn't have worked as an off-ball player next to DeRozan, much less with Murray at PG. That's why many of us said that simply adding a playmaker to the team we had last season wasn't going to be enough.
    Last edited by DAF86; 10-25-2018 at 07:57 AM.

  12. #112
    ಥ﹏ಥ DAF86's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Post Count
    44,754
    Nah. You missed the point I made toward the end of this thread's original run. The team drafting an SF at 18 was not important. Such a player wouldn't have closer to a rotation spot than Walker. It doesn't help that guy the time SA got to draft, there wasn't even a decent forward in the range. The Spurs failed to address the position in free agency.
    Your problem is trying to make a distinction between SG and SF as if the positions were so different. Walker is a wing, and I'm completely fine with picking him up.

    And no, "playmaking skills" isn't a characterstic of guards that forwards don't have. Patty Mills isn't more of a playmaker than Lebron ing James. You don't think the comparisson is fair? Well, Patty Mills isn't more of a playmaker than Joe Ingles or even Kyle Anderson. So stop it with that prehistoric idea that guards are quick, skilled players and Forwards are rugged, skill limited players.


    And they were wrong. That's what this year should be teaching people. The Spurs badly need good guard play last year. They finally have a top guard again, but now they let their wings go. The Spurs were a tremendous defensive team last year, but "smart" folks constantly shat on them. Now their gone, and it turns out that they weren't that bad after all. , OP (who is a perfectly good poster) even got his top guy signed in Beli, and it still looks like an abortion.
    Like I told you in a post above, simply adding DeRozan to Murray and Anderson wouldn't have made us any better. So no, people that thought we should have got more wings weren't wrong.

    This is where we still disagree. It's not like the Spurs have a bunch of good players, but they're not wings so it's not working out. They have a bunch of ty players. When you don't have talent, it doesn't matter what position you play. You add Derozan instead of Leonard's injured ass last year, and the team probably makes the WCF. That's not because of them being a modern team or whatever. They just literally had no one last year who could do anything on the perimeter. , even 2013 Parker would have made the Spurs a top-level team.
    Sure, if you can choose between Kemba Walker or Trevor Ariza, you should choose the all-star level player. I didn't think I needed to clarify thay. What I'm saying is that at equally level of talent, you should always go with the wing sized player.

    This is disingenuous as . You're asking if Green and Ariza are better than Forbes and Poeltl. Yes. Obviously if Danny plays the way he seems to be playing this year. This is setting aside that Ariza signed for way more than SA could offer and that Green was a part of the DeRozan trade. It's also overlooking that Forbes was forced into the starting unit because of injuries. Have a couple unknown, cheap wings in there instead of guys with many years of good or great service. I don't know if it is better or not. I do know that an elite 6-2 player is much more helpful than a mediocre 6-7 player. If you have a chance to get the elite talent, you do it. You don't worry about modern trends. The good players use their differences to their advantage and don't let generalists dictate the tempo. An elite big doesn't let a 6-8 guy hold him down in the post. An elite guard doesn't let a slower wing keep him from the rim. Mismatches go both ways, and the specialists have the advantage in a stable environment.
    You don't like the Green and Ariza examples? Use any wings that you think are equally in level to Forbes and Poeltl and make the comparisson.

    Let's say:

    Josh Hart (who is averaging the same kind of minutes and pts that Forbes is averaging) and Pascal Siakam (a third year player who played about the same amount of minutes that Poeltl played last season).

    Forbes, DeRozan, Gay, Aldridge, Poeltl

    Vs

    DeRozan, Hart, Siakam, Gay, Aldridge

    Which team is better?

  13. #113
    Veteran r0drig0lac's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Post Count
    14,486
    spurs should seek a trade with some team with stacking of wings like the heat

  14. #114
    Hope springs eternal. SAGirl's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Post Count
    27,774
    Spurs didn’t value the wings they had (other than Kiwi)

    Regardless of what your opinions are on them, the worse thing was giving them all away, while not having anyone else in the pipeline to take their place or get any wing back in return.

    Spurs had all these guys that are gone for nothing the last couple of seasons: (1) Simms— you asked to be let out of you RFA status? Off you go; (2) Hanga- you got a fat contract (not as phat as Patty), but ofc you go too. (3) Danny, you are good in a good contract, we have to retain Tony, Paddy and Pau, let’s see what we can get for you. Result= thrown in a trade bc Nephew by himself wasn’t good enough for Toronto (yeah, right)... (4) Anderson? yeah thanks for your 3 seasons of nice blue collar hustle, but we ain’t paying you. You will be fine in Memphis. (5) Manu? nothing we can do about your retirement, you earned it. I mean we had planned to bring Hanga over had you retired a year b4 but it’s cool. It’s not like we didn’t know beforehand that this was coming. We are shocked that we miss you. We panicked when Timmy retired and we gave a huge deal to Gasol, but we will be fine with Belli bc it’s not like we have other shooters in Forbes and Davis. We don’t need anyone who hustles like you did. We are fine.

    But wait!

    last season

    we are going to do it again but with more talent.

    Also Pop:

    This season
    We are defensively challenged.

    /end blue font where it applies.

    I hope people appreciate the humor.

    ———————-

    Sometimes I think they will look to do a small trade but I am not sure. They can chalk this terrible defense to missing 2nd team D Murray and just stumble all season. The only reason that a trade even crosses my mind is Pop acknowledging the personnel they have is not ideal but they also said in preseason they were looking around and still left a 2 way spot open for a guy in a walking boot for the rest of the year and kept Pondexter who only comes in garbage time and has no upside.
    Last edited by SAGirl; 10-25-2018 at 08:14 AM.

  15. #115
    Veteran r0drig0lac's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Post Count
    14,486
    while gsw signs with Alfonzo McKinnie, a 6'8''SF for a 2-way contract while already has a stack of athletic and versatile guys on the perimeter (
    Bell, Derickson, Dray, Iggy, Livingston, Klay, etc.),It's really depressing.

  16. #116
    Spur-taaaa TDMVPDPOY's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Post Count
    41,330
    defense wins games is what the spurs are known for,

    dont tell me pop is going away from that mantra?

  17. #117
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Post Count
    1,958
    Are we really talking about Danny green and KA as the missing parts to this roster? Oh good God!
    KA is averaging 4 points and 4 rebounds in 22 minutes a game and still hasn't made a 3 pointer

    Green still can't dribble.

    Those two need to go. The error was in ignoring sounds to replace them with.

  18. #118
    Machacarredes Chinook's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Post Count
    30,994
    Your problem is trying to make a distinction between SG and SF as if the positions were so different. Walker is a wing, and I'm completely fine with picking him up.
    Yet Walker wouldn't do against KD in the playoffs either, which is what people were ing about last year. Dude is 6-4 and change. To act like that's the same thing as a legit small-forward is obtuse. Four Walkers and a big isn't going to stop anyone.

    And no, "playmaking skills" isn't a characterstic of guards that forwards don't have. Patty Mills isn't more of a playmaker than Lebron ing James. You don't think the comparisson is fair? Well, Patty Mills isn't more of a playmaker than Joe Ingles or even Kyle Anderson. So stop it with that prehistoric idea that guards are quick, skilled players and Forwards are rugged, skill limited players.
    Patty doesn't have guard skills. He pretty much just shoots. That's why he needed to play off a play-making wing. More importantly, that's why I said the team lacked "guard skills" despite Mills being on the roster last year. It's like you really can't comprehend the idea that the team didn't have good guards last year. The D was fine. They didn't need taller guys than Patty or Forbes. They needed guys who were better play-makers than those two. Hence the need for guards over wings and why just getting 6-6 three-and-D players wouldn't have helped them.

    Like I told you in a post above, simply adding DeRozan to Murray and Anderson wouldn't have made us any better. So no, people that thought we should have got more wings weren't wrong.
    And that was a lie. Adding DeRozan wouldn't have hurt the team at all. Anderson would have been able to play on the bench like he had always been planned to, and you would have had Murray, DeRozan, Green and Aldridge as the main crew with Gasol and Bertans rotating the other starting spot. The offense was last year because they had one guy who could score more than 20 points in a given game and no one who could break down a defense. That team managed to be a decent offense with just Kawhi on the perimeter. They would have been at least as good with DeRozan.

    Sure, if you can choose between Kemba Walker or Trevor Ariza, you should choose the all-star level player. I didn't think I needed to clarify thay. What I'm saying is that at equally level of talent, you should always go with the wing sized player.
    What does equal levels of talent mean to you? It doesn't mean having a wing and guard with the same skill-set. Then the wing inherently has more talent. Lebron and Chris Paul aren't equal talents. Lebron is just way better, because he can do everything Paul can do while also being 6-8. A team of Lebron, Kawhi, Durant, Giannis and Davis would crush any team in any era. That's a talent thing, not a "new NBA" thing. But a team of Prime Parker, Green, Leonard, Aldridge and Prime Splitter would beat a team of wings, even good wings. It's much easier to compensate for Parker's lack of height and Aldridge's lack of mobility (compared to wings) than it is to compensate for everyone on your team being at a disadvantage against two of the opposing players unless you constantly double.

    Josh Hart (who is averaging the same kind of minutes and pts that Forbes is averaging) and Pascal Siakam (a third year player who played about the same amount of minutes that Poeltl played last season).

    Forbes, DeRozan, Gay, Aldridge, Poeltl

    Vs

    DeRozan, Hart, Siakam, Gay, Aldridge
    I don't think it's fair to compare Poe of this year to Siakam. Last year, Jakob was better. This year, he's at a nadir of value. If Jakob can figure out how to stop getting in the way on offense and how to be a better rebounder, he'll at least have some type of advantage to work. But as of right now, he's a bad big, much worse than Siakam is a forward. Then you have Forbes, who is playing a position because of injuries compared to a 3-and-D wing who's able to play that way because he has two or three top-level play-makers. Also ignores that Hart was a first-rounder and Forbes was a UDFA.

    I do wonder about Siakam's ability to defend threes and Hart's ability to defend 1s. Pascal is a big more than he's a forward. He'd fit in well with Aldridge but less well with Gay. With DeRozan also on the team, I could see them performing much worse than you seem to think they'd do.

  19. #119
    ಥ﹏ಥ DAF86's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Post Count
    44,754
    Yet Walker wouldn't do against KD in the playoffs either, which is what people were ing about last year. Dude is 6-4 and change. To act like that's the same thing as a legit small-forward is obtuse. Four Walkers and a big isn't going to stop anyone.



    Patty doesn't have guard skills. He pretty much just shoots. That's why he needed to play off a play-making wing. More importantly, that's why I said the team lacked "guard skills" despite Mills being on the roster last year. It's like you really can't comprehend the idea that the team didn't have good guards last year. The D was fine. They didn't need taller guys than Patty or Forbes. They needed guys who were better play-makers than those two. Hence the need for guards over wings and why just getting 6-6 three-and-D players wouldn't have helped them.



    And that was a lie. Adding DeRozan wouldn't have hurt the team at all. Anderson would have been able to play on the bench like he had always been planned to, and you would have had Murray, DeRozan, Green and Aldridge as the main crew with Gasol and Bertans rotating the other starting spot. The offense was last year because they had one guy who could score more than 20 points in a given game and no one who could break down a defense. That team managed to be a decent offense with just Kawhi on the perimeter. They would have been at least as good with DeRozan.



    What does equal levels of talent mean to you? It doesn't mean having a wing and guard with the same skill-set. Then the wing inherently has more talent. Lebron and Chris Paul aren't equal talents. Lebron is just way better, because he can do everything Paul can do while also being 6-8. A team of Lebron, Kawhi, Durant, Giannis and Davis would crush any team in any era. That's a talent thing, not a "new NBA" thing. But a team of Prime Parker, Green, Leonard, Aldridge and Prime Splitter would beat a team of wings, even good wings. It's much easier to compensate for Parker's lack of height and Aldridge's lack of mobility (compared to wings) than it is to compensate for everyone on your team being at a disadvantage against two of the opposing players unless you constantly double.



    I don't think it's fair to compare Poe of this year to Siakam. Last year, Jakob was better. This year, he's at a nadir of value. If Jakob can figure out how to stop getting in the way on offense and how to be a better rebounder, he'll at least have some type of advantage to work. But as of right now, he's a bad big, much worse than Siakam is a forward. Then you have Forbes, who is playing a position because of injuries compared to a 3-and-D wing who's able to play that way because he has two or three top-level play-makers. Also ignores that Hart was a first-rounder and Forbes was a UDFA.

    I do wonder about Siakam's ability to defend threes and Hart's ability to defend 1s. Pascal is a big more than he's a forward. He'd fit in well with Aldridge but less well with Gay. With DeRozan also on the team, I could see them performing much worse than you seem to think they'd do.
    There are no such things as having "guard skills" or "forward skills" because there are many different types of guards and forwards. Kyle Anderson has nothing to do with Kyle Korver and both are listed as small forwards. Patty Mills has nothing to do with JJ Barea and both play PG. You just have off-ball players and playmakers, and both of those type of players come in all sizes and positions, BUT, at equal level of talent, it is always better to have both of those types of skillsets in wing sized players,

  20. #120
    Veteran JeffDuncan's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Post Count
    3,035
    There are no such things as having "guard skills" or "forward skills" ...
    Sure there are. A point guard is a primary ball handler, a play caller, an excellent passer, an effective threat to score at least from either the outside or on drives, and the primary defender of the other team's point guard. Among a couple other things, like being very quick and fast.

    A forward is not the team's primary ball handler (except in unusual cases like LeBron sometimes,) not the play caller (usually,) not necessarily an excellent passer (altho that always helps,) more of a scorer from the inside, and a guy who can defend the other team's bigs. Etc. And not with such a need for quickness.

    ...because there are many different types of guards and forwards. Kyle Anderson has nothing to do with Kyle Korver ...
    But that's just mentioning different players. It says nothing about the desired skill sets, when teams have to play who they've got.

    ... BUT, at equal level of talent, it is always better to have both of those types of skillsets in wing sized players
    Trouble is, if you go all midsize, you'll give up speed on the outside, and height and weight on the inside.

  21. #121
    Don't stop believin' Dex's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Post Count
    26,352
    that, lets sign 15 undersized SGs and then watch the best ones' legs fall off.

  22. #122
    Spur-taaaa TDMVPDPOY's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Post Count
    41,330
    why didnt they try to get powell from raptors... they have so many wings, yet spurms didnt try asking for one, but went for the great white hope

  23. #123
    Hope springs eternal. SAGirl's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Post Count
    27,774
    why didnt they try to get powell from raptors... they have so many wings, yet spurms didnt try asking for one, but went for the great white hope
    I suspect Powell was gettable.

    I also suspect they didn't want him. To be fair, he's the same size as Walker and White give or take a half an inch... he's not exactly of sufficient size to help much, he's really a guard and the team had a lot of guards already and then they signed Belli.

  24. #124
    3 stars and a sun
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Post Count
    976
    spurs should seek a trade with some team with stacking of wings like the heat
    Stanley Johnson doesn’t seem to get much playing time from the Pistons. But can he help?

  25. #125
    ಥ﹏ಥ DAF86's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Post Count
    44,754
    Sure there are. A point guard is a primary ball handler, a play caller, an excellent passer, an effective threat to score at least from either the outside or on drives, and the primary defender of the other team's point guard. Among a couple other things, like being very quick and fast.

    A forward is not the team's primary ball handler (except in unusual cases like LeBron sometimes,) not the play caller (usually,) not necessarily an excellent passer (altho that always helps,) more of a scorer from the inside, and a guy who can defend the other team's bigs. Etc. And not with such a need for quickness.
    That's just theory. In reality, more and more wings are taking playmaking responsabilities: Lebron, Harden, Draymond Green, DeRozan, Giannis, Butler, Oladipo, among others. And that's not taking into account wings like Durant and Kawhi, who are more traditional scoring wings but that have the ball in their hands so much that end up functioning as defacto PG's for great parts of the game.

    But that's just mentioning different players. It says nothing about the desired skill sets, when teams have to play who they've got
    Everybody that isn't trying to be intentionally obtuse knows what the differences between Kyle Anderson and Kyle Korver are.

    Trouble is, if you go all midsize, you'll give up speed on the outside, and height and weight on the inside.
    If you don't have extremely slow footed wings like Anderson or Gay, you can make up for speed with long strides and size. Why do you think everytime a team wants to stop an opposing PG, they put a wing on him?

    And traditional bigmen size isn't as important in today's NBA. If you have wings with length, any type of disadvantage you may have for lack of size, you more than make up for it with advantages on quickness, speed, agility, versatility and athleticism. There's a reason why the most deadly lineup in the entire NBA has an originally 6'7" SF playing center.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •