Page 22 of 49 FirstFirst ... 1218192021222324252632 ... LastLast
Results 526 to 550 of 1221
  1. #526
    Veteran R. DeMurre's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    2,979
    Memphis doesn't get credit for Banes, Clarke, & Dillon Brooks because they were all draft day trades, but for all intents and purposes, they scouted and "drafted" those guys. Add that to Ja & JJJ and that's a pretty good haul.

  2. #527
    ಥ﹏ಥ DAF86's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Post Count
    42,009
    It's like it makes some of you feel better about the S bag fiasco if you pretend some geniuses outfoxed the Spurs, as opposed to what really happened which was an unprecedented confluence of luck.
    What? Everybody and their moms know PATFO ed up royally with that trade. I still don't know what does that have to do with the fact of being incapable of recognizing the Raptors' management has done a fine job the last few years.

    I've long said I strongly believe luck is by far the biggest factor in being a president/GM. If you really think they had an idea Siakam and VanVleet would become the players they have, you're delusional.
    Well, the same could be said about the Spurs with Manu, Tony and Kawhi. And not because of that we are going to deny the fact that they have done a tremendous job.

  3. #528
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Post Count
    11,926
    They definitely outfoxed the spurs (giving up zero players they actually wanted, not taking on any bad contracts, getting Greenís expiring contract), but that says more about the spurs than it does the raptors.
    No, they lucked into an unprecedented situation where there was no thought required on their end. Then lucked into the Warriors being decimated by injury and now, through their connections in the national media, are portrayed as if they're geniuses . . . yet anytime I bring that up, I get pushback from casuals.

    What? Everybody and their moms know the PATFO ed up royally with that trade. I still don't know that does that have to do with the fact of being incapable of recognizing the Raptors' management has done a fine job the last few years.



    Well, the same could be said about the Spurs with Manu, Tony and Kawhi. And not because of that we are going to deny the fact that they have done a tremendous job.
    That has nothing to do with what I said. Because the undeserved reputation all stems from that.

    Exactly, but the difference is the Spurs had a dynasty. If they actually knew something others didn't, they wouldn't be in the predicament they're in.

    If we're going to play this game though, then it's time to start giving the Lakers heaps of praise instead of hating on them because of some more than decade old rivalry and claiming their success is all about location.

  4. #529
    ಥ﹏ಥ DAF86's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Post Count
    42,009
    No, they lucked into an unprecedented situation where there was no thought required on their end. Then lucked into the Warriors being decimated by injury and now, through their connections in the national media, are portrayed as if they're geniuses . . . yet anytime I bring that up, I get pushback from casuals.



    That has nothing to do with what I said. Because the undeserved reputation all stems from that.

    Exactly, but the difference is the Spurs had a dynasty. If they actually knew something others didn't, they wouldn't be in the predicament they're in.

    If we're going to play this game though, then it's time to start giving the Lakers heaps of praise instead of ting on them because of some more than decade old rivalry and claiming their success is all about location.
    That's just not true, tbh. The Raptors were being praised long before that.

  5. #530
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Post Count
    11,926
    That's just not true, tbh. The Raptors were being praised long before that.
    No, that's not true. The two franchises basically swapped reputations from the moment the "trade" was made.

  6. #531
    Machacarredes Chinook's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Post Count
    29,119
    Yeah, Ujuri was on the hot seat before the DeRozan trade. It wasn't obvious that he was going to survive a power struggle with DeMar, which is a large part of why he was "covert" about it. He'd drafted Bruno (basically proto-Sam) as a bust, had potentially overdrafted Siakam (many thought he was a second-rounder) and had a raw OG. He'd also given a big contract to Powell, who was looking like a bust himself. It wasn't clear at all that the problem wasn't with the front office for not giving the DeRozan and Lowry a good enough supporting cast. Given how Ujuri always seems to have rumors about him changing teams, I could totally imagine Masai cutting bait and leaving the organization had he not won in 2018.

  7. #532
    Veteran exstatic's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Post Count
    34,594
    This doesn't speak at all to their developmental staff. As I said before, the Spurs are good at drafting and for a few clear reasons tend to draft guys that teams pass up due to different priorities. That most of these players did not show a notable level of improvement over their time in SA is a bigger deal than they being better than the players drafted around them (when they actually are). We were specifically talking about the d-league allocation, and potentially drafting decent prospects doesn't negate that. It's great if the front office is proficient at getting Pop and the coaches good players, but there's much, much less reason to believe they've been getting a lot out of them.
    You still havenít shown me a team doing it better with the kinds of picks we usually have. Didnít you say there were team(s)?

  8. #533
    Machacarredes Chinook's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Post Count
    29,119
    You still haven’t shown me a team doing it better with the kinds of picks we usually have. Didn’t you say there were team(s)?
    Lots. You still ignored me actually showing that the Spurs don't tend to have player who improve. You using evidence about a different situation doesn't make your claim the default. You want to assume the Spurs draft the 28th- to 30th-best prospects every year and end up with the 12th- or whatever-best players. If that were true, those players would start off mediocre or bad before over the years getting better and then ascending to being among the best of their class. We don't actually tend to see that. Instead, during the Medium-Three era, we saw some of the supporting guys gain half-hearted recognition as they grew into their roles and them nothing for the past half-decade despite the team drafting numerous prospects and needing guys to improve.

    Assuming there were only 10 top-10 MIP candidates every year (which is often not true as there were ties for 10th place), there have been 120 MIP spots including the 2009-2010 season. That means each team should have an average of four players make the lists. The Spurs have had four players do so. That's with the Spurs purposefully lowering the players' starting points by shunting them to Austin. That's with the Spurs supposedly having a reputation for developing players to aid their vote counts. That's with the Spurs actually outdrafting their draft slots on multiple occassions.

    So what gives? Well one thing is that the Spurs hardly ever draft projects. When they do, the players bust. Sam, Lonnie, LJC, Richards, Metu -- Murray is the only success among them, and his rise hasn't been quick at all. He at least should get legit MIP consideration this year, but you could (and I have, exhaustingly) argue his overall impact was stagnant for year before this season. So no, the Spurs aren't drafting guys that they are building up into good players. Instead, they tend to draft good players and let them adjust. Hill, White, Green, Bertans, Forbes and Mills were good players (well not Bryn, but he could shoot) who needed to adjust to the game. Certainly they've improved, but Spurs fans often overstate how much by assuming they were bad players or overrating how good they are. That's why folks can say that Johnson has been a developmental success when at best the jury is out on him right now.

    The Spurs have never, ever, been a team that created good players at a rate higher than the average team. They might have had the best shooting coach in the league at one point, but overall, their strength came from being able to identify player who could help them and fitting them in. They don't need to hang their heads that they haven't turned crap into gold. I fully accept they haven't had prime stock to draw from. But I'm not the one claiming the Spurs developmental team is special. The numbers just don't back that up. To show otherwise, you'd have to show players' growth compared to that of players on other teams. It's harder than just posting win-shares by draft class, I admit. But at least it would be part of the discussion and not just a non-sequitur.

  9. #534
    Veteran R. DeMurre's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    2,979
    I wouldn't call unloading a career long net negative stat guy like DeRozan for a career long net positive stat guy like Kawhi "lucky" in any sense of the word. It was an extremely intelligent trade for the Raptors, because even if they don't win the championship that year and Kawhi leaves, they still have a salary slot open for another big post-DeRozan move. And even if Golden State is healthy and beats them, it's still their first time in the finals. It was a smart move anyway you look at it.

  10. #535
    Veteran Sugus's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Post Count
    3,058
    I wouldn't call unloading a career long net negative stat guy like DeRozan for a career long net positive stat guy like Kawhi "lucky" in any sense of the word. It was an extremely intelligent trade for the Raptors, because even if they don't win the championship that year and Kawhi leaves, they still have a salary slot open for another big post-DeRozan move. And even if Golden State is healthy and beats them, it's still their first time in the finals. It was a smart move anyway you look at it.
    No blinder folk than one who refuses to see, tbqh.
    Last edited by Sugus; 01-13-2022 at 10:38 PM.

  11. #536
    Veteran Sugus's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Post Count
    3,058
    Ok, name how many players that have become major contributing players in the NBA after spending time developing in the G league. My money is on that sample size being rather small.

    It seems to me most evidence points to that nothing beats actual experience with the big leagues.
    the G-League's main page is exactly about debunking this. https://gleague.nba.com/.

    Literally a sidebar list of players who had G-L stints and went on to have productive NBA careers, headlined by FVV, Siakam (notice the "luck" here ), Gobert, Middleton, McCollum. And it goes on.

    Great quote: "41% of players on start-of-season NBA rosters in 2021-22 had played in the G League". But sure, Primo's magically beyond this even though he's literally the youngest player in a giant-ladden league

  12. #537
    Believe.
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2019
    Post Count
    245
    Lots. You still ignored me actually showing that the Spurs don't tend to have player who improve. You using evidence about a different situation doesn't make your claim the default. You want to assume the Spurs draft the 28th- to 30th-best prospects every year and end up with the 12th- or whatever-best players. If that were true, those players would start off mediocre or bad before over the years getting better and then ascending to being among the best of their class. We don't actually tend to see that. Instead, during the Medium-Three era, we saw some of the supporting guys gain half-hearted recognition as they grew into their roles and them nothing for the past half-decade despite the team drafting numerous prospects and needing guys to improve.

    Assuming there were only 10 top-10 MIP candidates every year (which is often not true as there were ties for 10th place), there have been 120 MIP spots including the 2009-2010 season. That means each team should have an average of four players make the lists. The Spurs have had four players do so. That's with the Spurs purposefully lowering the players' starting points by shunting them to Austin. That's with the Spurs supposedly having a reputation for developing players to aid their vote counts. That's with the Spurs actually outdrafting their draft slots on multiple occassions.

    So what gives? Well one thing is that the Spurs hardly ever draft projects. When they do, the players bust. Sam, Lonnie, LJC, Richards, Metu -- Murray is the only success among them, and his rise hasn't been quick at all. He at least should get legit MIP consideration this year, but you could (and I have, exhaustingly) argue his overall impact was stagnant for year before this season. So no, the Spurs aren't drafting guys that they are building up into good players. Instead, they tend to draft good players and let them adjust. Hill, White, Green, Bertans, Forbes and Mills were good players (well not Bryn, but he could shoot) who needed to adjust to the game. Certainly they've improved, but Spurs fans often overstate how much by assuming they were bad players or overrating how good they are. That's why folks can say that Johnson has been a developmental success when at best the jury is out on him right now.

    The Spurs have never, ever, been a team that created good players at a rate higher than the average team. They might have had the best shooting coach in the league at one point, but overall, their strength came from being able to identify player who could help them and fitting them in. They don't need to hang their heads that they haven't turned crap into gold. I fully accept they haven't had prime stock to draw from. But I'm not the one claiming the Spurs developmental team is special. The numbers just don't back that up. To show otherwise, you'd have to show players' growth compared to that of players on other teams. It's harder than just posting win-shares by draft class, I admit. But at least it would be part of the discussion and not just a non-sequitur.


    You Must have done your fair share of research I assume.
    Like Green,Bertans,Mills weren't even drafted by the Spurs. Liek green got gut before becoming the player he was or is. Bertans is a bigger Forbes, Mills wasn't drafted by the Spurs either.
    What the spurs did was identify there best skills and had them work on those skills.
    Second fact:
    Metu and Richards (if i have the right one): Were second round picks. If your expecting to find value in those picks, than your doing this entire thing wrong...... Plus Metu is still in the league and getting mins, and where he was slected...He ain't a bust..
    LJC: yeah having two big injuries can end your career, ask Oden, parker and many more....he was the 28th pick aswell, and in the last decade or there only like 1 or 2 players picked 28th still in the league.
    Lonnie: He's not a bust, he's more of a disappointment. He'll still be in the league after this year.

  13. #538
    Machacarredes Chinook's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Post Count
    29,119
    Cho phrasing the question the way he did means that is a valid way of rebutting it. But for obvious reasons, the sidebar allows folks to overstate the extent to which those players played in the d-league. Primo's 12 games are already most than most of the guys on that list. Most people don't have an issue with Primo playing any d-league games at all. Instead, the push-back is mainly against the idea that he NEEDS to go to Austin to get the minutes and focus to develop. The list of players who developed largely away from their teams' big clubs and with their d-league teams is much, much smaller, and the players who might deserve to be on that list were very rarely more than solid rotation players in the league.

    Go through the actual d-league stats: https://stats.gleague.nba.com/player...PerMode=Totals

    See how many of the points or minutes leaders in that league were actually future NBA players (not to be confused with former). As you go through the years, you might see a couple like Nunn, Caruso and even Christian Wood. But besides Wood (who's basically like a poor man's Cousins), the best true d-league graduates are role-players in the NBA. Most of the other notable ones are fringe players like Quinn Cook or washouts like Ray McCallum. Then the rest are non-NBA players. There's just not the evidence there to suggest that Primo getting a lot of high-usage minutes in Austin is a good developmental pathway. A handful of games or a quick match during a random break? Sure. As a way to get some run instead of being frozen out of a contending rotation? Unideal, but yes. As just a rubber-stamp matter of cause on a rebuilding team? No. The math isn't there. As I said before, defending this decision is attempting to rationalize something that wasn't reasoned into. Primo shouldn't be going back into the d-league. The only forces preventing him for a prominent rotation spot are those Pop is creating.

  14. #539
    Machacarredes Chinook's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Post Count
    29,119
    You Must have done your fair share of research I assume.
    Eh, I've done much more for posts in the past.

    Like Green,Bertans,Mills weren't even drafted by the Spurs. Liek green got gut before becoming the player he was or is. Bertans is a bigger Forbes, Mills wasn't drafted by the Spurs either.
    So Bertans was drafted by the Spurs. Yes, technically, his rights were traded as part of the George Hill deal. But that deal actually was fully agreed to before the Pacers were on the clock for their second-rounder. They were unambiguously making the pick for the Spurs, and Davis never had a reason to believe he was going to Indy.

    Yes, I know Green and Mills weren't drafted by the Spurs. I agree with you that hte Spurs did identify their best skills, though I disagree that they specifically had the idea to have them work on the skills. I'm not saying the Spurs didn't tell them to work on their shooting, but rather than they weren't the only ones. If you actually read up on Green during his early years, you'd know he had quite the journey to become a solid NBA player, and much of that journey was before the Spurs signed him on. He was the one who decided to leave Europe to focus on his shooting so he could stick in the NBA. It was him hustling in the d-league with Jeremy Lin before the Spurs ever called him up. I'm sure they did help them, and he's almost certainly say they did. But did he develop over the course of his time in SA? I'd say not much at all. He added only tiny things to his game, like a couple of back-door cuts and a transition three he'd take when he was streaking well. Basically from 2012 on, he was a fantastic role-player for the team. His progression was basically flat.

    The same is true for Mills in that he's always been a microwave guy. He went through some changes with the Spurs like bulking up or doing some PG things. But he's certainly not a huge developmental story either. That's okay, because as you said, the Spurs deserve credit for realizing how good those guys could be while other teams cut or renounced them. They just aren't' good example of development.

    Metu and Richards (if i have the right one): Were second round picks. If your expecting to find value in those picks, than your doing this entire thing wrong
    I don't blame the Spurs for not getting value from their picks. I think it's normal to expect those picks to bust. But the Spurs failing to develop projects is a sign they aren't actually superlative at developing players. Basically, the Spurs have had a lot of success finding guys who are basically NBA ready and getting them in positions to make a rotation. They haven't had much success taking raw players and developing their games.

    Plus Metu is still in the league and getting mins, and where he was slected...He ain't a bust..LJC: yeah having two big injuries can end your career, ask Oden, parker and many more....he was the 28th pick aswell, and in the last decade or there only like 1 or 2 players picked 28th still in the league.
    Lonnie: He's not a bust, he's more of a disappointment. He'll still be in the league after this year.
    I'm not going to get into the semantics of what a bust is. You can make excuses for why all draft picks who don't succeed fail. You can make that argument about every pick by other teams as well. That people here will make those arguments and needle claims about Spurs players while not examining those about other players is how they end up looking at the Spurs' average developmental record and concluding that they're top tier. Like everyone else, the Spurs have had successes and failures. But they're like everyone else, not above them, and they're certainly not effective enough to be above questioning for using a methodology that has such a poor track record.

  15. #540
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Post Count
    2,597
    Chinook……really? Please stop this foolishness for the sake of debating��

  16. #541
    Machacarredes Chinook's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Post Count
    29,119
    Chinook……really? Please stop this foolishness for the sake of debating��
    Go to Reddit if you want everyone to be lame, bro.

  17. #542
    Every game is game 1 Seventyniner's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Post Count
    8,429
    I wouldn't call unloading a career long net negative stat guy like DeRozan for a career long net positive stat guy like Kawhi "lucky" in any sense of the word. It was an extremely intelligent trade for the Raptors, because even if they don't win the championship that year and Kawhi leaves, they still have a salary slot open for another big post-DeRozan move. And even if Golden State is healthy and beats them, it's still their first time in the finals. It was a smart move anyway you look at it.
    The luck part wasn't making the trade, it was being able to make that trade. In a more sane world where Number Two doesn't go full wad, he stays with the Spurs and the Raptors never even get a chance at him.

    The Raptors were in the right place at the right time, with the right assets to offer (still a sandwich, but more than anyone else was offering). That's luck.

  18. #543
    Formerly Spurs21
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Post Count
    2,609
    The Raptors were in the right place at the right time, with the right assets to offer (still a sandwich, but more than anyone else was offering). That's luck.
    I agree with right place at right time and they absolutely had the right assets to offer but we still somehow got fleeced. Part of the reason they were in the right place at the right time was PATFO’s stubbornness and unwillingness to deal with rival west coast teams.

    The Raps ate our lunch and we made it easy for them to do it. Danny Green and 5mm cash and we still couldn't get a proper young asset on a team full of them. If the

  19. #544
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Post Count
    2,597
    Go to Reddit if you want everyone to be lame, bro.
    Itís not even an argument! My friend, any team you mention has had tons of lottery picks compared to our late rounders. Draft position matters right? And because it should, how do we continue to find serviceable NBA players in the late picks? Dude we didnít have a lottery pick for like twenty years�� We arenít the gold standard because we say soÖÖ..

  20. #545
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Post Count
    2,597
    If we didn’t know what we were doing, why does so many organizations have our stamp on them? Surely we can’t fool all the great basketball minds out there can we? No other organization has a bigger influence on the league than us….coincidence? I think not!!

  21. #546
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Post Count
    2,597
    I agree with right place at right time and they absolutely had the right assets to offer but we still somehow got fleeced. Part of the reason they were in the right place at the right time was PATFO’s stubbornness and unwillingness to deal with rival west coast teams.

    The Raps ate our lunch and we made it easy for them to do it. Danny Green and 5mm cash and we still couldn't get a proper young asset on a team full of them. If the
    We can’t win every trade or transaction….it’s crazy to think we can! It’s called leverage and we had none with that Kawhi trade! Monday morning quarterback is an easy game to play but we’ve obviously had more better days than bad. We still made a decent lemonade out of that situation considering all things.

  22. #547
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Post Count
    2,597
    This thread is supposed to be about Primo….

  23. #548
    Formerly Spurs21
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Post Count
    2,609
    We can’t win every trade or transaction….it’s crazy to think we can! It’s called leverage and we had none with that Kawhi trade! Monday morning quarterback is an easy game to play but we’ve obviously had more better days than bad. We still made a decent lemonade out of that situation considering all things.
    The little leverage we had was neutralized by our goal of sending Kawhi to the worst possible destination and not entertaining his preferred landing spots. It was never about winning the trade or the situation but should have been about optimizing the situation. Pre-trade, and post mortem 1 month, 1yr, 5yrs later we did not fair very well.

    I agree though this thread is about Primo, one of the few bright spots these days.

  24. #549
    Machacarredes Chinook's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Post Count
    29,119
    Dude we didn’t have a lottery pick for like twenty years.
    And it shows. That's the point. No one should have expected to Spurs to have great talent after not being in position to draft great talent for years. The Spurs do a good job of finding talent later in the draft and a mediocre job of developing that talent. That's why they're not a good team now. The Spurs have some of the worst talent in the NBA despite apparently being the gold standard for development. That means either the Spurs are comparatively great but that development in general sucks or that the Spurs aren't great. No amount of spitball logic that refuses to actually engage with the arguments will change that the Spurs don't have a metric to show they've made their guys better at a rate beyond what an average team would do.

  25. #550
    Machacarredes Chinook's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Post Count
    29,119
    And ugh, for the millionth time: There were theoretical trade packages that were better than what Leonard got, but most teams were completely unwilling to pay anything but pittances for him. Magic (horrendous GM that he was) thought he had the leverage to make the Spurs take Deng AND get Murray in return. Philly didn't want to include ing Saric in the deal. LAC wanted to keep one of their first-rounders that year. The Spurs could have made the DeRozan deal work IF they were willing to go all in and play a bit of hard ball. They should have kept Green. They should have gone ahead and acquired the third guy to put around DMDR and LMA. The Spurs could have made a real run at the West that season while still keeping all of their future picks. They basically could have been like the Bulls this year. They instead decided to take a step back while trying to develop around DeRozan and Aldridge. It turns out that they weren't able to right the ship before those guys left.

    It was arguably a poor choice, but that'll depend on what kind of player Murray ends up being for the Spurs going forward. If he's the leader in a new era of winning, keeping him and going through the eventual lean years could be good. If he is meh or leaves the team soon without bringing in a franchise-altering return, I think the Spurs would have been better off burning brightly before going out rather than decaying the way they have over the past year.

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
  •