NBA Free Agency

[WoodysGirl]

 

[bounce]

i dont know about gino but im pretty certain duncan and parker have always been spurs. Not like where the heat went out and got their guys from free agency. With the exception of wade. Thats why its different to me.

Now ill admit im not 100 percent certain bosh wasnt always with the heat cause i really dont remember but i seem to remember him coming in with Lebron to form the big three.

Manu was drafted by the Spurs with the 57th pick in 1999 and finally came over in 2002. They drafted Parker, Splitter, Duncan, Manu, Kawhi (traded George Hill for the Indy's draft rights - it was a pre-arranged trade, so SA, in essence, drafted him), C. Joseph. Traded for Bonner (Nesterovic) and Daye (DeColo). Signed Belinelli, Baynes and Ayers as FAs. Signed Green off FA (and waived him twice!) and claimed Diaw and Mills midseason off waivers.

Bosh played in Toronto for 7 years and then came to the Heat.

 

[TellerMorrow34]

Manu was drafted by the Spurs with the 57th pick in 1999 and finally came over in 2002. They drafted Parker, Splitter, Duncan, Manu, Kawhi (traded George Hill for the Indy's draft rights - it was a pre-arranged trade, so SA, in essence, drafted him), C. Joseph. Traded for Bonner (Nesterovic) and Daye (DeColo). Signed Belinelli, Baynes and Ayers as FAs. Signed Green off FA (and waived him twice!) and claimed Diaw and Mills midseason off waivers.

Bosh played in Toronto for 7 years and then came to the Heat.

Ok. That's what I thought I remembered.

Completely different situations because the Spurs built their big three from drafting. The Heat went out and signed big name Free Agents to get their big three and stuff. Completely different styles of building a team.

 

[casmith07]

Stein is reporting Nowitzki re-upped with the Mav's for 3yrs/$25M. That's not a typo.

That's ridiculous. I thought it was going to be 3/$30M. $10M a year. Wow.

Makes Dwyane Wade's 2/$31.1M look even more ridiculous from a talent and health standpoint.

 

[casmith07]

joey---
Heat: Can't see them as being very good but I know others like them.
Don't see PG, SG, or C as anything but below average, SF and PF both slightly above avg. Granger hasn't played in two years and two teams have basically given up on him.

Love: Still think he ends up in CLE. Rox have nothing to trade for him. GSW in play but think CLE is top possiblity by far.

Chi: think they've improved a lot and should be fine overall. Rose a wildcard there but a solid playoff team without him.


For me after expected moves:
East:
1. CLE
2. INDY
3. CHI
4. WAS
5. MIA
6. TOR
7. BRK
8. CHA

West:
1. SAS
2. OKC
3. LAC
4. DAL
5. GSW
6. POR
7. HOU
8. MEM

I think the Heat still can win 50 games.

I think the Pacers took a giant step back with the loss of Stevenson, even if he's a tool.

I think Cleveland will be good, but they can be beaten by any of the first 5 teams in the east and maybe Toronto.

Washington will be better than people think.

Chicago will be worse. I just don't see Derrick Rose coming back healthy enough to be a contributor, and he's not a true point guard. And that team still can't shoot, and they still have Boozer.

Toronto is going to be good. DeMar DeRozan still needs a haircut.

Brooklyn might be addition by subtraction without that clown Jason Kidd.

Charlotte is certainly intriguing. Atlanta could sneak in there too.

In the West, I think you've got it all the way there, but I think Dallas is entirely too high. Put them in the 6 spot, and move Portland up to 3 or 4.

 

[JoeyBoy718]

I think the Heat still can win 50 games.

I think the Pacers took a giant step back with the loss of Stevenson, even if he's a tool.

I think Cleveland will be good, but they can be beaten by any of the first 5 teams in the east and maybe Toronto.

Washington will be better than people think.

Chicago will be worse. I just don't see Derrick Rose coming back healthy enough to be a contributor, and he's not a true point guard. And that team still can't shoot, and they still have Boozer.

Toronto is going to be good. DeMar DeRozan still needs a haircut.

Brooklyn might be addition by subtraction without that clown Jason Kidd.

Charlotte is certainly intriguing. Atlanta could sneak in there too.

In the West, I think you've got it all the way there, but I think Dallas is entirely too high. Put them in the 6 spot, and move Portland up to 3 or 4.

Chicago amnestied Boozer. And they picked up Pau. I think it's hard to say that Chicago will be worse by getting Rose back (even if he's not the same) and replacing Boozer with Pau.

 

[DFWJC]

Stein is reporting Nowitzki re-upped with the Mav's for 3yrs/$25M. That's not a typo.

If that's true, Dirk is just over-the-top gifting the Mavs.
He could get 16-17mil/year or more on the open market.
He's made his money and is dedicated to Dallas, I know, but that's really charitable.

 

[bounce]

Ok. That's what I thought I remembered.

Completely different situations because the Spurs built their big three from drafting. The Heat went out and signed big name Free Agents to get their big three and stuff. Completely different styles of building a team.

The weird thing about the Spurs is, aside from Green - their entire regular starting lineup is drafted. Parker, Green, Kawhi, Duncan, Splitter. And the argument can be made that Manu slides into that Green spot, because he's only a bench player by design. Green for Manu is the first substitution at about 8 min every game, unless Green starts white-hot.

 

[WoodysGirl]

 

[jterrell]

The weird thing about the Spurs is, aside from Green - their entire regular starting lineup is drafted. Parker, Green, Kawhi, Duncan, Splitter. And the argument can be made that Manu slides into that Green spot, because he's only a bench player by design. Green for Manu is the first substitution at about 8 min every game, unless Green starts white-hot.

Kawhi was obtained via trade tho it did occur on draft night.
Same as Dallas did with Dirk.

 

[jterrell]

Rashard Lewis to Dallas as vet min.
Just a pure shooter as 12th dude.

 

[jterrell]

CAS: That take is sensible and probably popular.
I still think my initial offering holds closer to the truth but a lot of that is based on moves to come.
We've seen Mike Miller choose CLE already. Ray Allen and Love are probably coming soon.
Then at the trade deadline expect CLE can add another solid vet if they desire. Perhaps Lin to play 6th man in CLE.

DAL: Can't move them down myself. Maybe that's homerism but I see this roster:
PG: Devin, Felton, Mekel
SG: Ellis, Ledo
SF: Parsons, Rashard
PF: Dirk, Wright
C: Tyson, G. Smith, Sarge

That's strong. but it very probably gets stronger with future picks, Felton and Wright as very nice trade chips.

Port: I did struggle with where to fit POR. The West is so friggin deep... sheesh. I guess it came down to thinking Lilliard has a small sophomore slump and not trusting that depth. Obviously I laughed at the Kaman move... this guy is most famous for napping mid-game and might be the worst defensive center in the league.

 

[jterrell]

I think you're shortchanging this team. Not only are they "really, really good", but they have THE BEST winning percentage in sports for the past 17 years. Which is when Tim Duncan started there. Not just the best in basketball, in ALL of the 4 major sports! I'd say that's more than "really, really good". They've also consistently made the playoffs in every single season that Duncan's been there. Have any other teams done that (I don't know the answer, so it's a sincere question)? They are the model of consistent excellence.

"Over the 17-year span [since Duncan arrived] San Antonio has posted a 950-396 regular season record, giving the team a winning percentage of .706, which is the best winning percentage in all of professional sports over that span and the best winning percentage over any 17-year span in NBA history."

That quote is from here: http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/stor...tball/nba-duncan-opts-in-will-return-to-spurs

ROFL, again thank you SAS homers for proving my point.
There is no amount of praise the weasels will consider sufficient.

They are the model of consistency and have equaled the Lakers for the most titles in that 17 year span.
But 17 years is a length of time that matters to no one but Spurs fans.

They have not made 4 straight NBA Finals as the LeBron led Heat did nor have they dominated the West.
They've been really, really good which is a completely accurate and honest description of them.
In those 17 years they've made 6 Finals and won 5 of them but they've also had 3 first round exits.

 

[burmafrd]

they are the Indy Colts under Peyton. Every year win 11-12 games and make it to the conf finals and maybe to the champs; win a few. No real difference.

 

[JoeyBoy718]

ROFL, again thank you SAS homers for proving my point.
There is no amount of praise the weasels will consider sufficient.

They are the model of consistency and have equaled the Lakers for the most titles in that 17 year span.
But 17 years is a length of time that matters to no one but Spurs fans.

They have not made 4 straight NBA Finals as the LeBron led Heat did nor have they dominated the West.
They've been really, really good which is a completely accurate and honest description of them.
In those 17 years they've made 6 Finals and won 5 of them but they've also had 3 first round exits.

I agree. They've been consistent over the past 17 years. There's no arguing that. They've always made the playoffs, usually as a high seed, and they usually go pretty far in the playoffs, many times all the way. But they've been more consistent than dominant, if you ask me. They've never won back-to-back and they've never completely destroyed the league. They've never been like the Lakers or Bulls where you just know they're gonna win it all before the season even starts. They usually go sort of under the radar when they win it all. This past year was probably the most dominant year they've ever had and most people still probably had Miami as the favorites. During the Bulls' pair of 3-peats or the Lakers 3-peats, they were never not the favorites.

 

[JoeyBoy718]

they are the Indy Colts under Peyton. Every year win 11-12 games and make it to the conf finals and maybe to the champs; win a few. No real difference.

I couldn't really agree with that. They've won 5 titles and played in 6 finals. The Colts under Peyton went 1 for 2. The biggest difference between the Spurs and the Colts were the Colts would always be the clear favorites and always find a way to lose, while the Spurs were always under the radar and surprised everyone when they won.

 

[RastaRocket]

ROFL, again thank you SAS homers for proving my point.
There is no amount of praise the weasels will consider sufficient.

They are the model of consistency and have equaled the Lakers for the most titles in that 17 year span.
But 17 years is a length of time that matters to no one but Spurs fans.

They have not made 4 straight NBA Finals as the LeBron led Heat did nor have they dominated the West.
They've been really, really good which is a completely accurate and honest description of them.
In those 17 years they've made 6 Finals and won 5 of them but they've also had 3 first round exits.

How many teams have done what they have?

 

[Aggie87]

ROFL, again thank you SAS homers for proving my point.
There is no amount of praise the weasels will consider sufficient.

They are the model of consistency and have equaled the Lakers for the most titles in that 17 year span.
But 17 years is a length of time that matters to no one but Spurs fans.

They have not made 4 straight NBA Finals as the LeBron led Heat did nor have they dominated the West.
They've been really, really good which is a completely accurate and honest description of them.
In those 17 years they've made 6 Finals and won 5 of them but they've also had 3 first round exits.

They've had the best 17 year stretch EVER in NBA History. Meaning NOBODY has ever done that. But you go right ahead and say they're merely "really good".

Apparently the only thing that matters in your mind is Finals trophies. Not sustained excellence.

It's sad you can't discuss something without calling people "weasels" who don't see things the same way you do. In your world there is apparently only black and white, and you are always right. Nobody else can have a differing view.

 

[Silver Surfer]

How many teams have done what they have?

You mean win the draft lottery twice in 10 years when dominant big men were available? Not many.

They were so bad in the mid/late 80's before Robinson, there was talk they were going to move the team. The year before Duncan became available, Robinson and Sean Elliot got hurt and they stunk again (20-62). They had the third worst record, but won the lottery. The odds favored Boston to get the pick, but it went to the Spurs.

The difference for them has been to get Popovich and pick up foreign players late like Parker and Ginobelli.

 

[Risen Star]

I'm not a Spurs fan. They are the team of the last two decades.