From Frank Hughes' latest ESPN column: http://espn.go.com/nba/playoffs2002/columns/hughes_frank/2002/0426/1374395.html I don't know what I find harder to believe - that the Spurs actually rejected this proposal or that Hughes is able to defend them for doing so. He's kidding, right? This isn't about not pursuing aging Antonio Davis because the Rockets aren't yet ready to win - this is flat out rejecting an offer of the 2nd best point guard in the league when you are a contender....<i>because you don't want to trade Malik Rose and Antonio freakin Daniels.</i> I hope this isn't true.
Oh it's true, Cab. The *s only really covet their big men. Over the years guards have changed like the temperature in that "organization".
That's one of those classic trades that on PAPER you think "no way...they'd of won the whole thing"... However, when REALITY is looked at...it takes on a whole new perspective. 1. Antonio Daniels is Tim Duncan's best friend. It's an unwritten rule it seems that 'keep one...keep the other'. 2. Payton has a history of not getting on with players. Bring him in...send Daniels out...and if it back fires, Tim Duncan is GONE. Thus...the real question in that trade would have been "is it worth upsetting and possibly losing Duncan...to get Payton" . The Spurs must have felt it wasn't.
They probably have their sights set on bigger and better things, and I know that sounds a little ridiculous given Payton's talent. However......I really think you'll see Jason Kidd in San Antonio whenever he's able to get out of his current contract. That's really the only plausible explanation I can think of, since the only thing better than getting the second best pg in the league is getting the best point guard in the league. And even though reality and the perception of Spur fan is ever conflicting, I'd hope that their front office is not so myopic that they'd pass up that deal for Payton with the understanding that Kidd wasn't a viable option for them.
I'm confused. For a moment, forget the Spurs and only use Seattle as a reference point. The Sonics had a lottery pick (Radmanovic) and Parker was taken with the last pick in the first round. If the Sonics interest was so great that they would give up Payton, why wouldn't they give up the pick (or Rado) and trade down to get Parker? Something about this doesn't add up for me.
What kind of crack are they smoking!? I don't care if Daniels is Duncan's little brother DO THAT TRADE! It's not often you get a superstar like that. The "Gary Payton doesn't get along with his teammates" thing is blown out of proportion. He's grumpy when he's losing, and great when he's winning, just like Mario Elie. You do that trade, because if there's anybody who's going to stand up to the Lakers it's Gary Payton.
I am glad the Spurs didn't do that trade. Payton and Duncan have a damn good chance to go all the way and I hate the damn Spurs. Wtf were they thinking? Payton is not that old, and anytime you have a chance of adding a top 7 player to your squad you do the trade. Especially one that is riducoulously in your own favor.
