Spurs waive Simmons, sign Chris Quinn
@JMcDonald_SAEN
Pop announces Spurs have waived G/F Bobby Simmons, signed G Chris Quinn. Quinn played w/ Nets last season, spent camp in Philly. #spurs
Well, that's an interesting decision.
over 1 year ago
Tim C.
114 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
This can probably explain it:
Has played with the poise of a much older player since his rookie year.
From DraftExpress.com http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/chris-quinn-1013/#ixzz14QtzKju6
"If an expert says it can't be done, get another expert"
- DBG
Although I dont understand why we need another guy his size. Enough no?
"If an expert says it can't be done, get another expert"
- DBG
Our ball handling was a little ugly the other night when Tony was out. That said, I still didn’t think it was bad enough to get desperate and sign another PG.
And couldn’t we have gotten Jerrells back if we needed another PG?
Hey, if posting a sharp, insightful, yet non-sarcastic comment were that easy, even olf would do it.
Mike Monroe: ...the uninformed presume Parker is expendable.
by freshtunarightofftheboat on Nov 5, 2010 2:17 PM CDT up reply actions
Darn.
Hey, if posting a sharp, insightful, yet non-sarcastic comment were that easy, even olf would do it.
Mike Monroe: ...the uninformed presume Parker is expendable.
by freshtunarightofftheboat on Nov 5, 2010 2:23 PM CDT up reply actions
The release of Simmons means Anderson has won the backup SF spot for the rest of the year (yay!) and that Pop thinks he doesn’t need a situational PF (no more tinyball?). My guess is that the Spurs wanted to give Simmons the chance to catch on with another team, instead of having multiple DNP-CD. However, I don’t get why we signed another guard.
With all due respect, gentlemen, we're not as crazy as she is.
thats what i’m thinking too. Also might mean Gee is a lock?
Rim Rockin' Red Rocket -silverandblack_davis
by SpursfanSteve on Nov 5, 2010 1:44 PM CDT up reply actions
Who knows. We never fucking see him.
I don’t understand this.
"We suck on 'D. Both individually and team-wise, we suck. We're pretty consistent that way. I don't know if I have an answer to that. If I did, we wouldn't suck quite so bad." - Popovich
by Aaron "Hirschof" Preine on Nov 5, 2010 1:53 PM CDT up reply actions
My only thought is that this is a setup to a trade.
But if that was the case, the trade would have happened by now. These things usually occur in rapid succession.
"We suck on 'D. Both individually and team-wise, we suck. We're pretty consistent that way. I don't know if I have an answer to that. If I did, we wouldn't suck quite so bad." - Popovich
by Aaron "Hirschof" Preine on Nov 5, 2010 1:56 PM CDT up reply actions
That’s exactly what I was thinking Hirschof. I was wondering if maybe a point/combo guard is now made available because of this. Trying to understand Pop’s reasoning in these circumstances throws me off a bit. But one could presume..
According to Chris Broussard:
“With the Cleveland Cavaliers looking to move on from the LeBron James Era, clubs are calling about Anderson Varejao, an energetic role player who would help any contender. Portland has interest, and San Antonio, with ex-Cavs GM Danny Ferry now in its front office, is also a team to keep an eye on. After contending for titles the past few seasons, Varejao wouldn’t mind being dealt to an elite club either, according to sources. So stay tuned.”
Maybe there is a trade looming on the horizon?
Okay, I’m just adding fuel to the fire with these thoughts of mine, but one never knows what’s going on in complex mind of CIA Pop.
"He has an innate ability of putting the damn ball in the hole." - Pop on Ginobili
Biggest coach Pop/Tiago Splitter homer on the internet™
by Josh Guyer (completely deck) on Nov 6, 2010 12:39 AM CDT up reply actions 3 recs
I’m glad someone finally jumped on this meme.
by DrumsInTheDeep on Nov 6, 2010 10:51 AM CDT up reply actions
Incredibly reccable.
"A life, Jimmy, you know what that is? It’s what happens while you wait for moments that will never come." - Lester Freamon, The Wire
by silverandblack_davis on Nov 6, 2010 12:17 PM CDT up reply actions
Yes, I agree this means Anderson has won himself a spot in the rotation as RJ 2.0’s backup (even though he also subbed in for Manu in the Suns game). The Spurs are going with two rookies (him and Neal) over the vet… imagine that?! But I guess their play, upside, and young legs decided the issue.
And yes, the Spurs are said to be the kind of team that will release players that they feel are capable of making another team’s rotation, to give them a chance for more playing time than they’ll get with San Antonio. The Jerrells trade to NOOCH was maybe something of that sort.
I believe Pop liked the way Simmons came to the Spurs’ training camp without a guarantee and liked his character and coachability (i.e. work-ethic), so I’m at a loss to explain why they would cut him loose without a net. It would be more in character for the Spurs to have his next gig lined up for him, either via trade, D-League, or a friendly European club (and I doubt D-League is a possibility since their draft is over and the Spurs can’t assign Simmons directly).
If there was going to be a trade involving Quinn, why wouldn’t Simmons be included in the deal? And why couldn’t the team wanting Quinn just sign him outright, the way the Spurs apparently did?
And yeah, getting another guard for a F/G is curious… otoh, Quinn seems to be the kind of ‘combo’ guard that Pop favors, able to handle the ball AND hit his jumper. In Miami, he was just over 40% behind the arc for two out of three season. This is not good news for Temple. Maybe it was an opportunity to pick up talent?
This is all very confusing…
Hey, if posting a sharp, insightful, yet non-sarcastic comment were that easy, even olf would do it.
Mike Monroe: ...the uninformed presume Parker is expendable.
by freshtunarightofftheboat on Nov 5, 2010 2:42 PM CDT up reply actions
Quinn’s only involvement in a trade at this point would be that now that the Spurs have him, they could trade away a backup PG. I don’t think Quinn is eligible for a dleague assignment to the Toros, as he has more than 2 years in the NBA. He’s a Spur, or he is released. If he is released at this point (after the dleague draft), I’m not sure how it is determined which dleague team he could wind up on since contracts are with the league rather than individual teams.
As for as D-League, I thought he could still go down but not officially be on the Spurs. However, Toros would be the closest team, so he would end up in Austin. Or does the two years supersede it all?
Still trying to deal Hill I see. :P
Hey, if posting a sharp, insightful, yet non-sarcastic comment were that easy, even olf would do it.
Mike Monroe: ...the uninformed presume Parker is expendable.
by freshtunarightofftheboat on Nov 5, 2010 4:03 PM CDT up reply actions
I was trying to avoid any names. As it seems that Quinn isn’t a strong defender, I have my doubts that he’ll actually stick. But if he sticks, he’s a PG. I expect the only reason Temple played more in the last game and Neal did not is that Temple is considered one of the PG’s and Hill was not available to play as the backup PG.
The other possibility of the Quinn signing may be simply that they’d like to send Temple to the Toros on assignment (once their season begins anyways) but as the 3rd PG feel they might need to keep him close at hand. With Quinn they can send Temple to Austin and not worry about a quick call-up. Once Hill and Bonner are returned to the active list, Temple likely would not be on the active list. Might be better having Quinn sit around in his sports coat than Temple.
Additionally, Temple is a better defender than Neal and more familiar with handling the offense in short spurts.
Your theory sounds the best. They really care about Temple and would rather him get play time with someone like Gee in Austin while Quinn could sit around for 2 straight months before seeing real play time.
Both Temple and Gee have great potential so why not get them more consistent play time.
I think you may be right about the Spurs taking a look at Quinn and assigning Temple to Austin if they like what they see. I’m not particularly in favor of this — if they were thinking that they might assign Temple, why then did they give Jerrells to NOOCH for what turned out to be nothing? — but admit that I’m intrigued by Quinn’s 3 pt. FG %, as well as his alleged ball-handling abilities. I think Quinn could play either guard position, which Pop loves to have… However his FT % is too high for the Spurs; that alone may make it difficult for him to stick with San Antonio.
If Pop were willing to have Manu come off the bench until Hill returns to action, he could play Neal at off-guard and rely on the Amazine Argentine to distribute the ball when Tony’s not on the floor.
As far as dealing Hill or any other backup PG is concerned, for whom? What need do we have that could be filled by such a trade, and in what ways would it make the team better this year? I know you proposed a trade for Memphis’ third-string center a while ago, do you have anything better to propose? I’m gonna keep after you on this, ’cause the whole “Trade TP” controversy has sensitized me to challenge non-specific trade proposals.
Hey, if posting a sharp, insightful, yet non-sarcastic comment were that easy, even olf would do it.
Mike Monroe: ...the uninformed presume Parker is expendable.
by freshtunarightofftheboat on Nov 5, 2010 5:10 PM CDT up reply actions
Well CJ to me was a gift to Demps, but it didn’t work out. And those rumors of going overseas probably forced the Spurs hands in that respect.
To me, if Temple goes down, it is more about getting him more time and repetition in the system.
I think Hill will be back for tomorrow’s game, so there really isn’t going to be a time when Manu would have to come off the bench.
I think what will secure Temple a roster spot, if not a place on the rotation, is better PnR defense and some semblance of offense: PnR handling the ball, an ability to penetrate into the paint and score or dish, a mid-range jumper that is consistent, or 40% from the corner behind the arc. Pick one.
Question is, will time playing for the Toros help him develop in these areas?
Glad to see that Hill will be back Saturday. The time to have had Manu come off the bench was against the Suns, which I suggested before the game. Actually, it was Stampler who first mentioned it, I just chimed in.
Hey, if posting a sharp, insightful, yet non-sarcastic comment were that easy, even olf would do it.
Mike Monroe: ...the uninformed presume Parker is expendable.
by freshtunarightofftheboat on Nov 5, 2010 5:47 PM CDT up reply actions
Well right now, Temple is in a tough spot.
Even though Hill seems to fit better as a 2 guard, you have Neal now. Neal is a better pure shooter and the Spurs need that for their spacing.
The only way I see Temple getting more time than Neal is matchups with bigger teams, but that’s not going to be for many games.
The only other way is if Pop gives Manu or Parker a night off or a half off through the season.
My thought in terms of Temple going to the Toros would be to make him the point guard on the Toros. Run the team to build up his PG skills in Spurs sets. They did great work with Jerrells with all the focus he got. I think the same would happen for Temple. Obviously he’s proven he could do it in the NBA with his time last season with the Spurs.
My thought would be he would eventually become the backup with a mix of Neal and Hill at the 2 for the short term. In the longer term, maybe the starter as the big 3 get older and eventually retire if building for the future.
Check with Hirschof, they brought up this could be a trade set up. You then jumped to the conclusion that Quinn would be part of the trade, and I was clarifying for your behalf that Quinn wouldn’t be part of the trade but merely could free up someone else to be traded.
Memphis is still insisting on trying to avoid looking bad by giving up on Thabeet and playing Haddadi. I think Haddadi may getting fed up, as he apparently wants to take a leave to play for Iran in the Asian games. One of these days they have to admit Thabeet was a bad draft choice and use Haddadi.
Won’t George be back for Houston? I was thinking he only needed some extra strength Ibuprofin and a massage and he’d be back.
I admit to picking on you rather than Hirsch or Zeus, because while neither you nor they named names, you’re on record in several recent PtR threads for lobbying to trade Hill (while he has trade value and if the Spurs have an acceptable substitute for backup PG).
In other words, the other two mentioned some kind of trade involving an unspecified player (in Zeus’ case, a backup PG) as a possible explanation for the Quinn signing, but weren’t saying that we should trade anyone. It’s true that technically you did not lobby for a trade in this thread, but I had the impression that your previous posts about Hill were the subtext behind your posts here, and wanted to give you another opportunity to propose a better trade than the one for the big guy who’s not in Memphis’ rotation (since I honestly don’t see how trading Hill for him improves the Spurs this year).
Hey, if posting a sharp, insightful, yet non-sarcastic comment were that easy, even olf would do it.
Mike Monroe: ...the uninformed presume Parker is expendable.
by freshtunarightofftheboat on Nov 5, 2010 10:42 PM CDT up reply actions
From what I recall, it started with someone else saying that Hill may be needed less at SG and could concentrate on backup PG. Up until then, nearly everyone was saying he should be starting at SG with Manu coming off the bench (while I’ve said leave Manu). A lot of posters had felt that Pop was unlikely to give many minutes at all to rookies this year, other than perhaps Tiago.
It now looks like Pop is not that hesitant about using Neal and Anderson. Therefore Hill will be getting fewer minutes at SG than most people expected. He is most assured of getting minutes as Tony’s backup at PG. His more natural position is SG, and the Spurs have tried to turn him into a PG. Generally when he is in for Tony, Manu actually runs the show in the half-court offense.
George’s value then becomes somewhat limited to his defensive ability, which did not look that good in the Phoenix playoff series. One thing that can help any perimeter player’s defense is having a 7’+
player that can block or alter shots behind them. The Spurs have a shortage of that commodity. While Splitter might help, I don’t believe shot-blocking is one of his major assets. In the recent FIBA world championship tournament, Splitter averaged 1.1 blocks per 40 minutes. Haddadi on the other hand, playing in the same bracket, averaged 3.2 blocks per 40 minutes. Tiago averaged 8.3 rebounds per 40 minutes compared to Haddadi’s 10.6. When they matched up against each other, Haddadi looked more dominant inside (16 pts. 5 blk, 9rb in 25min) while Tiago looked more agile (13pts, 1blk, 4 rb in 23 min). Haddadi looked like perhaps the best center at FIBA, and is 4 mos. younger than Tiago. Between the two, I’d still prefer Tiago as I think Haddadi might continue having issues with his Iranian citizenship. However I wouldn’t mind seeing how well they might play together over the years in a twin towers lineup. Third string or not, Haddadi is way ahead of Cousin.
While there are a few other players that might fill the same role as I see for Haddadi, I think he is undervalued due to being on the same roster with higher profile Marc Gasol and Thabeet. Nearly anyone else fitting that same role would require the Spurs to shake up their roster even more to meet cap rules. Once Curtis was traded the situation has become that there are fewer players that can be traded prior to mid-season that could be packaged together to trade up.
The value to the Spurs will come even more in future years with the retirement of McDyess and Duncan, and my guess is that they won’t do much at this point to fill that role. If they acquired such a player now, they’d have 6 bigs (though neither Bonner or Blair come close to filling such a defensive role) and have a hard time finding playing time for at least two of them. At this point the Spurs should be happy enough with their main roster and any major trades would surprise me.
Thank you for clarifying, Alamo.
If you don’t think that Haddadi would help the Spurs this year, I see no pressing reason to do the trade now. I believe that Hill will overcome his early-season difficulties and return to form… no particular reason why, other than faith in hard work, character, and Pop continuing to give him the opportunities.
It just doesn’t make sense to me to dump a contributing member of the rotation for a guy who would likely be at the bottom of the big man depth chart this year. You can argue that Hill isn’t contributing, but c’mon, he’s played less than three games so far. His absence in the Phoenix game, coupled with Temple’s relative ineffectiveness, was noticeable; Manu and/or Tony might have been able to play fewer minutes had Hill been available. (And even you seem to have stopped saying that another player could fill in for Hill as the backup PG if he were traded.)
Even if Neal and Anderson cut into Hill’s playing time, do you honestly believe that Pop would play them ahead of Hill come the playoffs? He doesn’t have that kind of track record with rookies.
Anderson played some backup SG in the Phoenix game, but his main role seems to be RJ 2.0’s backup. (Side note: Did you notice that the Rage played every minute of the 4th quarter against the Suns?) Neal seems to be Manu’s backup, but Hill’s absence screwed up the rotation in the last game — meaning Manu had to be in there to give the Spurs another ball-handler, so Neal played limutes. And Hill is Tony’s backup, as you noted.
It looks to me that the majority of the minutes for the guards/wings will be shared by those six… I’m not too worried whether Hill gets fewer minutes because of Neal and Anderson or vice versa. I don’t think the Spurs care overly much about that either; certainly Neal did not appear to be pouting for playing less in Phoenix. They know that they’ll get their opportunities to play.
As for Splitter not being a great shot-blocker, true. The book on him though, is that, while not a great shot-blocker statistically, he has post presence, and at-the-rim defensive skills to make players alter their shots (and miss). Since ‘shots altered’ is not a recognized statistical category, we’re just gonna have to watch his play and decide whether Splitter has defensive impact beyond blocked shots, which are nice but somewhat overrated compared to say, defensive rebounds, in the sense that the defense does not always get the ball back. We could also try using shot charts, though they’re not really set up to measure individual defense as much as player offense.
Hey, if posting a sharp, insightful, yet non-sarcastic comment were that easy, even olf would do it.
Mike Monroe: ...the uninformed presume Parker is expendable.
by freshtunarightofftheboat on Nov 6, 2010 1:48 PM CDT up reply actions
Even if Neal and Anderson cut into Hill’s playing time, do you honestly believe that Pop would play them ahead of Hill come the playoffs?
Yes, if they’ve been playing better all season long before the playoffs. He’d play the same lineup that got him there.
My original suggestion did not come after George had played a string of bad games (other than last year’s Phoenix playoff series). It was based on expectations being high with many projections of him being the starting SG, where I figured he was more likely going to slip in the rotation.
Since he did start poorly, his trade value has likely already slipped some. Temple has not played as well as he seemed to at the end of last season, and Jerrells is gone. At this point I’d stick with George and figure he’ll start playing better. I just don’t expect that he’ll wind up as Tony’s eventual replacement as starting PG, and while he may start some this year I don’t see him as the long run starting SG either. I think he is a nice guard in the vein of Antonio Daniels, and might be better off in the long run going to another team with less talent.
The only scenarios I could see Pop choosing to play rookies ahead of an available Hill in the playoffs are if George gets benched and dropped from the rotation altogether, or if he gets hurt towards the end of the season and is unable to rehab quickly enough to get back into game condition. Since I expect George to play well enough to stay in the rotation, I think he’ll get the nod over Neal and Anderson, given historical precedent.
If the Spurs decided they needed Manu’s spark off the bench (ironically, because Hill wasn’t as good as a 6th man), wouldn’t it make sense to start Hill at SG instead of Anderson or Neal? The rookies would benefit from playing with possibly our best playmaker and creator, and whatever one may think about Tony’s approach to the game, I’m pretty sure he’d still kick it out to an open George Hill in the corner. At least I think he’s more likely to make that decision than to trust Neal or Anderson in the same situation, at least right now. Not a knock on Neal or Anderson, they shoot great, just an observation about a vet’s psychology.
Tony could be with the team for a while and he’s not even 30, so I’m not thinking in terms of his replacement yet. Whether Hill will be the Spurs starting PG in the future depends more on his continuing development than his current skills and deficiencies, imho.
I think we’re in agreement that there’s no good reason to think about trading George right now, especially for a player that won’t have an impact on the team’s success this season. Even though it may have looked in training camp that we had too many good guards and not enough roster spots or playing time for all of them, I think we can agree that our backup PG and potential starting SG (should Pop decide to have Manu come off the bench). George is not expendable imho.
Hey, if posting a sharp, insightful, yet non-sarcastic comment were that easy, even olf would do it.
Mike Monroe: ...the uninformed presume Parker is expendable.
by freshtunarightofftheboat on Nov 6, 2010 4:10 PM CDT up reply actions
Do you have any examples of rookies losing minutes in the playoffs for the mere reason of being rookies? If we’re working on the premise that during the season George sees minutes mainly as Tony’s backup at PG while Neal & Anderson get the minutes at SG behind Manu, you’re suggesting that Pop would change that rotation just because of rookiness?
George averaged 16.5 mpg during the regular season his rookie year and then 19 mpg during the playoffs. While Blair’s time went down in the playoffs, it seemed mainly due to Tim & McDyess playing more and the matchups. Beno dropped down from 14.3 to 11.5, but it wasn’t so much because he was a rookie as it was his high turnover rate. Tony also lost minutes due to playing poorly his rookie year. Tim’s minutes went up in his rookie year from 39.1 in the regular season to 41.6 in the playoffs. He didn’t lose time to a veteran reserve. If they’re playing well, Pop will play them in the playoffs regardless if they are rookies or not.
As I recall, Hill didn’t get much love from Pop in the playoffs his rookie year. I’m not sure if that was true in Tony’s and Manu’s cases, but I seem to remember TP saying something about not earning Pop’s trust his first post-season.
Hey, if posting a sharp, insightful, yet non-sarcastic comment were that easy, even olf would do it.
Mike Monroe: ...the uninformed presume Parker is expendable.
by freshtunarightofftheboat on Nov 6, 2010 6:26 PM CDT up reply actions
I’m just saying that I don’t believe that Neal and Anderson will take minutes away from Hill in the playoffs, which is what I assumed you meant by “Hill getting fewer minutes than expected at SG.” You’re turning it around to suggest I’m saying that Hill will take minutes away from them. That may happen, but what I was really saying is that I believe that Hill is ahead of the rookies in the rotation for backup guard playing time.
I don’t see that Anderson is competing with Hill for minutes at the backup SG spot. His minutes seem to be coming as RJ 2.0’s backup, which is what I predicted.
Remember Pop famously saying “This playoff probably isn’t for him” in Hill’s rookie year? So I’m surprised that his minutes increased from the regular season to the playoffs. But remember what else happened that year? Manu missed the playoffs altogether, so his minutes were up for grabs. Still, Game 1, DNP-CD. RMJ was backup PG, if you can believe that. Game 2, less than 5 minutes. Game 3, Hill picked up over 24 minutes, but that was the game Coach raised the white flag early in the 3rd and benched the Big Three. Game 4, back to just under 14.5 minutes. Game 5, a whopping 33 minutes (RMJ only played 12, not sure why). Hill played big minutes in a game we gave away as a lost cause and in the finale because RMJ was ineffective or hurt. Not exactly a vote of confidence from Pop.
Last year, I think it was a clear case of Pop deciding to play Dice more and Blair less. Yes, the Dallas matchup, where Dice’s D on Dirk was key, was a factor, but the point is that Pop went with the vet.
The Big Three all played more minutes in the playoffs in their rookie season, but Stoic Boy, French Boy, and Crazy Boy were and are special. Are you saying that Neal and Anderson are special too?
In any event, as I wrote before, I doubt that the Spurs’ guards are obsessively concerned about whether they’re getting a few more or a few fewer minutes of playing time, at least not the way we’ve been talking about it. It’s simply not the Spurs’ Way.
Hey, if posting a sharp, insightful, yet non-sarcastic comment were that easy, even olf would do it.
Mike Monroe: ...the uninformed presume Parker is expendable.
by freshtunarightofftheboat on Nov 6, 2010 7:31 PM CDT up reply actions
Actually, correction about that vote of confidence from Pop. I’m remembering now that Game 5 may have been the turn-around for Hill in Pop’s mind, and the first nail in the coffin for RMJ’s confidence and Spurs’ career. But by that time it was too late.
Point is, even when a rookie is playing great (as Hill was), Coach can decide to play vets in the post-season. Maybe Pop’s learned from this and will give Anderson and Neal more of a chance, should they continue to play well. We’ll just have to see.
Hey, if posting a sharp, insightful, yet non-sarcastic comment were that easy, even olf would do it.
Mike Monroe: ...the uninformed presume Parker is expendable.
by freshtunarightofftheboat on Nov 6, 2010 7:50 PM CDT up reply actions
Well, I’m never ever going to read through those walls of text, guys – but I applaud both of you, regardless. Impressive. :)
I smell death... everywhere.
It’s an ongoing thing…. I’ve been teasing Alamo about suggesting that one of our PGs was expendable (based on the pre-season play of the new guards, including Temple and Jerrells) for Haddadi, after I started insisting that PtR’rs propose trades for specific players, instead of just saying “We should trade XXX.”
We’re both wordy b@st@rds, especially when arguing, so I apologize for blowing up threads like this one. :)
Actually, I find most of what Alamo writes insightful and interesting. Just don’t tell him that, okay? It wouldn’t be any fun to tease him if he knew….
Hey, if posting a sharp, insightful, yet non-sarcastic comment were that easy, even olf would do it.
Mike Monroe: ...the uninformed presume Parker is expendable.
by freshtunarightofftheboat on Nov 7, 2010 1:32 PM CST up reply actions
It’s funny how every year, everyone (me included) starts fantasizing about the Spurs making a midseason trade that will greatly increase our title chances.
How many times have the Spurs made a season altering trade in the middle of the season? 5 years ago when they got Nazir Mohammed for Malik Rose? Nazir just happened to fit neatly in that 5 slot, and Malik had become expendable
The reality is, the Spurs are not trading anyone of consequence for any consequential player this year. Take that to the bank. It would be a disaster, just look at how long it took Richard to get acquainted, hell, it takes anyone not named Tim Duncan at least 1 full season to start playing well.
[ "Duncan, the Spurs' 34-year-old captain, was aghast when Splitter told him he used to watch him as a kid."]
"I didn't enjoy that at all," Duncan said
Checking back, while Thabeet was doing a dleague assignment last March Haddadi played 10 minutes in a game against the Spurs. During that time he blocked two layups by George and another one by Blair. I would expect that effected the Spurs shot selection after that.
3 blocks in ten minutes? OK, I see your point. :)
Hey, if posting a sharp, insightful, yet non-sarcastic comment were that easy, even olf would do it.
Mike Monroe: ...the uninformed presume Parker is expendable.
by freshtunarightofftheboat on Nov 6, 2010 1:50 PM CDT up reply actions
not about trading Hill for him, but why you’re so high on Haddadi.
Hey, if posting a sharp, insightful, yet non-sarcastic comment were that easy, even olf would do it.
Mike Monroe: ...the uninformed presume Parker is expendable.
by freshtunarightofftheboat on Nov 6, 2010 4:11 PM CDT up reply actions
Oh, I can’t imagine it happening, not right now anyway. Jerrells is gone (though I hope he might find his way back), I don’t think Temple is ready to back up Parker, and Hill still has that “favorite player” tag from before. And I don’t think the F.O. feels there’s a pressing need to get a 6th big, especially one needing playing time to develop.
What I was conceding to Alamo was that he has a point about Haddadi having more talent than I expected out of a third-string center on the Grizzlies. I’m basically agreeing that he could be a future asset in Silver and Black, if we could work out a way to get him… it would be a start at making up for the deal that sent Pau to LA.
But not for Hill…. not right now, not this season. He’s one of the guy’s keeping the window propped open.
Hey, if posting a sharp, insightful, yet non-sarcastic comment were that easy, even olf would do it.
Mike Monroe: ...the uninformed presume Parker is expendable.
by freshtunarightofftheboat on Nov 7, 2010 1:41 PM CST up reply actions
Forgot that we couldn’t trade Simmons yet, as he’d just signed as a free agent
Hey, if posting a sharp, insightful, yet non-sarcastic comment were that easy, even olf would do it.
Mike Monroe: ...the uninformed presume Parker is expendable.
by freshtunarightofftheboat on Nov 5, 2010 4:02 PM CDT up reply actions
Probably trying to convince him to go to the Toros if they like what they see from him? If we think about it as a rebuilding on the run, then this is a good thing.
Yes, Spurs have guys who can handle the ball and play the PG. However, if we really think about it, Hill prefers to play the 2 position and Manu isn’t a full time PG, even though he handles the ball and becomes a distributor from time to time.
You know what my favorite play of the game was, though? I bet most of you are guessing it was Gino’s quick pass to Splitter on the pick-and-roll for a dunk, and yes, that was sweet. But no, my favorite play was when Bobby Simmons popped Clippers’ prized rookie Blake Griffin in the mug “going for a steal.” That play won me over on Simmons and I guarantee you his teammates and Pop noticed too.
As always, don’t take anything I write seriously. I don’t know what I’m talking about AT ALL.
I don’t get this move at all. If you don’t like your third point guard, why not just cut your third point guard? Garrett Temple sucked, so we’re releasing Bobby Simmons? Makes no sense. And I don’t care what Pop thinks, this team could’ve used Simmons as an enforcer.
Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
Agree about the enforcer part. But it’s hard to do that when you’re only playing limutes.
Hey, if posting a sharp, insightful, yet non-sarcastic comment were that easy, even olf would do it.
Mike Monroe: ...the uninformed presume Parker is expendable.
by freshtunarightofftheboat on Nov 5, 2010 2:19 PM CDT up reply actions
Actually is ideal. Someone in the other team gets chippy. Get Simmon in and two minutes later, back to the bench.
"If an expert says it can't be done, get another expert"
- DBG
That’s not an enforcer, that’s a thug. Think Najara, for example.
The late Maurice Lucas, who recently passed away… now he was an enforcer.
Hey, if posting a sharp, insightful, yet non-sarcastic comment were that easy, even olf would do it.
Mike Monroe: ...the uninformed presume Parker is expendable.
by freshtunarightofftheboat on Nov 6, 2010 7:34 PM CDT up reply actions
Also, sounds to me like they just want to take a look at some other guys. They’ve done it in the past w/ guys like Croshere, etc
@JMcDonald_SAEN
"We suck on 'D. Both individually and team-wise, we suck. We're pretty consistent that way. I don't know if I have an answer to that. If I did, we wouldn't suck quite so bad." - Popovich
by Aaron "Hirschof" Preine on Nov 5, 2010 2:31 PM CDT reply actions
I recently noticed that 10 day contracts come into play only later in the season. Is there any particular length of time that they have made a commitment for, or can they turn around and waive Quinn at any time? I think it’s possible that the Spurs aren’t happy with the backups at PG as far as their ballhandling goes, and might trade one away now. Quinn doesn’t sound like a solution on defense, but may wind up having the best skills at guard for handling the ball.
Jeff McDonald says Quinn is in town on an unguaranteed contract:
http://blog.mysanantonio.com/spursnation/2010/11/05/bench-shuffle-chris-quinn-in-bobby-simmons-out/
With all due respect, gentlemen, we're not as crazy as she is.
ineligible for d-league
"We suck on 'D. Both individually and team-wise, we suck. We're pretty consistent that way. I don't know if I have an answer to that. If I did, we wouldn't suck quite so bad." - Popovich
by Aaron "Hirschof" Preine on Nov 5, 2010 4:40 PM CDT up reply actions
Not as an assignment, but aren’t their rules that allocate a player to the closest team? I believe Alamo posted somewhere about it, but wasn’t sure when it came to those details.
Allocations of the last three players cut from the team have already happened, before the D-League draft. And anyway, the Spurs have already filled those three allocation spots.
Hey, if posting a sharp, insightful, yet non-sarcastic comment were that easy, even olf would do it.
Mike Monroe: ...the uninformed presume Parker is expendable.
by freshtunarightofftheboat on Nov 5, 2010 5:11 PM CDT up reply actions
A “Being John Malkovich” experience with Coach Pop would be very interesting….
Hey, if posting a sharp, insightful, yet non-sarcastic comment were that easy, even olf would do it.
Mike Monroe: ...the uninformed presume Parker is expendable.
by freshtunarightofftheboat on Nov 5, 2010 2:44 PM CDT up reply actions
Would your alcohol tolerance pass over or would you get to keep Pop’s?
I’m not sure if I could handle that tsunami of instant inebriation.
"We suck on 'D. Both individually and team-wise, we suck. We're pretty consistent that way. I don't know if I have an answer to that. If I did, we wouldn't suck quite so bad." - Popovich
by Aaron "Hirschof" Preine on Nov 5, 2010 2:49 PM CDT up reply actions
H, please check out the Quotes page which has been updated to reflect your recent awesomeness.
The point with intangibles is that no one can see them.
I’m not sure anyone could survive that experience. :)
With all due respect, gentlemen, we're not as crazy as she is.
GOL
Hey, if posting a sharp, insightful, yet non-sarcastic comment were that easy, even olf would do it.
Mike Monroe: ...the uninformed presume Parker is expendable.
by freshtunarightofftheboat on Nov 5, 2010 4:05 PM CDT up reply actions
Can’t make any connections to Temple just yet. Really all we know right now is we didn’t like what we saw in Bobby Simmons and see some value (Toros? Trade?) in Quinn. With all due respect to Simmons, who we barely got to know, this is a minor move.
Another implication of this could be that Bonner may come back faster that we expected and/or Pop is prepared to play Splitter increasing minutes. Or we may get to see how RJ 2.0 fares in Pop’s small ball lineup…
I’d still like to know the inside story behind the decision to waive Simmons. There are aspects of this that seem very un-Spur-like to me….
Hey, if posting a sharp, insightful, yet non-sarcastic comment were that easy, even olf would do it.
Mike Monroe: ...the uninformed presume Parker is expendable.
by freshtunarightofftheboat on Nov 5, 2010 4:15 PM CDT reply actions
Simmons’ shot never seemed to come about. His D was pretty good though.
My thought is Simmons might have wanted more play time and Spurs were very Spur like and granted him his wish.
Or, both Anderson and RJ are exceeding expectations on the offensive and defensive end and they don’t see a need to carry him when he’s not likely to see consistent minutes ever.
Simmons time has come entirely at the bigs spots. I’d guess he was only with the team this long due to Bonner & Tiago being out at the same time. With Tiago looking ready for more playing time, Simmons was no longer needed to fill in at the 4 spot.
My thought is Simmons might have wanted more play time and Spurs were very Spur like and granted him his wish.
Yes… but without a team lined up to play for, his limutes with the Spurs drop to zero with… no one. It’s very strange, but maybe there’s a deal that hasn’t been announced yet. (requiring a physical or something)
Hey, if posting a sharp, insightful, yet non-sarcastic comment were that easy, even olf would do it.
Mike Monroe: ...the uninformed presume Parker is expendable.
by freshtunarightofftheboat on Nov 5, 2010 5:16 PM CDT up reply actions
that’s Chris Quinn super creepy Heat wallpaper btw.
http://basketbawful.blogspot.com/2009/03/beware-chris-quinns-wallpaper.html
I got the ‘super creepy’ part by myself… lol
Hey, if posting a sharp, insightful, yet non-sarcastic comment were that easy, even olf would do it.
Mike Monroe: ...the uninformed presume Parker is expendable.
by freshtunarightofftheboat on Nov 5, 2010 5:13 PM CDT up reply actions
It seems we’ve done just fine to this point without a creepy white guy of the Jason Williams mold. Why start now?
by DrumsInTheDeep on Nov 6, 2010 10:52 AM CDT up reply actions
GOL
Hey, if posting a sharp, insightful, yet non-sarcastic comment were that easy, even olf would do it.
Mike Monroe: ...the uninformed presume Parker is expendable.
by freshtunarightofftheboat on Nov 6, 2010 1:50 PM CDT up reply actions
My thought is that this is a move to get under the luxury tax threshold while still being able to keep 14 playres. With Anderson’s play at the backup SF and already having an undersized PF in Blair, there is really no need for Simmons and his $1.2M contract. He wasn’t getting any PT at SF, so keeping a young player with potential like Gee makes more sense. With the lower contract amounts for Gee and Quinn they can keep both on the roster if they want and can still stay under the luxury tax.
48 MoH has an interesting take on the Simmons and Quinn situation.
Tim Griffin/Spurs Nation reports Pop saying that adding Quinn and waiving Simmons is “not a tit-for-tat situation”
Hey, if posting a sharp, insightful, yet non-sarcastic comment were that easy, even olf would do it.
Mike Monroe: ...the uninformed presume Parker is expendable.
by freshtunarightofftheboat on Nov 5, 2010 6:30 PM CDT reply actions
btw, I’m thinking more that this is related to Splitter’s steep learning curve, which will allow him to log increasing minutes as the center. Blair’s minutes don’t go down, he just takes over he PF minutes that Simmons was holding for him. Between them, Anderson and Neal have pretty much locked up the backup SF and the remaining backup SG minutes after Hill has gotten his, so that leaves little if anything for Bobby, unfortunately. If he had been able to channel his “inner Bowen” things might have been different, but his shots weren’t falling and his D, though solid, was not the kind you stick on the other team’s best player.
Hey, if posting a sharp, insightful, yet non-sarcastic comment were that easy, even olf would do it.
Mike Monroe: ...the uninformed presume Parker is expendable.
by freshtunarightofftheboat on Nov 5, 2010 6:37 PM CDT up reply actions
With only 16 minutes in 2 games, Simmons wasn’t holding many minutes for Blair. That would seem fewer minutes than Bonner would have played if he’d been available. Tiago will likely take some minutes from Tim & McDyess, but Blair will likely lose some minutes as well, particularly once Bonner is back.
I’m still going with the Temple is given a Toros assignment and Quinn is on the team for insurance. I don’t see that as a Quinn being promoted over Temple situation, simply that Temple will be better off playing in Austin than sitting in San Antonio. Quinn would actually be on the active list if both Temple and Gee receive Toros assignments, but wouldn’t see much time as the 12h man.
As Quinn has just been signed as a free agent, he could not be included in a trade at this point (which the 48 minutes article suggested).
McDyess has been playing solidly, but I wouldn’t mind for his minutes to go down a bit to save him for the playoffs, and to give Splitter and Blair more playing time. Of course, that assumes that Tiago continues going up a steep learning curve, and that Blair figures out how to recapture the magic from the pre-season.
My point about Simmons was that there would have been little playing time available to him, should Tiago continue developing and adding minutes, allowing Blair to move back to playing PF, and assuming that Anderson and Neal continue to play well.
I’m not sure how Bonner figures into the mix. True, he stretches the floor, but the sharpshooters are doing well, and what I’m looking for are more boards. I think the other bigs are better suited for that.
Hey, if posting a sharp, insightful, yet non-sarcastic comment were that easy, even olf would do it.
Mike Monroe: ...the uninformed presume Parker is expendable.
by freshtunarightofftheboat on Nov 5, 2010 8:58 PM CDT up reply actions
Bonner factors in to it by allowing Dice and Duncan to sit more. Blair works well with Bonner also.
Spurs should have as many options that can hit the 3 as possible. Bonner’s also improved his defense enough to that of being decent. Against longer guys, he’s honestly a better option than Blair, because he has longer arms.
True
Matt has gotten better but he is still a liability on “D” and he sucks at rebounding because of his lack of athletic ability. He gives great effort and he does a decent job of being where he is supposed to be but it doesn’t help a lot if he doesn’t have anybody to help make up for when he gets blown by. Against anybody who can jump or has good quickness he is dead without Tim behind him and that is a fact.
Matt and Dejuan together on defense is one ugly sight to behold and we seen a lot of that last year. Offensively they click very well because of Matt’s outside shooting but is it a fair trade off? I like Matt against guys who are more post oriented on offense instead of the face up and pick and pop guys.
One thing i can do...................is FINGER ROLL.
by gunnin' gervin on Nov 5, 2010 10:08 PM CDT up reply actions
we signed the medicine man? wtf?
free ::insert player here who isn't getting court time::!
perth wildcats - 2009/2010 nbl champions baby!
by sleep research facility on Nov 5, 2010 10:58 PM CDT reply actions
What……I was gone for a while and the world changed?
- Fab retired
- Simmons out
- Quinn in
- Hill injured
WTF? This is not fair.
Keep the faith!!
If you missed the stretch between Hill’s injury and Simmons’ waiver, you probably also missed the epic 4th quarter performance RJ 2.0 came through with to beat the Sun in Phoenix for the first time in his 10-year NBA career.
Hey, if posting a sharp, insightful, yet non-sarcastic comment were that easy, even olf would do it.
Mike Monroe: ...the uninformed presume Parker is expendable.
by freshtunarightofftheboat on Nov 6, 2010 1:27 AM CDT up reply actions
Wow, over a hundred posts about a guy who played only limutes, and another guy coming in with for a look under the hood.
We’ve got a very passionate group of fans here, folks! :)
Hey, if posting a sharp, insightful, yet non-sarcastic comment were that easy, even olf would do it.
Mike Monroe: ...the uninformed presume Parker is expendable.
by freshtunarightofftheboat on Nov 6, 2010 2:40 PM CDT reply actions
lol, you may be right.
And yes, ladies…. I am passionate.
Hey, if posting a sharp, insightful, yet non-sarcastic comment were that easy, even olf would do it.
Mike Monroe: ...the uninformed presume Parker is expendable.
by freshtunarightofftheboat on Nov 6, 2010 5:16 PM CDT up reply actions
So long Simmons. Welcome Medicine Man.
I’ve actually been a fan of Chris ‘Dr.’ Quinn since watching him play in MIA.
Still wish I knew wtf is going on with that wacky FO.
'Offensive rebounding' is a gross understatement of DeJuan Blair's skill. It is far beyond 'offensive' and should be qualified as 'Get The Hell Out of My Way Or I'll Tear Your Arms Off and Eat Your Babies' rebounding.
by Iullaby on Nov 9, 2010 12:49 AM CST via mobile reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
Featured Stories
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Larry Bird calls his Indiana Pacers “soft” following the team’s physical Game 5 loss to Miami
- Dexter Pittman’s elbow to Lance Stephenson’s throat is just one of three nasty hits in Miami/Indiana’s Game 5 (VIDEO)
- Behind the Box Score, where the Miami Heat split the Indiana Pacers in two
- Metta World Peace calls Mike Brown fat
- Tracy McGrady is in a Chinese beer commercial (VIDEO)
