Reply With Quote
This was a good read.
Buck Harvey: Spurs' spouses love, honor and skirmish
Web Posted: 11/19/2007 10:41 PM CST
Buck Harvey
San Antonio Express-News
Their marriage has been successful, and it has been rocky. They've celebrated the best of times, and they've bickered as if divorce were possible.
They've done it for more than a decade, which is why Gregg Popovich and R.C. Buford likely will stay together a while longer. They are used to each other.
But recent days also suggest they will have a few more things to argue about. Luis Scola showed the Spurs what they had given to Houston, and Beno Udrih showed what Spurs' scouts always thought was possible.
If the Spurs weren't fine right now — with a healthy roster in place to defend a championship — would Popovich and Buford require some counseling?
Money can affect any marriage, and Peter Holt's lack of it does. He ranks at the bottom of NBA owners in personal wealth, with an estimated worth of merely $30 million. Popovich and Buford work within his budget.
That's why moving Jackie Butler meant so much last summer. They had made a mistake on him, and they needed to trade the $5 million they owed him.
The Knicks eat contracts of that size for snacks between depositions. To Holt, everything matters, which is ultimately why the Spurs traded Scola to Houston. The Rockets were the only ones willing to take on Butler's contract.
Popovich had to be talked into the deal because it violated one of his rules: Never help a rival.
Shortly after, Scola starred in Vegas in Olympic qualifying, and another of Popovich's rules had been broken: Never make him mad.
The issue subsided when Scola didn't do much to start the season. But then Tracy McGrady went down to injury, and the Rockets began to pass, and Scola put up 20 points against the Spurs last week.
It's early, and the Spurs won the game. But Scola had been everything Popovich loves. He'd been active and tough, and making 10 of 11 shots didn't hurt, either.
Afterward, Popovich praised Scola, which is typical. But then Popovich said something else. "It kills me to have him on that team," Popovich said. "Enough to make you spit."
It was if Popovich was talking to Buford through the media. But his spit-prompting frustration confused. After all, doesn't Popovich have ultimate say in the franchise?
In this marriage, he does and he doesn't. Buford flies around the world, does the research, scouts the talent — and Popovich is often on the outside with no recourse but to second-guess.
Conversely, Buford is as helpless on the other end. Once Spurs coaches take the players to the gym, Buford has little control for what follows.
Udrih, for example, looked like another international find as a rookie. The Spurs wondered if he was not only their best passer, but also their best shooter. When he was on the floor, they often said, the game made more sense.
Then came the 2005 Finals, when the Pistons barely let Udrih across midcourt. By the end of that series Popovich had lost all confidence in him, and the next season Popovich chose to lean on a wobbly Nick Van Exel.
Popovich has since said he could have done a few things differently with Udrih. He also never quit trying to make it work. Just last summer, for example, he went to various players for ideas.
Was there something he could be doing to better connect?
There wasn't. Udrih wasn't a Spur by Popovich's definition. Udrih had displayed more talent than heart, and Popovich prefers someone with the opposite combination, such as Jacque Vaughn.
Then Udrih broke out Sunday night, sticking 23 points on the same Pistons who had tortured him before. With 2:10 left in Sacramento's win, Udrih did more than score. He stepped in front of Chauncey Billups to draw a game- changing charge.
As it is with Scola, it's early. Udrih, in November instead of June, played loose for a team without expectations.
Still, Popovich and Buford will have a few things to say to each other, and they will argue, and they will plan to talk again tomorrow.
Just as an old married couple would.
[email protected]
LINK: http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/b...n.28ce78f.html
This was a good read.
It was a good read.
It must be like a marriage. They spend so much time together and they're responsible for their "baby," the team.
As long as they keep any big battles behind closed doors I'll be happy.
The Scola trade was insanely stupid. Was then, still is. I don't give a about Jackie Butler - and a businessman like Peter Holt should recognize burning a terrific asset to get rid of a middling liability is stupid business.
But what kind of businessman is he?
Udrih I don't give a crap about, but the Scola trade was braindead.
Well, the question I have is, would the Spurs have brought him in this year? Because if not, I think I read that he was ready to sign a multi-year extension with Tau in the summer and spend his career in Europe. So I don't think Scola would have ever been a Spur. But yes, it was dumb to trade him to a divisional rival. The best thing to do was to trade him to the Eastern Conference.
Nice article by Buck.
How can Holt be the Spurs' controlling owner if he's only worth 30mil? The franchise is probably worth $350-$400mil, so where's the rest of the money?
Totally agree. Scola should be a Spur, and letting a few million get in the way of that is short-sighted. However, with Splitter and Mahinmi waiting in the wings, it may not be so atrocious a mistake, as long as they pan out.
Must be frustrating for Pop to look at a situation like the Knicks who suck but will spend anything Isaiah asks, while he coaches the best team of the last decade and can't get them to throw 3mil per at Scola (how much was he paid by the Rockets?).
Scola trade hurted us, but we need to get rid of butler....
Udrih only d up on one series in that years finals against the pistons only, he was superb against the nuggets, sonics, sunss...so pop goes out and base his play on 1 series and d up on udrih in the second year by signing a over the milleage chucker NVE, its great when he makes shots, but its not great when he does the same play all over again and misses....I blame both parties on this, udrih shouldve workd harder toget the backup position back from NVE.
I REALLY hope udrih exposes pop when the kings play the spurs
It was a good read. The problem with the Scola trade -other than helping out an in-division state rival - is they got absolutely nothing of substance in return -other than salary cap space. It would been nice if they would've wrestled away someone like Chuck Hayes.
Last edited by SenorSpur; 11-20-2007 at 02:59 AM.
Pop seems to be laying the groundwork for who catches the blame in case the Scola trade ultimately bites them hard.
Good read. This article reminds me of Some of luddens old PR articles.
Imo, losing Udrih and Scola isn't as bad as losing Jack and Speedy.
We would have been a monster in '04 if we could have kept those two.
Trading Scola to a divisional rival for nothing was about the most anti CIA Pop move possible. The Pop I know would have sat on those rights and either forced Scola to come cheaper or let Scola rot in Europe. Gifting the Rockets doesn't compute and was obviously a RC Buford move. Buford probably hated Butler partly because Butler was brought aboard mostly on the advice of Larry Brown and not the internal team scouts.
Buford loves to hang onto his personal projects too long (for example: Udrih, Beno; Sanders, Melvin; Dial, Derrick). That's why I was rather proud of him for biting the bullet on Marcus Williams and admitting he sucked. Buford of the past would have fought to keep him around for years and years while wasting a roster spot in the process.
REALLY are you a Spurs fan?
I don't desire the worst for my head coach or my team. Never.
Spurs>>>>>>>Beno, Scola or any player on the world.
The TEAM before that names!.
I don't think it was so much the fact that they couldn't get Scola to sign with them as is the fact that they traded him away to help out a divisional rival. That's like us giving Oberto to the Mavs, it just doesn't make any sense....
Does this mean Pop and Buford soap each other's s and feed each other baklava?
what has speedy done since the trade. tyron lue is getting more minutes than speedy.
They just didn't think Scola's game could translate well to the NBA,plain a simple.
And the Rockets took the gamble coze they had nothing to loose anyways, and Scola costed them NOTHING.(un ingbelievable)
It was a stupid move,that's all.
In the end, did Scola's asking price play any part in him being shipped off in order to unload butler's contract?
In a way, but not of it's own worth.
I can't see the Front Office giving away Scola for a contract(given to him by Rockets) paying him less then Bonner(read it on an earlier article).
Unfortunately Scola's earlier problems with the FO made him the expendable asset needed to move Butler.
In essence the FO traded away the combination of Butler and Scola's(future) contract which I imagine would amount to over 10-12 mil per year plus luxury tax.
My guess is that the $30 mil figure is the total of his assets excluding his interest in Spurs Sports & Entertainment LLC.
Seems like it.
As for Udrih, I don't think there's much to blame anyone within the Spurs' organization. He was a good pick at #28. He had the talent and the coaching staff tried to make it work. The goal is to win, not to find a way to coddle talented, yet unfocused and undedicated young players.
If Udrih had Vaughn's sense of professionalism or Washington's heart and desire he'd be one of the better 6th men in the league and a mainstay on the Spurs.
I have tried to tell people that Holt is more involved than they realize.
Guess all those who claimed Beno did not have any talent can eat their words today.
They won't listen.
I don't believe many have felt that he lacked talent, but rather that he lacked the dedication and desire to be a San Antonio Spur.
I never saw anybody saying Beno didn't have any talent.
Actually everybody said that Beno was very talented.
Works ethic and Desire to get better is what most posters here were complaining about.
Scola's contract is bigger than Bonner's one : Scola costs $10M/3 years (including $500K given directly to Tau) while Bonner costs $9M/3 years.
And saying things like Spurs get nothing for Scola or that Houston didn't give up something for Scola is just false. Money isn't nothing in nba, you had to consider the financial/business part of the nba.
I'm not saying that the Scola's trade was a good one (I didn't like it) and I'm not defending it but you have to look at the whole picture before judging it.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
