Draft Scuttlebutt (Updated)

by

I’ve collected a few draft-related bullets for your perusal. I’ve tried to limit myself to those things which could involve San Antonio. And everything is speculative, at best. Temper yourselves. If I’ve missed something, add it to the comments.

For instance, the Wizards could trade down with Memphis (No. 27), Oklahoma City (No. 25) or Sacramento (No. 23), throw in $3 million (the maximum allowed) and dump Etan Thomas’ $7.3 million on their lap, simultaneously getting Washington back to the tax line while still adding another young player. Alternatively, the Wizards could ask for a role-playing wing with a modest contract, or just structure it as a straight salary dump for a future conditional pick.

Huh. The Spurs have given no indication that they’d like to move up this high, and even if did want to do so, they’re wise to play coy. But as a note in passing, San Antonio could put a package together that more or less meets Hollinger’s sketch.

A number of teams are already reportedly sending out feelers indicating that they would like to acquire a pick in the late first round-including the San Antonio Spurs, Houston Rockets and Toronto Raptors. A few teams that are rumored to be looking to trade or sell their picks are the Oklahoma City Thunder (#25), Minnesota Timberwolves (#28) and New Orleans Hornets (#21).

Update:

  • Chad Ford reports that the Pistons are open to moving their 15th pick and Amir Johnson. That’s an option the Spurs should consider, especially since Detroit’s primary interest is clearing cap. Just two summers ago, the Spurs offered Johnson a contract, so we know they would have some interest. And he’s a fit on a few important levels. He’d provide an infusion of youth and a legit shot blocking presence alongside Tim Duncan. Moreover, his contract expires after next season. So, if he flops, the Spurs are off the hook. Low-risk, high reward. The Pistons draft 15th, and at that spot the Spurs would have their pick of whatever small forward suited their fancy, whether Omri Casspi or otherwise. If Ford is correct-that Dumars is primarily interested in creating cap space in advance of free agency-then the Spurs are a good conversation partner for the Pistons. And, if I’m Pop and Buford, I would think about sweetening the deal by taking back Kwame Brown’s contract. Brown is almost certain to take his player option for next season, and that’s 4 million Dumars could use off the books. I know, I know. Kwame Brown? But he’s not as bad as you think, and his contract expires after next season. It’s not a big deal. I like that this scenario addresses roster needs without doing violence to the 2010 cap strategy.
  • And then there are options that destroy the 2010 cap strategy. Just a thought: Most Spurs fans are amenable to taking on a big contract in exchange for an impact player, such as Vince Carter or Richard Jefferson. One player that is on the block, and way overpaid, is Corey Maggette. Remember the Spurs were hot for him last summer. Aren’t we happy that didn’t happen! This is just a thought, and I’m interested in your reaction to the suggestion. Should the Spurs consider taking on Maggette outrageous contract if they could get a lottery pick and/or Anthony Randolph out of the deal? If the much-rumored Baron Davis for Corey Maggette trade doesn’t materialize, the Warriors won’t have many options beyond treating Maggette as a salary dump. He’s not Vince Carter. No one is eager to take on his contract. In other words, he’s a cake that requires all sorts of icing.
  • The IndyStar is running an article about George Hill this morning, and it includes one noteworthy aside. Gregg Popovich is committed to playing George Hill more next season, both at point and off guard. And Pop admits that Hill should have played more minutes against the Mavericks.
  • Bushka

    I’ve never been a simmons fan. Maybe it’s because I live in Australia and just don’t get the angle, though it has never held me back from appreciating Henry Abbot, Tom Ziller or a zillion other online writers.

    A trade of Parker for Roye and a lottery pick? That has to be one of the most prodigiously stupid comments from a professional sports writer I have seen in an awfully long time.

  • TDzilla

    Re-signing Gordon will be Chicago’s top priority.

  • http://www.48minutesofhell.com Timothy Varner

    So they say…I don’t buy it.

  • Big50

    I’m not super informed on all of this, but do the Spurs have any plans to get a nice wing player via the draft or are the looking big?

  • http://www.48minutesofhell.com Timothy Varner

    Big50,

    No one knows, really. We know they’ve scouted Omri Casspi heavily and that they’ve worked out a lot of guards so far. My best is guess is that they” target a big or a wing with their MLE, a big or a wing in a trade, and the best player available with their draft selection, but with a qualifier. I don’t see them drafting a true center.

  • Ken

    I have always liked Bill Simmons and appreciate his views on the NBA. I was at first a bit suprised by his take that we should trade Parker. Today, in his mailbag (part 2, I think) he defends in detail his trade recommendation. I don’t know if I agree or not, but I would be interested in a detailed, intelligent rebuttal. Here is what he says:

    Q: Can you please explain your asinine trade suggestion from your 5/20 chat that the Spurs should throw away Duncan’s last chance at a title by trading Tony Parker to Minnesota? I just want to make sure you’re the dumbest writer on ESPN.com.
    — Anthony, El Paso, Texas

    SG: Sure. I’ll even go with Hubie Brown’s second-person hypothetical tense for you.

    OK, you’re San Antonio. Your Duncan window is closing and so is your chance to contend. You’re in NBA no-man’s-land, a little like Utah from 1999-2002: 45-50 wins guaranteed, no real chance of contending, no way of getting better because they spent too many years picking at the bottom of the first round. So what do you do? You can’t trade Duncan; he’s an icon and has to finish his career in San Antonio. You can’t get fair value for Ginobili because of his injuries and because he’s an expiring contract. Your best trade chip is Parker, a good character guy coming off a career year. He’s also your most replaceable guy: a gifted scorer who can’t shoot 3s, isn’t a traditional point guard and struggles to defend certain points. You only need to replace him with someone who can provide 80 percent of his numbers and you’ll be OK. You also need to turn him into multiple pieces.

    Now, you’re Minnesota. You have three keepers: Al Jefferson, Kevin Love and Randy Foye. (Note: I still like Corey Brewer but let’s see how he recovers from his ACL injury.) You are a joke of a franchise with an owner who has one of the poorest reputations in the league and a fan base that doesn’t care, namely because you hire failed GMs and coaches, recycle them, then expect the fans to care. Jefferson could be the best guy on a contender, Love could be the third-best guy and Foye could be a starter or a sixth man. But you’re not winning anything if that’s your top three. Too young, not quite talented enough. You need to acquire an experienced blue-chipper who can show everyone else the way (shades of Ray Allen and KG in Boston). And you have no chance of landing a marquee free agent because NBA players want no part of Sota when they can play for a well-run franchise in a warm city. Thanks anyway.

    So what do you do? You have to bowl someone over with a big-time offer. That’s why you call San Antonio and say, “We’ll give you Foye, our No. 6 pick and Brian Cardinal’s 2010 expiring contract for Parker.” Note: The deal can’t work until July 1.

    OK, you’re San Antonio again. Foye is a scoring point guard like Parker (his January/February splits: 27 games, 19.3 PPG, 40 percent 3FG), he’s four years younger, he’s a quality 3-point shooter, he’s on the books for cheap ($8.3 million combined in ’10 and ’11), and between Foye and George Hill, you have a shot of replacing nearly all of Parker’s numbers. Plus, you’re adding the sixth pick and some much-needed young blood (maybe swingman James Harden, power forward Jordan Hill or shooter Stephen Curry); you’d have $27 million of expiring deals (Cardinal, Bruce Bowen, Fabby Oberto, Kurt Thomas, Matt Bonner and Roger Mason) for a possible mega-trade during the season; and you’re selling high on Parker, who will never have more value than he does right now. You’re telling me that trade doesn’t make sense?

    (Well, it makes sense to everyone but Parker and Eva Longoria, who just read the last few paragraphs screaming, “Nooooooooo! Noooooooooooo!!!!!”)

    Look, the biggest mistake fading contenders make is not audibling near the end of the run, when they can turn an expensive chess piece into multiple guys and an infusion of young blood. The Celtics had a chance to deal Kevin McHale (just a tad past his prime) for Sam Perkins and Detlef Schrempf in the late ’80s and wouldn’t do it; they could have headed into the ’90s with a nucleus of Reggie Lewis, Perkins, Schrempf, Danny Ainge, Robert Parish and Larry Bird. Instead, they played the loyalty card with McHale and made the fatal mistake of dealing Ainge for Joe Kleine and Easy Ed Pinckney. You should only be loyal to franchise guys in a 30-team league. Everyone else is expendable. That’s how the Spurs should be thinking. If they want to breathe new life into the Duncan era, Parker is the play. Sincerely, the dumbest writer on ESPN.com.

  • mori1040

    Just my two cents about Maggette. I’m from the SF bay area and the Warriors are my 2nd favorite team. I can tell you for sure that the Baron for Corey trade won’t happen.

    Chris Mullin got fired because he verbally agreed to a new contract deal with Baron and the owner Chris Cohan and his goon Robert Rowell felt Mully overstepped his bounds. They’re also tightwads and don’t really care about winning.

    That being said, Maggette IS overpaid, but he would have been great for the Spurs and I, for one, am disappointed they couldn’t get him. They guy can take almost anyone off the dribble and he’s got an uncanny ability to get to the foul line. We’re talking Kevin Martin ability, here.

    What the Spurs lacked the most this season was an athletic wing who could create his own shot at will. In spite of the incredible game winning shots Mason hit this season, he’s still a very limited player offensively (and he didn’t exactly shine in the playoffs either). Every time I see a defender close hard on Ime or Bowen in the corner and they put the ball on the floor, I cringe. With Maggette, that’s a dunk, a layup or a trip to the FT line 9 times out of 10.

  • Chris K.

    I initially scoffed at the Parker to Minnesota scenario that Simmons mentioned off-hand. I thought it was short-sighted.

    But his longer defense of the scenario made me think twice, although there is no way in the world that Pop and R.C. trade Tony.

    When’s the last time a team won a title with a point guard as their best player?

    ….The 04 Pistons, arguably. Before that, when?
    Answer: Unless you think Tony Parker is Magic Johnson circa 1984 or Isiah Thomas circa 1989, maybe Simmons has a point about our point.

    The Piston teams of Chauncey, and Isiah and the Lakers’ teams of Magic were balanced and loaded. These Spurs teams don’t possess that kind of depth or talent. The analogy to the fading Jazz of the Malone-Stockton era hits a little too close to home for my taste.

    Maybe we should shake things up.

  • Joe

    IF we decided to move Tony (and I’m not even saying that we need to move Tony), here are some better trades off the top of my head than what Simmons proposed:

    1) Tony plus partially guaranteed expiring deals and multiple 2nd round picks to ATL for Joe Johnson & their #1 this year

    WHY ATL DOES THIS: They need to resign key guys (Marvin Williams, Zaza, Bibby, & Josh Childress, if they can) and reduce salary, and they might lose Johnson next summer anyway. This gets them a comparable star from a winning program at a more reasonable contract that’s locked in for an extra year, they don’t have to pay Bibby too much or sign him for too long and can replace Johnson’s production if they can convince Childress to come back (he’s still a restricted FA, so if he’s dead set on coming back to the NBA, he might not have much of a choice but to keep playing for ATL), and it gives them financial flexibility to do whatever else they decide to do

    WHY THE SPURS DO THIS: They can play Johnson at the 3 (he’s listed at 6′ 7″) when Manu is also on the floor, he can hit 3s AND drive to the hoop, he plays hard on both sides of the ball, and they can use the draft pick to take the best available remaining PG (Maynor, Lawson, Calathes, etc.). If Johnson doesn’t work out, they can let him go next summer and use his cap room, and they have a solid PG prospect in the pipeline at a better price than what you have to pay for a lottery pick.

    2) Tony plus expiring contracts and multiple 2nd round picks to Philly for Elton Brand, either Thadeus Young or Maureese Speights, and Philly’s #1
    WHY PHILLY DOES THIS DEAL: They get out of Brand’s contract, which was a mistake in the first place. He can’t play at the speed that the rest of the roster needs to play at to be successful. Tony, on the other hand, could excel at that pace. Young plays the same position as either Speights or Iggy, so long-term, one of those two probably has to go anyway to free up PT for the other. They also then don’t have to worry about re-upping Andre Miller at a deal that would likely come back to haunt them in a couple of years.
    WHY THE SPURS DO THIS DEAL: A Brand/Duncan combo would dominate the paint and would help extend the Duncan window for the length of its natural life. Even if Brand can’t play at the level that he used to (I don’t see any reason why that should be the case with most of a season + a summer to recover), we then get 2 young pieces at positions of need — a combo forward, and presumably a PG with the draft pick.

    3) Tony + an expiring contract to Memphis for Rudy Gay, Darko, and Mike Conley
    WHY MEMPHIS DOES THIS DEAL: They get a playoff-tested star who can take some of the pressure off Mayo in the back-court. Gay didn’t seem to mesh well with Mayo anyway, and they don’t have to worry about paying Gay when his rookie contract is up next summer — they have Tony, a better player, locked in at a good price. Memphis also doesn’t have to worry about passing up on Rubio in the draft (his upside, at best, seems to approach about what Tony can do anyway) and can either trade down to get Hill & another asset or just take Thabeet without second-guessing themselves about Rubio.
    WHY THE SPURS DO THIS DEAL: They fill multiple needs for this year (shot-blocking & a wing), they get an expiring contract in Darko for next year to increase their 2010 cap space, and they get a respectable PG prospect in Conley. If they are smart and Gay is willing to play along, they can also use their 2010 cap space to bring in another stud before resigning Gay and going over the cap, if necessary (not that we would EVER do that, but we could if we wanted to).

  • Chris K.

    How about TP plus some combination of Bowen/Thomas/Finley/Oberto/Bonner to Milwaukee for Richard Jefferson, Andrew Bogut, and the #10 pick.

    Solves our wing, center, and youth issues in one swoop. We pick up one of the many point guards at number ten and he splits duties with George Hill.

    Hill, Manu, RJ, Duncan, Bogut w/ Draft pick, Mason, and whoever is left backing them up.

  • Bushka

    You can spin it as hard as you like. TP for Foye + a lottery pick (which at 6 in this draft is a very apt & literal description of the process), is ridiculous.

    As has been mentioned so many times before, Duncan is the window. If you want to stick with that window and make a trade you make one that at least solves multiple issues immediately as in the way Chris K, mentions above.

    Simmons taking the splits from the most productive months of Foyes career and parlaying them into that diabolical trade defense is irrelevant. It’s just a bad trade.

  • Jordan

    Not to mention Joe Johnson (while capable) doesn’t drive to the hoop ever, I’d rather not have him on the team.

  • Chris K.

    (Apologies for another one…)
    How about Tony to the Blazers for Jerryd Bayless, Travis Outlaw, and Greg Oden?

    The numbers work, and it gives us youth, depth, and potential. Of course it never happens, but still…

  • Big Lou

    TP, Matt Bonner, and 2nd Rd pick to GSW for Monta Ellis, Anthony Randolph, and Ronny Turiaf, #7 pick…Trade Machine Approved!!!

    We get a good physical center, a athletic 3/4, a scorer that can play both guard poisitons, and maybe Curry of Flynn with #7.

  • lvmainman

    Parker for Foye and a pick, when they are numerous better options, shows how short sighted Simmons was in this instance.

    I still say the Spurs should keep the big 3(Parker, Ginobili, Duncan) and go get another reasonably priced 8 to 10 million a year all-star or borderline all-star. Especially since we don’t have any upcoming all-stars, ala Rondo or Bynum on the roster.

    If the Warriors are so intent on dumping salary with Maggette, the Spurs should insist on getting Stephen Jackson and Randolph/or Wright. For any combo available - Mason Jr and Oberto for example.

    If the Wizards are so intent on dumping salary with Jamison, the Spurs should insist on getting Caron Butler, and the #5 pick for Mason Jr and Oberto and a 2nd rounder.

    The Spurs need to be aggressive and find a GM dumb enough to do a Pau Gasol for Kwame Brown trade because they want a salary dump. Besides what great player are we going to get in 2010 anyway? Wade? Nowitski? Bosh? Lebron? Joe Johnson? Yao Ming?

  • mori1040

    The Warriors aren’t likely to give up Randolph or Stephen Jackson for any price/trade. Brandon Wright would be a slightly more realistic option, although he’s still pretty raw and weak on the defensive end.

  • http://www.48minutesofhell.com Timothy Varner

    Mori,

    Everything you’ve written seems right to me. But the contract is for too much for too long. It’s just a nasty ugly contract for a guy who will be 30 next season. I don’t think anyone should look at it unless the Warriors build in real value. And some of the other comments seem to suggest that they are not willing to do that.

  • http://www.48minutesofhell.com Timothy Varner

    Bushka,

    I’m with you.

  • http://www.48minutesofhell.com Timothy Varner

    You’re not the only one to kick that scenario around, Chris. But I think the Spurs would ask for Batum.

  • http://www.48minutesofhell.com Timothy Varner

    Big Lou,

    That’s too much for Parker. Ellis and Randolph is pretty close to equal value. But I doubt Nellie wants such an underwhelming 3 pt shooter. Not that Ellis is better…

  • http://www.48minutesofhell.com Timothy Varner

    There is no way the Wizards give up Butler. Why?

    I think what the Wizards want to do is reduce payroll and take a stab at things with a healthy core. That would include Arenas, Jamison and Butler.

  • http://www.themilkcarton.com Tyler

    Joe,

    Memphis never does the deal. Even if it’s cost cutting, it’s giving up the two players Memphis has said it’s building around.

    Atlanta- I don’t want Joe Johnson. He tires quickly, and we would be requiring more of him than ATL did.

    Philly- We should never pull this deal. Brand/Duncan would be good for a few years, but both are working on increasingly injury prone resumes. And you always say that we should draft a PG in the draft, but the fact is even if we draft at any of the Memphis, ATL, or Philly positions, those PGs are NOT guaranteed starters. And unless Hill takes a giant leap forward in his PG ability, we wouldn’t have a true PG. The only option would be Lawson, but why take the risk?

    Chris K.- I think this is the most reasonable circumstance, but I still think it’s crazy for us. Bogut would be a HUGE get, and we could work with the #10 pick (Brandon Jennings?), but Jefferson is old, and it gives us a Big 3 (Manu/RJ/TD) that has a definite end date, and it’s soon. We’d be contenders (and weak ones) for 3 years tops, then all three would break down and we’d be screwed.

    I agree with Simmons, the Spurs should VERY clandestinely explore their options with Parker. But we need young talent (preferably a wing).

    I really like the Detroit idea of grabbing for Amir Johnson and their pick. we could turn that into something good. What would we have to give up? Also, it might give us some options to get a 1-year rental wing as well with what we have left.

  • longtimefan4

    2 years in a row the spurs have had key players hurt.
    If the big three are healthy the Spurs can go all the way. They need a shot-blocker in the mode of the Admiral and a wing with size who can shoot the three and rebound in the mode of Mr. Elliot. That’s the formula.

  • Phoebus

    Read the rest of Simmons’ chat:

    Chris Paul is available if you’re willing to throw the kitchen sink to the Hornets, because they’re in dire financial straits.

    For the next 6-8 years after this one, the NBA champs are going to have LeBron, Wade, Howard, Melo, Paul, and maybe Roy or Durant as their main guy. In the NBA you don’t win a championship if you don’t have one of the best 5 guys in the league as your main guy (2004 pistons being an abberation, but do you really want to build your house on that?)

    Paul could still be gotten for Parker and a bunch of other pieces (contracts).

  • EO

    Trade Parker. Keep Ginobli.

    Look Parker doesn’t play D. Yes he’s great on offense, but he’s not a traditional point guard which the spurs of the future need.

    Trade Parker and Bowen to the Griz for Mike Conley, D. Milicic and picks #2 and #27.

    Then trade pick #2 (if Griffin is picked first) to Kings for picks #4 and #23.

    Draft Harden for Sg, Daye or Casspi for SF, and Lawal for toughness at PF. With second round picks draft foreigners who will develop overseas.

    This way we’ll have young players with talent and still have a chance at a big name free agent in 2010.

  • Bushka

    I don’t understand the fascination that we as fans sometimes have with defining a player. They must be a traditional point guard, they have to be a shot blocking Centre etc.

    Players have skills and attributes. TP is as good a penetrator as you are ever likely to see at the PG position. He gets assists at a very decent clip (was hitting around 7 Per game this season). He shoots remarkable percentages for a PG.

    He doesnt hit a lot of 3’s…he also doesn’t take a lot of 3’s. His shot selection is actually excellent.

    I don’t really care if he gives you assists and points in a more traditional manner, right now he gives you those assists and point and he does it at a supremely high level.

    If he has shown one thing its that he can develop his game, and is willing to invest time in his shot. I don’t doubt he’ll finish his career a better three point shooter than he is now.

    You don’t trade him for anything other than absolutely outstanding value in return.

    You don’t involve him in a trade where a large portion of the inherent trades return value is lottery picks.

    Lottery means just that, and in this draft everything after Griffin is a lottery.

    You trade Parker to the griz for conley and milicic and the picks don’t pan out you just gave away a t0p 3 PG for a guy developing into a starter, and a one of the last decades biggest draft busts (go ask detroit how they feel about the lottery pick that is Darko Milicic).

    It’s that time of year though and everyone starts going dizzy for draft picks. I am not a zealot for this years draft, i’d love Rubio, but if it is not Blake Griffin why do you give up TP? Even then….TP is a mega star, can even Griffin develop into that level? Sure he can..Will he? Who knows.

  • http://www.48minutesofhell.com Timothy Varner

    Bushka,

    So everyone can see my cards, I think that evaluating trade options for Ginobili and Parker should be on the table for the FO. But I don’t think the FO is considering moving either player.

    Many of the comments under recent posts have stretched my imagination in terms of what might be possible. The scenario EO just suggested was helpful in that sense. But I’m with you. None of the suggestion strike me as returning equal value. Or, maybe more accurately, they’re more risky than just rolling with the current core.

  • Bushka

    Your points well made and well taken,

    EO is spot on with the youth movement path and 2010 cap space idea. My whinge about the traditional point guard things a pet peeve i should probably keep to myself.

    It is to some degree my standard Tony Parker Defense, (not that TP needs defending). I’ve used it in the past for various players who are not readily defined by their position on the court, but actually define their position.

    I would be bitterly dissapointed if we traded TP, but wholly support exploring the avenues for both he and Manu.

    I am sure the front office will breath a sigh of relief now that I have given them the green light. Knock yourselves out working those phones boys.

  • Joe

    Two comments, and I’ll do this as 2 separate posts.

    For the record, I wouldn’t recommend that the Spurs make any of the deals posted above, including my own — the point of my post was to demonstrate that any number of plausible deals for Tony would be better than what Simmons proposed. I don’t think you trade Tony until after it’s pretty clear that the Duncan window is over. What’s kept us back the past 2 years has been health, not talent, and Tony has been mostly healthy come playoff time. If you do trade one of your big 3, you trade Manu, not to get better (you can’t get equal value for what he can do when he’s healthy), but to give the team more certainty about who’s going to be on the floor come playoff time. That’s a judgment call, and I don’t think there’s necessarily a right or wrong answer. Which is a better use of the few years we have left in the Duncan window, having a lesser but historically healthy player like Vince Carter or Ben Gordon, or having a 50/50 chance (if that) of keeping Manu throughout a whole playoff run?

    Another parameter to consider: it seems unlikely at the moment, but given his worsening knee problems, what if the Duncan window only has one year left? We’ve talked about the risk of getting less than equal value in a trade, but what if not making a big trade this summer in the hopes of cashing in in 2010 squanders our last chance at a ring for a long time?

    Along the same lines, what if we do nothing but tweek around the edges and come up short again in the first round — what premier free agents available in 2010 would want to come to a franchise that they perceive as in decline? Do we have to make a strong playoff push next year just to prove that a top FA could put us over the edge for another ring?

    Ultimately, I don’t think we should look for the front office to go into this summer set on a single strategy. They’re well aware of all of these concerns, and I think they intend to be opportunistic. They’ll take a trade offer for Tony or Manu if it clearly gets us closer to a ring in the Duncan window, but they’re not going to panic, either.

  • Joe

    Tyler,

    I’m sure my trades aren’t perfect, but if we’re critiquing each other, here are my thoughts on your comments:

    Memphis: You’re saying that the 2nd and 3rd/4th best players on a 24-win team plus a role-player with an expiring contract aren’t worth a former finals MVP who is arguably the best player on a 54-win conference champ team (based on objective metrics like PER)? On the other hand, you think Bogut, a 24-year-old 7-footer who has averaged close to a double-double for the past two years, passes well, and defends better and better each year, PLUS Milwaukee’s best 2-way player and their 1st round pick is a more realistic deal when Milwaukee was in playoff contention through 2/3 of the season? I disagree.

    Atlanta: I don’t know why several posters here don’t like Joe Johnson, and I’m not sure I agree with the criticisms that have been posted. The guy broke his eye socket driving to the basket and still came back later in the playoffs, so I don’t understand where the impression comes from that he only shoots jumpshots. He may have done so late this season because he shouldered so much of the load all year and didn’t have any gas left by the playoffs. He looks ‘tired’ because he plays hard on both sides of the ball, taking the tougher of the 2 backcourt defensive assignments each game to accomodate for Bibby’s poor D while serving as the go-to guy on offense. He was 3rd in the league in total minutes played this year. A few summers ago, the Olympic coaches pointed out how surprised they were by how good he looked. I wouldn’t expect us to deal for him (I don’t think having him without also having Tony helps us, and I don’t think Atlanta is about to give just him away without a star in return), but next summer, I would bet that he is #2 on our realistic wish-list of free agents behind Bosh (LBJ and Wade aren’t going anywhere, and Amare doesn’t fit with us) if we keep our cap space.

    Free agent picks: I agree that PGs available in the 18 - 22 range are not definite starters, but in the Milwaukee deal that you favored, we get no veteran PGs but a chance to draft someone like Jennings. I’m not sure whether a 19-year-old with no record of success after high school is more ready to step in and start than someone like Lawson or Calathes.

  • Pingback: Spurs Sign Curtis Jerrells | 48 Minutes of Hell()

  • Pingback: Spurs Sign Curtis Jerrells()