SpursReport.com

SpursReport.com (http://www.spursreport.com/forums/)
-   Spurs and NBA Fan Feedback (http://www.spursreport.com/forums/spurs-nba-fan-feedback/)
-   -   Keep Tony, Bring over Splitter, DRAFT WHITESIDE! (http://www.spursreport.com/forums/spurs-nba-fan-feedback/92802-keep-tony-bring-over-splitter-draft-whiteside.html)

choppsboy 06-05-10 05:41 PM

Keep Tony, Bring over Splitter, DRAFT WHITESIDE!
 
DRAFT HASSAN WHITESIDE!

Offer Tony a 5 year 75 million dollar extension

Sigh Splitter to the full mid-level exception

**sidenote** An Israely friend of mine is a huge fan of Euroball (especially Maccabi). Last year he wasn't much impressed with Splitter. He said splitter was to soft. This year, however, he thinks Splitter is a lot tougher and stronger, especially in rebounding...

Don't trade Jefferson. If Jefferson finds his role this year, we should re-sign him.

and

GET HEALTHY

That is all I think we need to do.

I may be :stupid but we haven't had Tony and Manu healthy at the same time since 2007. I think we can win it next year if we can all stay healthy.

ro_50 06-05-10 06:51 PM

I love Whiteside's potential but I think he may be gone by the 20th pick. But you're right. Spurs best chance to win it doing what you mentioned and finding an able shooter, be it in the draft or free agency.

WILLTHETHRILL 06-05-10 07:37 PM

15 million per? No thanks. Take off some money dude.

Jose_TheGenius 06-05-10 10:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by choppsboy (Post 1206427)
DRAFT HASSAN WHITESIDE!

Offer Tony a 5 year 75 million dollar extension

Sigh Splitter to the full mid-level exception

**sidenote** An Israely friend of mine is a huge fan of Euroball (especially Maccabi). Last year he wasn't much impressed with Splitter. He said splitter was to soft. This year, however, he thinks Splitter is a lot tougher and stronger, especially in rebounding...

Don't trade Jefferson. If Jefferson finds his role this year, we should re-sign him.

and

GET HEALTHY

That is all I think we need to do.

I may be :stupid but we haven't had Tony and Manu healthy at the same time since 2007. I think we can win it next year if we can all stay healthy.

i agree with having Manu & Tony healthy = title if everyone else plays their role on O and D, but overall that whole deal is a mess.

$15 million is $2 million under the maximum contract under the new CBA ain't it? Parker's good, but he's not worth more than $10 if he doesn't get some speed back and pass more.

i'd re-sign RJ in a heartbeat if he took MLE money, of course there's gonna be someone out there who'll offer him way over. but not trading him if we have the chance for someone really decent or really good, he's on his way out. with RJ's $15 million, we can get at least 2 long contracted players for his expiring deal. 2 good players would help us tremendously (especially if it's a big and a small in a package). like i've said, if we can pry away a big like Biedrins and Maggette from Golden State for RJ and someone else, that'd be tremendous for us. even putting in Hill in that RJ package would be good. this postseason has killed any faith i had in him to improve and i hope he cuts the "i've matured" trash this year.

Splitter is getting the full MLE if he's coming, so that's a no brainer.

concerning the draft, i wouldn't be surprised if we give up the pick in a trade. i don't think the Spurs have the patience for another Blair/Hill experiment with TD getting one year older and his knee getting worse

parkfan 06-06-10 10:43 AM

what i would like to see happen (doable but dont think it will happen)
resign Ian, temple,gee, hairston(pick up contract by deadline)
sign spliter, outlaw, dorell wright
release bonner, mason, bogans

starters
Ian (its time for him to show what he has and it needs to be done by trade deadline)
tim
(winner of wright, jefferson, outlaw)
hill
parker

subs
mcdysee
blair
(another one of 3)
mannu
temple

pine riders
last of 3
hairston (he can fight with other 3 but might not beat them out)

D league
Splitter (get him some pt in spurs system and see what he has in spurs system)
Gee keeps him in the system and still gets him pt i think hell be good also.

the main bench players would be manu and dyess as well as other of 3 competing)

if Ian doesnt work out which i think he will then you still have dyess who can start as well as splitter who you could call up. outlaw and wright have also played PF so they could do that in a smaller lineup (takeing bonners place but better rebounders and better defenders)

manu hill parker and winner of battle of 3 could play most of min at 123. temple would still give us a solid backup pg if tony got hurt or we had a blowout. blair will also be on the bench and get some pt as tim and dyess will need more rest.

if Ian looks to be real (which i think he will) then you can trade dyess by deadline as well as possibly RJ and free up room for eitherspliter or gee to come up.

i would like to see RJ moved but i dont think he will be.

This would give us a taler lineup with more defense. only people that would be short for their position would be blair and hill. outlaw and wright would be short if the played PF but even outlaw is 6'9" sp he snt that short. while still giving us the speed.

parkfan 06-06-10 10:51 AM

what i would like to see happen (doable but dont think it will happen)
resign Ian, temple,gee, hairston(pick up contract by deadline)
sign spliter, outlaw, dorell wright
release bonner, mason, bogans

starters
Ian (its time for him to show what he has and it needs to be done by trade deadline)
tim
(winner of wright, jefferson, outlaw)
hill
parker

subs
mcdysee
blair
(another one of 3)
mannu
temple

pine riders
last of 3
hairston (he can fight with other 3 but might not beat them out)

D league
Splitter (get him some pt in spurs system and see what he has in spurs system)
Gee keeps him in the system and still gets him pt i think hell be good also.

the main bench players would be manu and dyess as well as other of 3 competing)

if Ian doesnt work out which i think he will then you still have dyess who can start as well as splitter who you could call up. outlaw and wright have also played PF so they could do that in a smaller lineup (takeing bonners place but better rebounders and better defenders)

manu hill parker and winner of battle of 3 could play most of min at 123. temple would still give us a solid backup pg if tony got hurt or we had a blowout. blair will also be on the bench and get some pt as tim and dyess will need more rest.

if Ian looks to be real (which i think he will) then you can trade dyess by deadline as well as possibly RJ and free up room for eitherspliter or gee to come up.

i would like to see RJ moved but i dont think he will be.

This would give us a taler lineup with more defense. only people that would be short for their position would be blair and hill. outlaw and wright would be short if the played PF but even outlaw is 6'9" sp he snt that short. while still giving us the speed.

Bryhn 06-06-10 11:18 AM

Too much money for Parker

And maybe I'm the only one, but Splitter is not what we need. He's a really a little more athletic version of Rasho. I fail to see how he would have helped in the Phoenix series. MLE money? I say we trade his rights. I bet Mahinmi could be just as good and for cheaper.

Jose_TheGenius 06-06-10 12:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryhn (Post 1206567)
Too much money for Parker

And maybe I'm the only one, but Splitter is not what we need. He's a really a little more athletic version of Rasho. I fail to see how he would have helped in the Phoenix series. MLE money? I say we trade his rights. I bet Mahinmi could be just as good and for cheaper.

i agree about Parker, but i think Splitter (if he's any decent as Rasho was) wouldn't be our missing key but he'd be some of what's missing. we're missing someone who can help defend the paint. Duncan's worn down trying to defend the paint by himself when Bonner's in there the past 2 years and Dice wore out during the Mavs series, so he didn't do much in the PHX series.

the big is what we need basically because we scored 95+ points in the playoffs, so offense isn't the problem. we just couldn't stop anyone.

Uwe Blab 06-06-10 12:47 PM

Soooo people are ok with giving Manu 13 million per year, after he had two injury plaqued seasons and was technically injured this playoffs and wasn't worth squat after the broken nose? Please, Tony is at least worth what Manu got. And this was his most injury plaqued season since he got into the NBA.

tenthousandaces 06-06-10 02:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uwe Blab (Post 1206574)
Soooo people are ok with giving Manu 13 million per year, after he had two injury plaqued seasons and was technically injured this playoffs and wasn't worth squat after the broken nose? Please, Tony is at least worth what Manu got. And this was his most injury plaqued season since he got into the NBA.

plagued

Jose_TheGenius 06-06-10 02:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uwe Blab (Post 1206574)
Soooo people are ok with giving Manu 13 million per year, after he had two injury plaqued seasons and was technically injured this playoffs and wasn't worth squat after the broken nose? Please, Tony is at least worth what Manu got. And this was his most injury plaqued season since he got into the NBA.

Manu's contract is back loaded, meaning he'll get more later. next year he's getting $11 million, then $13 million, which technically helps the Spurs because once the contract gets older (as Manu), he could be good trade bait with a big deal (like RJ is right now).

no way to compare Tony and Manu though, although i would pay Manu more than Tony for numerous reasons:

Manu makes everyone better and everyone enjoys playing alongside him because he moves the ball

Manu is much more versatile than Parker. he's basically a PG in a SG's body at this point in his career

Manu overall players better D than Parker. Parker's D consists of his O because he wears his opponents out

that's basketball, also Manu is a much smarter investment marketing wise. San Antonio is behind Manu, loads more than SA's ever been behind Parker. basically, Manu brings in more money than Parker would.

Uwe Blab 06-06-10 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crumb (Post 1206575)
plagued

No, I meant plaqued, as in the injuries were stuck to him like dental plaque...ok you got me, it was a typo. That's all you got out of my paragraph?

BackHome 06-06-10 02:25 PM

Dang everyone is smoking the pipe today........Pass It Around!........Gee for the love of God please give up on Ian.. people fall in love with the most worhtless bench players....ex..Pop who had much better stats then Ian in the D-League was the talk on this board for months and what team is he playing for? Is he even in the NBA?

Don't won't to hurt Ians feelings he is a nice guy but he ia an athlete he is not a NBA player. HUGE DIFFERENCE! We have had him more then three freakin years enough with the "Potential Crap"! The world is full of people who have tons of "Potential" who are never going to end up doing anything.

As far as Tony I love Tony I just don't think that a shooting pg is worth that kind of money. You look at Rondo and Nash and they are averaging between 10 to 12 mill a year. So my question to you if you replayed this past season but you took out Rondo, Nash, and Parker out for the year which team would be impacted the most and which would be impacted the least? Thats how you should pay him....

I would be suprised if Tony does not come out wanting something close to the 15 mill and we just can't have that amount of money tied up in a SG/PG.

We have bigger needs and that problem stems from having tweeners.

1. Hill a small sg and not a pg who I agree he got to big for his breaches and got spanked and put in time out by Nash. I still love the kid though.

2. I love Blair but he is small and slow and is a matchup problem for some of the more elite teams we will face. Also with his knees he will be played like an old veteran.

Needs for 2010 season in order:

1. Sign Splitter - We have had Bonner as our center anyone bigger then 6'9 is a Huge upgrade at that position! People complain and about him the same way they did about Manu, and Scola so I guess we should still listen to them?

2. We need a SF who can shoot the ball and play smart...the opposite of Jefferson.

3. Our bench needs to upgraded and developed so give playing time early to Temple, Hairston, Gee and our new draft picks to see what they can do? Also bring in Victor and Nando and lets see what they can do. Oh, since the Euro is going to **** in a handbasket look at some of seasoned Euro vets who might want to come over and see if they would be a good fit for us.

4. Bogans is gone so replace him with someone who is young, athletic, tough, smart, good foot speed, and passing skills. He can learn in time to hit the three from the outside.

5. Replace Mason with either of the guys from number 3.

6. If we sign Babbitt then Bonner is gone if not he might be traded.

7. Our bench should have a new true pg, and a new PF/C

choppsboy 06-06-10 03:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryhn (Post 1206567)
And maybe I'm the only one, but Splitter is not what we need. He's a really a little more athletic version of Rasho. I fail to see how he would have helped in the Phoenix series. MLE money? I say we trade his rights. I bet Mahinmi could be just as good and for cheaper.

How familiar are you with Splitter? He isn't at all like Rasho. He is not that lengthy at all, and plays with more power. He made large strides over last year in his strength and power game. Besides, if Ian was going to be any good, the Spurs would have picked up their option on him. Do you think the Spurs didn't pick up the option so they can re-sign him for more money? Give up on the dream man, Mahimni isn't playing here next year (but I bet Bonner does).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uwe Blab (Post 1206574)
Soooo people are ok with giving Manu 13 million per year, after he had two injury plaqued seasons and was technically injured this playoffs and wasn't worth squat after the broken nose? Please, Tony is at least worth what Manu got. And this was his most injury plaqued season since he got into the NBA.

Parker made 12millions+- this year. 5 years 75 mill is just a 1 mill raise per year. That seems fair to me. Tony should make as much as Manu or a little more because he is younger. (13mil + 14mil + 15mil + 16mil +17mil)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jose_TheGenius (Post 1206576)
Manu's contract is back loaded, meaning he'll get more later. next year he's getting $11 million, then $13 million, which technically helps the Spurs because once the contract gets older (as Manu), he could be good trade bait with a big deal (like RJ is right now).

no way to compare Tony and Manu though, although i would pay Manu more than Tony for numerous reasons:

Manu makes everyone better and everyone enjoys playing alongside him because he moves the ball

Manu is much more versatile than Parker. he's basically a PG in a SG's body at this point in his career

Manu overall players better D than Parker. Parker's D consists of his O because he wears his opponents out
.

Funny. . . . . Last offseason it was Manu Ginobili who needed to be traded and was making more money, and was a big injury risk so we should trade him. So Now You Turn On Tony!

Jose_TheGenius 06-06-10 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BackHome (Post 1206580)
We have bigger needs and that problem stems from having tweeners.

now that's the lie of the year. we've made our LIVING by having tweeners.

what do you think Brent Barry was? he was a 6'7" PG/SG/SF
what do you think Bowen was defensively? he could guard 1-5 positions
what do you think Horry was? a 6'10" PF/SF who could guard 3-5, rebound, hit 3's, block shots, and do the little stuff

no our problem isn't that we have tweeners because in essence, we don't anymore. the problem is Pop is trying to make players INTO tweeners.

he tried to make SG Roger Mason into a PG
he tried to make Matt Bonner into a basketball player
he tried to make George Hill into a PG
he tried making RJ into a PF

the problem is we don't have tweeners, the problem is Pop tried to make players into tweeners when clearly it wasn't their strong point

Quote:

Originally Posted by choppsboy (Post 1206582)
Funny. . . . . Last offseason it was Manu Ginobili who needed to be traded and was making more money, and was a big injury risk so we should trade him. So Now You Turn On Tony!

the only funny thing is that you thought i was for trading Manu for just about anything last year? lol i've always been on the Manu bandwagon, i've never really been on the Parker bandwagon. so if you mean by "you" everyone else, then yes you're right.

choppsboy 06-06-10 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jose_TheGenius (Post 1206583)

he tried to make SG Roger Mason into a PG
he tried to make Matt Bonner into a basketball player
he tried to make George Hill into a PG
he tried making RJ into a PF

the problem is we don't have tweeners, the problem is Pop tried to make players into tweeners when clearly it wasn't their strong point



the only funny thing is that you thought i was for trading Manu for just about anything last year? lol i've always been on the Manu bandwagon, i've never really been on the Parker bandwagon. so if you mean by "you" everyone else, then yes you're right.


You are damn right about George Hill. We need Nando to come over if not this year than next. George Hill is our backup SG! (Manu is the starter). George will be Manu's Predecessor.

And

I guess I didn't mean "you", but everyone else. I think Tony is as indispensable as Manu.

Jose_TheGenius 06-06-10 04:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by choppsboy (Post 1206587)
You are damn right about George Hill. We need Nando to come over if not this year than next. George Hill is our backup SG! (Manu is the starter). George will be Manu's Predecessor.

i'd politely disagree. i think Hill is our SG (not PG...EVER!) but i don't think he's our backup SG. i still like that for Manu because he can handle the pressure of holding the 2nd unit together. i don't trust Hill on the 2nd unit, even with Nando backing up Parker. if we get Parker and Hill starting and then Nando playing next to Manu, it'd be a more balanced unit (starting and backup).

that was another thing that killed us during the playoffs. Pop decided to kill the bench and start our 5 best players, Hill came off the bench and did nothing. Manu and RJ needed to go on the bench to provide the spark.

steefposton 06-06-10 04:35 PM

"George will be Manu's Predecessor."

I think you mean SUCcessor. Pre means before. Hill is coming AFTER Manu.

choppsboy 06-06-10 04:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by steefposton (Post 1206589)
"George will be Manu's Predecessor."

I think you mean SUCcessor. Pre means before. Hill is coming AFTER Manu.

Uh, He He, Yea

That!
:applause :applause :applause :applause :applause :applause

BackHome 06-06-10 05:29 PM

OK.Jose I have to agree with you in that Pop has forced players to play out of their position and that hurt us. But I have to also say that NO team is going to win a championship with a starting SG at 6"1 and a starting PF at 6"7. I also blame Pop for not developing the new kids he should have played our young bench players alot more for two reasons..1. See what we have.....2. Give our seniors more time off.

I think we all can say that we like Tony but were the difference is when it comes to how much we are going to pay him. I am in the camp that if he does us a Manu did in his first free agency contract ie..signing cheap we keep him but if he goes Lebron on us then trade him.

TheLadiesMike 06-06-10 06:42 PM

Manu hasn't been healthy for three playoff runs in a row. I wonder what people will say if that becomes 4 and we're dropping $13 mil/year on him.

tenthousandaces 06-06-10 06:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uwe Blab (Post 1206577)
No, I meant plaqued, as in the injuries were stuck to him like dental plaque...ok you got me, it was a typo. That's all you got out of my paragraph?

Ha - yeah, actually I agree with you about Tony's value there. Funny reply ;-)

BackHome 06-06-10 08:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheLadiesMike (Post 1206600)
Manu hasn't been healthy for three playoff runs in a row. I wonder what people will say if that becomes 4 and we're dropping $13 mil/year on him.

The samething if we drop 13 mill on Parker.

Uwe Blab 06-06-10 10:04 PM

The difference is Tony has been healthy most of his career and is in his prime. Manu is on the downside.

Jose_TheGenius 06-07-10 01:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uwe Blab (Post 1206613)
The difference is Tony has been healthy most of his career and is in his prime. Manu is on the downside.

say what? lol

you mean Parker's been healthy for the 2nd half of the season most of the time. the dude is always coming up with injuries in the summer during the national team. sprained ankles, bummed fingers, quad injuries too if i remember correctly.

Manu's had two injuries that effected our title hopes during the playoffs in 06 and the summer of 08 and it was the same injury that sidelined him during the 09 season, but Manu's mostly been healthy during the first half of the seasons.

Parker's come up with injuries for most of his career at the start of NBA seasons. Manu has an ankle injury in 06, the ankle injury in 08, the broken nose (freak accident), if anything Parker's been worse at injuries. the only good side to them is they've been early in the season so people forget, except for this season where he had the plantars fascitis, the broken finger, and didn't he hurt something else too?

if anything, if Parker could manage to stay healthy during the start of the season, maybe Timmy and Manu wouldn't be holding the burden so early in the season, to get injured later, especially with Tim's knee.

billsmith3503 06-07-10 05:59 AM

Sign Parker for 15 million and doom us. After Tim leaves we'd be toast and not have any financial flexibility to rebuild.

Uwe Blab 06-07-10 10:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jose_TheGenius (Post 1206631)
say what? lol

you mean Parker's been healthy for the 2nd half of the season most of the time. the dude is always coming up with injuries in the summer during the national team. sprained ankles, bummed fingers, quad injuries too if i remember correctly.

Manu's had two injuries that effected our title hopes during the playoffs in 06 and the summer of 08 and it was the same injury that sidelined him during the 09 season, but Manu's mostly been healthy during the first half of the seasons.

Parker's come up with injuries for most of his career at the start of NBA seasons. Manu has an ankle injury in 06, the ankle injury in 08, the broken nose (freak accident), if anything Parker's been worse at injuries. the only good side to them is they've been early in the season so people forget, except for this season where he had the plantars fascitis, the broken finger, and didn't he hurt something else too?

if anything, if Parker could manage to stay healthy during the start of the season, maybe Timmy and Manu wouldn't be holding the burden so early in the season, to get injured later, especially with Tim's knee.

:laugh Way to grasp there. Pop has always managed their minutes, no matter what, except for this year because they just didn't have the players. Either way, Parker is younger and except for this year, has been healthy for the playoffs. To your point though, if you add up their total regular season games played in the last 3 years since the last title, they are actually pretty close. But again, the main count is number of playoffs games played in and whether or not they were affected by injuries during those games.

billsmith3503 06-07-10 11:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uwe Blab (Post 1206613)
The difference is Tony has been healthy most of his career and is in his prime. Manu is on the downside.

Why do you say Parker is in his prime? He's coming off of a horrible season, injury riddled - specifically due to too much playing time.

Its MUCH easier to say his prime was 2 years ago, and that he's in decline right now- and you have no evidence to dispute that.

He has one skill- he is fast- you'd like to sign him to a near max deal after an injury riddled season, when his one skill is questionable now that he may be showing some wear and tear?

You dont think thats risky?

Just like Manu, the Spurs wanted to see him come back healthy-- noone knows what Parker we'll get next year.

Uwe Blab 06-07-10 01:13 PM

Parker is 28 and had a bad year full of injuries. He is taking the summer off. Just last year he was carrying the team through the season. If you take the Parker Hate Glasses off, you will see that he has developed a pretty reliable midrange jumper. The "decline" you speak of is not age, it was simply plantar fasciatis, which is healed with rest. There is no reason to expect a decline with no serious knee injuries, etc. Manu is 32. The "championship Manu" that we all love can't play a whole season without some kind of injury, and unfortunately it always happens at the end of the year.

Yes, giving a player a max deal after an injury riddled season is risky, but what's more risky is giving Manu the deal he got. THAT contract has caused the problems, because now you have to give Tony AT LEAST that, because Tony is young and will be around longer than Manu. For the record, I don't think Tony is max contract player, but he deserves more than 10 million and at least as much as Manu.

Jose_TheGenius 06-07-10 01:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uwe Blab (Post 1206642)
:laugh Way to grasp there. Pop has always managed their minutes, no matter what, except for this year because they just didn't have the players. Either way, Parker is younger and except for this year, has been healthy for the playoffs. To your point though, if you add up their total regular season games played in the last 3 years since the last title, they are actually pretty close. But again, the main count is number of playoffs games played in and whether or not they were affected by injuries during those games.

you can take any minutes you want, but the truth is even when TD played a few minutes during the early start of this season, most of the plays went through him via 4 Down, take into account he had to guard the paint, that's a hell of a beat up on his body.

if we were a running team that'd be different. there'd be no physical play on either side of the court, but we're not. Timmy goes through a beating on offense and defense.

of course you laugh at the minutes (even though you didn't take into account how we play, there's a reason Shaq wasn't really injured in PHX in a run n gun system, while he kept getting injured everywhere else), but you never took into account the international play and Parker's injuries, of course. but when it comes to Manu, you'll remember them. :richb

Uwe Blab 06-07-10 01:55 PM

You're all over the place Jose. The point is, Tony is younger and has been healthy for the playoffs except for this year. Manu is older and has been affected by injuries at the end of the year the last 3 years. Bottom line. What you're saying is that if Tony were healthy at the beginning of the year TD and Manu wouldn't have to play as much at the beginning of the season. BS. Even when they are all healthy, they still play the same amount of minutes per game because Pop is aware that they cannot play alot of minutes over a whole season.

billsmith3503 06-07-10 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uwe Blab (Post 1206660)
Parker is 28 and had a bad year full of injuries. He is taking the summer off. Just last year he was carrying the team through the season. If you take the Parker Hate Glasses off, you will see that he has developed a pretty reliable midrange jumper. The "decline" you speak of is not age, it was simply plantar fasciatis, which is healed with rest. There is no reason to expect a decline with no serious knee injuries, etc. Manu is 32. The "championship Manu" that we all love can't play a whole season without some kind of injury, and unfortunately it always happens at the end of the year.

Yes, giving a player a max deal after an injury riddled season is risky, but what's more risky is giving Manu the deal he got. THAT contract has caused the problems, because now you have to give Tony AT LEAST that, because Tony is young and will be around longer than Manu. For the record, I don't think Tony is max contract player, but he deserves more than 10 million and at least as much as Manu.

In 2010 Parker had Plantar Fascitis, a Hip Flexor Strain, a Sprained Ankle, and a broken finger and more games missed because of the flu... you can erase the broken finger & Flu from wear and tear injury. He's been playing professionally for 12 years-- non stop.

You have absolutely no basis to say he is in his prime. It's as probable that his decline has begun. The problem isnt necessarily the dollars, but the years. He'll surely want 5 years and I cant see the FO comitting to that. He'll be playing pro for 17 years at the end of that deal.... that is extremely dicey.

grizzly_bexar 06-07-10 03:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by billsmith3503 (Post 1206673)
In 2010 Parker had Plantar Fascitis, a Hip Flexor Strain, a Sprained Ankle, and a broken finger and more games missed because of the flu... you can erase the broken finger & Flu from wear and tear injury. He's been playing professionally for 12 years-- non stop.

You have absolutely no basis to say he is in his prime. It's as probable that his decline has begun. The problem isnt necessarily the dollars, but the years. He'll surely want 5 years and I cant see the FO comitting to that. He'll be playing pro for 17 years at the end of that deal.... that is extremely dicey.

I don't want to ditch TP-- I'd rather see what we've got this year like we did with Manu-- but we need to take note that the guys who came to the NBA young are breaking down at a corresponding younger age than guys who came in at age 21-22 after several years on college.

Plus TP's played deep into the playoffs every year.

So we should at least be on the alert that signing a 28 year old TP might be like signing a 30-31 year old American college player.

Jose_TheGenius 06-07-10 03:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uwe Blab (Post 1206665)
The point is, Tony is younger and has been healthy for the playoffs except for this year. Manu is older and has been affected by injuries at the end of the year the last 3 years. Bottom line. What you're saying is that if Tony were healthy at the beginning of the year TD and Manu wouldn't have to play as much at the beginning of the season. BS. Even when they are all healthy, they still play the same amount of minutes per game because Pop is aware that they cannot play alot of minutes over a whole season.

-younger doesn't mean less injury prone

-wasn't that a point I made? that he gets hurt early in the year? :rolleyes

-
2008 was the same injury as 2009 and reports said the ankle was gonna give out sooner than later, so even if he wouldn't have played in the Olympics, it would've given out on him during the season. having Dirk elbow you in the nose is NOT being injury prone, it's a freak accident. it could've happened to anyone else.

-and of course you miss the whole point of: when Tony is hurt, that puts more wear and tear on Manu and Tim, regardless of minutes. i know you're a bit stubborn, but this is quite ridiculous. if Tim played 25 minutes a game and every play went through him on 4 Down, he'd be more worn down than playing 35 minutes where he'd play a run-n-gun style and just play defense or offense. my point was, minutes are just half of the equation. Duncan had the offense and carried us through the first part of the season because of Parker's injuries and that wore him down. more or less minutes is just part of the equation, the bigger part of it is that he wore down because he had to do more in those minutes, thanks to Parker's injuries.

billsmith3503 06-07-10 04:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by grizzly_bexar (Post 1206678)
I don't want to ditch TP-- I'd rather see what we've got this year like we did with Manu-- but we need to take note that the guys who came to the NBA young are breaking down at a corresponding younger age than guys who came in at age 21-22 after several years on college.

Plus TP's played deep into the playoffs every year.

So we should at least be on the alert that signing a 28 year old TP might be like signing a 30-31 year old American college player.

I agree with the risk factors being
A) that he plays horribly and is less attractive at the trade deadline-- given the salary relief this isnt that big a deal as someone will likely take him anyway (you just wont get useful players in return)
B) He plays fantastic and you are unable to sign him.

WILLTHETHRILL 06-07-10 05:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by choppsboy (Post 1206582)
How familiar are you with Splitter? He isn't at all like Rasho. He is not that lengthy at all, and plays with more power. He made large strides over last year in his strength and power game. Besides, if Ian was going to be any good, the Spurs would have picked up their option on him. Do you think the Spurs didn't pick up the option so they can re-sign him for more money? Give up on the dream man, Mahimni isn't playing here next year (but I bet Bonner does).



Parker made 12millions+- this year. 5 years 75 mill is just a 1 mill raise per year. That seems fair to me. Tony should make as much as Manu or a little more because he is younger. (13mil + 14mil + 15mil + 16mil +17mil)



Funny. . . . . Last offseason it was Manu Ginobili who needed to be traded and was making more money, and was a big injury risk so we should trade him. So Now You Turn On Tony!

15 Million per for an average is still too much! No matter how you slice it. Trim some payroll dude!

katyspursfan 06-07-10 06:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by billsmith3503 (Post 1206673)
In 2010 Parker had Plantar Fascitis, a Hip Flexor Strain, a Sprained Ankle, and a broken finger and more games missed because of the flu... you can erase the broken finger & Flu from wear and tear injury. He's been playing professionally for 12 years-- non stop.

Perhaps this is the season that the FO and Parker agree that summers are a time for rest. Parker is probably moving into the 'career extension' phase of his life. He has agreed to not play for the French team this year. Things may change next summer.

There were no complaints about Timmy after he suffered from plantar fas... Since then, the training staff has had more experience with it. They have also altered summer training regimens for Timmy, along with strongly suggesting that players do not play for the national teams. Players are now listening.

This leaves you with a sprained ankle suffered in the summer play, and a hip flexor. There really is no way to infer that this season's injuries are the start of a trend. Parker is most likely on the downhill side of his career. After the 2007 season, it's not probable that you get better. However, he has more potential to have a career year than any of him, Manu or Duncan. That would put him back at his peak.

Duncan's been on the downhill side for 5-8 years already. There has been no call to unload him for potential to help usher in the post-Duncan era. To trade Parker for potential, or let him leave via free agency is silly. You extend his contract for 4-5 years. Really good point guards and big men are tough to get. You hold on to them.

Jose_TheGenius 06-07-10 06:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by katyspursfan (Post 1206698)
There were no complaints about Timmy after he suffered from plantar fas... Since then, the training staff has had more experience with it. They have also altered summer training regimens for Timmy, along with strongly suggesting that players do not play for the national teams. Players are now listening.

yeah they've had adjustments and know more about it (Tony mentioned he wore a special sock). from someone who's suffered from it, there's no real way to prevent it unless you use a real real comfy shoe (some players like different types of shoe, some like "quicker" shoes, others like "stronger" shoes, if you play ball, you'll kinda know what i mean).

but plantars fascitis could happen with any shoe you use that doesn't have the proper support or any surface you walk/run on. i bought some of those cheap $20 Protege shoes (the Al Harrington ones), it gave me it. once you have it, you credit Duncan for how he played in 2006. it's like a sharp hot knife/cramp like feeling when you try to be active. i still have them but wear Dr. Scholl's lol

anywho, i agree with you on that. plantars fascitis is an injury, but like Manu's broken nose, it's just a freak injury that can happen because of a number of factors that you wouldn't really think of.

Uwe Blab 06-07-10 06:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jose_TheGenius (Post 1206679)
-younger doesn't mean less injury prone

-wasn't that a point I made? that he gets hurt early in the year? :rolleyes

-
2008 was the same injury as 2009 and reports said the ankle was gonna give out sooner than later, so even if he wouldn't have played in the Olympics, it would've given out on him during the season. having Dirk elbow you in the nose is NOT being injury prone, it's a freak accident. it could've happened to anyone else.

-and of course you miss the whole point of: when Tony is hurt, that puts more wear and tear on Manu and Tim, regardless of minutes. i know you're a bit stubborn, but this is quite ridiculous. if Tim played 25 minutes a game and every play went through him on 4 Down, he'd be more worn down than playing 35 minutes where he'd play a run-n-gun style and just play defense or offense. my point was, minutes are just half of the equation. Duncan had the offense and carried us through the first part of the season because of Parker's injuries and that wore him down. more or less minutes is just part of the equation, the bigger part of it is that he wore down because he had to do more in those minutes, thanks to Parker's injuries.

So you're blaming injuries and age for other players on Tony as well. Got it. So you're saying that getting the ball in the post every play (which doesn't happen, I thought Manu was also taking some of the load?) is worse on TD's body than running on his aching knees for a whole game. So you're saying that Parker is more injury prone than Manu. Sure. I think at this point, billsmith is actually making more sense to me.

Tony has been playing professional ball since 1999, but would it be any different if he were to have played college ball for 4 years and then gone to the NBA? Either way, Manu has been playing longer, and people seem to be ok with his contract.

Jose_TheGenius 06-07-10 06:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uwe Blab (Post 1206700)
So you're blaming injuries and age for other players on Tony as well. Got it. So you're saying that getting the ball in the post every play (which doesn't happen, I thought Manu was also taking some of the load?) is worse on TD's body than running on his aching knees for a whole game. So you're saying that Parker is more injury prone than Manu. Sure. I think at this point, billsmith is actually making more sense to me.

Tony has been playing professional ball since 1999, but would it be any different if he were to have played college ball for 4 years and then gone to the NBA? Either way, Manu has been playing longer, and people seem to be ok with his contract.

-just saying if he'd stay healthy in the beginning of the season, the rest of the guys could have less of a load. wouldn't that make sense if Parker was healthy and they had less of a burden?

-have you ever played organized/competitive ball? when you post someone up, that takes a bit out of you, more than let's say pick and pop sort of deal. you're going to run in basketball either way, but if you're gonna get in the paint and try to earn your points (yes there's a reason why they say that phrase if you've ever heard it). couple "running the whole game" with him having to do that on the defensive end also and being posted up against also, yeah that pretty much does it for someone's whole body because you use your lower body for most of the time in basketball. Shaq is a prime example. i always kept hearing him during his playing time in Phoenix that he wouldn't hurt or get injured because running and gunning wouldn't take a lot out of him. he stated grinding it out in the paint, posting up takes a lot more out of you. i know Shaq might not be a popular example, but with his history of injuries, his time in Phoenix is vastly different health wise than his times in Miami or Cleveland validate his claim.

-when did i say Parker was more injury prone than Manu? lol come on now, you're just trying to argue. i said that Parker tends to get hurt in the beginning of the season, puts his burden on the shoulders of the other Big 2. Manu, on the other hand, gets hurt during the late part of the season, which validates my comment about how you always remember Manu's injuries because they're late in the season and not Parker's because they're early in the season.

-by "people" you mean Spurs fans then yes. who's the most talked about Spur? who's the most popular Spur right now? Manu Ginobili! it was a marketing and basketball move to give him that contract. if he left, because of his popularity, San Antonio would riot (or get horribly depressed). if Parker leaves, he's just another good player leaving. he'll be missed no doubt, but as far as popularity/influence, he can't match up to Manu.

-would it have been different if he went to college for 4 years here and then played NBA ball? of course it would. because he'd be American and wouldn't care about the Olympics like other countries do, which would mean no early injuries with the national team.

so i'll be awaiting your next answer on how you completely miss everything i say :smirk

tabspur 06-07-10 09:05 PM

If Tony's in his prime, and Manu's past his, it certainly doesn't speak well for Tony. Even at Manu's age, he is infinitely more valuable to the Spurs success than Tony is. There is a reason at the end of every game the ball is in Manu's hands a good 95% of the time. And, he brings all the intangibles that any franchise would welcome. He touches the game in ways that few players ever do. By the way, Manu is less than a year older than Kobe. And his game is less predicated on playing above the rim. He will still be effective at an older age. And as Jose so validly points out, from a marketing standpoint, its not even close in terms of value to the franchise. The Spurs are, in fact, in the business of putting butts in the seats. I'm not saying we get rid of Tony, just that Manu is far more valuable to the Spurs. Whereas the Spurs had no choice but to extend Manu, I feel they have some options to explore as far as getting something valuable in return for Parker.

billsmith3503 06-08-10 06:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by katyspursfan (Post 1206698)
Perhaps this is the season that the FO and Parker agree that summers are a time for rest. Parker is probably moving into the 'career extension' phase of his life. He has agreed to not play for the French team this year. Things may change next summer.

There were no complaints about Timmy after he suffered from plantar fas... Since then, the training staff has had more experience with it. They have also altered summer training regimens for Timmy, along with strongly suggesting that players do not play for the national teams. Players are now listening.

This leaves you with a sprained ankle suffered in the summer play, and a hip flexor. There really is no way to infer that this season's injuries are the start of a trend. Parker is most likely on the downhill side of his career. After the 2007 season, it's not probable that you get better. However, he has more potential to have a career year than any of him, Manu or Duncan. That would put him back at his peak.

Duncan's been on the downhill side for 5-8 years already. There has been no call to unload him for potential to help usher in the post-Duncan era. To trade Parker for potential, or let him leave via free agency is silly. You extend his contract for 4-5 years. Really good point guards and big men are tough to get. You hold on to them.

Ummm Duncan's been on the downward side for 5-8 years???? You say some stupid stuff. Timmy won 2 MVP's after your alleged downward slide began. Duh.

You say he has more potential to have a career year than Duncan or Manu- but it was Parker that lost his starting job this year and Manu who got an extension. So hopefully this career year your describing will be in Toronto. As far away from our Airport as we can get him.

Spurd_On 06-08-10 09:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by billsmith3503 (Post 1206828)

- but it was Parker that lost his starting job this year and Manu who got an extension. So hopefully this career year your describing will be in Toronto. As far away from our Airport as we can get him.

I'm on the fence over the question of what kind of year Parker will have with the Spurs. Obviously he was a physical trainwreck this past season due in part to summer play and there is no doubt it had negative consequences for the team but to lump Manu's extension into the same sentence with Parker being benched is anything but a fair analogy.

Tony was back and starting when his hand was broken with less than a month left in the season. There was not enough time to work him back into the starting line up.

billsmith3503 06-08-10 12:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spurd_On (Post 1206832)
I'm on the fence over the question of what kind of year Parker will have with the Spurs. Obviously he was a physical trainwreck this past season due in part to summer play and there is no doubt it had negative consequences for the team but to lump Manu's extension into the same sentence with Parker being benched is anything but a fair analogy.

Tony was back and starting when his hand was broken with less than a month left in the season. There was not enough time to work him back into the starting line up.


Wow you're not paying attention.
A) Tony Parker said himself that he felt that Manu's extension had implications on his own contract situation.

B) Parker was benched because the Spurs played better without him than they did with him-- not because he needed "to work back into the lineup"

Record when Parker went out: 11-5
Record after Parker came back: 7-9

Nuff said.

Jose_TheGenius 06-08-10 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by katyspursfan (Post 1206698)
Duncan's been on the downhill side for 5-8 years already.

8 years would be 2002 from right now, so you'd discount that 2003 domination he had and the 2005 Finals MVP lol i'm sure you mean 1-3 years he's been on a down side

katyspursfan 06-08-10 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jose_TheGenius (Post 1206841)
8 years would be 2002 from right now, so you'd discount that 2003 domination he had and the 2005 Finals MVP lol i'm sure you mean 1-3 years he's been on a down side

What I'm saying is that once you peak, you are on the downside. Kind of a definition of 'peak' thing. Doesn't mean you suck. And with such a high peak, a slow descent can last damn near a decade.

If you put Timmy's peak in the '02-'03 range (MVP seasons), then the downside started in the '03-'04 season. Not 1-3 years ago.
Manu could have easily walked away with the '05 NBA Finals MVP. He didn't, but it wasn't like Duncan dominated the Finals.
Hence, the 5-8 year downside range.

Timmy's been diminished in the last 3 years. Still damn good, but not nearly as good as he's been.

To get back to the point I was making, Parker's peak may have been the '07 playoffs. It's plausible that he exceeds that performance this year. Not likely, but more likely than either Manu or Duncan having their respective career year.

And, to answer a point that Selective Bill brought up, seems it's been years since Manu lost his starting job and Parker got his extension. Both have done well since then.

Jose_TheGenius 06-08-10 06:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by katyspursfan (Post 1206855)
Selective Bill

new nickname? will it stick? lol

i always pictured Bill as Mr. Bill

http://tvrecappersanonymous.files.wo...03/mr-bill.jpg

i agree with your post though, once you peak it's downside BUT what's kept Duncan still really relevant was his changing of his game.

Parker, though, hasn't changed his game. he hasn't tried to improve any since his 2007 Finals. by now, you'd think he'd be more reliable on his 3 pointers since he got a mid range jumper down pat or worked on his assists. he's still the same Parker from 2007. hell i think he's still the same Parker from 2005 because the Suns gave him that mid range jumper at that time, so he had it. i still stand that Parker had the match up in the Finals, that gave him the Finals MVP. but i honestly think he's still the same Parker he's always been and has not improved any after 2005, that's what i think is making his "downhill slide" more noticeable and it's being more of a liability for us right now.

Spurd_On 06-08-10 06:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by billsmith3503 (Post 1206838)
Wow you're not paying attention.
A) Tony Parker said himself that he felt that Manu's extension had implications on his own contract situation.

B) Parker was benched because the Spurs played better without him than they did with him-- not because he needed "to work back into the lineup"

Record when Parker went out: 11-5
Record after Parker came back: 7-9

Nuff said.

I haven't as yet read the article where Tony Parker mentions that Manu's extension has negative implications or positive ones. I guess he must have mentioned they were negative.

I should have read the article where someone from the Spurs coaching staff mentions that Parker was benched because of the Spurs record with or without him. I will try to pay more attention next time.

Jose_TheGenius 06-08-10 09:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spurd_On (Post 1206861)
I should have read the article where someone from the Spurs coaching staff mentions that Parker was benched because of the Spurs record with or without him. I will try to pay more attention next time.

i think what he meant by that (because it sounds like a negative) is that Parker got benched because the starters created chemistry that Pop didn't wanna ruin (even though he did it when he started all our good players).

billsmith3503 06-09-10 08:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by katyspursfan (Post 1206855)
What I'm saying is that once you peak, you are on the downside. Kind of a definition of 'peak' thing. Doesn't mean you suck. And with such a high peak, a slow descent can last damn near a decade.

If you put Timmy's peak in the '02-'03 range (MVP seasons), then the downside started in the '03-'04 season. Not 1-3 years ago.
Manu could have easily walked away with the '05 NBA Finals MVP. He didn't, but it wasn't like Duncan dominated the Finals.
Hence, the 5-8 year downside range.

Timmy's been diminished in the last 3 years. Still damn good, but not nearly as good as he's been.

To get back to the point I was making, Parker's peak may have been the '07 playoffs. It's plausible that he exceeds that performance this year. Not likely, but more likely than either Manu or Duncan having their respective career year.

And, to answer a point that Selective Bill brought up, seems it's been years since Manu lost his starting job and Parker got his extension. Both have done well since then.

So Kate Longoria agrees that Parker is on the downside, but still would extend him a 6 year deal.... I guess you're just minding your community property so I cant fault you.

In my mind when you have a one trick pony whose one trick is his speed at getting to the rim-- and he loses that because he's tore up and has too many miles-- you don't give him a 6 year deal keeping him on the roster until he's 35.

Can't pass, can't shoot a 3-- whats he going to do at 35? He aint Steve Nash.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:18 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.7.4


Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0