Wednesday, August 4th, 2010...4:39 am
Small forwards: Who’s available on the free agent market
It’s no secret that the San Antonio Spurs lack depth at the small forward position. Richard Jefferson, at this point, is the clear starter at the 3. But behind him there is a significant drop-off.
Alonzo Gee could be Jefferson’s backup this year. He’s technically listed as a shooting guard, but he has the build and athleticism to play the 3. I have my doubts, though, that Gee is ready for a role in the Spurs’ rotation this season.
The main two things the Spurs will look for from a backup small forward are defense and 3-point shooting, and slightly lower on the list of demands is defensive rebounding. Specifically, the Spurs are on the lookout for a defender who can cover the big, strong perimeter players the NBA has to offer, like Ron Artest and LeBron James. And hit the spot-up corner 3. It’d be nice to see someone else do that this season besides George Hill.
Barring an outstanding performance in training camp from Gee, the Spurs will be looking to bring someone in for cheap to backup Jefferson. They don’t really have a choice, really. All San Antonio has to offer is the Bi-annual exception (worth about $2.08 million this season), what’s left of the Mid-level exception from the Tiago Splitter signing, and the veteran’s minimum.
(Note: in this post, I’m not looking at options for trading for a small forward. This is strictly discussing who’s available on the free agent market and overseas.)
I have to warn you, this list is much less sexy than Tim’s list from the beginning of free agency. Blame it on the players who already signed. So who’s available, in no particular order:
- Keith Bogans - Yes, he’s still out there. No, I hope he isn’t re-signed.
- Bobby Simmons - Averaged 5.3 points per game in 23 appearances last year for the New Jersey Nets. He’s a 40% shooter from behind the three-point line in his career.
- Jawad Williams - An underrated free agent, in my opinion. At 6’9″ he has the size and athleticism to play both forward positions. He averaged 4.1 ppg and 1.5 rebounds per game in 54 appearances for the Cleveland Cavaliers last season. Williams is only a 32% 3-point shooter for his career, though. He’s a restricted free agent, so any offer the Spurs potentially made to Williams could be matched by the Cavs.
- Marcus Landry - He’s the younger brother of former Rocket, and current Sacramento King, Carl Landry, but that’s about as much as I know about him. He’s got the size (6’7″ 230 lbs.) to play small forward, but he’s 32% 3-point shooter in two years of extremely limited NBA action. At the Orlando Summer League this year, he shot 23%. But then was a 46% 3-point shooter at the Las Vegas Summer League. So there’s that.
- Rodney Carney - He’s 6’7″ and he’s got a 6’10″ wingspan. On top of that, he can jump really, really high. He’s got the potential to be a harassing defender, but he’s been a pretty average 3-point shooter (33%) in his four years in the league. He could also be a better rebounder for all his physical gifts.
- Sasha Pavlovic - 6’7″, 35% 3-point shooter, has a pulse. All solid things, but nothing great.
- Jarvis Hayes - He has an awesome name. Hayes also has good size at 6’8″ and 228 lbs. He’s been a 36% career 3-point shooter for his career, though he only shot 34% last season with the New Jersey Nets.
- Bostjan Nachbar - Remember him? Yes, the Boston Snackbar has been overseas for the last two seasons. But as a 6’9″ small forward who shoots 38% from the 3-point line in his NBA career, he could play 10-15 minutes if needed.
- Bobby Jones - A name several of the commenters have thrown around on a few posts. Apparently drafted in 1974, 10 years before he was born, by the Houston Rockets, Jones has yet to stick in the NBA. Jones actually played in three games for the Spurs in the 2007-08 season. In Italy last season, Jones shot 38% from the 3-point line.
- Tracy McGrady - He’s still out there, just waiting to be snatched up. Should the Spurs be the ones to make a move? No, probably not. McGrady’s more fragile than Duncan’s knee in May at this point.
Anyone in particular out there that the fans want to see on the Spurs roster this season? Any under-the-radar guys that I missed?
135 Comments
August 4th, 2010 at 5:06 am
Why not put Temple in transition at 3? He’s 6’6″ and can shoot 3s and he is not gonna have much time at point guard cuz of (hopefully) healthy tony and George…., but I do like Rodney Carney….
August 4th, 2010 at 5:36 am
I share others’ (relative) enthusiasm for Bobby Jones. He seems far and away the best mix of proven ability and upside available at this point.
Other than that, Rodney Carney is the only name that sticks out. He strikes me as more of an “athlete” than a “player,” but perhaps the structure of the Spurs’ system is just what he would need to flourish.
Also, is it true that the Spurs have both the LLE and the remainder of the MLE left? I thought one of those was tapped into to sign Gary Neal.
August 4th, 2010 at 5:43 am
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Andrew A. McNeill, San Antonio Spurs. San Antonio Spurs said: 48 Minutes of Hell >> Small forwards: Who's available on the free agent market http://buzztap.com/-LZ0guz [...]
August 4th, 2010 at 5:46 am
@TrueFan
To be honest, I haven’t been able to find where Gary Neal’s contract came from. Whether it came from the MLE, LLE or a minimum contract, his deal isn’t big enough to take up all of what’s left of the MLE (at least $2 mil) or all of the LLE, so there’s still some money available.
August 4th, 2010 at 5:48 am
I find this list depressing.
I think Simmons is the best choice out there. He is a willing defender and shot 44.7% on the corner three which is a Spurs staple.
Why not have the rook Anderson as RJs backup? He can play SF can’t he?
August 4th, 2010 at 5:53 am
The LLE can only be used on a two-year contract (or one year), so since Neal got three years, it had to be from the MLE; I think he got slightly more than the minimum.
August 4th, 2010 at 6:08 am
t-mac if willing to take a bench roll, 10-15 minutes a game and rest on back to back games. no one else wants him, plus he owes us from the ridiculous barage of threes he killed us with few years back.
August 4th, 2010 at 6:09 am
the spurs are probably gonna pull some no-name from over seas or from the nbdl that we’ve never heard of… Its the way of the Spur
August 4th, 2010 at 6:29 am
Forgive me for being a big dummy, but shouldn’t Anderson get some run at the 3? Between Tony, Manu, and Hill, there will be less than 10 mins total available between the 2 guard spots. If Anderson’s going to get any run, the 3 is the only place that can offer the minutes.
Perhaps this is a silent endorsement of Anderson by the coaching staff. Maybe he’s shown he’s shown flashes of ability defensively to accentuate his scoring ability that has given the coaching staff optimism. I can’t imagine the FO just let Hairston go unless they had some sort of back-up plan.
August 4th, 2010 at 6:52 am
Did Udoka sign somewhere?
August 4th, 2010 at 6:58 am
if you can get t mac for 2 mil. take him. If he is injured, anderson is going to have to step up. It might be really good for a rook to get some experience under those circumstances. T mac if given the mins can still put up #’s. Hell he might do better than RJ.
August 4th, 2010 at 7:07 am
Any way we can get one of the 8 sf that minnesota brought in this year preferably corey brewer
August 4th, 2010 at 7:12 am
@Jacques @ThatBigGuy
I’m apprehensive to put Temple or Anderson at the 3 because of their lack of size. They’re both a decent height at 6’6″, but I don’t think they’re strong enough to defend against NBA power forwards, yet. But I wouldn’t be surprised if both spend a little time at small forward, just not enough to round out the rotation.
August 4th, 2010 at 7:13 am
@Kalis
Very true, good call. Though I’m not sure if he got more than the minimum or not. Since he’s technically a rookie, I’m not sure how his salary stacks up.
August 4th, 2010 at 7:30 am
I think Nachbar is the best available option out there. I am not sure he can be lured to come for 2 mill per season though.
August 4th, 2010 at 7:36 am
One thing to remember is that signing a FA would most likely put the Spurs over the luxury tax threshold… which tells me they either get someone for REALLY cheap, or they stick with what they have and wait till February. No way they lose $3-4 million just to sign a fringe player who might not even get any minutes.
August 4th, 2010 at 7:50 am
Temple is a great young player who can play the PG and SG positions and is certainly an intriguiging prospect for us Spurs fans. However, there’s no way Temple can play the SF position. Sure he’s 6’6″ but he is a rail thin 190lbs. He doesn’t have enought meat to even defend some of the smaller SF’s in the league. I could see Anderson being able to fill in for RJ at the 3. Anderson has much better bulk (almost 20 lbs worth) than Temple and is reportedly a very good shooter, which we could use at the SF spot.
Realistically, the backup SF will play between 15-18min/game at the most. If I had to guess, the FO will go in one of two directions. Either they will slot Anderson behind RJ in an effort to give Anderson some rookie burn or they will sign a cheap Free Agent. Which option they will take is anyone’s guess.
I agree with most here that Bobby Simmons seems to be our best bet at backup SF. He is an experienced veteran who can hit the 3 at a very decent clip of 40% and can certainly fill in for those 15-18 min/game. He would be a nice pickup for the LLE and at only 30 yrs old should have plenty of ball left in him.
I really wouldn’t mind either option. I like the idea of giving Anderson some playing time at the SF spot because with Manu/Parker/Temple/Hill/Neal, we have plenty of PG’s, SG’s, and combo guards. Perhaps Anderson can be a special young player like Hill, Blair, and probably Splitter. If he doesn’t play, we’ll never know. I also like the idea of getting Simmons because of his 3pt shooting. With Bobby Simmons, he is a proven vet and a known commodity. You see what you get with him. Either option puts us ahead of last year’s team when we slotted Keith Bogans behind RJ. There’s no way Anderson or Simmons are worse than ole Bogsy…
August 4th, 2010 at 8:15 am
Forgive me for bringin up one of the all-time great spurs sf’s in Bruce Bowen, who was 6’7 and 200 lbs. Since when does the 3 position have to be someone 6’8 or 6’9 and be able to guard LBJ? If a player can hit the corner 3 and play above average defense, 6’6 at the 3 will not be a problem. Not sure if anyone remembers but Temple’s defense was second to none on the spurs last season and he will get the back up gig at the 3 for the coming season.
August 4th, 2010 at 8:20 am
@yavozerb
Bruce Bowen was a freak of nature. He had an extremely high basketball IQ. By the time he got to the Spurs, he was hovering around 30 years old. Temple and Anderson, while filled with potential, are in their early 20′s and not nearly as developed mentally. I think it’s too much to put the pressure of guarding bigger perimeter players on Temple and Anderson and expecting the young guys to excel.
August 4th, 2010 at 8:39 am
McNeill,
I cannot speak for anderson since I have yet to see him play, but Temple will get alot of run in this coming season simply cause he has good size and his perimeter defense (in my opinion) is the best on the spurs. He may not have high basketball IQ you speak of, but in my opinion his game is ahead of bowens at the age 24 and his 3 pt shooting will determine the amount of mpg he gets.
August 4th, 2010 at 8:45 am
@yavozerb
I don’t doubt that he’ll get playing time this season, I just don’t think he’ll get a lot of minutes at the 3. I see Manu sliding over to the 3 and covering guys like James, Artest and Pierce before putting Temple there.
August 4th, 2010 at 8:45 am
I like Jarvis Hayes and Jawad Williams of this bunch. Both are at least average-above average athletically, veterans with low egos and no history of serious injury.
Hayes especially intrigues me, as he is a former lottery pick who has never been on a winning team. In the Spurs system, as a complimentary player, he could blossom.
August 4th, 2010 at 9:22 am
I miss Bruce Bowen.
August 4th, 2010 at 9:23 am
@ Andrew
Yes I was just about to bring up the possibility of Manu playing the 3 for stretches this season. He’s got the 3pt shooting ability, BBIQ, ability to drive hard to the rim, and his defense is good enough to rise to a big occasion.
Its a really good “emergency” option but on the other hand we’re putting Manu up against bigger and bulkier players who he’s gonna give some strength up to, we’d have to rely less on him on offense if he was pouring the kind of energy into D that Bruce was, RJ wouldn’t be able to catch passes from him since they’d play at different times, and it may increase the possibility of an injury just from having him play out of his comfort zone. Any thoughts? It might not be as bad as I make it out to be.
August 4th, 2010 at 9:38 am
Overall I like the list, one name we might think about is:
Damien Wilkens.
He’s a career average 33.3% 3 point shooter, not great, but even at 6-6 he’s a pretty good defender and decent finisher. So long as he doesn’t get huge minutes, I think he’d be okay.
Did we consider the career 36.1% 3 point shooting Ime Udoka?
I don’t know how well he really plays the SF position, but he’s listed there by Yahoo! He probably sucks at defense, but he is a 36.9% career 3 point shooter… Tim Thomas?
Also only an average career 33.3% shooter, but he seemed to do well in Jerry Sloan’s system: Matt Harpring.
That’s all I have for now.
August 4th, 2010 at 9:51 am
@Jason
It’s a possibility. He did well at the 3 in sets with TP and George Hill playing alongside, but I think he’s best when his time at the 3 is limited. Guarding bigger, more physical players can wear you out over time, especially in a long NBA season.
@Jaceman
Damien Wilkins is an option, I’d rule out Udoka and Harpring though. I just don’t see Udoka returning to the Spurs after his shot disappeared in his last year with the team (and he only shot 29% last year with the Kings). And I’ve heard Harpring has moved on to broadcasting and likes it, I don’t think he’ll be playing any more.
August 4th, 2010 at 9:51 am
Bobby Jones should be signed. He has far more upside than past signings of Bogans, Udoka, a past his prime Finley, etc. He is more athletic, younger, hungrier than all those other choices. He will be cheap, wanting to play in the NBA.
Again, he guarded Brandon Roy and Nate Washington in college and shut them down according to his college coach Lorenzo Romar! Bowen guarded Lebron to Nash.
The Spurs thought enough of him to sign him to a 10 day contract before. Even draftexpress.com believes he has the potential to be a Bruce Bowen clone.
http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Bobby-Jones-351/
The last 6 champions had a wing defender. Their names have been Ron Artest, Trevor Ariza, James Posey, and Bruce Bowen.
Sign Bobby Jones.
August 4th, 2010 at 9:55 am
As for that dreaded back up 3 spot…Spurs still need a solid perimeter defender with a nasty streak. Sure, the team loves model citizens, but they need this particular type of player badly at that spot…Like a Mario Ellie type that doesnt mind getting dirty and cannot be intimidated.
The terrifying thing is that the Spurs seem to think that they are set in the front court.
Truth is, it is highly unlikely that we will win in the playoffs with this front court. Shaq would have been awsome off the bench at the 5…Ask Boston!
Nevertheless, Hopefully the Spurs brilliant FO and coach figure it out in time. Mcdyess and Blair logging minutes at center is just not solid.
What the Spurs should be doing is trying to work with Bonner. Teach him to play the 4 and still be able to get his shots. Teach him to play bigger and stop being allergic to the paint.
Finally, We should all pray that the team mandates DUNCAN, GINNOBLI, and PARKER to the weight room this offseason. All three need to get stronger. Cant continue to hide from the weight room when you are aging as a player. Strength becomes critical at that point.
Its the reason that Kobe continues to be an absolute beast. He keeps his body battle ready. Works on his upper body strength, and doesnt fizzle at the end of seasons.
Finally, of the players left on the market at the 3, I pass on them all…
At 2 million….Id sign McGrady immediately. Instant scoring, swagger, and he has plenty to proove…
No Brainer if it werent the Spurs…
August 4th, 2010 at 10:54 am
Jacques
August 4th, 2010 at 5:06 am
“Why not put Temple in transition at 3?”
Does not have the size. He’s not that tall, not a great leaper, and he’s lucky if he’s 190 lbs.
SA_Ray
August 4th, 2010 at 5:48 am
“Why not have the rook Anderson as RJs backup? He can play SF can’t he?”
ThatBigGuy
August 4th, 2010 at 6:29 am
“Forgive me for being a big dummy, but shouldn’t Anderson get some run at the 3?”
Ray, BigGuy - He’s best suited for the SG spot at the NBA level. I would put all my focus on developing him there, if possible. Maybe he can turn into someone special at the SG spot before Manu’s contract runs out. Also, as a rookie not known for his defense, he would have a hard time guarding most NBA SF’s. If Anderson proves that he can defend as the season progresses, he could get limited run at the SF spot. Otherwise, I’d keep him at under 10 minutes at the SG his first year, unless there’s injury downtime for any of the other three.
Best bets are probably the following:
Simmons (primarily shooter)
Williams (primarily a defender)
Jones (primarily a defender)
Hayes (a decent combo of both)
Forget McGrady. He can’t shoot or defend anyway. We don’t need another “high-volume scorer”. His best skill is passing, but that’s not a real weakness of ours. Besides, teams are much better off if they have players that are always ready to got to war, no matter what. With McGrady, you never know when he’ll be sulking away down in the bunker with a hang-nail. No way I want to depend on him for my ass.
August 4th, 2010 at 11:05 am
anyone think malik hairston could have filled that role?
August 4th, 2010 at 11:05 am
Lets be honest with ourselves:
Our best shot at the championship lies in the big 3′s health and Tiago Splitter being one bad ass Brazilian Baller. If not, we are headed for another second or third round exit…
In other news:
I would like to see alot of burn given to the new guys to get them some experience for when Manu and Timmy are off to retirement.
August 4th, 2010 at 11:08 am
At Ballhog
Two seasons ago duncan prepared in the postseaseon
fliping tires, we al know how that season ended, so i dont think its good for him to do weights, please, think before you write something
August 4th, 2010 at 12:22 pm
My clear option would be Bobby Jones. He could be starter at 3 in second part of season.
August 4th, 2010 at 1:15 pm
FWIW: I’d like to see the Spurs take a chance on Jonathan Bender…non-guaranteed training camp invitation. Why? He can play both forward positions and has the necessary length to guard stretch fours. Granted, whomever the Spurs sign will effectively replace Malik Hairston and is, at best, a deep bench option-someone who might spend the season on the inactive list. In addition to his length, Bender has a decent spot up game.
In terms of 6th big, Kwame Brown would be ideal. He’s actually an above average post defender. Doesn’t doing anything terribly noteworthy, but his body and post defense could prove useful. Otherwise, someone to develop in Austin.
August 4th, 2010 at 1:20 pm
I liked the post about Bowen but the Spurs should bring him in as a player coach, I thought that before the Spurs let him go. He sure could do some teaching to the younger players on defense on agressive pestering defense, to the point in the playoffs an opponent will lose his cool and get tossed. Bowen was a true artist of this!!!!!!
August 4th, 2010 at 1:24 pm
Bobby Jones or Jarvis Hayes would both be acceptable backups to me. Better than having Bogans and Mason out there chasing the small forwards of this league.
And we still need to sign Amundson, he’s just like an
Oberto with the same rebounding ability, superior shotblocking ability, excellent weak-side/help defender, and brings energy off the bench. There is absolutely zero risk in signing this guy and plenty of reward.
August 4th, 2010 at 1:27 pm
Correct me if I am wrong, but the various exceptions cannot be combined for one signing. Assuming Neal took most of the MLE, any additional signing would have to be for whatever is left of that, or the LLE, or the bi-annual, or a minimum salary, but not any cumulative combination of those. That leaves very little more than the minimum for most of these players.
August 4th, 2010 at 1:45 pm
Timothy Varner
August 4th, 2010 at 1:15 pm
“In terms of 6th big, Kwame Brown would be ideal. He’s actually an above average post defender. Doesn’t doing anything well, but his body and post defense could prove useful. Otherwise, someone to develop in Austin.”
If we’re mainly looking at size for defensive help in our low-post rotation, Brown’s a decent option. If we’re looking for a more mobile/agile/active “big” that’s a great energy guy, and hustles on EVERY play, it would be Lou Amundson. And the one major thing that Lou gives us that Brown doesn’t, is excellent additional “rim protection” in the rotation. Amundson ranks 24th in the entire league in blocks per 48 minutes, at 3.00, just behind Marcus Camby. Brown is ranked 186th, at.87 blocks per 48 minutes.
With the addition of Splitter, a nearly 7 foot tall, solid, low-post defender (but not a particularly good shot-blocker), I think it would be a better fit for the Spurs to bring in a guy that does what Amundson does, than to bring in a guy that does what Brown does (Brown is also a bit slow-footed for strong pick & roll “D”). During the Spurs title years, they averaged 6.3 bpg. Now we’ve averaged 4.3 bpg. over the past 2 seasons. The addition of Splitter will not be enough to close that gap sufficiently.
I do want more front court help, and if we can’t get someone like Amundson, or perhaps Boone, and maybe Mbenga (very good shot-blocker, with size - but not as good of an overall defender), than I’d be open to picking up a guy like Brown. I’d just would like to get a better upgrade than that though if I could.
August 4th, 2010 at 2:18 pm
@ Half Man, Half Amazing
That’s right. And if Neal got the MLE, he didn’t get much of it. I’d be very surprised if he got the just a little north of $2 million that was leftover from the Splitter signing. Most likely, he got a minimum contract.
August 4th, 2010 at 2:21 pm
Why don’t they look at Tyler Wilkerson from their Summer League squad. He was their third best scorer and led the team in rebounds. He has the size and athleticism to play the 3 from a defensive perspective, however lacks a solid 3.
August 4th, 2010 at 2:36 pm
Jarvis Hayes might just flurish on a good team with a defined role. I like his size and athleticism, and think it is our best move at this point in time. But I think the Spurs plan on using Anderson and Temple due to their letting Harston go. It might work, if not look for a move at the trade deadline. Last I agree Tim, Toney and Manu NEED to spend more time in the weight room. If you noticed all of Duncans missed shots late in the game are off the front of the rim. This is due to his legs being gone, but weight training would help.
August 4th, 2010 at 2:46 pm
@ Ballhog
I don’t think weights would help that much. The older you get it’s better to be lighter than buffer.
Besides Kobe did fizzle out this year. He stunk up Game 7.
Anyway,
I think T-Mac can still play but you know when people say “what if they get injured?” YOu can almost bank on it that T-Mac will get injured.
I say bring in Pavlovic. He was really underrated for the Cavs. He was a casualty of the Cavs trying to keep Lebron.
I know he only shot 35% from 3 but he can hit the three. Plus he can attack the rim.
I know D wins championships but The SPURS were put out last year because they just couldn’t score enough.
Sash can score!!
August 4th, 2010 at 2:47 pm
sorry Hairston not Harston
August 4th, 2010 at 3:02 pm
What about Kyle Weaver!?
August 4th, 2010 at 3:22 pm
I wouldnt mind tracy mcgrady as he is a good ballhandler and can create his own shots. This way, they do not need to put Manu in the second unit and can start with Jefferson, which increases his efficiency. George hill can also play off the ball in the second unit some of the time, and maybe go for a corner 3. Plus mcgrady is a good passer and can shoot the 3 well. He might outperform jefferson at the 3 position if he takes what little money we offer him, since jefferson might flop again this year.
August 4th, 2010 at 4:14 pm
Half Man, Half Amazing
August 4th, 2010 at 1:27 pm
“Correct me if I am wrong, but the various exceptions cannot be combined for one signing.”
Yes, that is correct.
“Assuming Neal took most of the MLE …..”
The problem is, we don’t have an “official” word on Neal’s exact signing terms.
“That leaves very little more than the minimum for most of these players.”
“Probably”, but we do have about 2.1 mil for the LLE, which is limited to a two-year deal, and is about twice the minimum. And as Andrew said, he was not addressing trade options as acquisition possibilities.
Greg
August 4th, 2010 at 2:36 pm
“But I think the Spurs plan on using Anderson and Temple due to their letting Harston go.”
Let’s hope not. Neither of those two could, at least as of now, defend adequately at the NBA SF spot.
junierizzle
August 4th, 2010 at 2:46 pm
“I know D wins championships but The SPURS were put out last year because they just couldn’t score enough.”
I’d have to disagree. They couldn’t get a stop against the Suns, particularly when they needed it. Our “offense” is fine, other than a “dependable”, clutch, high percentage shooter at the SF spot. We don’t need another “scorer”. We need another defender in the paint (Amundson?), and either a 3-point artist (Simmons?), or an aggressive lock-down defender at SF (Jones?). It would be pretty difficult to get both perimeter shooter & defender in one player, certainly not without making a major trade.
August 4th, 2010 at 4:53 pm
I like Simmons, Jones, Hayes: In that order, though sometimes Jones gives me vision of my constant dream: superstars for nothing. Austin and 2nd round pics keep teasing me.
August 4th, 2010 at 4:58 pm
I don’t care who the Spurs get to fill this role as long as it’s someone who is willing to play as a willingly team player who can contribute heavily in the minutes provided
August 4th, 2010 at 5:09 pm
@ Jim Henderson
I have to aggree with junierizzle. OUr O sucks butt…. We even in our best years never completely locked up the Suns or Mavs….. We were able to score along side them just well enough for our D to matter. Last year with TO and RJ both fading and not shooting well from 3. The Suns were able to play Frye alot more than they should have if just by doubling Timmy. Something in previous seasons would have given Finley or Bowen big nights from the corners…..
The SPURS only hope this year is to trade TONY PARKER for another proven BIG. Either that or hope for a magical coming together of talent like the Kings had earlier in the decade.
August 4th, 2010 at 6:01 pm
What about Gist? The Spurs still own his rights, correct?
August 4th, 2010 at 6:42 pm
Who’s to say the “3-point specialist” has to come in the form of a SF?
If either Temple, Neal or Anderson can effectively contribute in the 3-point category, then a defensive SF is all that would be needed.
Though it is a trade scenario…I like A’Moute from the Bucks. Who are loaded at SF but desparately need some b/u help at the PG position who the Spurs have in abundance.
The team wouldn’t have to use any of it’s MLE/LLE money in a trade scenario for A’Moute. And that money could be used out right to sign either Amundson or Boone to sure up the defensive presense in the post.
But if it HAS to be that way….(signing somebody)…I would go with Jones or Hayes in that order since I think Neal, Temple and/or Anderson could very easily be our 3-point specialist allowing either Jones or Hayes to focus mostly on D.
August 4th, 2010 at 7:10 pm
rob
August 4th, 2010 at 6:42 pm
“If either Temple, Neal or Anderson can effectively contribute in the 3-point category, then a defensive SF is all that would be needed.”
“Temple, Anderson, & Neal” will be lucky if they combine for 10 mpg. at the GUARD position, because that’s the only position that they’re currently really qualified to play at. We need a SF to back-up & hopefully compliment RJ with some stellar 3-point shooting, OR some stellar perimeter “D”, for about 15 mpg. The guards you list are really not a legitimate factor in this equation. They’re all unproven at the NBA level, and even if they ended up becoming “dependable” 3-point shooters at the NBA level, 10 mpg. is insufficient in and of itself to provide a real impact for our 3-point shooting as a team. And it will be unlikely that any of them cracks our playoff rotation this year.
Thus, I would rather get a back-up SF shooter, if we felt that he was good enough to be in our playoff rotation for 15 mpg. The lower his 3-point percentage, the better his defense would need to be. If we can’t get a good enough mix between shooting & defense, than I’m fine with going with a “defensive stopper”. Of course, the guy you mentioned, Moute, is only available through trade, which the author of the post, Andrew, did not intend to address. That’s why in a previous post I listed B. Jones, and Jawad Williams as possible “defensive” options, although I’m not really sure how good they would be as “defensive stoppers” on the perimeter. It’s not like either of them are Shane Battier.
August 4th, 2010 at 7:10 pm
Jones has already signed with a team in europe..
August 4th, 2010 at 7:51 pm
Jim,
I don’t have a crystal ball or insider info regarding Temple, Anderson and Neal or the coaching staff’s desires.
But I do believe that the Spurs are not in a big hurry to sign a specific type of player to fill the SF b/u role.
I think they are going to see what they’ve got in Temple, Gee, Anderson and Neal in the pre-season and even into the season before making final assesments on what roles they want to fill.
RJ’s improvement (if at all) will dictate a lot as well.
I only mentioned a trade scenario because it would seem to make more sense than just signing a player to fill a projected need with regards to a b/u SF without first seeing what is going to happen with the players they have now.
As you mentioned…the afore mentioned list of players are no Shane Batier. And short of being an impact player in the b/u role to SF….just spending money to get one of them might not be the best thing to do at this time without first knowing if and how good the players on the team now may become. (Same could be said about the post)
And I’m not saying for certain that Temple, Anderson, Neal or Gee WILL become significant role players. But neither can somebody say they won’t without first seeing what they will do on this team.
My bet is the Spurs’ staff is hoping one or even two of them WILL be a part of the regular rotation and are going to give them every opportunity to become just that.
But if they did…Jones or Hayes would be my choice. As I mentioned before.
August 4th, 2010 at 7:54 pm
yavozerb
August 4th, 2010 at 7:10 pm
“Jones has already signed with a team in europe..”
Thanks. I didn’t know that.
Then my choice would be Hayes or Williams in that order.
August 4th, 2010 at 7:54 pm
@ Jim
I agree with your assertion that Anderson is more suited as a SG rather than small forward, but he’s not going to get any minutes if he doesn’t slide over to the SF some. I think Hill gets 32 mpg (a slight increase from last season), Manu gets 28 (a tiny decrease), and Tony gets 30 (a tiny decrease). That’s 90 minutes out of a possible 96 minutes combined between the guard spots.
Right now there’s 17 mpg just waiting to be grabbed behind Jefferson. I can’t imagine that Anderson won’t claim some of that.
If we sign an FA, at best we get a homeless man’s Bowen, who still needs to learn the system. At worse, we have a low salaried guy who dunks well in warm-ups. We saw how long it took Jefferson/Blair/Antonio to gain the corporate knowledge last year.
So what about giving Anderson some burn at SF? Best case scenario is he develops the defensive chops to play within the defensive system, al la Bonner (according to some, but I digress), all while being an offensive threat. Worst case scenario is he scores 10 while his guy scores 15. However, even in the worst case scenario, he’s still gaining crucial minutes that will only make him a better all-around player.
August 4th, 2010 at 7:56 pm
Don’ t think Temple should play the 3.
Anderson at 6’6″ has the strength to be serviceable at the 3. Guys like Simmons and Jones have the same height and are therefore redundant here. Not a good idea to have Anderson compete for minutes.
Gee also at 6’6″ has the strength to do well at the 3. Though he’s like the 13th player in the Spurs roster so I doubt he’ll be playing much.
note:
pg - Parker, Hill, Temple
sg - Manu, Neal
sf - RJ, Anderson
pf - Duncan, Bonner, Blair
c - Splitter, McDyess
12 players
August 4th, 2010 at 8:10 pm
ThatBigGuy
August 4th, 2010 at 7:54 pm
“Right now there’s 17 mpg just waiting to be grabbed behind Jefferson. I can’t imagine that Anderson won’t claim some of that.”
Agreed. Let’s see how things play out for these guys. Mainly with regards to Anderson at the SF.
In a role capacity…Anderson wouldn’t have to defend the better SF in the league. And Ginobili could defend that position as well in limited situations.
I will admit…I would prefer a prototypical SF. But I just don’t see signing somebody for position sake if they wouldn’t break splinter off the bench.
August 4th, 2010 at 8:29 pm
Qyntel Woods is overseas playing for Poland. A troubled past indeed. But a good prospect as far as a b/u SF.
Could be had on the cheap and is longing to return to the nba.
August 4th, 2010 at 8:50 pm
If Jones is gone, Simmons, Hayes and Pavlovic are are worth serious consideration, and I like the earlier thought of Jonathan Bender.
But what are your thoughts on Devean George, Mo Evans or James Singleton.
August 4th, 2010 at 9:06 pm
I don’t think the spurs will sign anyone else of note: I think they are happy to have the roster set with a front court group of Parker Manu Jefferson hill Anderson temple and Neal with someone like gee an injury list standby. If splitter works out we can dismantle teams by playing small ball on the perimeter with 2x 6’11 guys defending the paint.
August 4th, 2010 at 9:51 pm
McGrady is the only guy on this list that can help a win games; others just take up space .
I was glad the Spurs avoided Shaq, not because it would stunt Splitter’s growth, but I don’t think Shaq was willing to play the role we need; however, Tracy may be content with limited minutes.
I wish we could trade RJ and Bonner for a defensive minded 3 or 4. You can floor three guards if you have Duncan and a shot blocker. Problems is, their new contracts are d-u-m-b and other teams know it.
August 4th, 2010 at 10:22 pm
I meant backcourt players.
@ chilfan. Contacts might be on the dumb side agreed, but at least the organisation can plan ahead now with certain role players in place whilst the youth movement develops. The way the NBA is going right now, there is a vacuum of top talent to small market teams and struggling franchises, meaning the spurs will rely mostly on draft talent and development prospects to build their team(the odd free agent signing notwithstanding).
August 5th, 2010 at 12:17 am
what about wally szerbiak ?
August 5th, 2010 at 12:20 am
or jerry stackhouse ?
August 5th, 2010 at 2:17 am
Look FO and coach POP its a no brainer GO GET T-MAC be real look at the top teams in the league roster and look at ours we need another scorer to help out down the stretch and T-MAC got something to prove playing bench minutes will preserve him also down the stretch now come on before someone else get him
August 5th, 2010 at 4:47 am
Jim,
I hear what you’re saying about Amundson. Good argument, and I don’t think anyone will be disappointed if the Spurs sign him. In terms of a high energy, deep rotation front courter, Pops Mensah-Bonsu is still available. As a 6th big, he wouldn’t be bad.
August 5th, 2010 at 5:38 am
@ cmac
Agreed..TMAC instantly bolsters this roster and improves scoring..
@ Tim Varner
Agreed again…Bring in Mensah-Bonsu and Tmac and suddenly, we have a contender…
Going into the season depending on Anderson, Temple, and Neal is idiotic at the highest level.
Not to mention going in with Tis frontcourt…This is the NBA and we need to floor a competitive team.
Other than Admunson, the rest are no better than the rookies and 2nd year guys we already have, minus the experience.
Why bring in another bench warming cheerleader? Stupid not to sign Shaq and would be another miscue if TMAC not considered…This team has more ingame scoring droughts than any team in the league…With Tmac on the floor with Parker and Ginnobli…Oh My….
Somebody send a telegram to the FO and coach. Let POP know that he can bring in Tmac. I know he was afraid of Shaq, but Tmac wont get in his face. Maybe if POp is assured that Tmac wont undermine his dictatorship mentality, then we could sign him.
August 5th, 2010 at 5:46 am
@BALLHOG
Bring in TMac and Mensah-Bonsu make the Spurs a contender? 2 guys who can barely make an NBA roster aren’t going to make the Spurs a contender.
TMac is done. He couldn’t average double digit points with 25+ minutes last year with the Knicks where he was a primary offensive weapon. He did however turn the ball over nearly twice a game and shoot a staggering .242 from the 3 point line. How is that suppose to bring offensive fire power to the Spurs bench.
I certainly wouldn’t mind Mensah-Bonsu as a 6th big but I don’t think he makes the difference in the front line that makes the Spurs compete with the Lakers. I would rather have Amundson but I think he can get more minutes/money elsewhere.
I do agree with you that going into the season depending on Anderson, Temple, and Neal is not wise. We need another SF who can defend.
August 5th, 2010 at 6:47 am
Nothing left in Tmac’s tank? No way. The guy is a threat from deep and with handles. Apologies to the yet unknown Tiago, Tmac instantly becomes the fourth most reliable Spur. He’s an injury risk worth taking because of the scoring upside. Will his defense be worse than RJ or Bonners?
@ easy
Locking up role players to long term contracts is fine, but neither Bonner nor RJ have been consistent with scoring, the only reliable aspect of their games is their defensive shortcomings
@ballhog,
getting Shaq for cheap was worth debating, but…shaq would expect to start alongside Duncan. Not signing him shows the Spurs are commited to developing Blair and Tiago, which I am cool with.
Depending on fading stars is tricky, as the Cavs learned w Shaq, and Celts with Sheed
But signing Shaq and Tmac, then trading Blair and a short RJ contract for Camby?
August 5th, 2010 at 8:03 am
Names:
For a cheap 6th big, I have no idea why no one has signed Louis Amundson yet…
As a SF one more name to add to the list: James Singleton. A good rebounder, ugly 3 pt shooter, decent defender. More of a PF than an SF though…
August 5th, 2010 at 9:52 am
McGrady is pretty much done and has been for a while. His workouts for other teams haven’t been impressive and he still thinks (like some people here) that he is the T-Mac of 2002. Shaq might still have some basketball use but his egomania and attention-whoring get old real quick. Not really a Spurs kind of guy, not to mention he is almost immobile now.
August 5th, 2010 at 11:20 am
how about Tim Thomas? Size, natural position, and shoots the three well.
August 5th, 2010 at 12:48 pm
The Spurs need to get some one who has the size, speed, mental toughness, and DESIRE to defend Small Forwards. A player who knows that defense is the key to his NBA life would be great. Later the Spurs can add “an effective corner 3-point shooter” to their repertoire. Think Bruce Bowen…he did not have a great jumper when he came to the Spurs but developed into a 40% 3-point shooter. Bowen played in the CBA, overseas, and could never stick with an NBA team until he accepted he was not Michael Jordan and replaced that desire with desire to be a key supporting piece for a Championship team. The Spurs have been great at getting players to buy into the concept that they can be a key supporting player on a Championship team or score 10-15 quiet/garbage points on a lottery team.
August 5th, 2010 at 12:49 pm
The Spurs need to get some one who has the size, speed, mental toughness, and DESIRE to defend Small Forwards. A player who knows that defense is the key to his NBA life would be great. Later the Spurs can add “an effective corner 3-point shooter” to their repertoire. Think Bruce Bowen…he did not have a great jumper when he came to the Spurs but developed into a 40% 3-point shooter. Bowen played in the CBA, overseas, and could never stick with an NBA team until he accepted he was not Michael Jordan and replaced that desire with desire to be a key supporting piece for a Championship team. The Spurs have been great at getting players to buy into the concept that they can be a key supporting player on a Championship team or score 10-15 quiet/garbage points on a lottery team.
Lets hope Jefferson buys in and develops the tenacity and determination to play better defense, be a more athletic and skilled Bruce Bowen
August 5th, 2010 at 1:04 pm
SA_Ray
August 5th, 2010 at 5:46 am
Sound post, Ray.
ChillFAN
August 5th, 2010 at 6:47 am
“Nothing left in Tmac’s tank? No way. The guy is a threat from deep and with handles. Apologies to the yet unknown Tiago, Tmac instantly becomes the fourth most reliable Spur. He’s an injury risk worth taking because of the scoring upside.”
“Forget McGrady. He can’t shoot (career 43% FG, 33% 3-point) or defend anyway. We don’t need another “high-volume scorer”. His best skill is passing, but that’s not a real weakness of ours. Besides, teams are much better off if they have players that are always ready to got to war, no matter what. With McGrady, you never know when he’ll be sulking away down in the bunker with a hang-nail. No way I want to depend on him for my ass.
anonymous
August 5th, 2010 at 8:03 am
“As a SF one more name to add to the list: James Singleton. A good rebounder, ugly 3 pt shooter, decent defender. More of a PF than an SF though…”
Yeah, Singleton is about 4th on my depth chart for FA 4/5 pick ups:
Amundson
Boone
Mbenga
Singleton
Brickowski
August 5th, 2010 at 11:20 am
“how about Tim Thomas? Size, natural position, and shoots the three well.”
Yeah, he’s not bad. A SF/PF tweener. Can hit the big three. Not much of a defender, or very versatile, but hey, what can we expect for 1-2 million dollar type contracts. I thought Dallas was bringing him back though, but maybe he is still available.
August 5th, 2010 at 1:13 pm
By the way, if we don’t pick up a back-up SF, the coaching staff & FO better be in LOVE with Anderson. Because he’ll have to play pretty special for a number 20 pick to really help us with regular minutes at the SG & SF spot. He’s the only one in our system that could have the potential to help out there (I say no to Manu, no to Gee, no to Neal, no to Temple, and no to anyone in Austin). In my view, we need a strong compliment to RJ not only in the regular season, but in the playoffs too. Is Anderson that man? Is he the best that is available? If we don’t bring in another SF, let’s hope so.
August 5th, 2010 at 3:13 pm
The Spurs should sign James Gist…very athletic, will bring excitement, excellent defender for small forward and shot blocker..type of energy the team needs when comes in the game
August 5th, 2010 at 3:48 pm
Jim
I do understand your PoV. I too would love to have a Kapono, Mbenga, or at least another somewhat proven as back up for the SF position.
And there may be ways via trade to land one. But what’s left on the market to just obtain in signing without giving up anything simply is not out there.
That leaves this team with a sliver of hope that somebody already on the roster has some potential to fulfill that position. At least it looks that way at the moment. The coaching staff may be a little more in tuned than we as far as what they think might work.
And that’s not to say they haven’t been looking for a situation to land a prototypical SF as a back up. It could mean that haven’t found the right deal or player.
We can assess all we want. But reality is the coaches have the final word. Do they always make the right decision? According to many of us…No. But in my, yours, and every body elses assesment of what may be needed…those are great speculations that …in all honesty…the coaching staff probably has already looked into as well.
If this is the team the Spurs “start” the season with…I’ll have to hope (as you or any other Spur fan) that it will work.
But if you look at the west. The Spurs are better on paper than they were just a year ago. I don’t think too many teams got that much better this off season. Although the Lakers definately improved on paper. And it’s not beyond Spur basketball to ride with what they trust until proven wrong.
Too many times in the past I berated the decision to let other players go just to watch them do well for another team. Now the Spurs are holding their hand on the talent they’ve acquired. I don’t doubt their ability to find talent. Especially role playing talent. So that is the hope I have with this team. To trust that if in years past the Spurs have managed to find good to great role player talent only to let them go to another team….what should make me question that all of a sudden that ability has faded?
Top tier talent simply was not an option to land this off season. RJ has a year under his belt and all indicators of years past show top talent excell on this team in their second season. I look forward to that happening.
If that be the case in RJ and with Blair, Hill and Temple coming back…indicators of past experiments should be a positive.
I’ll agree 100% with you about Amundson. If the Spurs can manage to sign him….front court issues will be solved with depth and versitility that have been needed for some time now.
But with regards to a back up SF….I wouldn’t just sign any of the afore mentioned selections just to fill a position. IMO…I don’t think they could be anything better than what the team may already possess on the roster in terms of shooting and defense.
August 5th, 2010 at 5:30 pm
rob
August 5th, 2010 at 3:48 pm
“But if you look at the west. The Spurs are better on paper than they were just a year ago. I don’t think too many teams got that much better this off season.”
I disagree. I believe the following playoff teams in the West should clearly be better:
Lakers
Rockets
Blazers
Thunder
Mavs
I don’t think we’ve improved any more than these teams have, and all those teams are VERY good. If we want home court advantage, and a WCF appearance, we need to do more.
“To trust that if in years past the Spurs have managed to find good to great role player talent only to let them go to another team….what should make me question that all of a sudden that ability has faded?”
Look, I make suggestions for what I hope the team would seriously think about doing, but obviously it’s ultimately out of my hands, and I really have no idea exactly what they’re up to (the FO). For example, they may have already surreptitiously inquired about getting Amundson, the guy I’ve been harping about for awhile on this blog. They may have determined that they can’t get him for a price that they think is worthy, or is feasible, or maybe Amundson has simply made it clear that he just doesn’t want to play in San Antonio. I have NO idea what’s going on behind the scenes, other than what I read over the rumor mills, which may or may not be true, and does not represent the whole story anyway.
And as far as trust in the FO to make good decisions, sure, if I’m going to have some confidence in an FO to make sound decisions, I’d trust the Spurs FO over most other teams in the league simply because of their track record. I just attempting to do my part to keep them sharp, and proactive enough!
“But with regards to a back up SF….I wouldn’t just sign any of the afore mentioned selections just to fill a position. IMO…I don’t think they could be anything better than what the team may already possess on the roster in terms of shooting and defense.”
As I said, they better love Anderson more than I could possibly know, otherwise I think you still have to seriously consider one of the 3 reasonable SF’s that are left:
Simmons
Hayes
Williams
Or consider making a trade for one.
August 5th, 2010 at 8:48 pm
@ Jim
“I disagree. I believe the following playoff teams in the West should clearly be better:
Lakers
Rockets
Blazers
Thunder
Mavs”
I’m saying meh to this list with the exception of LA. And the only real thing that sealed the deal with that was the Barnes signing. Of those teams you have on the list here’s my thoughts…
Lakers: Good pickups with Blake and Barnes, but one really has to ask in this offseason of jumping on bandwagons and chasing coat-tails, how much more time can they afford to slot for these guys? They definitely improved, but the real question is how much?
Rockets & Blazers: I put these two into the same category that, you’re right, on paper they look awesome, but until they finish a full season without some devastating injury then you might as well start flipping a coin as to where they’re going to land. Yao may possibly retire if the foot is still giving him trouble and there’s no telling if and when we’ll ever see Oden play. (On a side note, how bad does Portland feel for not taking Durant? Wow).
Thunder: They played fantastic last season but everyone isn’t going to be taken by surprise anymore when they roll into town. Teams are going to force the ball out of Durant’s hands and while they’re still as good as they were last year, I don’t see them getting any further than last years first round exit… especially if they play any one of the top 3 seeds.
Mavs & SA: These are the two X-factors of the West IMO. In Dallas, you have a team coming off a horrendous first round exit, their star player almost leaving the team, and lots of young potential in their guards. Really its going to boil down to how hungry they are, and if Nowitski can finally get them over the playoff hump. Chandler was a great pickup over Dampier but his health could be a factor.. just a lot of question marks here.
SA is no different. What are we going to get out of RJ this year? Does Tony come out and play like an all-star? What does Splitter bring to the table? Can Bonner finally step up and make some plays in the playoffs? Who the heck is gonna be our back-up SF? Can Anderson truly standout on this team? Does the defense get better? And so on….
The West has obviously become weaker while the East is looking more and more ridiculous everyday. Between Chicago, Miami, Boston, Orlando, and dare I say, New York… it’s friggin nuts whats going on over there. And what’s worse is that the season hasn’t even started yet. I think the West is still going to challenge those teams, but until we see what we’re dealing with on opening day, I’m not gonna bank on anything.
August 5th, 2010 at 10:48 pm
No rush… I like the idea of Kyle Weaver, Rodney Carney too. Best shooter - Steve Novak, though thin version of Bonner not whats needed. Quinton Ross, James Singleton, Stephen Graham, Trenton Hassell, there are a lot of other options out there. Plus there will be some names pop up on the waiver wire as the season gets closer.
Corey Brewer in a trade would be nice… Kahn is no match for RC, lets go get him.
August 6th, 2010 at 12:10 am
sign amundson and a wing defender even if thats all he does shoot i think bowens last year he was avrg 2-3 pts a game so we dont need a great scorer i think we have that with parker in a contract year.
manu will have a year of health under his belt which means his big ankle injuries are a thing of the past and have a good year of strength under them i notice that manu plays alot safer until the games close/wire and then lets it all out only when needed and to me that is awesome so we can have him all year.
i have a really good feeling about neal he is a very serious player and has passion for the game alot of our guys recently were serious and loved to play but didnt have much to prove and great shooting performances in the past. i believe neal is going to be loyal and fierce he can change games not just be a role player guys.
anderson should get good playing time and has potential of being a star so you guys make it seem like these guys are a slight upgrade from mason and bogans if you look at blairs 1st year he did great!! why? well he was pretty darn good in college/ good pedigree and played with alot of heart. to me NEAL and ANDERSON are the same & are wayyy better scorers in every aspect.
ok ill keep this part short . i was all for shq and some center presence but since the geniuses in the fo passed i say we go with amundson/benga.what about oberto? maybe FAb is too old but we need shot blocking sooo bad and if they dont understand that they are insane, that and a defensive lunatic who could care less what the cool players think of him when hes pestering them and pissing them off but i also think it takes the spurs org. to set that frame of mind on these players not just expect a bowen zombie to appear
August 6th, 2010 at 12:47 am
Ryan
August 5th, 2010 at 8:48 pm
Lakers - They’re the defending NBA champions and they still got better - lost Farmar, and picked up Blake & Barnes - that’s all you need to know.
Rockets - All I know is if Yao has a healthy year, Houston is truly scary, even for the Lakers.
Blazers - No team could possibly be as injured this year as they were last year, and they still finished as a 6th seed last year - now they’ve added Mathews, should have a full year with Camby, and if Oden can finally get in a full year in, and Roy comes back 100%, they’re a big fat handful.
Thunder - One of the most talented, and youngest teams in the league, and went about as close as you could come to taking the Lakers to 7 games in last years playoffs - they’ve got young stars, budding stars, and solid role players that are all still getting better. They could very well be a major threat in round one next year.
Mavs - Important upgrades on their front line - if Chandler gets in a solid, healthy year, plus having Hayward & Butler back for a full year, and the young guard, Beaubois, with his substantial upside, the #2 seed Mavs are likely to be better in their second year under coach Rick Carlisle.
The Spurs got better with Splitter, but you mentioned some of the question marks that remain for this team. Plus, we have key guys that are aging, and are likely to perform either similarly to last year, or even decline a little bit. Thus far, we have not really improved this off-season above our main competition.
Obviously the East is stronger this year, but they’re top-heavy - not as deep - and LA is still favored to win it all in my view. I’d say the West’s top four match up pretty well with the Easts top four, and five through twelve in the West is stronger.
August 6th, 2010 at 6:24 am
FYI Neal’s contract is for $525,000.00 this season.
August 6th, 2010 at 9:49 am
Greg
August 6th, 2010 at 6:24 am
“FYI Neal’s contract is for $525,000.00 this season.”
So he has a three year deal worth approx. $525k/year. In order to get a three year deal, we would have had to dip into the MLE. This must mean we have just under $2mil left of the MLE plus the LLE for about the same amount. Surely we could fetch Louis Amundson plus a decent backup SF for these amounts….
August 6th, 2010 at 10:26 am
Greg
August 6th, 2010 at 6:24 am
“FYI Neal’s contract is for $525,000.00 this season.”
Thanks for the info, Greg. It would be nice to have a link to the source of your information. Where did you get your information from?
Hobson13
August 6th, 2010 at 9:49 am
I’m still not convinced we know enough to be sure of what we still have available to spend in free agency. Also, it’s against league rules to combine the MLE & LLE to sign a free agent. Thus if your assumption about where the 525k came from is correct, we really only have the LLE available, which limits us to offering the max of a 2-year deal. I think it would take more than that to get Amundson. If we really want Amundson, we have to be prepared to get the Suns to do a sign & trade, and hope they would be okay with us offering McDyess. I believe we could offer Amundson a better, longer term deal that way (Suns have Lou’s Bird Rights). Then use the LLE for a back-up SF (Simmons, Hayes, Williams), unless the FO thinks VERY highly of Anderson’s ability to fill in at the SF, including the potential for a playoff role. We’ll need the extra 3-point shooter in the playoffs.
August 6th, 2010 at 2:41 pm
Jim Henderson,
On your assessment of the West top teams:
Rockets and Blazers-The big word here for both of these teams is the potential that oozes out of the paper their lineups are on. I dont thik Houston will be dangerous, if fully healthy, until the playoffs, because they need Yao to return to All-Star form, regain basketball shape, and find out how to play with him being the centerpiece. If they do all those things, then yes, they are gonna be pretty freakin good.
You make a great point about the Blazers injury woes and yet still finishing 6th in the West last season. The Blazers team has been living on potential for years now. My question is, do they have enough experience(because they certainly have enough talent) to really challenege the Lakers in a playoff series.(Assuming the road goes through LA)
The Thunder are a very good basketball team. I think they were such a tough out against the Lakers because the team as a whole is super quick and athletic, ad that really gave the Lakers fits. They still need a proven frontcourt player to body up the bigs(Gasol, Bynum, Duncan, Yao) of the conference. Plus we beat this same(for the most part) Thunder team 3 times last season. They are a good team, but I dont believe they are second to LA.
I would put the Spurs right now anywhere between 4-6 in the conference with what we have. and that definitely will not get us anywhere near contending for the title this season.
August 6th, 2010 at 2:56 pm
Bentley
August 6th, 2010 at 2:41 pm
I agree with much of what you said, hence, from a previous post, my estimate for final playoff seedings, as things stand right now in the West:
LA
Rockets
Blazers
Mavs
Spurs
Thunder
Nuggets
Jazz
Battling for the eighth spot could be these “dark horses”:
Grizzlies
Suns
Kings
Clippers
Hornets
August 6th, 2010 at 3:00 pm
That could slow the Mavs down a bit:
http://sports.espn.go.com/dallas/nba/news/story?id=5443649
August 6th, 2010 at 5:13 pm
Jim Henderson I went to ESPN NBA trade machine clicked on teams Spurs and then roster it lists what each player makes in 2011 season. Hope this helps
August 6th, 2010 at 5:48 pm
Greg
August 6th, 2010 at 5:13 pm
Okay, thanks Greg. The espn trade machine does seem to confirm 525k for three years. So if that’s accurate, that leaves the Spurs with the ability to offer two different free agents, less than 2.1 million each. For the MLE, we could offer up to about 1.9 mil. over a max of 5 or 6 years (I forget which), and for the LLE we could offer up to about 2.1 mil. over a max of 2 years.
Could we add any productive players that could crack our rotation (top 9) with that kind of money and terms? Not easily.
August 6th, 2010 at 6:03 pm
By the way, and correct me if I’m wrong, but it looks like the Spurs currently have 15 players under contract, and are sitting just a hair under the luxury tax threshold of 70.3 million. Thus, it appears as though adding any players through free agency at this point without a trade is unlikely.
August 6th, 2010 at 6:26 pm
Looks like Bogans was signed by the Bulls.
http://sports.espn.go.com/chicago/nba/news/story?id=5443778
Good luck Keith! We’ll miss you. (well, maybe not too much…)
August 6th, 2010 at 6:53 pm
Jim,
I was looking at that too. I don’t know how valid this site is regarding salaries…
http://hoopshype.com/salaries/san_antonio.htm
13 players are listed. Temple is not on that list.
August 6th, 2010 at 8:00 pm
espn still lists Hairston. Take away him and the roster stands at 14 if it’s true that Temple is receiving a guaranteed contract for this year.
That leaves 1 roster spot open.
Jim
“Thus, it appears as though adding any players through free agency at this point without a trade is unlikely.”
Still a possibility…but just not who we might like to have. A sign and trade scenario appears the only way to get Amundson or Boone.
There is this hope…
http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=2v4bk8u
As I pointed out before, the Bucks are in need of a b/u PG. Something the Spurs have in spades. Mbah a’Moute is your prototypical, perimeter defender at SF. He can defend against SG’s, SF’s and in small ball…defend the 4. Jerrells is the type of pg Skiles likes to implement. Gee gives the Bucks depth as a SG/SF behind Redd and Salmons. Maggette, Del Fino and Douglas-Roberts all but nulify playing time for Mbah. But Gee does provide them with a slight lack of depth at the 2 spot.
This would open the Spurs opportunity to just signing Amundson, Boone, or Brown outright.
PG- Parker, Hill, Temple
SG- Ginobili, Anderson, Neal
SF- Jefferson, a’Moute
PF- Duncan, Amundson, Blair
C- Splitter, McDyess, Bonner
Spot minutes could still be given to Anderson at SF in situations of small ball as well a’Moute playing some PF. One roster spot left open to bring in a D-league player in case of emergency. Blair and Amundson could switch between PF/C depending on the situations.
August 6th, 2010 at 8:01 pm
I really like Louis Amundson. He’s the hustle guy we need in my opinion. Also I think a trade for Corey Brewer would be nice. The wolves don’t need him and you know Khan. I say Antonio Mcdyess and Alonzo Gee for Corey Brewer
August 6th, 2010 at 8:26 pm
this is what we want as a backup sf:
Defensive specialist: Hayes fits the role
3pt%: 36% for his career, both reg season and playoffs
height: 6’8 one inch shorter than bowen
playoff experience: yes, has guarded lebron
Age: 28, on the better side of 30
potential: i believe he was a lottery pick
cost: vet min.
bonus: on boston radar, some believe lakers took note of him, and spurs like guys that have bounced around
why is Hayes not our top option?
August 7th, 2010 at 3:10 am
For the Sf James Singleton and another big DJ Mbenga
August 7th, 2010 at 10:05 am
Another one bites the dust..
Bogans to Chicago…
http://sports.espn.go.com/chicago/nba/news/story?id=5443778
August 7th, 2010 at 10:07 am
If he signs for the vet min, I think that we should sign Tmac! I mean he has the most potential than all the other guys named and could bring the most to the table. IF he does get injured than we just bring in a player of the rest of the players named above or Gee from the DL. Plus from a financial standpoint he would sell more tickets and jerseys for sure.
August 7th, 2010 at 10:35 am
DNITCH
August 7th, 2010 at 10:07 am
We don’t want a pop & fizzle celebrity. We want a warrior that is dependable & can get in your face on the defensive end, and/or a humble, “opportunistic shooter” off the bench. T-Mac isn’t either.
rob
August 6th, 2010 at 8:00 pm
I’m open to trying to get Moute from the Bucks. Even though his minutes are going to be crunched now in Milwaukee, I think they’ll have a hard time letting him go. But it’s worth a try. As for the trade you proposed, since both teams are over the cap, the salaries would have to match better. Thus we could try Gee and a 2011 2nd round pick for Moute. See if that would work. As far as Amundson, I doubt he could be had for what we have left in the MLE, or the LLE. We’d have to be willing to trade for him. I say offer the Suns McDyess for Amundson in a sign & trade.
TP, Hill
Manu, Anderson
RJ, Moute
Duncan, Blair
Splitter, Amundson
Reserves: Bonner, Temple, Neal, Jerrells
Still one player short. Could sign an MLE guy (or vet min.), probably at the 3, 4 or 5 spot (e.g., Simmons, Boone/Mbenga).
That might be a team that has at least a chance of going far.
August 7th, 2010 at 11:52 am
Louis Admundson is not a good fit on the Spurs.
Pop is an Air Force Academy graduate and there is NO WAY HE COULD DEAL WITH A GROWN MAN WITH HAIR LIKE HIS.
August 7th, 2010 at 11:56 am
If Buford could somehow steal Brewer from the Wolves than I would not require another X-Mas present.
August 7th, 2010 at 2:26 pm
Corey Brewer is a nice player, but I’m not sure why people keep mentioning him. Number one, Brewer is clearly the T-Wolves starting SG, and they only have the undersized Ellington behind him. And number two, SG is not a Spurs weakness, with Manu, Hill, Anderson, & Neal. We’d have to trade Anderson & Neal to try to get Brewer (something the Wolves probably wouldn’t be interested in), and also hope that Brewer wouldn’t mind getting the majority of his minutes at the SF spot, which is not really his natural position.
August 7th, 2010 at 3:06 pm
“Corey Brewer is a nice player, but I’m not sure why people keep mentioning him.”
First off, Corey is 6’9″. He has the size to easily be a SF. Hell, he was a SF at Florida (I am pretty sure about this). He is a defensive pest with a strong desire to compete. Give him to Pop and he just might go from a good to a really great perimeter defender. He gets to the hole good and he’s a better 3pt shooter than RJ. The only downside he has got is his ball handling and he would have to put on some muscle. He would make a fine fine back up at the 3.
August 7th, 2010 at 3:41 pm
Brewer has an excellent chance of being on the all-defensive team some day. If the Spurs could get him for cheap, I’d be ecstatic.
August 7th, 2010 at 7:30 pm
As I said, I like Brewer. And he may be listed at 6’9″, but he’s probably closer to 6’7″-6’8″ (Draft Express lists him at 6’6.75″ without shoes). Plus he’s pretty much a rail at 185 lbs., and not a very good rebounder for his height. Maybe he can put on 25 lbs. & become more like Tay Prince under Pop, but that’s still a pretty big question mark. He’s played SG primarily since he’s been in the NBA, probably for good reason (T-Wolves currently have the #4 pick Wes Johnson, and ex-Blazer, Martell Webster at SF). But even if he is a good fit for us in whatever capacity, does anyone have any realistic suggestions on how to acquire him? I know David Kahn’s a bit wacky, but why would the T-Wolves trade Brewer at this point, and what could they possibly want back in return?
August 7th, 2010 at 11:03 pm
Meh… I like Brewer but the thought of dealing with the nonsense that is the T-wolves makes me cringe. There’s no telling what Kahn would want back in return for this and frankly unless its draft picks like 5-6 years down the road I dont really see anyting coming to fruition from this.
Stick with the Amundson idea….
Oh and Jim… you were spot on…
“We don’t want a pop & fizzle celebrity. We want a warrior that is dependable & can get in your face on the defensive end, and/or a humble, “opportunistic shooter” off the bench. T-Mac isn’t either.”
I couldn’t agree more.
August 7th, 2010 at 11:04 pm
“I know David Kahn’s a bit wacky, but why would the T-Wolves trade Brewer at this point, and what could they possibly want back in return?”
Who really knows what Kahn would be thinking. He obviously has no real plan but just “likes shiny things”. He might be infatuated with the 2011 #1 and/or Anderson, maybe Gee. If I were RC, I would try Gee and next years #1. Gee seems to be the type of player that Kahn might like. Doesn’t hurt for RC to try.
August 7th, 2010 at 11:14 pm
I like James Anderson and it would sting a little to trade him BUT….
He probably won’t make a real impact until his 3rd year and by that time Timmy and Manu won’t be playing the same. Compared to Corey Brewer who could make an immediate impact. Something to think about.
On a side note, I wonder if the players like being in Minnesota? Checks cash just the same and it’s probably more “fun” than a real team. Of course, losing all the time isn’t too fun.
August 8th, 2010 at 5:27 am
kahn will trade brewer on temple, at least he will be tempted. when was the last time he had a chance to get a pg and he passed on it?
August 9th, 2010 at 7:02 pm
Interesting “rumor” developing out of Detroit.
http://www.nba.com/2010/news/08/08/mcgrady.pistons.aldridge/?ls=iref:nbahpt2
What would the Pistons and Spurs think of this trade?
http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=2ef52lv
Pistons receive Parker to run their offense. Hamilton moves to SF and has (if signed McGrady as b/u) Gordan solidifies SG position. Detroit would have the money to offer Parker a good contract after next season with the ability to build a team around him.
Spurs now have 2 legit SFs’ with Prince as the starter. Spur’s increase their capability to make one last title run with Duncan and Ginobili before their decline.
PG- Hill, Temple, Jerrells
SG- Ginobili, Anderson, Neal
SF- Prince, Jefferson
PF- Duncan, Blair
C- Splitter, McDyess, Bonner
This opens the door to outright signing Amundson, Boone or Brown and keeping the door open to bring in a D-league prospect.
August 10th, 2010 at 2:25 am
Tracy Mcgrady…
August 10th, 2010 at 3:21 am
Rudy Fernandez too…
August 10th, 2010 at 7:47 pm
Now that the Pistons have signed Tracy McGrady, do you think that the Spurs might make a move acquire Tayshaun Prince? His fills a role as a SF, corner 3pt shooter, and solid defender. Plus he is an expiring contract.
August 11th, 2010 at 5:28 pm
Bogans has since signed with another team, and he’s more of a 2 than a 3 anyway.
I hear that Detroit may be interested in trading Tayshaun Prince. Maybe Tony Parker, Garrett Temple, and DeJuan Blair for Prince, Rodney Stuckey, and draft pick Greg Monroe?
J2
August 11th, 2010 at 7:05 pm
J2
August 11th, 2010 at 5:28 pm
“I hear that Detroit may be interested in trading Tayshaun Prince. Maybe Tony Parker, Garrett Temple, and DeJuan Blair for Prince, Rodney Stuckey, and draft pick Greg Monroe?”
That’s an interesting deal that we should have considered closer to draft day, before agreeing to pay RJ 40 million dollars. I don’t think Prince & RJ on the same team makes a lot of sense. Both are too good to play an average 24 mpg., and are too expensive to man just the three spot.
August 12th, 2010 at 7:32 am
The decent 3′s listed aren’t really available. The rest are canon fodder. The Spurs are better off taking a gamble on Gist or Wilkerson along with the possibility that Anderson or Temple could fill in for short periods. From what I saw of Gee’s defensive play in the summer league, I don’t think he will even make the team, let alone earn a back-up spot as a 3. His defensive stance stinks and he hasn’t even come close to figuring out where he is supposed to be in the help out defensive scheme. Plus he is not a good three point shooter. Unless Pop completely changes the Spurs offensive plan the three will still have to be able to hit the outside shot. Can you hear me Jefferson? That would mean Anderson, Temple or maybe Neal, who is a bit short, would be considered. I think Ginobli could play the three as well. I could see Parker, Neal and Ginobli playing alongside Duncan and Splitter. That would be a pretty hard to stop five.
August 13th, 2010 at 2:59 am
J2
“I hear that Detroit may be interested in trading Tayshaun Prince. Maybe Tony Parker, Garrett Temple, and DeJuan Blair for Prince, Rodney Stuckey, and draft pick Greg Monroe? ”
I wouldn’t be willing to give up both Parker and Temple. That would leave the Spurs extremely thin at PG. In limited play, Temple has looked better at PG than Hill.
Detroits lack of size in the post would make me think they wouldn’t give up 6’11″ Monroe for 6’6″ Blair leaving them with an extremely undersized front court.
But I agree…Prince would solidify a very thin SF position on this team if RJ wouldn’t mind being relegated to coming off the bench.. Parker for Prince strait up works on paper as far as a trade would be concerned and still leaves the Spurs with good PG’s to run the offense.
See my previous post above..
rob
August 9th, 2010 at 7:02 pm
August 13th, 2010 at 11:16 am
rob
August 13th, 2010 at 2:59 am
“I wouldn’t be willing to give up both Parker and Temple. That would leave the Spurs extremely thin at PG.”
But we’d be getting Stuckey in the deal?
“Detroits lack of size in the post would make me think they wouldn’t give up 6’11″ Monroe for 6’6″ Blair leaving them with an extremely undersized front court.”
That is an issue, but they’d be getting Tony Parker at the point. That might be difficult for them to pass up. And what Blair lacks in height, he makes up for with desire and rebounding. Monroe is unlikely to ever be the rebounder that Blair is.
“Prince would solidify a very thin SF position on this team if RJ wouldn’t mind being relegated to coming off the bench…”
As I said, that’s the main problem with this deal. We don’t want to pay someone 10 million a year to come off the bench. We simply can’t afford it.
“Parker for Prince strait up works on paper as far as a trade would be concerned and still leaves the Spurs with good PG’s to run the offense.”
Sorry, but Hill and Temple are not championship level point guards, and probably never will be.
August 13th, 2010 at 2:31 pm
Jim Henderson
August 13th, 2010 at 11:16 am
“That is an issue, but they’d be getting Tony Parker at the point. That might be difficult for them to pass up. And what Blair lacks in height, he makes up for with desire and rebounding. Monroe is unlikely to ever be the rebounder that Blair is.”
I’m not so sure it would be an issue with Jefferson. He’s got his guaranteed contract and would be able to spend another season “learning the system”. That along with not having too much pressure as being the starter, he might even relish the idea.
But why would the Spurs want to have 3 new faces at this point learning an already difficult system that even top notch players take a full season to learn? And you’re correct…I wouldn’t give up Blair for Monroe if I were the Spurs.
“Sorry, but Hill and Temple are not championship level point guards, and probably never will be.”
I don’t disagree with you that they are not Tony Parker…but I do disagree with the assumption that they could not help this team win a championship. They both have the time put in with this system which is apparently worth more than somebody who’s never played in the system.
With a combination of Prince and Jefferson at SF along with Ginobili and a top prospect in Anderson…I believe the team would be able to overcome what would be lost if Parker were traded.
Granted again…Stuckey would be nice. But how long would it take him to get acclimated to the Spurs system? He’s more a 2 guard which the team already has an abundance of. In Detroit with Parker at the helm…Stuckey plays his natural position (SG)…Hamilton slides to SF…and with McGrady signed…the Pistons are loaded at the wing positions.
I also don’t think you give Hill, Temple and Jerrells enough credit to run the PG slot for the Spurs. With this trade if it were to ever happen…the Spurs address the weakest position on the team while not losing as much at the PG position.
Again…granted Hill, Temple and Jerrells are no Tony Parker…the team faired reasonbaly well in Tony’s absence. And that was without a player of Prince’s caliber.
Enter Splitter and a year wiser Blair with Prince, Jefferson, Ginobili, and Anderson…this team is better on the perimeter than last year with Tony alone.
But I digress. It sounds more like ranting. I’m just of the opinion that it wouldn’t matter if the Spurs were paying out 10 mil for a back up SF as long as the players they have would make a significant impact in winning another title before Duncan and Ginobili lose their abilty to be significant themselves.
And if Pop sees something in Temple who has done a good job at PG (even better than Hill)…then I don’t see the loss of Parker as that detrimental to the team if (combined) others on the team can be as significant in his absense.
August 13th, 2010 at 4:42 pm
rob
August 13th, 2010 at 2:31 pm
Stuckey is more of a PG than Hill or Temple is, and with his size (6’5″, 205 lbs.) he can provide a match-up problem for the opponent. Stuckey is not a very good shooter, and needs to focus more on his play-making, and shoot less. He’d have an easier time doing that on a better team like the Spurs.
Hamilton cannot defend at the SF spot. He’s to small, skinny, a bit old, and not too athletic. And as I said, it doesn’t make sense to pair RJ & Prince.
Bottom line: I don’t really have an interest in doing a deal with Detroit now. If we traded RJ & a 2nd round pick for Prince & Wilcox before RJ opted out, that might have been worth looking at. Now, I just don’t see a very good deal with that team.
August 14th, 2010 at 4:48 am
Jim,
I do agree with you regarding your pov about Stuckey. And yes…it would have been better to do a trade earlier before RJ opted out.
But having 3 new faces on the Spurs in the trade offered above by J2 would be non-productive imo regarding the Spurs chances at winning the title this year. It’s been proven too many times that new guys (no matter how good they are) take at least a year of learning this system before becoming significant to the team.
You take away Blair and Parker…insert Stuckey and Prince…the Spurs basically become the Pistons of last year. All I was saying is that Prince alone would work better being the team would be keeping it’s core players who already know the system while significantly improving their SF position.
August 14th, 2010 at 10:51 am
rob
August 14th, 2010 at 4:48 am
“You take away Blair and Parker…insert Stuckey and Prince…the Spurs basically become the Pistons of last year.”
But J2′s trade had Temple and #7 pick Greg Monroe in the deal. I do like Monroe, and his length, so that deal had some potential, since Parker may not resign anyways. And it would not make our team anything like last years Pistons - we would still be a playoff team. It’s hard to say if it would have made us better in year one. But the adjustment problem of three new players is overblown. Blair didn’t have any real problems last year. RJ’s adjustment was a “fit” problem, in terms of style, and particularly in him adjusting as a 4th option. But as I said, after we signed RJ for 4 years/$40 million, this deal doesn’t even rise the the level of consideration, in my view.
August 14th, 2010 at 10:08 pm
Jim Henderson
August 14th, 2010 at 10:51 am
“But J2′s trade had Temple and #7 pick Greg Monroe in the deal. I do like Monroe, and his length, so that deal had some potential, since Parker may not resign anyways.”
That’s just the point I’m making. Three new faces in Prince, Stuckey and Monroe along with three new faces in Splitter, Anderson and Neal leaving the Spurs with only Ginobili, Duncan, and Bonner with core seasoned veterans on the team does not lend itself to a championship contender no matter which team that may be.
I could be wrong…but I don’t think the Spurs do that trade for that reason more than any other.
And I did read your other post regarding the link about Parker and the Knicks. If any team thinks that may be true…it will be hard for the Spurs to trade Parker anyway.
The best the Spurs could hope for this year is that Parker plays all out and doesn’t try to just coast his way (like LeBron James) into free agency the following year just to join the Knicks.
August 15th, 2010 at 12:10 pm
rob
August 14th, 2010 at 10:08 pm
“That’s just the point I’m making. Three new faces in Prince, Stuckey and Monroe along with three new faces in Splitter, Anderson and Neal leaving the Spurs with only Ginobili, Duncan, and Bonner with core seasoned veterans on the team does not lend itself to a championship contender no matter which team that may be.”
I’ll put it as bluntly as I can possibly put it: outside of a miracle, it is VERY unlikely that we win a title THIS year, trade or no trade. The goal should be to try to get there in the next TWO years, if possible. And the fact is, Prince is one of the smartest players in the league, and is an almost perfect fit for what the Spurs do. Even Monroe & Stuckey are pretty good fits (based on their style & skill-sets) in a Spurs system, and as I said, the whole “difficult to adjust in the Spur system” idea is overblown in my view.
Ultimately, the main reason we should not be interested in doing a trade with Detroit right now is that it would be unlikely that RJ could be part of the deal (plus, I’m not cool with giving up Blair). The primary concern with this trade proposal is not due to gaining three new players, in my view. They would all be pretty good “fits” for us, and could allow us to be competitive in year one, and probably more of a threat in year two — and beyond if Duncan re-signs for less money in 2012, and other factors.
“The best the Spurs could hope for this year is that Parker plays all out and doesn’t try to just coast his way (like LeBron James) into free agency the following year just to join the Knicks.”
As I said on the 2nd most recent thread, as of 8/15/10, “that’s not Parker’s M.O. Unlike LeBron, he’s a “winner”, and winner’s don’t coast — ever.”
August 15th, 2010 at 5:39 pm
Jim Henderson
August 15th, 2010 at 12:10 pm
“I’ll put it as bluntly as I can possibly put it: outside of a miracle, it is VERY unlikely that we win a title THIS year, trade or no trade. The goal should be to try to get there in the next TWO years, if possible. And the fact is, Prince is one of the smartest players in the league, and is an almost perfect fit for what the Spurs do. Even Monroe & Stuckey are pretty good fits (based on their style & skill-sets) in a Spurs system, and as I said, the whole “difficult to adjust in the Spur system” idea is overblown in my view.”
I agree with you about 95% of the time. On this one I just can’t.
After this year…Duncan and Ginobili’s inevitable decline…Parker probably going to another team (Knicks)…does not lend the Spurs the luxury of waiting 2 more years before becoming title contenders again. If anything…they will be 2 years removed from their best opportunity now with what they have now.
And the record more than shows that it takes at least 2 seasons for any new player on this team to become acclimated to the intriquicies of this system. No matter who they are.
Having that many new faces may to you not seem like that much of a problem. Basing that opinion on what evidence to show different is. Because there is NO evidence that shows any new player on this team being able to perform at their expected level the first year they’ve ever played on this team.
Now could it miraculously happen one year? I guess it could.
But this next season is not the year to experiment with such a forgone conclusion of years past by bringing in 3 new faces along with the 3 new faces already on this team.
If anything….if the Spurs can’t get just another decent wing player to play back up SF prior to the season starting….they might as well role with who they have now hoping that the roster can gel together as a team by playoff time.
And if that be the case…I couldn’t agree with you more…”it is VERY unlikely that we win a title THIS year, trade or no trade.”
August 15th, 2010 at 8:17 pm
rob
August 15th, 2010 at 5:39 pm
“After this year…Duncan and Ginobili’s inevitable decline…Parker probably going to another team (Knicks)…does not lend the Spurs the luxury of waiting 2 more years before becoming title contenders again. If anything…they will be 2 years removed from their best opportunity now with what they have now.”
We’re not contenders now anyways. And by the way, I’m saying “the year after this coming season”, not “2 more years”. The fact is, if we’re going to compete for a title in the next three years, we’re going to have to get more from budding stars, and important role players that are great fits for the system. We will not be able to win anymore by depending on the old big three to be dominant throughout an entire playoff run. That’s NOT going to happen.
“And the record more than shows that it takes at least 2 seasons for any new player on this team to become acclimated to the intriquicies of this system. No matter who they are.”
What record are you looking at? Where’s your evidence? In Bowen’s first year with the team, 2001-02, he did exactly what we wanted him to do, and had a better year in almost all categories compared to his previous season with Miami. He was simply the right fit for our team at the time, and the Spurs won the same number of games as they did the year before he came. Horry came over in 2003-04. We wanted him to defend & hit the big three balls, and that’s exactly what he did. He was simply the right fit for our team at the time. Barry came over in 2004-2005. We needed him to play a steady role in the guard rotation, hit the three ball from the back court, particularly in pressure situations during the playoffs, and that’s exactly what he did. He was simply a good fit at the right time, and we ended up winning a championship during the his first year with the team. Francisco Elson came over in 2006-07. We needed him to platoon with and compliment Oberto at center by give us some extra rebounding and shot-blocking. He fulfilled that role perfectly, and ended up having better numbers in almost all categories compared to his previous year with Denver, and we woundd up winning the title again that year. And it’s not about assimilating two or more players at the same time either. With Bowen, also new were Parker, Charles Smith, & Steve Smith. With Horry, also new were Nesterovic, Turkoglu, & Devin Brown. With Barry, also new were Muhammed, Udrih, & Tony Massenburg. With Elson, also new were Vaughn, & Bonner. And ALL these role players/starters also did a very nice job in their first year in San Antonio.
Sure there are exceptions. But that’s what they are, exceptions. It’s a myth to suggest that most players require close to a year or more to assimilate effectively within the Spurs system. RJ is the exception, not the rule.
August 16th, 2010 at 12:31 am
Jim Henderson
August 15th, 2010 at 8:17 pm
My recollection of all the players you just mentioned, sparing Bowen who broke his finger his first year with the Spurs, is that they were good fits as you mentioned…but they didn’t become consistant players on this team until after their first year with the Spurs. Most saw limited action their first year and were not expected to be key components on the team.
If RJ were to have come in last year and allowed to play a more limited role than asked of him…his production might have been like that of the players you mentioned in Horry, Barry and Bowen. Remember….Udrih and Turkoglu apparently were not good fits either and they were expected to be major contributors.
The Spurs certainly found a gem in Parker. And after Daniels not living up to the expectation of being a starter quality PG…were very fortunate to have Parker emerge as well as Jackson being a better player than expected and able to take up the slack that Turkoglu left in his unproductive wake.
What I think you and I are talking about are two different things with regards to making our respected arguements legit though both could be used in our defense of our own belief.
And I think we are both correct in our assumptions of what might happen with regards to a hypothetical situation regarding the trade that would give us Prince, Stuckey and Monroe because there has been documented cases with players past where either scenario has a possibility of happening. Good or Bad.
My only concern is that right now…not having Duncan of the past….a Ginobili that won’t be as dynamic…a huge question mark as to how RJ is going to play this year….how are journeyman players such as Hill and Blair are going to perform…and the new faces of Splitter, Anderson, Neal, Temple and Jerrells…it wouldn’t be a good time to bring in 3 more new faces that may or may not play to expectations needed from at least 2 of those 3 in Prince and Stuckey during their first year on the team while having to give up players like Parker, Blair and Temple who have already proven to be the types of players that work well in this system.
And there is no arguement from me that losing Parker (via trade) at this time would be a serious blow to the Spurs chances of winning a title…but it would make it even more disadvantageous for the Spurs if they would have to give up Blair and Temple when (if Parker were to be seriously considered traded this year) that the team could simply get Prince for Parker without having to give up known commodities in Temple and Blair.
August 16th, 2010 at 12:16 pm
rob
August 16th, 2010 at 12:31 am
“……but they didn’t become consistant players on this team until after their first year with the Spurs.”
No, that’s incorrect. They were all very good during their 1st year. Look at the data. Look at their production numbers during their 1st year. It was very much as expected.
“Most saw limited action their first year and were not expected to be key components on the team.”
No, that’s incorrect. Virtually all of them were in the main rotation. ALL of them played an average of 11 mpg. or more. The great majority of them played between 15 and 30 mpg.
“If RJ were to have come in last year and allowed to play a more limited role than asked of him…his production might have been like that of the players you mentioned in Horry, Barry and Bowen.”
RJ had the best & most consistent production as a starter during his career compared to all of the players mentioned, and was used to logging heavy minutes throughout his career. The idea that he would have played better with half the minutes he was used to just doesn’t hold any water.
“Remember….Udrih and Turkoglu apparently were not good fits either and they were expected to be major contributors.”
No, Udrih & Turkoglu were lost for other reasons. It was not because of poor fit, or lack of contribution. The issue here is how did they perform in their 1st year with the club. Turkoglu, 36 minute avgs.: 12.8 ppg., 6.2 rpg., 1.4 spg., and shot 42% from three. Udrih, 36 minute avgs., as a 22 year old rookie: 14.8 ppg., 4.7 apg., 2.6 rpg., 1.3 spg., and shot 41% from three. They were good fits, and produced. Both the Spurs and each party decided to go in a different direction. Role players change teams fairly often, for a variety of reasons.
“…….Anderson, Neal, Temple and Jerrells…it wouldn’t be a good time to bring in 3 more new faces that may or may not play to expectations needed from at least 2 of those 3 in Prince and Stuckey during their first year on the team while having to give up players like Parker, Blair and Temple who have already proven to be the types of players that work well in this system.”
First of all, the following guys are likely to not even crack the rotation this year, and none of them have any, or hardly any, experience playing in the Spurs system: Anderson, Neal, Temple and Jerrells. And none of them would certainly be in the rotation after acquiring Prince & Stuckey, unless Anderson or Neal surprise to the upside & get in at the 4th guard slot, deep in the rotation. Acquiring Prince & Stuckey would not be a huge adjustment, other than the fact that any time you lose a guy like Parker would require an adjustment. Second, I’m not a big advocate for this trade anyway, but the reason is because it is overkill at the SF spot to have RJ AND Prince (plus, I’m partial to Blair, even though I like Monroe), not because the adjustment of these new players would be a huge problem.
“And there is no arguement from me that losing Parker (via trade) at this time would be a serious blow to the Spurs chances of winning a title…”
It would not be a blow to the Spurs chances of winning a title this year (not going to happen), but it would reduce their chances of making a WCF appearance THIS year.
“……the team could simply get Prince for Parker without having to give up known commodities in Temple and Blair.”
First of all, Temple is not a “known commodity”. He’s played a grand total of 334 minutes in the NBA, of which were 193 minutes with the Spurs over just 13 games (14.8 mpg.). He acquitted himself fine during that short stretch, but I don’t consider that a “known commodity”. Second, simply Prince straight up for Parker is no good because it leaves us without a true PG, AND without a reasonable level of experience at the point. It also creates an imbalance in terms of talent & salaries at the SF spot.
August 18th, 2010 at 9:44 am
What about potentially trading for Carmelo Anthony? Using the Trade Machine the Spurs could send Manu, Mcdyess, and Hill for Melo. This gives the Nuggets a big for their front line (McDyess) and a scorer to replace Melo in Manu and Hill is a good young player that they could develop under Billups.
It would get the Spurs a high volume scorer that could take pressure off Duncan and Parker, and one of the best young superstars in the league. Melo wants to win so why would he join one of the top-notch organizations?
This could also bring Chris Paul in. A straight-up trade of Parker for Paul works out financially but the Hornets will want more so maybe a third team will be needed, but this completely revamps the Spurs.
August 18th, 2010 at 10:42 am
Wait, did you say Manu?
The big fear with Melo is that he wouldn’t resign. Is he going to NYC regardless?
August 19th, 2010 at 11:36 am
Jim Henderson
August 16th, 2010 at 12:16 pm
No, that’s incorrect. They were all very good during their 1st year. Look at the data. Look at their production numbers during their 1st year. It was very much as expected.”
“No, that’s incorrect. Virtually all of them were in the main rotation. ALL of them played an average of 11 mpg. or more. The great majority of them played between 15 and 30 mpg.”
I stand corrected. My “recollection” wasn’t as good as I once thought. The numbers don’t lie and I double checked each player.
But speaking of numbers:
I took what appears to be a significant form of data you presented in per 36 minutes.
Regarding Hill and Temple not being able to handle the PG position in the absense of Parker if something like that were to happen via trade this year, your arguement in favor of Stuckey is warranted but look at these per 36 as well. If the Spurs were not to garnish another “starting” caliber PG this season…Hill and Temple have put up some tantelizing numbers that making a strait up trade of Parker for another really good SF and a defensive big might be something warranted as well.
3rd year player Stuckey- 17.5 ppg, 5.0 apg, 4.0 rpg, 1.5 spg, .228 3pt%
2nd year Hill - 15.2 ppg, 3.6 apg, 3.7 rpg, 1.2 spg, .379 3pt%
1st (1/2) year Temple- 14.7 ppg, 2.3 apg, 3.3 rpg, 1.4 spg, .351 3pt%
Parker’s 2nd year- 14.7 ppg, 5.5 apg, 3.2 rpg, .8 spg, .312 3pt%
It could stand to reason that the upside that Hill and Temple have with regards to most categories except assists…(which should increase in a starting role as PG)… would seem to imply they could handle the duties of PG for this team in the event Parker should be traded. And both are better perimeter defenders as well as 3pt shooters thus nulifying the 1 to 2 assists higher that Parker garnished at the same time of his nba career.
I don’t think the team needs to focus on getting another pg to replace Parker if Parker were to be traded. Now IF a really good, proven PG would be part of the deal…that’s not to say I wouldn’t want to accept that deal. But again….Parker for a proven SF and defensive big would work for me as well.
August 19th, 2010 at 12:09 pm
rob
August 19th, 2010 at 11:36 am
“I stand corrected. My “recollection” wasn’t as good as I once thought. The numbers don’t lie and I double checked each player.”
I appreciate you taking the time to look into it more carefully.
“Parker’s 2nd year- 14.7 ppg, 5.5 apg, 3.2 rpg, .8 spg, .312 3pt%”
Actually, Parkers 2nd year, per 36 minute stats at age 20 were:
16.5 ppg., 5.6 apg., 2.8 rpg., .9 spg., .337 - 3pt%
If you notice, both Parker and Stuckey’s apg. were 5.0 or above. Hill’s and Temples are both below 3.8 apg. That’s a pretty big difference, and does seem to indicate, at least at this point, that both Hill and Temple are more combo guards than PG’s. Parker & Stuckey are both “scoring” PG’s, with Parker of course being the most “efficient” of the two (Stuckey needs to keep working on his shooting). Also, the data is too limited on Temple (only 193 minutes played on the Spurs) to really draw any firm conclusions from his production numbers. I do like Hill and Temple, but I don’t know if either of them will be adequate as “playoff acceptable” starting PG’s. I think Stuckey has a better chance, and I don’t think we trade Parker without a legitimate starting PG back, or at least another more established “creator-type” combo-guard.
Leave a Reply