Tuesday, June 22nd, 2010...6:29 am
On Tony Parker to the Pacers
Somewheres on the internets there is a humorous interview of Hunter S. Thompson conducted by, if memory serves, Dick Cavett. Cavett asks Thompson the back story on his campaign trail reporting that presidential candidate Edmund Muskie was addicted to ibogaine, a drug associated with morphine dependence. Thompson acknowledges that the rumors did surround Muskie, and that his reports of those rumors was completely factual. And he then he offers this confirmation [paraphrasing from memory], “I know people were talking about Muskie’s ibogaine addiction because I started the rumors.”
Sometimes I get the impression that sports chats are like following Dr. Gonzo on the campaign trail. It’s because of this that I’m increasingly slow to chase every rumor associated with Spurs personnel. No one is quite sure what is true, or who to believe. In recent weeks, Chad Ford added to the resilient will-the-Spurs-trade-Tony Parker conversation by suggesting the Spurs and Pacers were considering swapping Tony Parker for Troy Murphy, Brandon Rush, and the No. 10 pick in the 2010 draft. This is old hat to most Spurs and Pacers fans, but I just got around to discussing it with Jared Wade and Tim Donahue of the fantastic Pacers blog 8 Points, 9 Seconds.
(I’m not suggesting Chad Ford pulled a Gonzo and started the rumors. Rather, I’m saying that trade rumors are fun to discuss, but what is really being said behind the scenes, if anything, is impossible to know. But these rumors have hung in the air for several weeks, and there is probably something to them.)
Varner: So, what do you guys think? Tony Parker for Troy Murphy, Brandon Rush and the #10 pick?
Wade: Seems like something that isn’t completely nuts, but unless SA is simply in love with Rush (something I find insane), it feels like silliness. Murph is an expiring to make the salaries work who provides no “one last run at a title” incentive. Rush is cheap for two more years (and likely more) and while he does have some Bowen-like qualities, I’m not sure that plus the #10 pick is really enough.
Then again, if they’re cool with a cheaper-than-and-nearly-as-effective-as-Tony Hill then Manu, Timmy, Splitter, Blair, Rush and #10 could become a pretty damn good rotation. Obviously, Indy does it without thinking.
Dunno. Could see SA doing it now that I write all those names down. Not a “great” deal on paper yet and certainly not the cruddy, headline-for-headline-grabbing sake that bad teams usually make (“We got Shawn Marion…Championship”) but would probably turn out to be a perfectly seamless rebuild on the fly knowing RC Buford and Gregg Popovich.
They turn Rush into 1st Team All Defense, re-sign Murph for the BLE, get a Paul Pierce-level steal at #10, turn Splitter into Chris Bosh and win the 2012 title in Timmy’s last season.
Sounds about right.
Varner: Tony Parker to the Pacers for kitchen scraps…rumors like this make me crazy. Perhaps Tim Duncan and Manu Ginobili are the only two Spurs who have achieved apotheosis amongst the Spurs faithful, but I always feel like Tony Parker’s contribution to their championship runs is sold short. He was a Finals MVP at one point, and, when he’s on his game, is a Top 10 point guard-in a league that favors quick quards. The importance of postseason savoir-faire is perennially under-reported, but is almost always a critical NBA storyline in May and June. Take note of the Celtics recent run into the Finals or Derek Fisher’s presence in the Lakers’ rotation. Tony Parker provides consistent, solid numbers and postseason know-how. And he’s only 28.
The Parker to the Pacers proposal is not a complete laugher, but it certainly seems like the Spurs would be losing value. For me, it depends on who the Spurs are targeting at #10, and whether they can squeeze another decent draft pick out of the Pacers. Troy Murphy makes sense for the Spurs as a 5th big-he’s Matt Bonner plus rebounding. Plus, he’s an expiring contract.
If you asked me to isolate the two areas in which the Spurs need to improve next season, I would organize my response around ‘defense’ and ‘three point shooting’. In that sense, Brandon Rush makes sense for the Spurs. But he’s a fringe player on a good team and Tony Parker is core player on a great team.
Malik Hairston has looked decent in limited minutes for the Spurs, and Rush is equipped with some of the same skills but with the advantage of a rangy, reliable catch and shoot game.
Again, who do the Spurs get at 10? And are the Pacers willing to up the ante? What do you think, Tim?
Donahue: If Parker is healthy, it’s really a no-brainer for the Pacers. Parker’s a huge upgrade at a crucial position. If, at 28, he can return to form, then he is at least equal to, if not better than Danny Granger. (I have a hard time comparing players who play different positions.) If he can be extended at a reasonable amount, then the Pacers have added the star level player, and they’ll still have plenty of space to add assets. (For the sake perspective, I threw an estimate of $16,000 for first year extension - which I think is too high - and it still leaves the Pacers payroll between $36-$40mm, depending on our 2nd rounders this year and our 1st next year.)
However, there are two big worries from the Pacer side, and they both make me reluctant to “up the ante.” First, can he be extended at a reasonable amount (or at all)? Indy is not exactly a destination franchise, so would Parker re-sign? If so, what are those dollars going to look like? He’s only 28, but he has played 800 games (including the playoffs), and he’s coming off his worst, most injured season of his career. Personally, I’d be ok with a deal in the $13-14mm a year average, ideally for three years, but no more than four. Will that get it done? If not, and we can’t work out a deadline deal, then we just get a year older and lose two pieces (Rush & #10).
Second, will he be healthy again? He’s a smallish guard, and small guys age faster. They rely more on athleticism, and that’s what you lose if you get older. If he can stay healthy enough to play 2,300+ minutes per season for the next three years, then it’s a slam dunk. If, however, this year is an indication of what’s to come, then the Pacers are screwed (particularly if he signs an extension).
For the Spurs, I can’t really speak for their motivation.The #10 looks like it’s going to produce a good rotation player this year, but nothing exciting. Of the guys that I think will be there, I like Udoh and Bradley. I could see either working for SA, particularly a defensive PnR combo guard like Bradley.
Murphy is an expiring contract with some good skills. What Popovich will love about him is that he almost always gives you what you expect. He’ll get the defensive rebounds, he will drill the open jumpshots. He will definitely space the floor nicely for you. Defensively, he’s physically weak and slow, and he can be exploited (read: killed) one-on-one. However, he’s a smart guy, and he can play reasonably well within a team defensive scheme. Jared will probably choke on this, but hindsight to me says that Murph would have helped Cleveland more than Jamison did in the playoffs. He’s bigger, so you could play him at the 5 with Andy or Hickson, and he’s really a much more reliable shooter than - well, anyone Cleveland had. I also think he would have done a better job with Garnett, defensively, but that’s just speculation.
Rush is really the lynch pin here. How you view Rush, from both sides, really affects how you view the trade. On Pacers Digest (the most active Pacer Forum), there’s actually a lot of resistance to the trade. Some of that resistance is the typical overvaluing of draft picks and young guys. A lot of it centers around the widely held belief that Rush is a lockdown defender and starting quality shooting guard. A lot of people lay almost all of his shortcomings at Jim O’Brien’s feet, saying that he’s misusing him.
I can’t speak for Jared, but for me, I pretty much reject that. He does have talent, and he is a decent athlete. He does three things well - in this order - knock down open three’s, rebound from the guard position, defend. His core problem is that he’s just a passive cat. There doesn’t seem to be anything in particular that motivates him, but there do appear things that get in his head negatively. His offense and his rebounding wax and wane with his confidence. His man-to-man defense is pretty good, but I think he tends to drift when his guy doesn’t have the ball.
I’d be more likely to buy the thought that O’Brien was more culpable, if this wasn’t more or less the book on him coming out of Kansas. This is a guy with great size, shooting ability, and very good athleticism for a wing, yet never averaged more than 13-ish PPG in college.
It seems to me that he’d be nice in SA, as long as you aren’t counting on him. If you stick him in as the 5th/6th/7th best player, and his contributions aren’t relied upon heavily, then he may end up being a really, really nice player. He’s got the length and skills to be All Defense, but I’m not sure he’ll ever have the drive.
Getting back to what Jared said, my overwhelming sense is that you’re the Spurs, and we’re the Pacers, therefore it will work out fabulously for you and horribly for us…just because. (Which should tell you how far the Pacers have fallen as a franchise.)
Varner: I’m not sure who the Spurs are targeting in the draft, but I’d guess that a trade like this is not finalized until they see who is available at 10. If a player mocked in the top 5 slides, maybe the trade looks better to them. Or maybe the Spurs make a choice between Luke Babbit, Xavier Henry and Paul George at 10. Of course, that would make Brandon Rush somewhat redundant. Not to mention that the Spurs have fairly good odds on making a rotation quality player out of one or both of Malik Hairston and Alonzo Gee. What does that leave the Spurs? A glut of mediocre, bottom of the rotation wings and questionable depth at point guard?
Perhaps, the Spurs are trying to prepare themselves for their inevitable shopping of Richard Jefferson’s expiring contract that will begin in earnest January 2011, and this move merely represents the opening gambit in a more fully-realized plan.
If the Spurs’ strategy is to put a young, athletic core around a nucleus of Duncan-Ginobili-Hill, then Splitter, Blair, Rush, Gee/Hairston, #10 and #20, and a young player as part of a package for RJ’s expiring contract is a start. But gosh, is Duncan-Ginobili-Hill really the center of championship contender? Not from where I sit. If the Spurs pull the trigger on a deal like this, San Antonio fans should expect a team facelift (and perhaps a season-long faceplant) as the Spurs reshape the rest of their roster around subsequent moves.
More interesting to me are the rumors that San Antonio is trying to move into the top of the draft. The All-Star potential of players like DeMarcus Cousins (whom the Spurs attempted to interview at the pre-draft camp, but were rebuffed), Derrick Favors and Evan Turner all make the possibility of losing Tony Parker more palatable.
48 Comments
June 22nd, 2010 at 7:06 am
Where there is smoke there seems to be fire. I think the news on the Spurs and the chatter has been unusually quiet which indicates that something is brewing.
I don’t love this trade because I really believe that TP will be motivated next season. It’s a contract season and like he said “I will like like a revenge”.
I believe that should be their motto for next season. Get Splitter, draft well, get the young ones working and find a sucker for RJ that will give us something decent in return.
I think the Spurs could have given the Lakers trouble because they don’t fear them. Tweak and stay healthy and they could make a serious run.
June 22nd, 2010 at 7:12 am
“Questionable depth at point guard” doesn’t begin to describe it. Trade Tony and Manu becomes our only proven point guard.
June 22nd, 2010 at 7:18 am
Thanks for the breakdown here, Tim. I know you can’t comment on every trade rumor that is floated, but I was hoping we’d get some comment on some of the stuff out there as we approach the draft.
This Pacers trade rumor didn’t make me happy at all. Sure, we get a decent enough wing and post player in this scenario, but who is running the offense? Hill is turning into a fantastic player, but he isn’t the playmaker that TP is. Getting the #10 might be okay, but we aren’t landing Cousins, Favors or Turner at that position.
June 22nd, 2010 at 7:29 am
I would be upset if we made this trade. I wouldn’t trade Tony Parker unless it would get us in the top 3, where we could get either Derrick Favors or DeMarcus Cousins.
June 22nd, 2010 at 7:32 am
Great post. The possible Nets trade sounds way better for us than the Pacers trade.
June 22nd, 2010 at 7:50 am
I believe - as a whole - we greatly undervalue Tony.
While Troy Murphy would be a fantastic upgrade from Bonner, we would lose the essential piece that makes our scheme work; a penetrating point that can collapse a teams defense at will.
Whatever you trade Tony for needs to be able to provide 20+ points, and 6+ assists at a very efficient rate.
Lets say you can make the numbers work. You find someone/pair that can produce what he does; Can you guarantee me that they will produce come playoff time? We currently have a guy that makes 42% of all his three pointers throughout the season, and cant buy one come playoff time. I dont want to trade proven/tried/true, for someone who might be able to get it done. That makes no sense at all.
I understand the desire to get younger. Trading away a 28 year old all star and former finals MVP is not the way to do it. If we get rid of Tony for anyone not named Paul, Williams, or Rondo, it will be a terrible mistake. You can write that down.
June 22nd, 2010 at 7:57 am
i wouldnt do it. once we get tiago splitter, getting troy murphy would be redundant and would force tiago to the bench, making him upset. two thumbs down for tony parker even if we do get anyting but a top three pick in the draft. there have been SO many draft busts these days that we can’t risk a championship by trading a proven winner like tony parker. and hill still needs another year to season before he becomes a star.
June 22nd, 2010 at 8:05 am
Trade Parker.. we want somethin new..
June 22nd, 2010 at 8:11 am
GhostDog -
The same thing was said about the presedential race…
How do you like what we have now? HaaHaa
June 22nd, 2010 at 8:22 am
Good one, DieHardSpur. Let’s stick with what we know works.
June 22nd, 2010 at 8:38 am
[...] Timothy Varner touched upon one of the more persistent trade rumors, which has the Spurs offering Tony Parker to the Indiana Pacers for Troy Murphy, Brandon Rush and the number 10 overall pick. Parker has also been mentioned in [...]
June 22nd, 2010 at 8:45 am
Good breakdown. I liked the perspective on Brandon Rush; if the FO is really considering this they must be pretty high on the guy.
I agree with the other guys here-TP is only worth trading for one of the top 5 players in this draft, or if theres a larger plan in the works.
I got no problem with “just” adding #20 and a Euroleage MVP to last year’s conference semifinalist.
June 22nd, 2010 at 8:46 am
Tony’s not going anywhere.
June 22nd, 2010 at 9:14 am
Hey, wasn’t it not quite a long time ago when somebody here observed that with the acquisition of RJ, the Spurs seemed to be preparing for the “passing of the torch”: from Duncan being the centerpiece towards Parker being the franchise?
Has one season-filled injury clouded that observation? Mind you - these were not injuries brought about by offcourt irresponsibility or by playing for one’s country without evaluating its repercussion to the team. Tony got burned after practically carrying the Spurs on his shoulders through the 08-09 season.
I’m not exactly a Parker fan - in a heartbeat, I’d trade him (only) for Wade or Bosh - but I think that the guy deserves to be seen as what he is - an All-Star calibre player who can lift a team up when he’s healthy. I don’t see the sense in trading a Top-Ten point guard for a bunch of tradeable/waiveable parts.
In observing the Spurs, I don’t think that they would put all their hopes up in an unproven player that they drafted versus that of an NBA Finals MVP. The trend seems to be towards that of playing Tony, Hill and Manu, with either RJ or Duncan at PF or (I’m not holding my breath but yes, I’m praying) Splitter or Duncan at C.
What’s really the use of Bowen Part II and Bonner v2.0 if we lose the point guard who has carried us (and carried us well!) when both Manu and Timmy were down? And for just one injury-plagued, not-really-so-sucky season? To their credit, RJ does a pretty decent defense and Hill is improving - and both have plenty of opportunities to mesh up with the roster. A lot has been said about second year players improving so much with the Spurs, so I won’t be surprised if we see a far better, more comfortable RJ and a more mature Hill next season.
June 22nd, 2010 at 9:16 am
I agree with many of the posts here. If Splitter wasn’t coming over, I think we consider this trade because of Troy Murphy. However, it appears very likely that Splitter is coming over thus nullifying the need for a big who will make more than twice what Splitter can command. If we trade Parker, it needs to be for a top 5 draft pick in order to pick up a stud.
There was yet another rumor out today regarding Chris Paul for Devin Harris and the #3. This however, doesn’t seem likely at all. If the Nets were willing to dump Harris for the best PG in the league, wouldn’t they be willing to dump Harris for a PG who is only a notch below Paul (Parker when healthy). Plus we could give them the #20 to boot. As long as they could resign Parker, I think they would look long and hard at this deal. In my opinion, this is the only somewhat realistic trade scenario that could net us a top 5 pick.
June 22nd, 2010 at 9:38 am
Good point Hobson13.
Has anyone ever noticed…
Anytime we ever play a team who has a great PG, (Paul, Rondo, Williams, Nash) Tony always outshines the other star PG?
Everyone trashes Tony’s ability to play defense; I think he is a very under rated defender. He may not be the “lock-down” defender that everyone dreams of, but i think for his size and position, he does a great job.
FYI - there are really only 2 ‘lock down’ defenders in the league after Bruce left.
Kobe Bryant and Chris Paul
June 22nd, 2010 at 10:21 am
Actually, I don’t believe you have a single lock down defender at point guard anymore. And you never will. Even Rondo can be burned (see the Bulls-Celtics series a year ago). The rule changes really prevent point guards from guarding the position. Those days are over.
The only thing you can really use against quick point guards these days is length and shot blocking behind that length. (Ariza, Trevor).
Assuming we can get that second shot blocker, Tony is decent enough to funnel people into them the way Avery Johnson was decent enough to do the same.
June 22nd, 2010 at 10:46 am
I agree, Jesse. There are no “lock down” point guards. Sure, Rondo and Chris Paul get lots of steals, but that’s mostly from being sneaky and jumping passing lanes. TP does a respectable enough job on defense. The 2nd shot blocker will go a long way towards rebuilding team D.
June 22nd, 2010 at 11:23 am
Thanks, Varner, for giving us an interesting discussion at this time of year, although I don’t think Chad Ford’s credibility warrants it, but the discussion with the 8.9″.com guys makes it worthwhile. We don’t have Chad Ford’s influence to give a rumor such legs that everyone has to comment on it, even the respective FO’s, but it would be great if 48MOH would analyze, or could talk to Warriors World, or the likes of Tom Ziller, about an RJ to GS proposal, which is honestly better than almost any “official rumors” out there.
June 22nd, 2010 at 11:50 am
I do not expect (or want) this Indy trade to happen, especially if we sign Splitter. It’s an indicator that we don’t have better options, and if that’s the case, then I guess we have to do what we can. Of course, I wouldn’t be at all surprised if Chad Ford made it up, as he has a tremendous accuracy problem historically when it comes to his NBA rumors playing out. However, Ford is good at getting people talking (obviously) which is his job for the corporate media.
But there are a few factors, which taken together, might equate to this happening:
1) If the Spurs do not consider us contenders without a major overhaul, and thus are beginning a rebuild while keeping us the playoff mix.
2) And If the Spurs have targeted with their eye for talent a steal at #10 (Ed Davis? George? Orton???) that they are CONVINCED will have a great Spurs career.
3) And If the Spurs really have no intention of signing TP, and/or are dead certain that Hill and/or our pick at #20 (Elliot Williams?) will shine as Spurs’ starters.
However w/o Splitter, all bets are off, and the FO has to get extremely creative, so anything goes. But I fully expect Tiago to be our starting center next year.
Picking up Murphy next summer is possible, who is a better player than Bonner, but by then, with Blair’s rebounding we shouldn’t pay or play him much. I am dead set against even a best case Matt Bonner-type down low for more than 10mpg, and we used Danny Ferry at the 3 because (a) we had a very different team, and (b) didn’t win with him until S-Jax became our starting 3.
I also don’t really believe in Rush. “A fringe player on a good team”?… correction, he’s a fringe player on a mediocre team. He is not as strong mentally (i.e. confidence and work ethic) as Bruce, and will not become Bruce Bowen. That said, he might improve if given a good opportunity by Popovich, but more likely this means we have otherwise found very few options to improve this team right away, and are going to be making several subsequent moves as Varner indicated. Rush’s Spur’s career will be similar to Bogans, or at best, Roger Mason, Charles Smith (remember him? he’s playing well enough in Europe), or Devin Brown.
It comes down to how in love with, and how badly they think we need, an early-to-mid first round sleeper in this year’s draft… who would that be, I wonder? We’ll likely never know.
June 22nd, 2010 at 11:52 am
Unless the Spurs can get a top 3 pick then it’s not worth it to be honest….
If you tell me you are getting Devin Harris & Favors/Johnson or if all he’ll breaks lose Turner then to me you gave to trade Tony and the 20th pick for this….
By the 10th its hit or miss if you ask me…
June 22nd, 2010 at 12:33 pm
Here’s how I see a potential trade of TP:
Tony’s game will not age well. Once he loses the ability to get past the 1st defender his game becomes average.
He is going to demand a ton of money for an extended period for his next contract. It will be his last big pay day. Will he keep that first explosion for four-five years? Is his talent worth his monetary demands? No sir.
June 22nd, 2010 at 12:41 pm
@ Lenneezz - Much was made of this same scenario in regards to Steve Nash here in Dallas. Cuban thought he was on the edge of “breaking down” and wouldn’t finish his contract out.
TP is resilient and persistent and a champion. I think he easily makes 5 years at his current pace, barring MAJOR injury, and he is smart enough to compensate after that for a couple more years, IMHO, as well.
June 22nd, 2010 at 12:59 pm
[...] move up, they should do it, even if Tiago Splitter is already locked into the Spurs’ future. Trading Tony Parker for a pick somewhere between 2 and 6 is equitable, provided that George Hill continues to [...]
June 22nd, 2010 at 1:22 pm
@SAJKinBigD
Nash is an exception to the rule. It all depends on the character of the individual, the skill set, desire and even genetics.
Nash vs. Parker
Tony’s game is based on finishing. He takes hitS at the rim nightly. It is based almost solely on speed and acceleration. That is what makes him special.
Nash’s game is based on vision, ball handling, pin point passing and shooting.
To me it’s obvious which skill set will be better when in their 30′s.
June 22nd, 2010 at 1:25 pm
Tony’s game is also based on the 18′ jumper as well. When he can’t get past the first guy, that is what he’ll be. A decent ball handler and passer with an 18′ jumper.
Worth 15 MIL/ YR?
June 22nd, 2010 at 1:37 pm
I think the same was said for Chauncey Billups of Detroit… and he is how old now and still playing excellent ball?
TRADE TP = BIGGER than the SCOLA MISTAKE
June 22nd, 2010 at 1:39 pm
My initial reactions to this rumor from a few weeks back:
• Jim Henderson
June 3rd, 2010 at 1:17 am
“He’s (Murphy) one of the more productive PF’s in the game. Plus, he’s a stretch four that can also rebound, a pretty unique and awesome combination. Rush hasn’t done much yet, but he’s young & athletic, has some defensive potential, and can hit the three (41%). And obviously the 10th pick would be an upgrade over #20. The salaries involved do appear to offset, making it feasible on the financial end, but I’m not sure that this deal makes Indiana better. They don’t really have someone that can replace Murphy, unless they think Hansbrough (a very different type of player – 13th pick of 2009) can come off an injury-plagued rookie season and give them enough (along w/Jeff Foster) to compliment the emergence of Roy Hibbert, and the scoring machine of Danny Granger (unlikely, in my view). And then, do they have a problem with getting full use out of T.J. Ford in a back-up role at the point? In addition, do they just want expiring deals, or do they want to resign Parker? And could they, even if they wanted to? As far as the Spurs go, Murphy would be an excellent fit in the rotation (although not a great defender) with Duncan, Blair, & McDyess (maybe Splitter), and it’s possible (although far from guaranteed) that Rush could become our small forward of the future. Of course, the # ten pick could be pretty good in this years draft, but it’s still a crapshoot. On the downside, Hill is not ready to take over for TP at the point, so not getting a decent PG (Ford - but not really a great fit) back in the deal is a drawback.”
“……It’s a rumor, but at least it doesn’t appear to be completely far-fetched! That said, I’m not sure I like the deal too much, because I think we need to focus more on defense, particularly in the paint, and Hill is not Parker. I do like Murphy, but he would invariably steal minutes from Blair, thwarting his development, and we would still need a young defender/shot-blocking type of player in the paint, in my view.”
• Jim Henderson
June 3rd, 2010 at 6:37 pm
“Personally, I think Chad Ford is out of his mind to seriously suggest that the Pacers would even consider this deal without requiring us to give up the #20 pick. Parker’s good, but he alone cannot possibly command those two Indiana players PLUS their tenth pick. No way, particularly since the deal doesn’t make much sense for the Pacers anyway.
In fact, do you really think that Parker’s best offer will ultimately be to play for Indiana? Can you imagine Eva Longoria going to his games in Indianapolis? And then what’s Indiana left with? Cap space? What for? They are already going to create about the same cap space from the Murphy & Rush expiring contracts?
Sure, the original deal floated on Ford’s chat would give the Spurs something to work with (though not solving our most pressing issue - a shot-blocking defender in the paint, and also weakening our PG coverage), but you have to admit, it’s risky and not realistic from the Pacers perspective — and certainly without demanding our 20th pick in return. The risk of losing Parker is just too great.”
I’ll stick with that assessment. This rumored deal is old news, and in my view, it will ultimately be a rumor without legs. On the other hand, the Warrior deal we’ve been talking about more recently is still worth doing an in depth blog post on, by fielding some additional insights from both sides: Warriors & Spurs bloggers.
June 22nd, 2010 at 2:09 pm
Bird has openly stated that the Pacers are seriously shopping for a point guard even though (or because) this years draft is slim for PG’s.
I am not agreeing with those bloggers who think that Hill is not ready. He excelled when Tony was injured. Plus Manu can handle the ball handling duties just fine if Hill were to be injured.
If Tony doesn’t get traded it is because of Tiago. His presence doesn’t make Murphy a necessity.
June 22nd, 2010 at 2:16 pm
@Jim Henderson
@Hobson13
Unless it falls through, Maggette has been sent to the Bucks for expiring contracts. This perturbs me, b/c an RJ deal would have been better for them. I don’t know if SA was unwilling to take on the contract or they are just blinded by the sweep and have tunnel-vision regarding the upside in the draft and of our need to build for the future
Best case, they are dead certain that there are some steals in the draft. I see no better chance for the Spurs than adding the 4 players (GS trade + Tiago) that we have discussed here.
Regardless, w/o such an influx of talent to our core, I now (1) have to expect that we try trade Parker, and (2) have lowered my expectations for not only next year, but for the TD window in general. I don’t see us getting as much tough, solid scoring and big athletic defense from any other moves this summer. Not even if we give up some key talent back, which now we are virtually forced to do.
June 22nd, 2010 at 2:40 pm
td4life
June 22nd, 2010 at 2:16 pm
“Unless it falls through, Maggette has been sent to the Bucks for expiring contracts. This perturbs me, b/c an RJ deal would have been better for them.”
Wow. It appears you are right. Charlie Bell and Dan Gadzuric are total trash. They essentially gave Maggette away for cap space which RJ could have given them. Well, there goes the great RJ to GS trade.
Maybe something else will materialize with an RJ trade.
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_ylt=AvnSEXTz9qFEB_JhIptidCO8vLYF?slug=ys-maggettebucks062210
June 22nd, 2010 at 4:48 pm
Trading Parker for top 2-5 picks may be worth gambling. Then again, the question would be what the Spurs have to give up (or take in, like Brand’s ridiculous contract) in addition to Tony Parker for that to happen?
I don’t like this trade with Pacers because Murphy, Rush and that #10 pick will likely end up being borderline contributors at best, and god knows whether Rush and #10 will pan out in the near future?
I personally would like to see Hill assigned with PG duties more often (just to see if he can accel in that position), and for this to happen TP must go. Having said that though, if Hill does not develop into a serviceable PG (which seems quite likely at this point), trading TP will really cripple this team.
June 22nd, 2010 at 5:48 pm
@Ian,
You are most likely correct… Hill+Parker+Ginobili is more valuable talent than we could get back. The only caveat is if the FO, with their eye for talent, sees and absolute steal with the #10. Even Cousins/Favors is a big gamble, but maybe you have to take it if you think our window is slamming shut (if we stick with the status quo + Splitter)… however, Elton Brand’s contract makes such a trade virtually impossible. Even in his prime, EB would not be someone we could depend on in crunch time… I guess he’d be a brutally expensive back up to TD. Brutally expensive.
Would Philly part with both Iggy and a chance at Evans simply to free up payroll? I don’t know what they’d possibly wait for that would be better than the number 2 pick, they sure aren’t gonna be an FA destination any time soon. On the other hand, TP really isn’t a fit for Philly, they’d have to really be poor bb visionaries. Meanwhile, Iggy is also a brutal commitment for the Spurs. There’s only one very outside chance, and that’s if Evans and Johnson are both gone by number 4, leaving both Cousins and Favors on the board, but I still don’t see any top 5 team (in this case Minny) wanting either TP or an expiring that badly.
Even RJ’s expiring for a chance at a surprise all-star with the #6 means taking on Biedrins’ nasty 5 year cap killer.
The odds are long on getting any franchise-changers, alongside Tiago, any time soon.
June 22nd, 2010 at 6:03 pm
All bets are off until Tiago picks a horse anyway.
June 22nd, 2010 at 6:22 pm
@td4life - I think that’s what one of the authors on this blog said too: none of the top-5 pick holders need TP right now. I was merely saying that trading Parker for #6 or higher pick might not be worth gambling for. Sure, the Spurs should be all ears when a good offer has been made to them, but that Pacers trade doesn’t really seem that appealing to me. You’re right about those long-term contracts. Spurs just can’t afford them. Hell, I think one of the reasons why Parker is involved with so many rumors is the likelihood of Spurs not being able to extend Parker (who’d demand a max/near-max extension if he’s had a good year) to a reasonable contract. Trading for a less productive guy who’s paid a lot more wouldn’t make any sense.
June 22nd, 2010 at 6:39 pm
Very interesting reads here. I’m going to squash the overall likelihood that many will read through my post by noting that I’m not much for speculating trades. Maybe it’s a stage of life thing, but it’s time not well spent for me.
I do wonder on a few things:
a. What is RJ’s second year like with the Spurs? Did he truely fail in his first year in the system, I mean to say, fail like we haven’t seen in some time? Or will he have a second year rebound like we have seen time and time again in the Spurs system?
b. TP’s first non-international off season play. How does this translate for him next season? Or is the real issue the redundancy in the system with George behind him?
c. What are the realistic expectations for Tiago’s first year with the Spurs? And/or is he an “impact’ post player for this team?
d. What do we anticipate from Blair’s second year? Does he have a George Hill second year? Or is it a mere mathematical equation which translates to more minutes = more stats?
e. As stated here more over, how do the Spurs adequately spell minutes for TD and Manu through the roster?
I can’t wrap my head around the draft’s potential for the Spurs. It’s just so rare that they draft a college kid who gives them solid minutes. G Hill being an exception, I’m not really sure what to read from Blair’s first year, Manu/TP who don’t fit that mold and the last college rookie of any real note was Timmy.
It almost seems like, what’s the point to some extent? The Spurs system bleeds veteran experience.
June 22nd, 2010 at 7:01 pm
Jim Henderson
June 22nd, 2010 at 6:37 pm
Yeah, I see what you are saying with regards to the it being a bad deal for both GS and the Bucks. Damn! The RJ plus #20 would have been a superior trade for GS. They could clear ALL of Maggette’s salary when RJ’s contract expires next year plus possibly resign RJ for a fraction of what he will make this year.
With that said, what the hell were the Bucks thinking?! They unloaded one overpriced SF who had two years and $30 mil on his contract last year (RJ) so the next year they can pick up another overpriced SF who will make $31mil over the next 3 years?!!?! What exactly is their big plan? On top of this, rumor was that at last year’s trade deadline that the Warriors were willing to part with Randolph if someone took Maggette’s contract. The Bucks didn’t even get in on that action! I guess you are right; there is a reason they are both assclown franchises.
June 22nd, 2010 at 7:09 pm
Die hard spur- what has tony done that has made him a proven player when we needed him? He is a role player that was considered a 3-4 option during our ring days. Since he has had the chance to be the man and take over hes done nothing. ZERO.
He scores points. So did Allen Iverson. And its not hard to get 6 APG running Pick Roll with Duncan 30+ times a game. I could do that.
I dont disagree that trading him for a higher pick is a bad move because the draft blows, but I would not be opposed moving McDoosh, Parker, RJ.
RJ isnt really at fault here 100%. The coaching has been AWFUL. When in the world was he ever a half court jump shooter. Ill tell you = NEVER.
GREGG GETS AN F for coaching
June 22nd, 2010 at 7:22 pm
Trade Tp
June 22nd, 2010 at 7:09 pm
“what has tony done that has made him a proven player when we needed him? He is a role player that was considered a 3-4 option during our ring days. Since he has had the chance to be the man and take over hes done nothing. ZERO.”
It amazes me that most seem to ignore the inconvenient fact that Spurs did pretty damn well during that 6 week stretch where Parker was injured and Hill and Manu ran the team. I heard a million and one excuses as to why that was, but few ever admitted that it was because our ball movement and player involvment on the offensive end was superior with Hill and Manu. I won’t even discuss the other factors such as his impending free agency and whether or not we sign him or let him walk for free. If Parker can be traded for a decent PG plus a top 5 draft pick, it needs to be seriously contemplated.
June 22nd, 2010 at 9:27 pm
Trading Tony is not the answer. I know he is the most marketable piece, although if we get Splitter like we are hearing we do not need a big man. Stay put and not have too much player movement. Look at this year, too much movement and got swept in the second round. Keep the 20th pick and get a replacement for Jefferson long term. Damion James from Texas is a nice fit. We still have one run left in us. The Indiana trade is not for us. If they trade Parker top 5 pick in return. Don’t trade Parker Pop!!
June 23rd, 2010 at 4:14 am
okay fellow spurs fans, we take a top 5pick thats it.
Tony in his recent interviews stated “i would like to come back “THIS SEASON” “. ok another statement was “i think this is the last chance for “THE SPURS” to get a ring”<——hello????
okay notice hes not sounding like manu did before he inked " i would love to play for the spurs and retire here its what i thought i wouldnt have to worry about this"
to me tony is already gone guys, ive been called a parker hater or what not, the reason why well.. its all in his interviews people hes been saying" if were not in contention he wants to go to L.A or any champ contender!!!!" these are all things the spurs FO observe.
2nd trust our front office when dealing parker theyre not going to do a parker trade unless they know he doesnt want to be here after the contract is up.
here is a list of + to trade TP for a top pick:
*he seems like hell leave after timmy retires so why not get something for him now
*hes going to play every summer internationally as long as he has a contract shoot he was still thinking about playing this summer until he heard trade talks.. hes going to be a pain in the ass every summer…no thank you
* this will make or break hills growth as a Pg and well possibly lose george hill to another team while having an older tony
*its like cashing in to me, we got tony as a 28th pick we send him to get a top 3 pick!! thats amazing, for a big who can easily dominate with pure talent for a decade to come! we may not be able to get close to a top 5 pick for a very long time spurs fans so we need to do this and be dominate for years to come!
** if youre scared hill cant run the point and take us to the finals , take a look at the 2008 nba champs point guard!! hill can get the job done thats how you make new champions you trust in them! this is our last chance to trade for a major player without clearing our whole roster, while getting youth and a future center piece.
oh and i think we should go after john salmons if we can get rid of princess peanut, .. and yes i know tony is amazing and talented but we have to sacrafice for a strong future all the while competing
June 23rd, 2010 at 5:14 am
Trade TP:
Do you not remember last season (’08-’09)?
We had no Manu, and a half of a Timmy, and the same bullshit role players we had this year. Tony was the only person who could create any offense. You think assists are easy to come by in our system - think again. No point guard in the past 15 years has averaged more than 8 per game. I think that with Tony averaging 6+ a game that is stellar, considering we have no one who can knock down the open shot.
If you think that the coachinig sucks and the players suck and everything sucks ecxept you - how about being a Laker fan? You were probably in here in ’07 whining and complaining when we won, screaming the same song…
June 23rd, 2010 at 9:10 pm
I dont think we should trade TP…..
but, I would be willing to trade with IND for only this: TP for Hibbert, TJ Ford, and the #10.
Our lineup would look like this:
PG - Hill/Ford/Temple or Jerrells
SG - Manu/Hairston/Paul George (#10)
SF - Jefferson/Gee/Paul George (#10)
PF - Spliter/McDyess/Blair
C - Duncan/Hibbert/Mahinmi
Plus we would still have the #20 pick to add.
Jefferson, Ford, McDyess all come off the books next year (~28 mil.). Think this would give us an excellent bench with 3pt shooting and Defensive/Rebounding help plus set us up for the future!
June 24th, 2010 at 12:12 am
@ jk31007,
Wow, if the Pacers would be willing to give up Hibbert, I’d be down with that trade! Hill could start and Ford could be a good backup that can get to the rim off the pick and roll. Hibbert/Splitter would be great to match up with Bynum, Oden, and Ming in the playoffs. Plus the #10 and #20 draft picks.
I wish the front office is being active with ideas like this one.
June 24th, 2010 at 7:37 am
TP cannot play well with Manu. Trade him now. He stagnates the offense. We played better without him this year. PG’s are a dime a dozen. TP can score but he can’t distribute. We need a PG who thinks assist first.
June 24th, 2010 at 10:32 am
KP - Do you not watch Spurs basketball?
We are consistently in the top 5 teams in assists.
No Spurs PG in the last 15 years has averaged more than 8 assists per game. Our system, for so long, has been set up to have a penetrating point guard, and a double teamed post presence.
The penetrating pg either scores (layup) or dishes out to the open man from the defence collapsing. That open man doesnt always shoot, as there will be a help defender roll over. Where the defense is screwed is when the open shooter makes the extra pass (usually a corner three left open).
The corner three is a direct result of having a point guard who can get the first step (if not multiple steps) on his defender. This something that Tony is spectacular at, not to mention, the best finisher in the league under the rim.
If this is not enough information for you, do some research and get back with me on your findings…
June 24th, 2010 at 2:10 pm
KP
June 24th, 2010 at 7:37 am
“TP cannot play well with Manu.”
Are you really that clueless. TP won THREE championships playing with Manu!!
“We need a PG who thinks assist first.”
That’s NOT our system!
June 26th, 2010 at 4:32 am
i would love to see my man TONy ParkeR tradng to NEW YOrK Knicks……..go TP leave spurs…..they think they can still win a title without you…..they think they can win a title with manu, tim, hill…..wahaha where is manu and hiLl in round 2 vs suns…..
Leave a Reply