I still don't understand where all of these big name free agents are coming from that San Antonio is going to sign in the next year or two to make Tim Duncan want to stay. Who exactly are the Spurs looking at with this grand design of theirs? It is not like the rest of the Spurs look like a competent team, ala Sacramento. They are a one trick pony surrounded by old men. Unless AD just blows up, there is no one around come contract time to make Tim want to stay, yet he is good enough with the geriatrics to take the team to the playoffs and eliminate good draft poicks from the equation as well. Face it, when Tim looks around and sees all of the old geezers on the verge of retirement, he will jump the Admirals sinking ship, and the Rockets will be standing with open arms to greet him.
'Cept they won't have any cap money for him, not to resign Franchise as well. The Magic will have the room to get Duncan, though, with no big contracts coming up due in that offseason. After all, why else do you think they'd be planning around that offseason?
This year, the Spurs will be stuck in a state of "upper-mediocrity". What I mean by that is that they will have just enough to have a solid regular season, but will quickly fade in the playoffs. They are the new Utah Jazz. And it is all downhill from here.
They are the new Utah Jazz. And it is all downhill from here. Yeah, we all know that Tim Duncan is a perennial playoff choker, right?
They've been to the WCFs twice and won a world championship with Duncan, they are not the Utah Jazz. Sure they lost to the Lakers, so did everybody else in the league. The ironic thing is the Rockets were in the same boat with aging players, but look where they are now. The Spurs actually have someone to build around. If the Spurs have a solid season, and sign some quality players with their exceptions in a year or two this will disappear. Derek Anderson bolting hurt though. Either way, I'm happy the Rockets future is set!
But that's what the Mavs thought with the three J's, the Nets thought with Marbury and Van Horn, and the Timberwolves thought with Gugliotta, Marbury, and Garnett. Countless other cases as well... ...these weren't just teams with a good rookie. These teams all had "can't miss" players who had experienced some success in the NBA. Yet the teams busted, due to chemistry, injuries, underachievement, etc. Am I optimistic? Yes. But a little wary as well.
I think the Spurs are the second best team in the NBA, and I don't really see how anybody can disagree with that assessment. All the Spurs need is an injury to Shaq or Kobe, and the title is up for grabs.
The Magic aren't the only ones. Charlotte, Dallas, Indiana, and Washington will all be sniffing around as well (and I think all will have more cap room than Orlando, and be less likely to expect him to play C).
3 words, sign and trade. If the Rockets pakage Eddie with Glen Rice, I don't think the Spurs will be able to turn them down, at least if EG plays well the next couple of years. Also, the Rockets can exercise a team option on Francis and give him the big money the following year. I am sure Steve wouldn't mind holding off on his payday if it brought Duncan and an excellent shot at the title to the team. Regardless of all this, my question was more about how the Spurs plan to keep Duncan for all of the Spurs fans that have said time and again that they can make roster moves so that he will stay. (MrSpur)
Well, I (and many others) happen to think that Chris Webber, Stojakovic, Bibby, Christie, and Divac + a good bench are better than Duncan, Drobb, Smith, Daniels, and Bowen + a crappy bench. In fact, its substantially better. The Kings improved a great deal. The Spurs got older and thinner.
The Spurs got older and thinner. How do you figure the Spurs got thinner? They lost Derek Anderson, Avery Johnson, Sean Elliott, and Samaki Walker. They got Steve Smith, Bruce Bowen, Stephen Jackson, Tony Parker, and Cherokee Parks. I won't argue the older point because of Steve Smith (who still isn't that old), but I like the Spurs depth a lot more this year than last year. Hydra, So we're already planning on trading EG for Duncan? I highly doubt the Rockets would make such a move two years from now. Assuming Eddie fits in team chemistry well, he has the potential to be extremely dominant in his own right, just like Duncan. Chemistry means more to the Rockets than building the All-Star team, as evidenced by our pursuit of Mo instead of Webber this summer. I think the Spurs are the second best team in the NBA, and I don't really see how anybody can disagree with that assessment. All the Spurs need is an injury to Shaq or Kobe, and the title is up for grabs You can put me on record as saying this now: the Lakers will not win a championship next season, even if Kobe and Shaq are healthy all season long. I'll be happy to make a bet with someone, if they wish. I'm not saying the Spurs will, but I seriously doubt that the Lakers will have all the breaks such as chemistry going for them again. Imho, the Bucks, Spurs, or Kings will rise to the occasion and knock off the Lakers. And perhaps even the Blazers, if they can get it together again.
TheCat: Of course they got an equal number of new players as they gave up. I, and most other people in the world who carea bout the NBA, consider those players to be of an inferior quality. Obviously you do not. Smith isn't ancient in years, but his body's a little gimpy.
What we are dealing with here is some fuzzy math. <u><b>Losses</b></u> 195 lbs - Derek Anderson 180 lbs - Avery Johnson 220 lbs - Sean Elliott 250 lbs - Samaki Walker ================== 845 lbs - Total Weight Loss <u><b>Gains</b></u> 177 lbs - Tony Parker 221 lbs - Steve Smith 240 lbs - Cherokee Parks 200 lbs - Bruce Bowen 218 lbs - Stephen Jackson ================== 1056 lbs - Total Weight Gain Clearly, the Spurs team did not get thinner. God...when will this offseason end.
I, and most other people in the world who carea bout the NBA, consider those players to be of an inferior quality. Such as who? If you watched the Spurs much last year, you'd know that Avery Johnson, Sean Elliott, and Samaki Walker were not instrumental to that team's success. Bruce Bowen, Stephen Jackson, Tony Parker, and Cherokee Parks imho are much better, not worse, than the 3 mentioned. The three they lost had bigger names-- and over their careers had done a lot more. But we're strictly talking about from last season to this season, and none of those 3 guys was a significant contributor on that Spurs team last year.
You know, now that I think about it, I agree that the Kings are going to be very tough. I have always thought that Jason Williams is horribly overrated, and Bibby is a great classic point guard. However, I think the Spurs got better, not worse. With the new rules, Steve Smith will thrive in my opinion. Also, Pat Riley called Bowen the best perimeter defender in the league, and he will be a great help to the Spurs as well. I hope that the Spurs and Kings end up playing eachother in the playoffs, because that will be a great series.
Bowen's an excellent defender. But overall matchup advantages are determined by comparative productivity. Bowen has absolutely no O... check out his fg % from last year. Might give you a good laugh. If Bowen scores 8pts and Kobe scores 26, the Spurs are worse off than if a guy with better O but weaker defense scored 15 and let Kobe have 30. It's harder to make a differense on defense than offense, imo. There's simply less difference between an average defender and a great one, especially for swingmen than there is between an average offensive player and a great one. I do allow that great defensive big men are worth considerably more.
The difference between those teams and the Magic is that the Magic have already been through this once and darn near landed Duncan, were it not for his girlfriend (who will be out of the way by then ).....by that time comes, they won't need him to play center if Hunter develops. Indiana would need him to play center because of O'Neal. Dallas will only be able to complete a sign and trade, and I don't see how SA would take back overpayed players in return. Charlotte has never payed any free agent the money to stay, yet alone sign with them. Washington could be a different story, but it remains to be seen what happens between now and then.
I don't understand this recent, "I am going to start a thread about how much the Spurs suck" trend. Don't we get a new one every week? Then the defenders come out, the haters respond, etc, etc, ad naseum. This thread, however, does have one redeeming quality the others have not had: Raven's post. So, uh...continue. BTW: The Spurs will still be a top team in the league. Beyond that, I cannot tell how well they will do until they actually start playing.
The Magic will have roughly 32 million commited in the salaries of three players in 03/04. (Hill, McGrady and Outlaw) If they exercise the team option on Miller, the Magic will be at about 35.4 million. Hunter puts them at 36.8 million for 5 players. A few drafted players over the next two seasons puts them easily over 40 million. Explain your math on cap space for Duncan as a free agent because I don't see it. Mango
Yeah, I'm sure the guilt factor will mean a lot more than Duncan's assessment of the environment where he's going to play the next seven years. Can you say, big if?? Since O'Neal's a few years older than Hunter, won't he fill out sooner? Dallas will have only a few million dollars more in cap commitments than Orlando, with Bradley/Eschmeyer, Nowitzki, Finley, and Nash just waiting for a top PF to join them. And if they do have to go the sign-and-trade route, Nowitzki isn't a bad starting offer, is it? (Of course, if Dallas is under the cap, they wouldn't necessarily have to match Duncan's salary in a trade.) But they have shelled out money to give extensions to players they wanted to keep, such as Mashburn and David Wesley. Even assuming they max out Baron Davis, they'll have only $33M in salary commitments -- i.e., a few million less than Orlando -- with a full lineup of Mashburn, Wesley, Davis, and Jamaal Magloire (plus a couple of bench players) all under contract. And, say, isn't Charlotte rather close to where Duncan played his college ball?
