NBA Mock Draft, TrueHoop-Style: The Spurs select…
According to fellow TrueHoopers, the 2010 NBA Draft will play out this way:
1. Washington: John Wall
2. Philadelphia: Evan Turner
3. New Jersey: Derrick Favors
4. Minnesota: Wesley Johnson
5. Sacramento: DeMarcus Cousins
6. Golden State: Greg Monroe
7. Detroit: Epke Udoh
8. Los Angeles: Al-Farouq Aminu
9. Utah: Xavier Henry
10. Indiana: Paul George
11. New Orleans: Cole Aldrich
12. Memphis: Ed Davis
13. Toronto: Avery Bradley
14. Houston: Patrick Patterson
15. Milwaukee: Gordon Hayward
16. Minnesota: Hassan Whiteside
17. Chicago: Luke Babbitt
18. Miami: Eric Bledsoe
19. Boston: James Anderson
20. San Antonio: Damion James
Damion James to the Spurs
Honestly, I’m not completely enamored with Damion James. Not because he’s a poor player–he could step in and help the Spurs right away. But the Spurs need to upgrade their talent beyond what James brings to the table, and James represents a small step forward at a time when the Spurs need to take one or two big steps forward.
From where I sit, the Spurs need to add shooting and another big this offseason. Tiago Splitter would absolutely help, and acquiring Splitter is far more likely (some believe he is already committed to the Spurs) than the Spurs moving up in the draft to select Derrick Favors, DeMarcus Cousins or Ed Davis. But if the Spurs have a decent opportunity to 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 develop.
The Spurs’ Wing Situation
The Spurs lack proficient three point shooting wings. And since Brent Barry left the team, the Spurs sorely miss a third ball handler and playmaker. Damion James is none of these things.
The 2010 NBA Draft contains a few interesting players who could help the Spurs in this regard, especially Evan Turner (who is out of reach), Paul George and Luke Babbitt. But according to the TrueHoop Mock Draft, George and Babbitt are gone before the Spurs select.
In my opinion, this draft contains five players who could become NBA superstars: John Wall, Evan Turner, Derrick Favors, DeMarcus Cousins and Paul George. Babbitt doesn’t have that kind of potential, but he’s an impact player. And from a locker room standpoint, Babbitt is a Spur.
The Spurs’ wing situation is further complicated by Richard Jefferson, Alonzo Gee and Malik Hairston. Jefferson is now an expiring contract, and could be attractive to other teams come February. And his 2009-10 play was so underwhelming, I’m convinced the Spurs could equal his production if they simply turned his minutes over to Gee and Hairston.
Of Gee and Hairston, Gee is more intriguing. When he had opportunity to play NBA minutes last season, Gee shined. Our Andrew McNeill covered Toros home games, and often spoke of Gee as a legit NBA player. And from a small sample size, it appears he’s a competent three point shooter. Gee is a Spur who will receive plenty of offseason scrutiny from 48MoH.
Malik Hairston appears to be an NBA player, as well. But his two strongest deficiencies are shooting and ball-handling. In short stints, he’s shown an ability to defend and get to the rim, but unless he improves his catch and shoot game and ability to handle the ball in the half-court, it’s hard to imagine Hairston sticking in San Antonio. He’ll find a home in the NBA, no doubt. But his future in San Antonio is uncertain.
Mock Drafting Damion James
So we can see that the Spurs’ wing situation is thin. Jefferson will either be traded or wished-well when his contract expires. Gee and Hairston are interesting, but uncertain. And the Spurs need to upgrade their collective skill set at the 3.
What does Damion James does well is enough to justify the 20th pick. He can guard three positions, is a passable spot-up shooter, and can supply a brand of low-minute, high-energy hoops that necessarily enamores players to coaches. Beyond this, James receive high praise for his work ethic and professionalism, two things the Spurs value as basketball skills and not merely character traits.
We’ll see. The Spurs have a history of surprising on draft night. And honestly, I’m open to a surprise during the 2010 NBA Draft. Although Damion James is a solid player, I’m hoping the Spurs uncover an unheralded diamond in the rough or unexpectedly move up in the draft. The gap between them and the Lakers is wide enough that one or two small improvements won’t get Tim Duncan back to the NBA Finals.
I like the idea of Big Al from Minny for our Jefferson best of all, since the Maggette deal was squashed earlier. Does anybody have a link to see what the list of free agents will be this year? If we cant draft a starting SF, maybe we could sign one BAE, and use the rook to back him up.
Duncan – McDyess – Blair
Jefferson – Splitter
??? – #20
Ginobili – Hairston
Parker – Hill
With the 20th pick in the 2010 NBA Draft, The San Antonio Spurs select *best player available*!!!
Then, in a week, we trade that pick to another team for a veteran player who can fill a need on our team. Maybe we could do a TP + 20th pick for Chris Paul. Hornets need some front court depth and there seems to be several decent big men around the 20th pick. TP would give Collison another year of development, plus TP’s contract off NO’s books in only a year, crucial for a team that is more broke than Antoine Walker.
(I’m not advocating many TP trades, but Parker for Paul is worth considering, no?)
I’m thinking that we need a game changing talent added and I’m not confident that the 20th pick can provide a game changer. I’m thinking the addition of Splitter + a proven veteran makes us much better than Splitter + a rookie. A veteran is ready now, a rookie simply is not.
Take a look at Blair. He did well during the season (for a rookie) but ultimately fell short of being a game changer when the play-offs hit. Next year he becomes a game half-changer, and his 3rd year will be the Year of the Bear, no doubt. I’d equate the 20th pick with a player of Blair’s talent, but we can’t wait 2 years for 2010 Rookie X to turn the corner and become a game changer.
We’d be in so much better of a situation if Jefferson didn’t suck.
@ Jim Henderson
“I’ll have to discontinue interaction with you if you either refuse to, or are incapable of, communicating clearly, and with reason.”
You are kinda rude buddy. I am afraid I will cut off all communications with you if you talk to me that way again.
This is just a blog man. It isn’t a non stop pissing contest for you.
If I may humbly offer a suggestion to you; lighten up.
BTW what is not reasonable and clear regarding this comment?
“Can’t answer yes or no to that Jimmy. He is coming off an injury plagued year. How he bounces back will be very important to his future.”
What are your thoughts on trading Richard Jefferson to Toronto for Calderon and the 13th overall pick.
He might be overpaid, but he shoots 39% from behind the arc and is capable of running the offense for limited minutes. The spurs would open up cap space and have two first round picks. One to go after a solid (bench) player in Damion James. And, one to take a chance on a player with more potential.
Hobson13
June 23rd, 2010 at 12:57 pm
I agree, and I’m certainly open to trading TP. I’m just saying that I would be VERY careful, and especially so if “draft picks” are a big part of any proposed deal.
David G
June 23rd, 2010 at 12:58 pm
“The big rumor right now is that Minnesota is desperate to move Jefferson and his big deal for an expiring contract. Shouldn’t the Spurs really look into this.
A Jefferson for Jefferson swap makes a lot of sense.”
I think you’re right. T-Wolves are one of the teams in which an RJ move has some potential. AJ is not a perfect fit, and we’d be assuming 36 mil. over the next three years, but if Splitter comes aboard, and we deal McDyess, it may make some sense to consider, otherwise Blair’s minutes get squeezed, and I’m not in favor of that. Perhaps include McDyess and pick up Sessions?
“Well, I’m actually not making that assumption, buy are you really suggesting that TP is in decline already?”
This was the first question asked to me by you Jimmy.
Jim Henderson
June 23rd, 2010 at 2:12 pm
“Perhaps include McDyess and pick up Sessions?”
My thoughts exactly. A Spurs front line of Jefferson, Duncan, Blair, and Splitter would certainly challenge the lakers. Ramon Sessions is a good talent and is absolutely rotting away on their bench. The Twolves were originally looking for a good SF (Danny Granger) but got shot down during the season.
This move would really tear up our salary cap situation though. Jefferson is good and can be a beast, but it would be a BIG decision for Holt, RC, and Pop to take on such a big contract. However, if AJ can return to his previous form, he is a 20/10 machine. The proposed trade would look like this:
SA gets: Al Jefferson and Ramon Sessions
Minny gets: RJ, McDyess, and #20
Do you guys really think Minny would unload him for expiring contracts??
Lenneezz
June 23rd, 2010 at 1:53 pm
“You are kinda rude buddy. I am afraid I will cut off all communications with you if you talk to me that way again.”
Look, I’m just telling you that if you’re going to critique my comments with things like, “Your analysis leaves a bit to be desired…… and …. accounting for that would prove more insightful”, at least bring logic and reason to the forefront. If not, I’m just saying that I’ll be ignoring your comments in the future because they will have no useful basis for me to bother engaging.
“BTW what is not reasonable and clear regarding this comment?
“Can’t answer yes or no to that Jimmy. He is coming off an injury plagued year. How he bounces back will be very important to his future.â€
How does the value of a guy like Parker, a three-time all-star (an all-NBA player just the season before last) whose only had one season in which he’s missed over 10 games during an 82 game schedule (plus all the playoff & French National games he’s been in), get dropped to the point where you question whether he’s better than ALL of those 37, number 2-5 picks that I listed? You seem to imply that Parker coming back strong is something like a 50/50 proposition, yet you provide no basis for this assessment.
And in fact, you have not provided any “reasonable” evidence that Parker’s injury issue from last year should detract from his value, and even if it does detract “slightly”, you have provided no evidence that he’s still not better than virtually all of the players on that 37-man list.
@Jim Henderson – I understand your point that high draft picks turn out to be busts/underachievers more often than not (I thought it was a common sense but let’s just say you’re very perceptive in saying that). Now then why did you have to ask whether anyone would trade TP for the players in your list? Don’t tell me that just because every top-5 draft picks will more likely be busts, they might as well have the equally low values as the actual busts.
I’m not really countering your argument here: call me block-headed if you will but it’s just that the logic behind your argument was really strange that’s all.
God, it’s reported that Miami traded their #18 and Cook for OKC’s #32. Ridiculous…
Can’t Spurs get a bargain like this? I mean, even the Bucks got CDR from the Nets for almost nothing.
Hobson13
June 23rd, 2010 at 2:31 pm
“Do you guys really think Minny would unload him for expiring contracts??”
I do, for a few reasons. Number one, the T-Wolves are obviously STILL in rebuilding mode. They’ve made a series of poor decisions over the years. I actually feel a bit sorry for them, and really hope Rubio comes over next year & is everything they hoped he would be. But the point is, they have to have to be serious in implementing a 3-5 year plan, and that starts with clearing cap space by letting go of pricey contracts. Number two, I really believe their is a problem with Love & Jefferson co-existing effectively in the same front court. They do too much of the same thing, and they’re both vying for heavy minutes (one a young potential star, and one a very effective big still in his prime). The T-Wolves need to focus around their main guys, which I suggest are Love, Brewer, Flynn, and this years number 4 pick. With RJ & McDyess expirings, with Sessions & especially AJ gone, they should have decent room to make some big decisions on whether, and for how much, to extend Love, Brewer, & Flynn (which may depend on Rubio) in 2011, plus have some cap available to sign a nice free agent (hopefully a banger/defender type center).
The question is (as you raised), would the Spurs be able/willing to take on AJ’s hefty long-term deal? That I don’t have an answer for, but I would be surprised if they have not at least looked at the feasibility of such a trade, and perhaps even made an informal preliminary inquiry. But I guess we’ll never know.
By the way, we might not have to give up the number 20 pick in this deal. I think the T-Wolves may be desperate in some ways to dump AJ’s contract, at least partly because of the conflict with Love.
Ian
June 23rd, 2010 at 2:37 pm
“I’m not really countering your argument here: call me block-headed if you will but it’s just that the logic behind your argument was really strange that’s all.”
You haven’t specifically identified what you mean by “strange” logic. I contend it’s actually very sound logic. In fact it’s just basic odds. Do you or anyone else want to risk trading TP as a “gamble” to hopefully get something as good or better in the future? That is in fact what the trade-up scenarios offer. And the facts show that there’s about an 80% chance that you’re going to get a player not as good as TP from your pick, and you probably won’t even know the final verdict for at least a few years. Many on here are simply too cavalier in their willingness to offer up TP for the hype of a top-five pick. I’m just attempting to temper the enthusiasm by bringing a sense of reality into the picture.
bills
June 23rd, 2010 at 1:29 pm
Portland would not do that deal. You do know that they have Andre Miller at the point. Any deal with them involving Parker would necessarily have to involve Miller as well.
“Do you guys really think Minny would unload him for expiring contracts??â€
I can’t believe they would (of course its David Kahn so…) but apparently they’re talking to the Griz about Zach Randolph who has one year left on his deal. First Zach’s not a guy you want playing with a young team and second how does he fit with Love any better than Jefferson? At least R. Jefferson fills a need for the Wolves and he’s also a one year rental.
The Spurs really should push for this deal if the Wolves are serious about dumping Al’s contract. There’s very very few players who command a double team in the post and those guys don’t come around very often. It’s the only reason teams consider drafting a world class A-Hole like Cousins in the first round.
Dejuan Blair Rookie season http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q3zmUQbdiJk
Tony Parker 2009 2010
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CK_CK_mddeE
Ginobili 2009 2010 season
Assist
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rp0QYJW2gXQ
Offense
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RUUlE9nRBQ
Defense
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCerawsZg90
What the Spurs need?
1._Splitter
2._A great defender
3._A great 3pt Shooter
4._Im not worry about the draft, Popovich is going to make a great work with the future rookie
5._George Hill and Blair need to improve, practice and get better
6._Parker, Ginobili, Duncan need to Rest and get Focus
7._Richard Jefferson need to learn Defense!!!
I would like to see the spurs get Solomon Alabi. A big man w/lots of similarities to TD, he also came to the game late, has a great attitude and good work ethic and is a team player. Talk about the perfect subject for Tim to mentor.
It’s all about having players that cause other teams to have difficulty matching up. Alabi would be a match up nightmare for other teams. he has an awesome skyhook shot shoots 80% ft. and we can’t loose sight of the future of the team. We need players that can help now and later.I’m not saying he could start now but w/Splitter (hopfully) Alabi could give Quality mins.
If the Spurs were to pry Jefferson away from Minny, they would be unreal title contenders for the next few years. Could you imagine a front line of Splitter, Jefferson, and Blair? Especially one year from now once they’ve had time to grow together and learn the system? My Gawd! Timmy could play 20 min/game and just focus on mentoring these young studs. His biggest concern would be what bar he wants to go to after the Spurs win the game. In the draft the Spurs would HAVE to get a decent SF.
However, if we did get Sessions and Jefferson, you can say goodbye to Parker. No way we could afford to resign him next summer. Plus the Spurs would be 3 deep in the PG department with Hill, Sessions, and Parker with the first two being great backups if not good starters. With all that said, I would trade RJ’s arse so fast his head would spin.
Labron for Jefferson and Parker via sign and trade (With assorted others to fill out the deal).
Make it happen!!
This gives you a replacement for Parker and Jefferson in one player. Allows Ginobili to come off the bench and be uber 6th man again ( as well as get rest ), Hill to start at PG and develop his game in real game min. Add Splitter to all this and champs for years I tell ya!
Yes this is tongue in cheek pipe dreaming, but wouldn’t it be amazing?
“get dropped to the point where you question whether he’s better than ALL of those 37, number 2-5 picks that I listed? You seem to imply that Parker coming back strong is something like a 50/50 proposition, yet you provide no basis for this assessment.”
When the fook have I said that?
I have said, not implied, that Parker’s skills are going to decline a bit more rapid than some other PG’s with different skill sets. I have said that Parker is going to demand a very large contract for 4-5 years. I have said I do not believe he should be given that contract by SA. Therefore, the Spurs should trade him now when they can still get something for him.
Jimmy, you have read things that I haven’t said. Check your glasses bub.
I think one discrepancy that different posters are having is the issue of timing.
Odds are strong, that a player that is drafted at #10 will not have as good of a career as Parker.
However, we don’t care about comparing careers.
The correct basis for judgement should be Tony’s career from NOW.
What kind of production will Parker have for the next 5 years? How much will it cost?
Compare that with the draft picks production over the next 5 years and what that will cost.
That method is far more accurate imo.
Of course, there are plenty of intagables to mind.
But, keeping salary in mind when comparing forecasts is more realistic.
Gotta keep it real.
The chances of a 5-10 pick in this draft having 4 better years than Tony Parker’s next 4 are about 1 in a 100.
jim, i agree that your statistics regarding trading up for a top 5 pick are technically sound, but i have one caveat.
yes, the figures bear out that an overwhelming majority of picks 2-5 are less productive than tony parker. however, this analysis doesn’t take into account the teams doing the picking. a team like atlanta, that picks marvin williams ahead of chris paul (especially considering their pg woes) seriously drags the curve down. same for detroit and darko. cleveland picking potapenko ahead of kobe bryant. no one can deny the spurs FO’s acumen at the draft. we have consistently gotten contributors and worth out of picks that by the statistics have an infintesimal shot at becoming valuable at all. there’s probably 2 all-stars (a poor measure of greatness, btw, but that’s neither here nor there) in this draft, and i have faith that the spurs would be able to divine who they are (yes, john wall +1). sure, i understand that you’d want to temper the wild enthusiasm over trading up for the pick (i’m not for trading TP for harris and the 3, but i agree that you have to consider it), but to claim that it’s “just a gamble” isn’t intellectually honest either. or perhaps i’m just a complete homer.
that said, i’m intractably against trading TP for the 10 plus whatever trash indiana has to offer. TP’s next 3 years, even if he’s not fully healthy, is likely worth more than anyone we’ll get at the 10 (barring someone falling). at least with the 3, we have our pick of any of the top 5 players save wall and turner (the likely top 2), and you can save judgement because the pick will be made with potential and the future in mind.
All the people that are saying parker’s career over the next 4-5 years vs the pick is overlooking the possibility that Parker could sign elsewhere next summer. What if he doesnt resign with the Spurs and we are left with nothing?
Are*
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!
Lenneezz
June 23rd, 2010 at 7:40 pm
“When the fook have I said that?”
Below is the initial exchange that has now ended up devolving to where we are at present: talking in circles. It’s a paste & copy of the relevant aspects of our exchanges, from oldest to newest, on the topic of trading Parker.
Jim Henderson
June 22nd, 2010 at 10:37 pm
Lenneezz
June 22nd, 2010 at 9:17 pm
“Your post has one huge assumption.
TP will play like an allstar going forward.â€
Well, I’m actually not making that assumption, but are you really suggesting that TP is in decline already? That he’s not better than half of those picks on the list, whether an all-star or not? Indeed, from his rocking chair, if need be?
And then you respond with the following post:
Lenneezz
June 22nd, 2010 at 10:52 pm
Jim Henderson
Can’t answer yes or no to that Jimmy. He is coming off an injury plagued year. How he bounces back will be very important to his future.
To which, I responded with this:
Jim Henderson
June 23rd, 2010 at 2:36 pm
How does the value of a guy like Parker, a three-time all-star (an all-NBA player just the season before last) whose only had one season in which he’s missed over 10 games during an 82 game schedule (plus all the playoff & French National games he’s been in), get dropped to the point where you question whether he’s better than ALL of those 37, number 2-5 picks that I listed? You seem to imply that Parker coming back strong is something like a 50/50 proposition, yet you provide no basis for this assessment.
And in response to that series of exchanges, you respond with this:
“When the fook have I said that?”
Please try to follow the exchanges in order very carefully:
— I expressed reluctance to trade Parker for a top-five pick, and pointed out that 80% of 2-5 picks over the 12 draft years were not as good of players at age 28 or younger as is Parker at age 28. And I “asked” if people agreed with that.
— You responded by saying that I’m assuming that Parker is going to play like an all-star in the coming years, implying that you are somewhat skeptical that would be the case.
— I then asked if you were suggesting that Parker was on the verge of decline, and I again tried to elicit a response to the initial question: Is Parker better than those 37 picks that I listed.
— You responded by saying that you can’t answer the question, and that Parker just came off an injury plagued season. You ended the post, and I quote again, “how he bounces back will be very important to his future.”
— Since the meaning of the quoted sentence from your response above was unclear in terms of its relevancy to our conversation, and the entire post seemed to be concerned about TP’s health, I provided my case that Parker has not had a “pattern” of significant injuries in his nine year career, and suggested that you seemed to be inexplicably devaluing TP (because you won’t say that he’s even better than any of the 37 picks, injury or no injury) because of ONE injury-plagued season, by probing you with the following statement: “You seem to imply that Parker coming back strong is something like a 50/50 proposition, yet you provide no basis for this assessment.”
Now, I was not quoting you there. I was probing you about TP’s injury status, and how it all relates to the original exchange that provoked this discussion, because you seemed to be making two separate points about Parker that apparently left you balking at the original question, which is: is Parker better than those 37 players I listed when they were/are at age 28 or younger? You apparently can’t answer that question because of TWO concerns that you have about Parker, which you seem to believe lowers his value in relation to the 37 picks: (1) his particular skill-set; and (2) his health issues. The health issues were never clearly articulated by you as to why you brought them up in the discussion, other that to imply that the injuries lower Parkers trade-value. And the skill-set issue I never even got from you until your very last post in this exchange. So it’s only natural that I would have felt the need to probe you with statements that “may” end up incorrectly characterizing your position.
Also, my original post that prompted this exchange had “nothing” to do with “trading” Parker, and had everything to do with “trading Parker for a top-five pick”. There is a BIG difference there.
From your last post:
“Parker’s skills are going to decline a bit more rapid than some other PG’s with different skill sets.”
The assertion quoted above is strictly your opinion. You provide NO reasoning or data to make your case.
“…….Parker is going to demand a very large contract for 4-5 years.”
You don’t say what a “very large contract” means, and your statement calls for considerable speculation on your part since we won’t KNOW what Parker’s value on the open market will be NEXT year, and also because his free agency will begin at the outset of a new collective bargaining agreement (which is expected to lower salaries).
“I have said I do not believe he should be given that contract by SA.”
Without a plan for a replacement, the comment above is necessarily premature, unless you think that there’s a good shot that GHill can be a point guard for a championship team in the next few years.
“…..the Spurs should trade him now when they can still get something for him.”
There’s some basic logic in this statement, yet it is a view that I’ve never disagreed with from the outset of this exchange.
“Jimmy, you have read things that I haven’t said. Check your glasses bub.”
On the contrary, in your most recent post, you said things that I’ve not seen on here before. If you care to provide quotes of previous comments that essentially duplicates the comments in the second to last paragraph in your most recent post, we can talk about that, but I certainly don’t see them on this thread (other than that you “want to trade Parker”).
In the meantime, you need to learn how to follow the logic of an ongoing exchange better (recreating it for you has been a hassle), and also work at being more logical, specific, clear, and detailed in the points that you make.
Do you think you could answer the original question now? Is Parker, right now, better than those 37 picks when those picks were at age 28 or younger? If not, can you make a coherent case as to why not? And again, please take this into account in your response: “work at being more logical, specific, clear, and detailed in the points that you make.” Otherwise, it’s pretty hard to have a useful exchange of views.
dude jim you are amazing you just competely pwned leneezz. Thanks (and you have no life)
Lenneezz
June 23rd, 2010 at 7:53 pm
“The correct basis for judgement should be Tony’s career from NOW.”
That’s fine. I’ll take TP’s next four years against the BEST four-year consecutive stretch (their highest paid years) of any of those 37 picks. We’ll just say, that’s their careers (which by the way, gives an edge to those 37 picks, because a players BEST years are typically between 25 & 30, not 28 & 33). But that’s okay, I’ll still take TP over any of them.
David G
June 23rd, 2010 at 8:10 pm
“The chances of a 5-10 pick in this draft having 4 better years than Tony Parker’s next 4 are about 1 in a 100.”
Great pithy comment, David. I almost fell out of my chair laughing in agreement over that one!
andy
June 23rd, 2010 at 8:30 pm
“jim, i agree that your statistics regarding trading up for a top 5 pick are technically sound, but i have one caveat.
yes, the figures bear out that an overwhelming majority of picks 2-5 are less productive than tony parker. however, this analysis doesn’t take into account the teams doing the picking.”
Okay, Andy, that is at least minimally a valid point. In other words, I do agree the Spurs FO has earned an edge over the average franchise in term of their acumen in evaluating talent. That said, it is difficult to quantify, and it by no means reduces the risk to any significant or meaningful extent. Plus, the sample size and relevant data available is quite limited. In other words, the Spurs have had little experience at selecting top-five picks, and there are plenty of “misses” in many of their low-round, and 2nd round picks.
“…..but to claim that it’s “just a gamble†isn’t intellectually honest either. or perhaps i’m just a complete homer.”
No, it’s not JUST a gamble, but a good part of it is, otherwise no FO’s would make any mistakes, and we know that’s far from the case. I know the Spurs FO is good, but please be careful to not over-value their talents. They’re smart, but they’re not Nostradamus!
DNITCH
June 23rd, 2010 at 9:09 pm
“All the people that are saying parker’s career over the next 4-5 years vs the pick is overlooking the possibility that Parker could sign elsewhere next summer. What if he doesnt resign with the Spurs and we are left with nothing?”
Well, if you’re referring to me, remember, I never said I wasn’t open to trading TP. My posts on this thread have focused on my general reluctance to trade TP for a top-five pick. There’s a big difference there.
jk31007
June 23rd, 2010 at 9:14 pm
Problem is, Indiana is not going to trade Hibbert, Ford, & the number 10 pick for Parker. Not gonna happen. Not without Parker agreeing to a hefty 4-year extension, which is highly unlikely.
zainn
June 23rd, 2010 at 9:59 pm
“dude jim you are amazing you just competely pwned leneezz. Thanks (and you have no life)”
Gee, thanks, I guess I just get more done in a couple of hours than whatever “important” stuff you do all day. Better work on your time-management, and efficiency in the completion of tasks. And maybe take a writing class; if you did, maybe “your life” might be a bit more successful and fulfilling. Take care.
@ 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.
if were going to go for a title we cant expect for these pieces to just come from the sky i say if we cant get a top 10 pick through draft we go after these guys in order im glad everyones downt to finally get a smart big, non other than big al who molded his game after the big fundamental. been wanting him before dice but hey!he was better than bonner (nothing)lets start by going inside to out 1.) secure Al jefferson. if so teams are screwed #2) get shane battier! if we do this he will be the next best thing to bruce bowen and i think he brings just as much passion and heart & we are lacking that bad (cough mmmhmm*cough TP) so i think he will be the difference in setting the tone for our perimeter defense for all the young ones and show how to play with heart Unlike our man RJ. if we cant get shane i say we go after PLAN B JOHN SALMONS very underrated perimeter defeder who pops that 3 we love all the while being a natural defender and with the influence of the spurs he can be great he still is getting better every year even though hes getting a lil older
oh yeah and i was waiting for that come back jim seriously i was refreshing my page and i was like oh there it is hahaha why do people have to disrespect ea. w/out any motive whatsoever ?! lets talk basketball not shit hahah
“The chances of a 5-10 pick in this draft having 4 better years than Tony Parker’s next 4 are about 1 in a 100″
I actually agree. But you have to weigh performance vs cost.
@ Jimmy-
“That’s fine. I’ll take TP’s next four years against the BEST four-year consecutive stretch (their highest paid years) of any of those 37 picks. We’ll just say, that’s their careers (which by the way, gives an edge to those 37 picks, because a players BEST years are typically between 25 & 30, not 28 & 33). But that’s okay, I’ll still take TP over any of them”
Again and again. I said a cost performance analysis was what I was basing my supposition that TP should be traded. I did not say just a performance vs performance criteria should be used, which is what you are referencing.
It appears that Parker isn’t going anywhere.
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/rumors/post/Spurs-keeping-Tony-Parker;_ylt=AitLCh2yjwcIBD5LYicKwGC8vLYF?urn=nba,250938
It’s probably just as well. I really do wish the Spurs would go for the Jeffeson for Jefferson trade. The Spurs really need another big gun and Jefferson would certainly extend Duncan’s career. We will probably select either a PF or SF in todays draft. I have no idea WHO exactly they will get. I’m sure much will happen between now and tonight and perhaps a good name like Cole Alderich or Damian James will fall. I would LOVE it if we got Paul George, but that isn’t likely without trading up 10 spots or so. As I said, a Jefferson trade could vastly bolster our chances at competing with the top 5 teams in the league.
In regards to a RJ for AJ swap, I don’t think Minnesota would go for it.
AJ is a pretty well respected player around the NBA, and like others have touched on, automatic double teams like him don’t come around all that often. For a player of his talent (even though he’s pretty bad defensively), I think Minnesota could/would hold out for a better offer.
And in regards to a salary dump, Minnesota isn’t one of these teams desperately trying to get under the cap at all costs – they’re already under the cap. A salary dump wouldn’t be their primary motivation for moving Al Jefferson. They’d rather take back a young, defensive big they could pair with Love.
I hope I’m wrong though. If you could pair him with a TD or Splitter, you could have a nice combo.
Does anyone know of a resource online that will list the available free agents this summer? Trade rumors via ESPN say that Jefferson is on the trading block for Minnesota… hopefully our speculations will come to fruition!
@ Jacob
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?page=FreeAgents-10-11
That should give you a list of the available free agents. Yes, Jefferson is on the block, in fact this was rumored as far back as the middle of last season. Most of the trade scenarios that have been rumored are saying Minny would take back players like Zach Randolph and Troy Murphy. Both of these guys are expiring contracts and I don’t see how either one would fit well next to Love and the other big man (Favors or Cousins) they pick up with the 4th pick. If what they want is an expiring contract, RJ can actually fill a need for them at the SF position where the Twolves are particularly poor.
The biggest question is whether or not the Spurs want to commit to pay the luxury tax for the next few years. They can either let RJ expire or they can pay the toll and possibly get a great player. To me, it is a matter of dollars and cents at this point.
Apparently Detroit turned down a Jefferson for Prince/#7 pick…….
Maybe I’m wrong. Maybe an expiring could get it done, although Minnesota would most likely want out #20 thrown in as well…..
In Chad Ford’s latest mock, he has the Spurs taking Craig Brackins:
“Analysis: The Spurs need size, and this pick likely will come down to either Brackins or Alabi. Although Alabi has the size and upside, with Tiago Splitter possibly coming to San Antonio this fall, the Spurs may be set at the 5.
Brackins’ ability to spread the floor and play inside and outside is coveted in San Antonio. A number of GMs have told me he could end up being the sleeper of the draft. I’m also hearing tht Jordan Crawford and Devin Ebanks are getting serious consideration here.”
Interesting. I like Brackins. I had the opportunity to watch him a few times the past two seasons, and he seems like a surefire role player.
Tyler
June 24th, 2010 at 8:22 am
“Apparently Detroit turned down a Jefferson for Prince/#7 pick”
Minny would have also had to give Detroit the 23rd and 16th picks, though. They could keep those picks plus get the #20. Two big questions I have about this trade: How is Big Al’s knee? Would Peter Holt be willing to take on Al’s contract??
Here is todays chat with Chad Ford:
“Evan (St. Paul):
What are the wolves hopeing for in a Big Al trade? what could they get realistically?
Chad Ford:
Not much anymore. They explored moving him to a number of teams and I think they’ve found that his value isn’t as high as they thought. Teams are concerned about his knee and his contract. When you have the Grizzlies refusing to do a Al Jefferson for Zach Randolph swap … his stock must be near rock bottom.”
If Al’s knee is fine, then the Spurs could pick up a top 20 player for a rock bottom price of RJ (Think Pau Gasol trade). If his knee is not fine, then the Spurs are screwed with an albatross contract. Huge possible risk, huge possible reward.
Thanks, Hobson.
I know that I’m more than likely setting myself up for heatbreak, but I can’t help but to hope that we might trade Jeffersons with the Twolves. If we did do a deal that would net in Sessions and Big Al for Jefferson and McDyess, we would have to draft a SF and probably look at bringing in a guy like Outlaw or Josh Childress. Childress is on his way back over from Greece, and is an EXCELLENT defender. I think that we would be able to swing him our direction.
Duncan – Splitter – Mahinmi
Jefferson – Blair –
Childress – #20
Ginobili – Hill – Hairston
Parker – Sessions – Temple
@Hobson13
You’re right. I guess an expiring is all they can get for him.
Yeah, first the decision is on Holt – is he willing to pay the tax? If yes, then you look at AJ’s knee. This scenario makes me think of the Tyson Chandler trade to OKC.
In the end though, I think the Spurs will opt not to take on that risk. That seems to fit more in line with the philosophy of the organization. We’ve never been one to take huge risks and I don’t see that changing.
On a personal note, I’m not too high on Al Jefferson. First, the knee is a concern. Second, I think he’s overpaid. He’s got a pretty fat contract for someone who’s pretty terrible defensively. As good as he is on the block, I have a hard time paying someone star money when I don’t consider them a star. And last, he’s a black hole down low. AJ doesn’t pass out of the post well at all, and in our system, we need good interior passers to hit our shooters on the perimeter (even though those “shooters” were pretty much nonexistant this year).
@ Tyler
I agree with your assestment of Al Jefferson.
1. He is a poor defender
2. He is a poor at passing
but he’s shown a great willingness and desire to get better and he’s always been on horrible teams and poorly run organization.
If the Spurs (huge IF) got him this offseason I think they’d have him concentrate of defense and Popovich could design the defense around two big men again. I think he could at least go from liability to slight assest with the right system and coaching on the defensive end.
About passing out of the post…most young big men are terrible at passing out of the post (probably because in previous levels of play they never had to pass out of the post no matter how many guys were thrown at them). Again I beleive Al Jefferson could get better at this skill and the Spurs offense doesn’t ask the post players to make passes like Walton or Divac used to. Its more wait for the double team and pass it to a guy on the perimter and then the perimiter guy swings it to the open player.
About the Cost Anaylasis with Tony Parker.
First trying to get cap space if fools gold and especially so in San Antonio.
Even with Tony Parker at 10 million per vs a rookie at 3 million the Spurs are much better off with Tony Parker. He’s a star player and that’s what wins in the NBA. You don’t win with sub-standard replacement level players like TJ Ford or Roy Hibbert. (a tell tell sign about how a player is viewed around the league is can the player’s current team give him away…in TJ Ford’s case, that’s a NO)
It will also be very easy to say in three years player X was drafted number 19 and has produced at nearly the same level as Tony Parker has and then say the Spurs would have drafted him 10th plus saved money if they would have shipped Parker to Indiana, but we don’t have any idea who the Spurs would pick at number 10…
To have a true cost anaylais, whoever thinks Parker for the 10th pick is ideal then choose a player right now for the Spurs and compare their contributions going foward.
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=ys-draftbuzz062410
Warriors looking to move Biedrins
“League sources said the Golden State Warriors are trying to move center Andris Biedrins(notes). The Warriors already shipped the remaining three years and $31 million of Corey Maggette’s(notes) contract to the Milwaukee Bucks and wouldn’t mind moving Biedrins’ deal, which has four years and $36 million left.”
Marc J. Spears, 12:26 p.m. ET, June 24