Friday, February 20th, 2009...7:09 am
Hard Morning in Spursland
Yesterday’s inability to swing a trade left me discouraged, especially in light of the latest Manu Ginobili injury. I was in favor of the Spurs moving for an impact player, even if it came at a steep cost. Tim Duncan is the window.
The Spurs certainly tried to put an impact piece around him. In addition to the rumbles about Vince Carter, Richard Jefferson, and John Salmoms, Johnny Ludden tells us the Spurs were in hot pursuit of Marcus Camby, something which no one caught wind of until the day was done. Typical Spurs.
Of all the names bandied about, I’m most disappointed in the Spurs unrequited courtship of Vince Carter. Rod Thorn’s requirement of George Hill and Roger Mason Jr. was a costly demand. It’s the sort of high risk/high reward trade scenario that places a bickering angel and devil on each shoulder, shouting one another down, collapsing the distance between themselves. Their voices raise in an angry crescendo, leaving the audience uncertain who is for and who is against. Henry Abbott wrote the one must-read Vince Carter piece. Re-reading it this morning I’m not sure if the following words represent an angelic call to measured discretion or the wiles of a championship denying deception:
The bad news is simple, and potentially a deal-breaker: At 32, he is old, especially for one of the NBA’s athletic positions. Statistics show players of his age, at his position, are universally in decline. But what kind of decline? There are studies, but they are tightly held by teams. Players with Vince Carter’s profile can drop off a cliff of productivity. (See Stackhouse, Jerry.)
And remember, run all that through the filter of a 2009 financial crisis, when being lavish with cash can be a problem for more than just the salary cap. So, when does that drop in productivity begin? For 2010-2011, that’s the $17.6 million question. (And Carter is not even a free agent after 2010-2011 — but can be bought out of the remainder of his contract for $4 million. This is important as it dilutes, his value on the trade market as an expiring contract.)
Some insight comes from Kevin Pelton, who shares that the historical NBA players with statistical profiles most similar to Carter’s are Rolando Blackman, James Worthy, Alex English, Walter Davis, and Reggie Theus. In the year he turned 33, Blackman saw his own PER (once a shade under 20) drop from 15.6 to 10.6. Then he retired.
Worthy’s, in the year he turned 32, had dropped to 12.8, and then he retired.
Reggie Theus had a similar pattern, with a PER of 15.9 at 32, 14.2 at 33, followed by retirement.
My gut feeling says that this trade season will be marked by a variety of regret. In a sinking economy, many owners will mourn the day they passed by an on the table salary dump. The rules of the game change when the financial parameters shift, and too many GMs were unwilling to think in new categories. A certain species of greed refuses to admit that a bloated contract blights a player’s value. Vince Carter or not, 50 million dollars in guaranteed salary swings with all the grace of a millstone around a small market neck. This sounds dour, and perhaps unnecessarily so, but it’s not completely outside the pale of possibility that the refusal of some GMs to salary dump may compound with the other economic conditions and cost their respective cities a franchise.
Another species of greed over inflates the value of attractive role players-players such as Roger Mason Jr. and George Hill. If the Spurs’ adroit front office has shown anything over the years, it’s the ability to plug and play. They’re masters at finding fringe talent and making it work. If you have a chance to land a game changing talent like Vince Carter, you do it. You don’t think a Duncan-Ginobili-Parker-Carter Spurs team would hold appeal to veteran’s coming off a buy out? Sam Cassall and Joe Smith wouldn’t want to play for that team? Adding value adds appeal.
In the team’s defense, and judging by all the accounts I’ve read, the Spurs were in the trenches trying to make something happen. It’s possible their best we’ll-give-you-what-we’ve-got offer wasn’t enough. In fact, this is likely the case.
Where, then, do they go from here?
The obvious answer is too turn an eye toward the buyout market . John Hollinger identifies a list that includes Joe Smith, Mikki Moore, Drew Gooden, and Rasho Nesterovic. Of these names, Smith, Gooden, and Nesterovic catch my eye. And I would append this list with consideration for Toros D-Leaguer Pops Mensah-Bonsu. Gooden is not whole with a bad hamstring, so any pursuit of him is tied to health. Of the aforementioned names, Nesterovic and Smith are the most appealing. Smith’s games is well-suited for San Antonio, something I touched on back in December. But it’s actually Nesterovic who comes out as my lead horse. I know that hits you like an unexpectedly cold cup of morning joe, but he’s the best player of the bunch. His big body is better suited for banging the likes of Shaq, Oden, Bynum, Big Z, and Perkins. He knows the Spurs system, and he’ll fit in the locker room. When the Spurs previously traded Rasho, it was to move a burdensome contract, not an ineffective player.
The Spurs only have 2.1 of leftover MLE to spend. In all likelihood, that is only enough cash to land one player. But the fantasy fan in me hopes the Spurs waive Jacque Vaughn and try for two of the players listed above. A homerun would be a combination of Rasho and Smith, a tandem that would give the Spurs an excellent 5 man rotation of bigs—assuming that Smith and Nesterovic were used situationally. Adding either or both of those players would certainly improve the team. But even a tandem of Nesterovic and Mensah-Bonsu, on a deep bench training camp retainer, would satisfy me. Pops will not help the team this season, but finding some way to hold on to him, and expecting something from Mahinmi, could prevent the Spurs from being in this same spot a year from now. Alongside San Antonio, everyone expects teams like New Orleans, Boston and Cleveland to be in the buyout hunt. So I guess, in theory, adding any of the expected vet buyouts is at once an offensive and defensive maneuver.
The bigger question moving forward, however, is not related to the Spurs chances of landing a stretch run big. The bigger qustion is the health of Manu Ginobili. And not just when will he be back to full strength, but how durable is his 31 year old frame? In order for the Spurs to win another championship, they need Ginobili healthy and aggressive. Yet another reason why I would have gone all in on Vince Carter.
Hard morning in Spursland. I’ll come around by lunch, though. The team is still in contention.
20 Comments
February 20th, 2009 at 8:23 am
Agree with you 100% - I think we will regret not doing the bold move and acquiring Carter. Let’s see how this season unfolds (yesterday’s victory over a crappy Detroit squad did not inspire much confidence). We have a tough schedule of games coming up with Dallas-Portland-Cleveland-Portland coming up - let’s see how we fare.
Is it too early to think about next season and hope like hell that the Spurs do WHATEVER it takes to sign free-agent Rasheed Wallace?! I’m salivating at the thought of him playing next to Duncan - great defense, fantastic spacing - a new set of twin-towers!
February 20th, 2009 at 8:29 am
i would have rather had Camby than Carter. I don’t think Carter would have helped the Spurs a whole lot this year. He has no “William Wallace” in him like Ginobli has. Sure, he fills up the stat sheet but that’s all he does. Camby would have really helped our front court match up with the Lakers. I think our defense would’ve improved significantly with Camby next to Duncan. I’m glad the Spurs didn’t make a move on Carter.
February 20th, 2009 at 9:12 am
I wouldn’t mind seeing Rasho in a Spurs uniform again. I remember that 5 game stretch a few years back where he was actually our go to player when everyone was hurt. Spurs got rid of him at a time when we needed more athletic big men to guard players like Dirk. It’s time to go big again.
February 20th, 2009 at 9:30 am
camby? that guy is more brittle than vince is.
rasho looks good. hibbert is the pacers future, so i could def see a pacer buyout.
joe smith is solid.
drew gooden has been out with a sports hernia. tough to get him only to find out he can’t play for us.
vince is the guy i wanted. i posted before that this is a smarter and wiser vince. i wanted him even more when manu didn’t make the trip to NY.
if tim is the window and i want to win now and next year, i would’ve gave up roger and hill if thats who the nets wanted. hills confidence is growing but he’s still not there yet. i squirm every time i see mason try to penetrate with his suspect dribble. we could’ve had the big 3 with vince and bonner spreading the floor.
February 20th, 2009 at 9:34 am
I’ve gone back and forth on Carter about 20 times and still haven’t made up my mind. If Thorn had proposed just Mason OR Hill, then I think the deal gets done with the buyouts of Bowen and Oberto.
Camby would’ve been nice although I think his contract is a little bloated too, but probably worth it.
February 20th, 2009 at 9:41 am
I’m so glad the Spurs didn’t get Carter. His age and contract would have come back to haunt the Spurs down the road. I watched the Nets/Mavs game Wed night and in the 3rd quarter when Dallas pulled away Carter simply shot them out of it. He missed his first 7 shots of the quarter and none of them were good shots. He forced way to many bad shots and even had an air ball 3. Camby would have given the Spurs the best chance against the Lakers and at a title. No longer would opposing PG’s been able to get to the rim at ease the way thy have been lately. Giving up Hill would have hurt because I actually think the Spurs drafted someone who may have a little something. We do need a big and Pops wouldn’t be the answer this year but I wish the Spurs would lock him up for the future
February 20th, 2009 at 9:43 am
Wow, Jimbo, for once I can’t diagree more. This Piston win without Manu showed a lot of heart. Lose, and we’d be in a 3 game skid. Instead, we can stay curious about Hill’s potential. This Piston team is better than the Raptors and Knicks right now, plus if Pop talked to Sheed last night that may be bigger than anything this week.
Rasho is a the best of a group of guys that have proven bad teams should let them go. And gettibg vince equals a Sam Cassel? Does a wheelchair come with that bonus so sammy can make of to the game? Or stevie franchise? stoudemire didn’t learn our system, but we can’t add guys like cassel who won’t even attempt to.
February 20th, 2009 at 9:49 am
Since the trade deadline has past. The Spurs must find another big man. Rasho should be the lead candidate. Rasho’s offensive has improved. Joe Smith would be a good pickup. But Rasho is a 7-footer, who knows the system. Rasho can bang with the bigs. Which allows Duncan to exploit the mismatch at the 4. Plus Bonner has proven he can score. Regardless Smith or Rasho will help the Spurs. But Rasho will have a bigger impact this time around.
February 20th, 2009 at 10:06 am
I’ve come to the conclusion that, more often than not, the Spurs will sign “retirees.” By this, I don’t mean that they only sign old men, which in itself could be a trend in Spurs acquisitions; what I mean is that the Spurs usually sign someone who can retire as a Spur. Look at the biggest signings they have made in the Duncan era and a single thread bonds them together: lack of loyalty, popularity, etc. to the teams and places they depart from to come to San Antonio.
When we signed Robert Horry, it was to make him a Spur for life. JA Adande had a great article after Horry (unofficially) retired asking where he would eventually retire his jersey. To me there is no question; his jersey will rise in the Alamo city. KT, Mason, Horry, Udoka, and whoever else comes — these will be players we aim to keep until they are spent. That’s why Jefferson seemed so appealing to me and, not coincidentally, why Ime must have seemed so appealing to management when he first arrived: they are “journeymen.” We like these drifters because we believe they can find their home here in silver and black. Our system becomes like destiny: it chooses them.
It doesn’t always work out, of course. We sent Rasho away. We might get him back. But the (possible) Joe Smiths and the Ime Udokas represent an idea, whether successful or not. They aren’t signed just to integrate into the system; they are acquired to become that system, to represent it even after they retire. This might sound too heady for basketball, but isn’t that, after all, why we like the Spurs? Aren’t we referred to as a team with a unique substance? When you look at it like this, the moves we do make display a clearer logic than simply grabbing at a superstar. “Fringe talent” everywhere else becomes team folklore here. That’s Spurs philosophy. Watch how it plays out through 2010.
February 20th, 2009 at 10:41 am
Joe Smith is a terrible fit. Have you ever really watched him play? He’s never been productive, he’s not even average- why are the big teams all talking about getting him? Rasho and Chris Mihm are the real prizes. They protect the rim and are legit wide-bodied 7-footers. I’d take Rasho in a pinch, as he knows the system, but Mihm is 3 years is younger and will be dying to prove his value, as he hasn’t played much since the emergence of Bynum.
February 20th, 2009 at 10:55 am
Vince Carter is a taller version of Allen Iverson. He would not work on the Spurs. I’ve been wanting to trade for Rasho for months. Hopefully we can get him in a buyout. We need length at the 5. I think Kurt Thomas is great, but he’s about 2 or 3 inches too short to really be a really effective shot alterer.
February 20th, 2009 at 11:04 am
Vince Carter is an above the rim player. These types of players always deteriorate at a faster pace than others specifically because they rely on their athletic ability to score. Once this goes, Vince is done. Sacrificing two key acquisitions that have helped us get back into the discussion of a legitimate contender is not the way to go.
In reference to buyout and sign talks, I’m 100% for Rasho. Joe Smith it seems already has his plane ticket to Boston.
I think the thing we’re all forgetting is that the ball is in our court. Remember when Marbury was initially addressing his buyout, he said he wouldn’t mind playing for the Spurs. No one in San Antonio jumped to their feet and rallied to sign him, but his interest enough is proof that players still realize San Antonio is a legitimate contender and with the right role players can make a title run.
Like Caleb said, our system chooses them, they don’t choose us.
February 20th, 2009 at 11:32 am
Manu MUST take summer 2009 (and every summer hereafter) off. He did that in 2007, and that’s why he blew up in 2007-2008.
February 20th, 2009 at 11:33 am
Manu must take every summer off from here on out.
February 20th, 2009 at 11:42 am
I have coming into the post so late, because you guys said everything I wanted to say. Basically, my proposal is: Rasho now, ‘Sheed in the offseason.
We need some Ts to wake us up next year.
February 20th, 2009 at 11:46 am
Thanks for intelligent posts that help me analyze my favorite team differently.
Caleb, great points, I never thought about it. The Rockets should retire Horry, though, if only for sorely needed good memories. I’m still mad at Horry for his “performance” the last two years.
Nico, the SPuRS don’t need to worry about Starbury’s comments one way or the other, the man will say anything at this point.
Camby? Carter? Irrelevant, but buckle up for this one SPuR-goggled fans, between Vince and Manu only one of them should have made the All-Star team this year. Get well, Nozo, because the little statues don’t matter to us.
And at this point, I don’t care who the SPuRS sign or who’s healthy. I liked the Braveheart reference above, because if the SPuRS sign anything right now it needs to be some “Ready-to-bully-other teams” attitude. New Orleans, Gasol and Odom, born-again Suns, Nuggets, prepare to meet a team that’s mentally tougher than you, with little outside expectations with Manu down, that can excute in the closing seconds. Blazers? Welcome to the no layups, no threes, no easy-baskets party.
February 20th, 2009 at 3:05 pm
I am bothered by our lack of movement on the trade front. I hope we can get Rasho, he’s a solid player all around who won’t rock the boat and will play the Spurs way.
Caleb: I disagree. I think the Spurs are very loyal to the player, as long as the player performs and earns his keep. Remember, we cut Avery twice before he developed a jump shot and led us to the ‘99 title and then he ended up playing for the Mavs. Make no mistake, every single player on the roster excepting Timmy can and will be traded, cut, or waived if the Spurs deem them unproductive. Horry retired a Spur not because he was dubbed a “lifer.” He retired a Spur because he happened to have on a black and silver jersey when he called it quits.
I think it’s just a neat angle because David spent his whole career here as well as Sean Elliot (at least most of it).
I don’t think the Spurs will think twice about getting rid of Bowen/Vaughn/Finley/Udoka/Thomas/(enter name here) if it helps the team win a championship.
February 20th, 2009 at 8:55 pm
Thatbigguy I agree with you about Spurs being a business. I’m sure Barry’d be comfortable retiring as a Spur, and we sent Damon on quickly. Finley is a contract the Spurs probably regret. Still, it says a lot that the Spurs gave a contract to Bowen no one else would have. He’s the only on I see as a sentimental choice. Antonio daniels, malik, rasho, devin brown, nazr, derek Anderson, and anyone named Jackson we not missed the day after they left.
February 21st, 2009 at 11:05 am
Bowen was extremely effective up until this season, where his age finally overcame his acumen for the game. I hope he retires after this season and takes a front office job. The guy has a sharp mind who I could see being the coach-in-waiting for the post Tim/Pop Spurs.
We have sent off way more guys who flourished in our system and got contract offers that we couldn’t or wouldn’t match. Nearly everyone ChillFAN mentioned plus Udrih and Speedy count in this bracket.
All this warrants the title of “Most Efficiently Run Organization” in the league. We can hem and haw about not making a trade this year, but no one has been consistently better and more obviously intent on being good than our Spurs. As soon as I can afford it (in many years), I am buying season seats on principle alone.
February 22nd, 2009 at 3:30 pm
ThatBigGuy misses my point. I’m not saying we are guided by an ambiguous sense of loyalty. This is a business, one of the most efficiently run machines in the league. Loyalty isn’t even an afterthought.
What I am saying is that potential signees are not weighed by status in the league. That consideration takes back seat to the bigger question of how a player might fit into the system. A well-coached team is one that finds the right players for the right positions and inspires their improvement in that role. If it doesn’t work out, let them go. But don’t go after someone who puts up incredible numbers in an ineffective system focused totally on them anyway.
I wouldn’t have thought twice about sending Fab, Ime, Jacque, Fin, or even Bowen, given the opportunity to land a player that fits both our needs and our system. But if we send them all away for someone who doesn’t do that, it’s a wasted trade.
And on another note, I never said we have to keep these players for life. Perhaps ‘retirees’ was misleading. I meant lifers in the sense that even if they do leave, they will never have meshed as well as they did when they donned the silver and black. (Hakeem comes to mind for the Rockets, but that’s digressing, I suppose…)
Leave a Reply