State of the Spurs (Ambassador Post)

by HurraKane212 on Sep 16, 2009 7:21 AM PDT

Last time I talked about the Spurs, things looked rather bleak going into the new season. Manu was injured, Timmy closed out the season on bad knees, and it looked like they might try for a big time free agent in '10, sacrificing '09. My how things have changed.

Obviously, the Spurs traded for Richard Jefferson, giving up virtually nothing to do so. He provides an athletic scorer on the wing who can take some of the pressure off if Manu is injured. Also, the theory goes, now that he's playing for a contender again, perhaps he will start playing defense. RJeff is currently injured, thumb got dislocated, but x-rays are negative and he should only miss training camp. Spurs fans are pretty optimistic about Jefferson.

RE: Bowen, most will miss him, some vote good riddance. He's a polarizing figure here too, even if more people like him.

The Spurs also drafted Dejuan Blair, and most people are pretty jazzed about that. Between Blair, McDyess, and the development of Mahinmi, they think the front court will be OK.

They are also watching Les Bleus, because of Mahinmi, Parker, and De Colo. They are mostly cool with Parker's up and down performance as long as he isn't injured. They are somewhat high on De Colo as well. I think they wish they had Batum too...

Spurs fans are expecting a good season. They expect to contend with LA for the top seed, though many think that with Pop's regular season strategy, they may sacrifice seeding for resting the starters. Here in San Antonio, it doesn't really count until the playoffs.

Well, that's the current state of the Spurs and the Spurs fanbase here in south TX, if anything develops, I'll let you know.

Tweet Comment 28 comments | 8 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Jefferson was as good of pick up for them as it was for the Bucks to get rid of him.

The poor Bucks (my ambassadorship) keep getting maligned for dumping Jefferson for monetary reasons. But that’s like maligning Portland for dumping Zack Randolph for two players we let walk. Bucks GM John Hammond has been given the green light to rebuild from the ground up instead of trying to simply reach the playoffs year after year. I wouldn’t be surprised to see Michael Redd moved for scraps if possible. Jefferson was not in the long term plans, nor should he have been.

Still Jefferson is put into a good position by going to San Antonio. He doesn’t have to “be the man” because he can’t. It’s like asking Outlaw to “be the man.” He’s a good player at what he does, but is not the player to build the team around. The spurs needed what Jefferson gives, and Jefferson needed a place where he could be who he is. And the Bucks needed to start making room for a multi-year rebuild without financial albatrosses around their necks.

The Jefferson move was good for both teams, Spurs short-tern, Bucks long-term. This makes the San Antonio a team to be reckoned with this season, and maybe even next. Ride the train as far as it will go, and only when it’s done can one adequately rebuild.

Looking forward to the season. I want it to start now.

μὴ φοβοῦ, μόνον πίστευε.

Blazersedge.com || New to Blazers' Edge?

by T Darkstar on Sep 16, 2009 7:40 AM PDT reply actions

So we could have used Raef and gotten Jefferson?

"Goals are good. Plans are better." -Ben.

by Sabonis4Ever on Sep 16, 2009 3:13 PM PDT up reply actions

I think it was quite likely that is was possible.

There’s definitine, KP fashion.

It’s also likely that Milwaukee believed that it was fighting for a playoff spot at the trade deadline. The price may have been higher. And we would not have been able to get Miller. Plus what would we have done with yet another wing? Still doesn’t explain The Turkoglu Tribulations™ though.

μὴ φοβοῦ, μόνον πίστευε.

Blazersedge.com || New to Blazers' Edge?

by T Darkstar on Sep 16, 2009 3:42 PM PDT up reply actions

definitine = definitive

μὴ φοβοῦ, μόνον πίστευε.

Blazersedge.com || New to Blazers' Edge?

by T Darkstar on Sep 16, 2009 3:42 PM PDT up reply actions

Maybe but...

If he got Jefferson, how would we improve players at the SG and SF position while still keeping him happy with enough minutes? Portland has young talent that needs to improve, and it doesn’t need to load up on players like Jefferson.

by Cheese Is Yellow on Sep 16, 2009 5:21 PM PDT up reply actions

I thought this was interesting:

http://www.fannation.com/truth_and_rumors/view/119052-spurs-chasing-greek-center

I don’t know anything about the guy, but it would be a classic Spurs move to bring over a guy like that who contributes big minutes immediately.

by matthewcc on Sep 16, 2009 8:09 AM PDT reply actions

He is rather a PF in the NBA than a true C

Talented and bulky, but nothing sensational. He got dominated in the Euroleague Final 4 semifinals by a draft pick of the Wolves (Pekovic, who is a poor man’s Darko). But experienced enough so his learning curve in the NBA will be manageable.

There's Gotta Be More To Life

by Norsktroll on Sep 16, 2009 2:17 PM PDT up reply actions

But Olympiakos has billionaire owners with no salary cap

So if they want him they will simply offer more money then the Spurs can offer. Have the Spurs used their MLE?

The Greeks are reportedly threatening the European salary structure alrready by buying whomever they wish at inflated prices.

I just listen for Casey. His voice gives me tingles. —Dave

by lee3022 on Sep 16, 2009 8:42 PM PDT up reply actions

This rumor is from June. The Spurs pursued Bourousis for a while, but he re-signed with Olympiacos. For some reason, news outlets picked up the old rumor this week.

ACLs are like crutches. They’re only for the weaklings who can’t get along without them. -jollyrogerwilco

by Tim C. on Sep 17, 2009 2:55 PM PDT up reply actions

Is Dave going to reset the ambassadors?

It got to the point where I just gave up going over to BaB. After the Blazers kicked their butt they told me to go away.

by tominhawaii on Sep 16, 2009 8:18 AM PDT reply actions

I kind of hope so.

My internship in Milwaukee is done, and I’m back in Indiana. Though I’m not that interested in Pacer basketball.

μὴ φοβοῦ, μόνον πίστευε.

Blazersedge.com || New to Blazers' Edge?

by T Darkstar on Sep 16, 2009 8:40 AM PDT up reply actions

I'll do San Antonio again if Dave wants, I'm still here

2 more years at least.

Come on you gotta listen unto me,
lay off that whiskey and let that cocaine be. ~Johnny Cash

by HurraKane212 on Sep 16, 2009 9:07 AM PDT reply actions

Rj is deceptively not athletic

keep in mind he was playing with jason kidd in the years he made money and was scoring 19 a game on a really bad team.

to be honest… my prediction is that he becomes just like every other top 2 or 3 guy on a bad team that moves to a great team as the 4 or 5th best player and everyone gets excited about it but he turns out to be just another role player.

ala jason richardson on the suns.

by mandoman10 on Sep 16, 2009 9:58 AM PDT reply actions

that's a good take

another way to look at this is to take the Blazer’s top 3 or 4 guy (Rudy or Outlaw) and project their impact on a bad team. They would likely make a huge impact. However, turn around and put them back on a good team like the Blazers, Spurs, Lakers, etc and they become what they currently are for us.

It’s rare when you find a good team with four players who are considered top level at their position. Kareem, Worthy, Magic and…Who? Jordan, Pippen, and…Who? Duncan, Parker, Ginobili and…JEFFERSON?? I don’t think so.

by mlsinpdx on Sep 16, 2009 10:46 AM PDT reply actions

> It’s rare when you find a good team with four players who are considered top level at their position. Kareem, Worthy, Magic and…Who?

Michael Cooper, Byron Scott, Mychal Thompson.

> Jordan, Pippen, and…Who?

you got me there

> Duncan, Parker, Ginobili and…JEFFERSON?? I don’t think so.

I hope not! Sorry Spurs fan! – Elgin

Without you out there, we're nowhere here

by 22baylor on Sep 17, 2009 2:51 PM PDT up reply actions

Jordan, Pippen, and.... Rodman?

by Falcao on Sep 18, 2009 9:58 AM PDT up reply actions

appreciate this!

Blazers Edge.com

by Ben Golliver on Sep 16, 2009 10:48 AM PDT reply actions

I think Jefferson was a great pick-up for them

And I am going to have to respectfully disagree that Milwaukee was right in giving him up. I mean giving up your best player in his prime, when your team only missed the play-offs due to injury, and then adding Brandon Jennings, renouncing Villanueva AND Sessions, but not adding any young talent is not the way to build a winning program.

Luc Mbah-a-moute hopefully will be great, but it seems like he would benefit from the veterans on his team which would allow him to learn the game, rather than just being forced into a starting position. Joe Alexander is the same way, now he’s behind Amir Johnson instead of Charlie V? It doesn’t seem like either of these players are ready for starter minutes, and this seems rushing it.

Then the addition of Jennings, who is going to be battling with Ridnour for a starting spot? This is a guy who definitely has some maturing to do, and having a good veteran or a true starting PG like Sessions, would go a long way with his development. As it is I think he’s going to look at Ridnour, and ask why he isn’t starting because he’s clearly a better player…

Jefferson, Sessions, and Villanueva all ended up in better positions, but I never like it when teams seem to disrespect their fans like this. “Well we weren’t going to win a championship so we blew it up”. And how are you planning on winning a championship with you current roster? What are your plans to build a winning team, is it around Luc, Joe, and Brandon? Because I don’t think any of these players have shown that they are better or are going to be better than the people that they are replacing (with the possible exception of a matured controlled Jennings).

The Spurs now get a player in his prime who can and does score against double teams, if he doesn’t command them in San Antonio than all the better, if he does he can pass to an open Manu, Tony, or TD (and whoever else is out there can shoot the three)? That’s kind of sick how good that line-up is, and will be. I’ve trash-talked the Spurs before about their age, but just looking at the possible floor combinations kind of makes the reality sink in, they’re going to be good, really good, and that Jefferson trade is exactly why.

You're saying that they look like they're giving it their all. And you know why they look that way? Because they're bad, and it literally takes them the maximum physical effort to accomplish basic baseball tasks like throwing the ball from short to first. When David Eckstein throws the ball to first base, he has to wind up like a shot-putter, spin around forty-three times, and launch it at an angle 89 degrees from the horizontal. Afterwards, he undergoes an IV drip for a fortnight and he's so out of breath that he requires several months of acupuncture to regain the power of speech. For this we laud him. -Junior of Deadspin on 'scrappy' players

by TheOdenator on Sep 16, 2009 11:13 AM PDT reply actions

I disagree with your disagreement!

I think the Bucks did the only thing they could this offseason. Jefferson’s contract is horrible, he is not worth it so he had to be moved, and while I would have wanted more back for him in terms of picks/young players, if that was the best deal they could get then I am fine with that. Charlie V. is not worth the contract he just signed with Detroit so that was a good one to let go. Sessions seems to be cheap to retain, but they did just draft Jennings who should be given every opportunity to start right away if they are serious about rebuilding. They need to find out asap if this kid has it and can be their PG in the future.

I think the Bucks didn’t do what many bad teams do, which is make the mistake of keeping their “good” players for “bad” money. The Blazers did this with Randolph, Miles, and Ratliff just a few short years ago and they regretted it from almost the moment the ink dried. The GM of a bad team needs to make difficult decisions on young players when they are up for their first big payday, giving the wrong player big money can set back a teams rebuilding plans by years. For the Bucks to rebuild and challenge in the East, they need to draft well, and sign players who can help teach their young guys the ropes of the NBA. It would have helped if they could have traded Charlie V and Sessions, maybe getting some draft picks in return, but that is just crying over spilled milk now.

I guess my point is, as a fan of a team, I would applaud my GM and owner for not resigning a player like Charlie V or Sessions, as neither of them are players you can build a team around, but both wanted pretty big money for what their positions on the team warranted.

Ben II Blazersedge.com || New to Blazers' Edge?

by usmcr3049 on Sep 16, 2009 12:31 PM PDT up reply actions

Great points.

I mean you’re totally right, these guys aren’t worth their contracts, so it probably was the correct move in letting these players go.

Maybe what I am more hung up on is what do the have to rebuild, and what do they have to show that they are going in a direction that will ultimately make them a better team in the future than they were last year? But yea, once again you’re definitely right in pointing out that this is clearly a sign of the team starting to make the correct moves, and that in the future they will hopefully continue to make the right moves and get the players who will be able to make a difference for them.

And that by signing these players to long term contracts it would just inhibit their ability in the future, when their team in last year’s incarnation was not set to win it all in the near future(read: length of those guys’ contracts).

It just kind of stinks that they had to give up their best players in their prime and their young replacements don’t currently show the ability to become as good of players as the ones they are replacing. But its true that this is a good first step, what happens from here will be really interesting.

by TheOdenator on Sep 16, 2009 1:02 PM PDT up reply actions

None of the draft picks appeared central to an organization

so the only way to rebuild was to tank and get a very high pick in the coming year, and start the rebuild then. For now, they need to develop. It’s a shame they couldn’t get more picks 2-3 years out which might or might not turn out to be high picks.

by lurtsman on Sep 16, 2009 7:21 PM PDT up reply actions

Sessions is a fantastic player who they could have had for 4 years and 16 million. He is like a high draft pick… young, very high PER, good character guy.

I find it hard to let him go.

"If the Lakers are Hollywood, then we are South Central." - Clipper fan.

by Cablinasian on Sep 16, 2009 1:09 PM PDT up reply actions

That one confused me as well.

Though Skiles hasn’t ever really been a Sessions fan, and Skiles, as coach, has a lot of say in these kind of things. Not the final say, but enough to bend Hammond’s ear. Could come back to bite them. Could prove to be a reasonable move. But what it does say is that the Bucks are making a real commitment to Brandon Jennings. Or at least giving him the chance to make his own destiny.

μὴ φοβοῦ, μόνον πίστευε.

Blazersedge.com || New to Blazers' Edge?

by T Darkstar on Sep 16, 2009 1:30 PM PDT up reply actions

I agree

at that price I would have kept Sessions. But what this tells me is that they believe Jennings is their guy, and Sessions wants to be the guy, instead of the back up. So there is no use is giving him even $4million per season if he is going to be a headache as a backup. They already have Luc R, to back up the point or start if Jennings doesn’t do well right away. I think a trade of Luc to open more minutes for Sessions should have been made, but once again Skiles seems to like him alot, which is part of their problem, if they are bending to his will then Skiles has to go. This team is about setting up for the future right now, not trying to win now which is what most coaches are about, Skiles included. Playing Luc over Sessions last year was a joke, hopefully he doesn’t make the same mistake this year with Jennings.

Ben II Blazersedge.com || New to Blazers' Edge?

by usmcr3049 on Sep 17, 2009 12:36 PM PDT up reply actions

Joe Alexander was picked before Bayless

And may well be a more productive player in the long run

by southern oregon on Sep 16, 2009 9:53 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs

I think they wish they had Batum too

::nods in agreement::

ACLs are like crutches. They’re only for the weaklings who can’t get along without them. -jollyrogerwilco

by Tim C. on Sep 17, 2009 2:47 PM PDT reply actions

See, the Spurs can't be our #1 rival...

Nowhere near enough hatred… We couldn’t even get 3 comments about the Spurs before this post was hijacked by Buck fans..

Blazers: RUN away with the title!

KP: Please don't trade the next decade's Scottie Pippen (Batum), Spanish Larry Bird (Rudy), Bill Russell (GO) or Captain BRoy - at least until they 3-peat..

by Visionary2 on Sep 19, 2009 10:24 AM PDT reply actions