Challenge: Name the 3rd best draft pick in the Pop/Buford era
by Dennis010 on Aug 6, 2010 10:13 AM CDT
Email
Print
Manu and Parker were great draft picks, but who was the third best draft pick in the Pop/Buford era starting in 1994? Some rules:
1. Duncan doesn't count as he was the consensus #1 pick
2. The player must have played his first game as a Spur
3. The player must have played at least 3 seasons
If you need it, here is the Spurs drafting history. I am a Laker fan and I have never understood how the Spurs got a reputation of a good drafting organization as they appear to me to have only made two good draft picks in 10+ years.
Edit: corrected link for draft history
Edit: changed "Pops" to "Pop"
189 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Felipe Lopez: Don’t know him but he played an impressive 249 games and 4,150 minutes for a guy who isn’t currently in the league and might be contributing overseas or possibly injured….
Luis Scola: NBA starter
John Salmons (traded to Philly, I don’t think they made the pick though)
Leandro Barbosa (Suns may have made this pick, but a great 6th man and a career Sun on contending teams)
Romain Sato: a top 5 outside the NBA SG
Beno Udrih: Rotation player
Ian Mahinmi: New contract with a contender in Dallas
Don’t qualify, but Splitter, Blair, Hill, Goran Dragic, and possibly Marcus Williams, James Gist, and Jack McClinton will all be on NBA rosters this year
The majority of the other picks are all playing overseas which to me doesn’t equal a bust, especially when they are second rounders or late round draft picks a contender didn’t care to add immediately in the first place.
Name another team that has drafted better with less and/or later picks. Other than Duncan, we haven’t had a pick in the top 18 since we took Elliott 3rd in 1989!
Look at the rules
Again, the challenge was to name the third best pick, not to list the Spurs drafting history
1. Scola – doesn’t count as he never played as a Spur. His draft rights were given away for crumbs
2. Salmons, Barbosa – were picks of other teams
> Name another team that has drafted better with less and/or later picks
Define “better”? There are several depending on the definition.
I did see the rules, that’s why I didn’t answer your question….your rules combined with the drafting circumstances and motivations of the franchise render your question pointless and moot
by BlaseE on Aug 6, 2010 11:15 AM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
+2. I think anyone with an unbiased view would say the Spurs have made just about the greatest value out of their draft picks as possible. The only major error I can see is trading away Scola. Even trading away Dragic wasn’t a bad thing, since we eventually got Blair out of it and as good as Dragic is, we wouldn’t have as much use for him now considering all of the guards on our roster.
Who’s the best player the Lakers have picked in the last 3 years?
[Arbitrary rules are fun]
Tony apologist since 2010.
by Tim C. on Aug 6, 2010 11:03 AM CDT reply actions 1 recs
Marc Gasol
48th pick in the 2007 draft, was a key to the Pau Gasol trade, has started 144 games in the last two seasons with PER’s of 16.7 and 19.3
Never played for the Lakers. Not that he’s a bad player or anything, but if we can’t count Scola, you can’t count Gasol.
Tony apologist since 2010.
exactly forgive him the lakers arent guided by rules in the nba, lol jk
*****LE0NArD'0******
Does that pick meet your rules?
Lauri: thank goodness I have you magnificent bastards to waste [the offseason] with.
Also, note that if Marc had not been included they would have worked the trade out somehow. It is not like Memphis really wanted Marc and gave up Pau for him.
Lauri: thank goodness I have you magnificent bastards to waste [the offseason] with.
I hate it when fellow Spurs fans say this. West wasn’t the GM at that time.
Tony apologist since 2010.
West wasn’t the GM at that time.
Which does not rule out unofficial involvement in helping the trade to happen.
by doggydogworld on Aug 6, 2010 2:11 PM CDT up reply actions
I would argue that just Manu and Tony are enough to make the reputation. How many teams have gotten two players of that caliber with lowish picks? Add players like Hill, Splitter, Scola, and probably some others.
Also, I would not say that the reputation of the Spurs org is based purely on ability to draft wisely. Their reputation is more of an “overall solid organization”.
Lauri: thank goodness I have you magnificent bastards to waste [the offseason] with.
by swgeek on Aug 6, 2010 11:26 AM CDT reply actions 1 recs
If Portland hadn’t stolen Pritchard, we would have drafted Batum in the first round and had Hill fall to us in the second since he wasn’t on anyone’s radars. We had told both they’d be drafted. Batum had only made his health records available to us and Cleveland, I believe. Pritchard had seen them as a Spur and drafted him as a Blazer.
I also believe the Kings only drafted Casspi after the Spurs scouting fawned over him for 5 years.
This pains me every time I think about it… however, even though George Hill was under the radar, might another nifty GM have picked him up before we got to him? That said, I, like most spurs fans around here really really wish we had Batum (hopefully not at the expense of not having Georgie Porgie). He is the #1 player on my “realistic future spurs” wishlist. I don’t know how realistic that really is.
Hill was 44th on the DE mock. I think he would have fallen to the Hairston-Dragic picks or even the Gist pick. Gist was projected higher than Hill and he fell all the way to 57.
Maybe not. I heard one of the announcers during the playoffs mention that the Celtics were the only other team that have admitted to having Hill ranked as highly as the Spurs did, so depending on the draft order (which I am to tired to look up now) the Celts might have taken him had the Spurs not.
While complacency costs, perseverance pays
The Celtics did have the 30th pick, with which they selected J.R. Giddens. So yeah, if what those announcers were saying was true, I can imagine the Celtics possibly taking Hill over Giddens (in retrospect, it seems like a no-brainer, but who knows how high Rivers/Ainge were on Giddens back then). We didn’t select again until the 45th pick, which was the Dragic pick.
Here is the Lakers’ Draft Register. The picks that were in the top 30 picks for the same time frame are:
Derek Fisher(24), Sam Jacobson(26), Devean George(23), Mark Madsen(29), Chris Jeffries(27), Brian Cook(24), Sasha Vujacic(27), Andrew Bynum (10), Jordan Farmer(26), Javaris Crittendon(19) and Toney Douglas(29).
The Spurs picks in the top 30 picks:
Felipe Lopez, Tony Parker, John Salmons, Leandro Barbosa, Beno Udrih, Ian Mahinmi, Tiago Splitter, George Hill and James Anderson.
Personally I think the Spurs have done better with the picks they have, though I take it the Lakers don’t have to defend a reputation of being a good drafting organization.
Seriously?
Tony Parker is the best of the picks, but beyond that? Look at the picks #26 later taken by Mitch Kupchak (starting in 2001):
2003 #24 – Brian Cook – avg 14.1 mpg in 7 years in the NBA, still playing
2003 #32 – Luke Walton – started 138 games in 7 years in the NBA, still playing
2004 #27 – Sasha Vujacic – avg 14.5 mpg in 6 years in the NBA, still playing
2004 #56 – Marcus Douthit – never played a game in the NBA
2005 #37 – Ronny Turiaf – started 59 games in 5 years in the NBA, still playing
2005 #39 – Von Wafer – avg 13.3 mpg in 4 years in the NBA, still playing
2006 #26 – Jordan Farmar – avg 18.1 mpg in 4 years in the NBA, just signed a 3 year, $12M contract
2007 #40 – Sun Yue – played 28 minutes in one season
2007 #48 – Marc Gasol – started 144 games in 2 years in NBA, still playing
That’s 7 picks who played multiple seasons in the NBA out of 9
If you factor in having an average of at least 7 points a game to distinguish talent from hangers-on, since 1998 the Lakers have picked Ruben Patterson, Andrew Bynum, Marc Gasol and Tony Douglas. Of these 4, only Bynum actually did that for the Lakers, and he was a number 10 pick. By this criteria, the Spurs picks with over 7 ppg include Manu, Parker, Scola, Salmons, Barbosa, Udrih, Hill and Blair. They have 4 of those players still on the team.
The Lakers didn’t pick Toney Douglas. They had sold that pick to the Knicks and drafted who the Knicks wanted.
So they’ve actually only picked 3 players that have averaged over 7 ppg. Only two, Bynum and Patterson played for the Lakers. Patterson was let go after 24 games with a 2.7 ppg average, and went on to play an additional 625 games while averaging 11 ppg. I suppose they made a good call using the #10 pick on Bynum, who has averaged a bit more than 55 games per season and 10.3 ppg. The 2005 Draft doesn’t look like a particularly good one beyond a few players, so they might have done worse.
How the hell does a decent 7 footer fall to pick 10? That would be like the co-big east player of the year slipping to the second round. Impossible.
Lauri: thank goodness I have you magnificent bastards to waste [the offseason] with.
Get'em
One thing i can do...................is FINGER ROLL.
by gunnin' gervin on Aug 6, 2010 7:28 PM CDT up reply actions
When I am trying to distinguish talent from hangers-on, I look at seasons played and mpg. By your standard, Bruce Bowen is a hanger-on, correct? Ditto for Nesterovic?
Bruce was over 7 ppg his first 5 seasons with the Spurs, slipped slightly the next 2 years, and then had his average drop considerably his final year. His first 5 years with the Spurs were his most talented ones. Rasho’s career average was just about 7ppg until just this past season. Rasho was never a big talent, though his most talented year may have been his first one with the Spurs when he averaged 8.7ppg and 7.7 rpg.
Of course, I mainly picked some arbitrary criteria in order to eliminate nearly all Lakers’ draft choices.
I think both teams have done a good job of drafting while contending. I agree with you that it is kind of silly to compare the two to determine if one was bad at drafting. It’s like comparing Duncan to Malone to figure out which player was a bad PF undeserving of his reputation.
I’ve never said anything about it, but after a while, it aggrevates me.
It’s Pop. Not Pops.
Don’t think I need to add anything about our draft picks, BlaseE said it all.
"Age ain't nothing but a number!" - Reggie Miller after a Dice block
Since Tim Duncan doesn’t count, and he would clearly be the best of our draft picks during the era in question, what you’re really asking is who is the 4th Best Spurs Draft pick since 1994. It would be #1 Timmy, #2 Manu/Tony, #3Tony/Manu
Some would say George Hill at #4, but based on their careers so far, I’d have to say that Euroleague MVP and Euroleague Finals MVP is good enough to give the #4 spot to Tiago. Though very much remains to be seen with the development of Geoge, Splitter, Blair, and now Anderson.
We’re probably considered a good drafting team because we got all 3 of our big 3 from the draft, not through free agency and trades. Is there another team that has done that and won championship with them?
That’s so easy. The best draft picks that meet the rules are Manu, Tony, Hill in that order. So the answer is George Hill
While complacency costs, perseverance pays
Yeah, I missed that thinking the answer was so easy. The answer in reality is Beno. He’s not great, but still okay.
While complacency costs, perseverance pays
And that’s why we hadn’t answered. The only players who qualify are Beno and Mahinmi and we’ve had 10 better draft picks that don’t meet your rules or that would have been better had the Spurs not traded away the pick for a veteran who contributed to a contending, if not championship, run.
The only Spurs Draft Picks to meet all of your rules
Cory Alexander (29)
Derrick Dial (52)
Beno Udrih (28)
Ian Mahinmi (28)
Marcus Williams (33)
You could probably rank them: Udrih, Alexander, Mahinmi, Williams, and then Dial
Thanks!
That is even more than I asked for.
To be fair, I don’t remember Alexander and was ranking him by his stats. I also wish Williams was a Spur while I had given up Mahinmi as a Spur. I like all the picks though.
Mahinmi was actually a pretty bad pick but a lot of people whiffed on the same draft picks as the Spurs.
Drafted after Mahinmi (in order but not sequential picks):
David Lee
Brandon Bass
CJ Miles
Ersan Ilyasova
Ronny Turiaf
Monta Ellis
Andray Blatche
Amir Johnson
Marcin Gortat
The Spurs were drafting for the future though and Ian had tremendous upside. He just never panned out and was majorly set back by injury.
People rarely accept that gambles frequently fail
On Mahinmi, when you are looking for a center and are drafting after #5, you have to gamble and gambles by definition don’t frequently pay off. When the Lakers were looking for a center, they acquired Mihm, gave up a future all-star in Butler for Kwame Brown and drafted Bynum. Laker fans will go on and on about how trading Butler for Brown was such an awful deal. But I look at it that 1 out of 3 gambles worked, which is fine. Mahinmi flopped, but another gamble pick on Splitter may well pay off.
You bring up a good point, most Spurs picks during your 1994-2007 time period were gambles. The Spurs were a “veteran team” during almost that entire period. You don’t draft a solid, late first rounder (e.g. James Anderson this year) who needs minutes to develop when you have proven vets like Michael Finley willing to join for $2m/year. You instead go for draft-and-stash long shots who develop overseas without taking minutes away from your vets. Sometimes these lottery tickets pay off spectacularly (e.g. Manu Ginobili) but usually not.
No longer a prime destination for vets looking to win a ring, the Spurs drafted more conventionally in the last three years. George Hill, Malik Hairston, DeJuan Blair and James Anderson are the kind of players who need minutes to develop. Had the Spurs drafted these kinds of players the prior 15 years they might have more Nick Van Exels and Luke Waltons on their list. But they might also have fewer rings.
by doggydogworld on Aug 6, 2010 4:44 PM CDT up reply actions
The issue to me looks to be that the Spurs just didn’t like drafting in the first round until recently.
1995 – Alexander
1996 – No first round pick
1997 – Duncan
1998 – First round pick was traded on draft day
1999 – No first round pick
2000 – No first round pick
2001 – Parker
2002 – First round pick was traded on draft day
2003 – First round pick was traded on draft day
2004 – Udrih
2005 – Mahinmi
2006 – No first round pick
2007 – Splitter
2008 – Hill
2009 – No first round pick
2010 – Anderson
During the early and middle part of this decade, when they were always in the title conversation, they probably felt like they didn’t need to develop young players(and they were probably right). When Manu hit 30 a few years ago(may or may not be the reason), it seems like they shifted their focus to actually drafting players that could be developed and even used by the team. That big shift would actually be a great topic for conversation around here at some point.
Tony apologist since 2010.
the Spurs just didn’t like drafting in the first round until recently.
Correct. They didn’t want to give late first rounders the minutes they needed to develop. Every pick on your list from 1998-2008 was either traded or used on a foreigner for potential draft/stash.
This changed after 2007 for two reasons. First, the Spurs started to think about developing a young core for the post-Duncan era. Second, they bought the Austin Toros so rookies could get the minutes needed to develop even if they weren’t yet able to contribute at the NBA level.
by doggydogworld on Aug 6, 2010 5:27 PM CDT up reply actions
Without looking in to the specifics, I think we got contributors back from the trades that sent away all of those first round picks.
I know we traded away first round picks in the Antonio Daniels, Speedy Claxton and Kurt Thomas deals. I’m sure there were others.
by doggydogworld on Aug 7, 2010 12:42 AM CDT up reply actions
I didn’t realize that it was only 5. I just scanned the Spurs draft page and didn’t think to see if players had actually played for the Spurs.
which I think you would have known if you were a true Spurs fan.
by freshtunarightofftheboat on Aug 6, 2010 5:14 PM CDT up reply actions
Zing.
"We choose to go to the moon... and do the other things, not only because they are easy, but because they are hard." - JFK
by silverandblack_davis on Aug 9, 2010 4:09 AM CDT up reply actions
I have always read that it takes 3 years to assess a draft pick, so players who have played less than 3 years can’t be chosen. That leaves out Splitter, Hill, Blair and Anderson.
Yeah, so once again your question is pointless in accessing how good at drafting the Spurs organization is. Two of those players could potentially be all-stars or border-line all-stars (Hill, Splitter), and I think the other two will be at the very least extremely solid rotation players (Blair, Anderson). That said, this is all just speculation, but so is your question.
LOL!
Splitter and Anderson haven’t played a single game in the NBA and you are already projecting boffo futures for them?
I am saying look at 13-14 drafts and tell me which are the top 3 draft picks that provided value to the Spurs, excluding the consensus #1 overall pick. I even provided the answer for #1 and #2. To make things simpler, I put in a rule to exclude Scola as I consider the rights to a player who never played for the Spurs (Vassilis Spanoulis) and a future second round pick as next to no value.
To do the comparable thing for the Lakers with the added restriction that the pick has to be #24 or later with one exception up to #22 and going back to 1993, I would say the top picks for the Lakers are:
Nick Van Exel
Derek Fisher
Ruben Patterson
Jordan Farmar
Devean George
Luke Walton
Ronny Turiaf
Sasha Vujacic
Mark Madsen
Brian Cook
So, one good player, a few decent players and a bunch of garbage. I don’t understand your point here. are you saying the Lakers have drafted better than the Spurs in the last 16 years?
Yeah except we won 4 titles in that draft period to your 3, and ours covered a consistent dominance of ‘99 to ’07. We’ve only recently started drafting for immediacy and those picks aren’t allowed by your rules.
And to repeat myself, our draft picks are all late ones marginalizing their immediate value with their selections…
Nick Van Exel
Derek Fisher
Ruben Patterson
Jordan Farmar
Devean George
Luke Walton
Ronny Turiaf
Sasha Vujacic
Mark Madsen
Brian Cook
Nick was a good player no doubt, but most of those players no longer play with the Lakers and had a limited impact when they did.
Truth is the majority of the success the Lakers have had has been due to trading for Kobe and Pau while breaking the bank to add Shaq. Take those moves away and the drafted players you put above would have performed more like the Bobcats or T’wolves.
While complacency costs, perseverance pays
Apparently you didn’t read all of my post. I was just speculating, but that doesn’t change the fact that your question is a waste of time. And I am sure the Lakers would give up 80% of those players you listed if they knew they could get a Spanish league MVP and Big 12 player of the year, despite those two being unproven in the NBA. That is chance worth taking.
Oh and Ruben Patterson only played one season with the Lakers.
Brian Cook was the Big Ten Player of the Year, a second team All American per The Sporting News and Laker fans have few fond memories of him.
But now it’s the Big 10+2 and the Big 12-2
by doggydogworld on Aug 6, 2010 5:19 PM CDT up reply actions
Cap’s on vaca.
She’ll be back next week.
I always knew someday I was going to go viral - Paul "Double Rainbow" Vasquez
This is how really weird rumors get started. I think jolly meant “vacay”, as in vacation. But I’m back now, and boy have y’all been busy!
And please don’t get me started on Brian Cook. I happened to live in Illinois while he played at U of I, and no offense Dennis, but don’t even try to compare Big 10+2 basketball to Big 12-2 or Big East or ACC. Cook was soft in college and that continued in the pros, which is too bad, because if he had learned how to play a more physical game, his shooting stroke would have enabled him to be a valuable bench player for years as opposed to an HVC.
Are you saying Tiago’s accomplishments in Vitoria don’t count? So basically, you can rig the rules any way you like, so long as it makes the Spurs front office look less than stellar? Gotcha.
Tony apologist since 2010.
His rules make perfect sense. A Spanish league big man who never plays for the team that drafts him counts if traded to Memphis, does not count if traded to Houston. What could be more clear?
by doggydogworld on Aug 6, 2010 2:16 PM CDT up reply actions
Let it go
One thing i can do...................is FINGER ROLL.
by gunnin' gervin on Aug 6, 2010 7:33 PM CDT up reply actions
Here is a likely 10 man rotation this year:
Starters:
Parker – drafted
Ginobili – drafted
Jefferson – trade
Splitter – drafted
Duncan – drafted
Bench:
Hill – drafted
Temple – free agent
Anderson – drafted
Blair – drafted
McDyess – free agent
That’s 7 draftees in a contender’s 10 man rotation, with only one pick better than #20 in the past 15 years. Show me any other team which approaches this level of productivity from the draft.
Let's not discuss hypotheticals
Are you saying that the Spurs signed Bonner to a 4 year, $16M contract and he is not going to be in the 10 man rotation this year? What you propose could be the rotation or could be something very different. I can’t factually discuss possible futures
Bonner makes 3.0m this year. That’s the Spurs’ 7th highest salary but there are rookie-scale guys (Blair, Hill, etc.) who will get more minutes. Matt was 10th in minutes last year, but that was without Splitter. This year he’ll be more of a situational specialist. Kind of like a field goal kicker in football.
by doggydogworld on Aug 6, 2010 3:06 PM CDT up reply actions
The Lakers had 6 draftees out their top 9 players per minutes played on the ‘08-’09 championship team, with the picks being #10, #13, #24, #26, #27 and #32
Yeah, after you dumped Radmanovic in February of ‘09 you settled into a lineup in which 6 of the top 9 rotation players were draftees. And with draft positions that were no better than the Spurs. That’s good work.
by doggydogworld on Aug 9, 2010 12:32 AM CDT up reply actions
Top 10
I see a flaw in your list. Gary Neal has a guaranteed contract and his high level of experience and even higher numbers may put him in the top ten. I don’t think Temple’s contract is giaramteed/ The big question after the 11 guaranteed contracts is who makes the team from a list of Temple, Gee, Jerrells, Gist and Wilkerson. There is a need for a bigger player who can play the SF/PF spot. That should mean either Gist or Wilkerson make the squad. Temple will probably make it leaving Gee, Jerrells fighting for a spot. I think Pop will be satisfied with a 14 man roster. What say you?
I picked Temple arbitrarily. Substitute Neal (or Gee) for him and we still end up with seven draftees in the 10 man rotation. Actually I could argue that Gee is a draftee because the Toros drafted him, but I won’t go there..
Anderson is really the only one of the seven draftees I can see getting knocked out of the 10 man rotation and dropping us to six. Which is still darn good, as I noted above when Dennis discovered the ’09 champion Lakers had six draftees in the rotation.
by doggydogworld on Aug 12, 2010 3:00 PM CDT up reply actions
How about a different challenge. What team has won the most championships in the last 15 years. Of course there are rules, the team has to have stayed under or close to the salary cap, i.e. minimal or no luxury tax.
Don’t like that one?
What team has won with no more than one of its top stars being a top ten pick when originally drafted.
I can make up rules all day long if you want.
Lauri: thank goodness I have you magnificent bastards to waste [the offseason] with.
The Spurs
Happy now? Would you be nice enough to return the favor?
Not sure what you are asking for.
Lakers have done an outstanding job managing their team given their market, the Spurs have done an outstanding job given their market and constraints. Difficult to say who has the best FO as it is not apples to apples, but the Spurs has a more sustainable model for a non-mega-market, as evidenced by all the copycats.
However, the Lakers have won more recently in the only thing that really counts. No doubt about that.
Lauri: thank goodness I have you magnificent bastards to waste [the offseason] with.
I am a Laker fan and I have never understood how the Spurs got a reputation of a good drafting organization as they appear to me to have only made two good draft picks in 10+ years.
Did you honestly think that a self-admitted Lakers fan from DFW, who isn’t even registered to the Lakers’ blog on SBN, could post something like this on a Spurs blog[as their very first post ever], make up extremely restrictive rules so as to get rid of any recent and/or successful draft picks, and everyone would just cooperate without crying foul? Come on.
Tony apologist since 2010.
Ah crap. Look at me people, I am feeding a troll.
Lauri: thank goodness I have you magnificent bastards to waste [the offseason] with.
Hilarious.
swgeek, please check out the Quotes page which has been updated to reflect your recent awesomeness.
I always knew someday I was going to go viral - Paul "Double Rainbow" Vasquez
That’s not your first one, is it?
I always knew someday I was going to go viral - Paul "Double Rainbow" Vasquez
Ford and Hollinger recently ranked the Spurs the #1 management team in the NBA. That made me wonder yet again who are the good Buford/Pop draft picks after Manu and Parker. I thought I would seek enlightenment here. I thought people would debate the merits of various picks. Don’t posters here discuss whether various Spur picks were good or bad?
What the hell, will keep feeding for now. Manu. Tony. Hill. Blair. Anderson, though not proven yet. Splitter. All good picks, even though some don’t fit your arbitrary rules.
Also, Spurs were ranked the #1 management team, not the #1 drafting team. There is more to management than the draft.
Lauri: thank goodness I have you magnificent bastards to waste [the offseason] with.
You are welcome, guess you are not a troll after all. Thought you were just yanking our chain for a minute. Welcome to PtR.
Lauri: thank goodness I have you magnificent bastards to waste [the offseason] with.
Come on
I praised the picks of Manu and Parker. When someone said it was “Pop”, not “Pops”, I corrected the OP. I gave the equivalent answer to what I was asking for the team I root for. I tried to be polite, even though I was getting frustrated at the refusal to answer what I thought was a simple question. I thanked all of those who gave answers. Are fans of other teams not welcome to post here?
No, we have two great regulars Olf, a Lakers fan, and 2Nashty, a Suns fan. Maybe it was our perception of your question, but even your thank you’s “read” as snide acknowledgments of perceived superiority.
Tandur and pslakerfan are here quite a bit too. Don’t want anyone to feel left out.
Tony apologist since 2010.
And WaveOcean the Cavs fan.
"We choose to go to the moon... and do the other things, not only because they are easy, but because they are hard." - JFK
by silverandblack_davis on Aug 9, 2010 4:12 AM CDT up reply actions
I haven’t seen him here since the LeBacle. Did I just miss him, or has he not come around?
Wonder how he’s doing.
I always knew someday I was going to go viral - Paul "Double Rainbow" Vasquez
Probably still not done burning his LeBron merchandise.
"We choose to go to the moon... and do the other things, not only because they are easy, but because they are hard." - JFK
by silverandblack_davis on Aug 9, 2010 6:53 PM CDT up reply actions
I bet his tears keep putting the fire out.
Hey if repeating as champions were that easy even the Spurs could do it.
by olf on Aug 9, 2010 8:47 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Erm, Wave didn’t seem like the type to burn stuff. But I could definitely see him shedding a manly tear or two.
The Spurs have an awesome front office. They are the envy of the entire league. - olf
Hey who are you calling an Erm?
Hey if repeating as champions were that easy even the Spurs could do it.
by olf on Aug 9, 2010 9:26 PM CDT up reply actions
I’m not calling ANYBODY an Erm.
I’m calling YOU Erm. It’s short for Ermenegildo Zegna, as in the menswear line.
I figured you looked like one of these guys in real life. I can’t be that far off, can I?
The Spurs have an awesome front office. They are the envy of the entire league. - olf
LOL
do you go on every site talking trash to people Olf? I must admit you do drop a few jewels here and there.
One thing i can do...................is FINGER ROLL.
by gunnin' gervin on Aug 9, 2010 11:00 PM CDT up reply actions
There are several fans of other teams that post here on a regular basis, but they don’t choose to make inflammatory remarks in their very first post on the site, and then structure the rules of your question in such a way that you get the answer that makes that inflammatory statement look correct. You didn’t get off to a very good start. So, if that was a mistake on your part, mistakes are easy to forgive. I’ll forget it and start over.
Anyway, I agree with the other posters above who said that Beno is the best player who meets all of your “criteria”.
Tony apologist since 2010.
It says management team in the NBA…which doesn’t specifically mean a team’s ability to draft. You can make solid free agent signings and solid trades to be considered a good front office. I think that is what makes them so good. That the Spurs haven’t needed to draft in the top 10 at any point this decade to still be so successful. They landed Duncan with the overall #1 and then have just built the team around him since.
Name another team in the league that has done that recently and won championships without high draft picks or getting a big name in a trade (Lakers with Gasol, Heat with Shaq, Celtics with Allen & Garnett).
Name another team in the league that has … won championships without high draft picks or getting a big name in a trade.
Great point, GMac! I thought this was such a excellent observation that I did the research and you have to go all the way back to Houston’s first championship in ’94 to find a team besides San Antonio that fits your criteria.
Sound weird? Check it out:
Lakers: Gasol
Lakers: Gasol
Celtics: Garnett, Allen
Spurs: Draft
Heat: Shaq
Spurs: Draft
Pistons: R. Wallace
Spurs: Draft
Lakers: Shaq
Lakers: Shaq
Lakers: Shaq
Spurs: Draft
Bulls: Rodman
Bulls: Rodman
Bulls: Rodman
Rockets: Drexler
Rockets: Draft
I always knew someday I was going to go viral - Paul "Double Rainbow" Vasquez
Shaq was not traded to the Lakers. (He signed as a free agent.)
Hey if repeating as champions were that easy even the Spurs could do it.
Good point. I thought FA signing was covered by GMac.
I always knew someday I was going to go viral - Paul "Double Rainbow" Vasquez
Oh, I only read your quote. Never mind.
But are trades and free agent signings considered “cheating” or something in South Texas? Or is this another way for all y’all to pat yourselves on the back for having an awesome front office? (I’ve heard read it is the envy of the entire league.)
Hey if repeating as champions were that easy even the Spurs could do it.
Not at all. However the article was about drafting skills, which is also not the best way to prove anything.
btw, this may be just me, but you are getting extra snippy and annoying lately with your sarcastic comments. I used to like you and feel we treat you ok for the most part so it bugs me a bit.
Lauri: thank goodness I have you magnificent bastards to waste [the offseason] with.
I’ve decided that olf just SEEMS more annoying lately, because of LA’s repeat trophies in conjunction with the Spurs’ longest title drought since the Lakers’ three-peat.
I always knew someday I was going to go viral - Paul "Double Rainbow" Vasquez
This may seem like blasphemy to many, but I don’t really care about trophies that much. I love following the Spurs even though I did not expect them to win it all last year and do not expect it next year.
I didn’t go over to the Cleveland site and bait them after they lost in the playoffs. If you want to discuss Spurs, come over to PtR, but if you just want to engage in sarcastic baiting there are better places to hang out, like SpurTalk. Olf used to have more useful discussion points, it seems like more of his comments (and his sig) are just baiting now.
Lauri: thank goodness I have you magnificent bastards to waste [the offseason] with.
But are trades and free agent signings considered "cheating" or something in South Texas?
E.g. He could have stopped her and it would have been perfect.
Ok, I will stop now. Just had to get that off my chest.
Lauri: thank goodness I have you magnificent bastards to waste [the offseason] with.
I’m sorry you feel that way. Fwiw I have had that sig for probably 6+ months now, back somewhere mid last season. When the Lakers were playing poorly and I kept getting crap that they would never make/win the Finals.
Also, I realize that a lot of people here love the Spurs (which is pretty much the point of this site, duh) I try not to comment on every thread. I have no problems with you guys lovin’ your team and being excited for the new season.
But I am often moved to add my opinion when it comes to comparing teams. The “team of the decade” and “awesome front office – envy of the entire league” stuff regularly pushes my buttons. Or if someone cracks on my Lakers sometimes I add my “perspective”.
PS. You’re from NorCal, right? They hate us up there – kinda like they do in So Texas or Portland or Boston, or down in San Diego or . . .
Hey if repeating as champions were that easy even the Spurs could do it.
by olf on Aug 8, 2010 2:30 AM CDT up reply actions
envy of the entire league" stuff regularly pushes my buttons.
Trust me, I noticed that after about the 453rd time you posted it :)
Yep. I am from NorCal, and Laker hate is nowhere near as prevalent as you would think. I joke about them, but don’t really hate them, though admittedly I liked them way more in the Magic/Worthy/Kareem days than I do now.
Lauri: thank goodness I have you magnificent bastards to waste [the offseason] with.
Understand your position, but what’s true is true. Lakers have won the championship for two years running. That’s true. Spurs have an awesome front office, that’s true. Give kudos where it is deserved. Ah, but we’re talking about opinions here.
Kobe is an incredible talent on the court, that’s true. But my opinion is that he lacks class on the court at times and off the court most of the time. Since I know you’re not a Kobe lover that shouldn’t push your buttons.
Back to the thought at hand, would it kill you to give kudos where it is deserved? Maybe like the Spurs front office is one of the best, too bad it didn’t bring them a title the last three years? That sounds more like the old olf to me, not quite as smug.
Timmy D .... enough said.
I guess I am missing your point. My recollection of the Spurs championship teams was that everyone important was acquired by trade or free agency except Duncan, Ginobili and Parker. Personally, I find it more impressive that the Lakers drafted three starters (Bryant, Bynum and Fisher) with no pick higher than #10. Of the top 9 players on the ‘08-’09 championship squad, the Lakers had drafted 6 of them.
My point is that when they were ranked #1 front office, that doesn’t mean they were ranked solely on their drafting ability. It had to do with the total body of their work. I know your premise was to rip on the Spurs and bring every angle back to the drafting of players. I was pointing out that a front office does more than just draft players.
Also, Kobe Bryant was drafted by the Hornets, not the Lakers. So technically he doesn’t count as being drafted by them. So 5 players…. Here is the roster from Lakersuniverse.com :
5 Jordan Farmar – Drafted by Lakers
2 Derek Fisher – Drafted by Lakers
9 Sun Yue Point – Not top 9
12 Shannon Brown – Drafted by Cavs
24 Kobe Bryant – Drafted by Hornets
18 Sasha Vujacic – Drafted by Lakers
3 Trevor Ariza – Drafted by Knicks
6 Adam Morrison – Drafted by Bobcats
4 Luke Walton – Drafted by Lakers
7 Lamar Odom – Drafted by Clippers
21 Josh Powell – Not top 9
16 Pau Gasol – Drafted by Hawks
17 Andrew Bynum – Drafted by Lakers
28 DJ Mbenga Center – Not top 9
And how many rings would those draft picks have won if Gasol wasn’t traded to the Lakers? Seems like that roster of good draft picks couldn’t get very far in the playoffs until the league shifting trade of Gasol from Memphis.
As I said, I don’t understand your point. The work of a front office is drafting, trading and signing free agents. And then you said something to the effect that the fact that the Spurs didn’t use a major trade or a major free agent signing sets them above other championships team. Why? Why is using all options available to a front office a bad thing?
Ok. Your original comment was that you didn’t understand how the Spurs front office could be ranked number 1 because they had no other good draft pics other than Tony, Tim, Manu, George, and DeJuan. Correct?
Ford and Hollinger recently ranked the Spurs the #1 management team in the NBA. That made me wonder yet again who are the good Buford/Pop draft picks after Manu and Parker.
So my point was that being a good front office means signings, trades, and draft picks to build a championship team. My point was also that with the lack of Top 10 picks, major free agent signings, and a blockbuster trade, it shows how resourceful and truly good the FO is. My point was also to have you or anyone name other teams in the league that have used the same criteria (no major signings, trades, and top 10 picks) to build a championship caliber team.
So to summarize, I never said using all options available is a bad thing. I was merely responding to your comment that you couldn’t understand how the Spurs front office was ranked number 1 with “no good draft picks.” And then I merely asked you how good your roster of great Laker draft picks would have been without the 1 sided trade for Pau Gasol?
How good would the Spurs teams have been if the Spurs had gotten the #2 (or even the #5) pick in the 1997 draft? The Spurs got the #1 pick and the Lakers made the trade. Pretending they didn’t is just a waste of time.
Dennis010
you and Olf are so funny. San Antonio Spurs front office gets the recognition it does because of the way the team has stayed competitive year in and year out while not being a sexy spot for free agents like the bigger cities in the U.S..
Of course the number one pick in 97 which is known to be Tim Duncan helped a lot. The team still had to build around him year in and year out. The way it has stayed competitive is by utilizing advance scouting of foreign and domestic players intelligently. While also not over paying for marginal role players that fit the team needs accordingly. Or finding role players that were looked at as being inferior by most teams and making them work for us and our system.
It is not a coincidence that a lot of Spur front office disciples hold middle to high ranking jobs through out the league.
The team has set the standards on draft and stashing foreign players. Was one of the first NBA teams to actually own there D-League team and used it to cultivate players for the actual Pro squad. Not to mention pretty much perfecting the blue print on how to run a smaller market squad to perfection.
It is easier for a bigger marketed team to get free agents because they have more to offer outside of basketball earning capabilities. Like making movies or being able to hook up with music producers easier to launch a music career. San Antonio doesn’t provide easy access to those similar endeavors Like a New York or Los Angeles. Not to mention the night life as cool as it is in San Antonio is not as appealing as it is in most major cities.
In conclusion the Spurs get so much praise from actual basketball writers or people in the know of any sport because they realize the job that has been done by this organization isn’t an easy one in any city. Not to mention a city that isn’t recognized in the world as a major one.
One thing i can do...................is FINGER ROLL.
by gunnin' gervin on Aug 9, 2010 11:31 PM CDT up reply actions
I think if your post wasn’t structured as an (artificial) challenge, but instead led with your statement that you’re a Laker fan seeking enlightenment as to why the Spurs’ management is so highly regarded (considering the picks that haven’t worked out over the last ten drafts), you would have gotten a different response and the answers that you seek.
I’m assuming that your intent was not to force PtR’rs into admitting that the 3rd best draft pick — under your restrictive rules — was a player not highly regarded here, but to gain some insight into why we think our F.O. is a good one. Debaters often try to define the terms of the argument in order to ‘win’ whereas true knowledge seekers keep an open mind and ask open-ended questions.
by freshtunarightofftheboat on Aug 6, 2010 5:36 PM CDT reply actions
I suppose an indicator of how highly regarded the Spurs’ management is would be the number of them be hired elsewhere. As of this minute the most recent hiring seems to be Lance Blanks, former Spurs scout, as the new GM of Phoenix. I’ve lost count as to how many there are altogether.
Dang! I thought I read that Turkey-Glue’s agent had already gotten the job, and posted under that assumption. I guess Sarver (Phoenix’ owner) is a lot smarter than I thought. And he raided the Spurs for talent once again. :(
by freshtunarightofftheboat on Aug 10, 2010 2:21 PM CDT up reply actions
I thought I read that Turkey-Glue’s agent had already gotten the job
I think he is Lance’s new boss.
Ah, thanks for clarifying. So conflict of interest issues could still arise?
Hey, if posting a sharp, insightful, yet non-sarcastic comment were that easy, even olf would do it.
by freshtunarightofftheboat on Aug 11, 2010 10:29 AM CDT up reply actions
I just checked and you’re right, Lon Babby (Turkoglu’s and Childress’ agent) is the Suns’ President of Basketball Operations. I wonder, when he sits down with Lance Blanks to discuss those two players’ contracts and any personnel decisions that might affect his clients, does he do so as his clients’ agent, or as Blanks boss?
Hey, if posting a sharp, insightful, yet non-sarcastic comment were that easy, even olf would do it.
by freshtunarightofftheboat on Aug 11, 2010 11:12 AM CDT up reply actions
I would have thought he would have to give up his agent job
While complacency costs, perseverance pays
That would make sense to me too. But I haven’t read anything to indicate that his clients have found new agents, nor have I seen any statement from the Phoenix FO or the league office addressing the conflict of interest concerns that were raised in the press.
Hey, if posting a sharp, insightful, yet non-sarcastic comment were that easy, even olf would do it.
by freshtunarightofftheboat on Aug 11, 2010 8:01 PM CDT up reply actions
Fair. I thought phrasing it as a challenge would bring out more responses (“I loooove challenges”) but I was wrong.
I’m with FreshTuna on this. I saw your post minutes after it came out and saw it only as baiting.
To answer your question of why they have such a great reputation, and Kupchak doesn’t, if you look at the list of players from both teams taken 20th or lower you will find the Spurs with two all-stars and the Lakers with zero. While the Lakers have drafted some serviceable guys late, none of the guys are perennial borderline all-stars and none of them were the top dogs on teams that one championships.
Additionally, they have had very few busts.
We specialize in misinformation around here. Facts and stats just get in the way.
by Wayne Vore (ATS) on Aug 6, 2010 6:33 PM CDT up reply actions
Regardless, how freaking hard would it have been to say “Beno” to shut me up? This thread then would have like 3 replies
That wasn’t the point of your post. The point of your post was this:
and I have never understood how the Spurs got a reputation of a good drafting organization
You just constructed a lot of criteria around your question around to try to make your point.
So, alternatively, you could have just not posted it.
I remember back when Greg Maddux had won 15 games per season for something like 12 years in a row. Nobody had done it, or it was a very elite group, and somebody asked him about it. He said something to the effect of, “you are just drawing arbitrary limits to get a stat. If you had chosen 16 games per season, I wouldn’t make the cut. If you chose 14, then other people would have.”
We specialize in misinformation around here. Facts and stats just get in the way.
by Wayne Vore (ATS) on Aug 6, 2010 6:51 PM CDT up reply actions
Yeah, Maddux wasn’t full of himself. That’s for sure.
We specialize in misinformation around here. Facts and stats just get in the way.
by Wayne Vore (ATS) on Aug 6, 2010 6:59 PM CDT up reply actions
The point of your post was this:I wasn’t going to post it. I originally hit “Publish” with just the challenge and the rules. I struggled to come up with something to pad out the post to 75 words and that is what I came up with. A poor choice, but oh well. And again, the “challenge” idea was a bad one but I thought coming up with the answer would involve researching players drafted 15 years ago, but it didn’t.and I have never understood how the Spurs got a reputation of a good drafting organization:
So, alternatively, you could have just not posted it.
You just constructed a lot of criteria around your question around to try to make your point.
I don’t think the rules were that arbitrary. I would use the same basic rules for evaluating any GM. If I took out the #1 exception, it would have changed the post from third best to fourth best – something I consider pretty minor.
The arbitrary was the "third"best. Sure, if you remove the three all-stars from the list of somebody’s resume it isn’t going to look quite as good. Not to mention the play at least 3 years and played with the Spurs parts. You eliminated maybe the top 5-6 guys from the list. I’d say that is not minor.
We specialize in misinformation around here. Facts and stats just get in the way.
by Wayne Vore (ATS) on Aug 6, 2010 7:35 PM CDT up reply actions
Doing that did bring out more responses… this thread has TONS of comments. My point is that most of the responses that the ‘challenge’ elicited were not helpful to you, because of its artificial nature and the recognition of that fact by PtR’rs.
Again, there’s no percentage in trying to game us. If you have a real question and want thoughtful answers, ask it directly with no agenda or bias behind it. You might be surprised by the responses you get here.
by freshtunarightofftheboat on Aug 9, 2010 8:14 PM CDT up reply actions
So the discussion has entirely centered around the Spurs and the Lakers which is kind of silly (I think, as aforementioned, with Duncan/Malone analogy).So let’s look at some other teams, this is kind of scan so i might be not entirely correct. But some of better teams in league and see who they have managed to draft 20th pick or above 1997-2007. And nevermind following the rest of the rules b/c I’m just not that bored to look up all these players and see if they played their first game and 3 years thereafter.
Boston Celtics…Kris Clack, Josip Sear, joseph Forte, Darius Songalia, Brandon Hunter, Dahntay Jones, Justin Reed, Tony Allen, Delonte West, Orien Green, Ryan Gomes, Gabe Pruitt, Semih Erden, JR Giddens Lester Hudson
1.5 guys still on roster if I’m not mistake. 3-4 role player guys, no starts.
Orlando Magic: Eric Washington, Miles Simon, Laron Profit, Jerly Sasser, Omar Cook, Zaza Pachulua, Anderson Varejao, Antonio Burks, Travis Diener, Martynas Andriuskevicius, James Augustin, Lior Eliyahu,
Um, lots of interesting names, None of them on the roster anymore. Varejao the only one who has gone on to do anything really.
Phoenix Suns: Stephen Jackson, Jake Tskalidis, Alton Ford, Casey Jacobsen, Nate Robinson, Marcin Gortat, Rajon Rondo, Sergio Rodriguez, DJ Strawberry, Alndo Tucker
Suns have actually managed to pick some pretty good late picks. None of them are with the Suns today but….
Miami Heat: Charles Smith, Mark Sanford, Corey Brewer, Tim James, Rodney Buford, Eddie House (from Denver, via cleveland), ernest brown, ken johnson, rasual butler, Jerome Beasley, Pape Sow, Matt Freije, Wayne Simien, Jason Smith, Stanko Barac,
Brewer? House? Butler? Of course, nobody is on the Heat anymore besides Wade who was traded or free agented.
Chicago Bulls: Roberto Duenas, Keith Booth, Maceo Baston, Shammond Williams, Corey Benjamin, Lari Ketner, Michael Ruffin, Khalid El-Amin, Jake Voskuhl, AJ Guyton, Dalibor Bagaric, Sean Lampley, Trenton Hassell, Lonny Baxter, Roger Mason, Matt Bonner, Chris Duhon, Jameson Curry
Well, they gave us two spurs players and Duhon, otherwise, I have no idea who these people are. And pretty sure they aren’t playing for the Bulls.
So, that’s all I feel like doing right now, but clearly finding “stars” after the 20th Pick (which was frankly fairly generous considering where Spurs have picked most of roster. ) So whether they have played for us for 3 years and not to mention our overseas scouting, the Spurs have arguably the best talent scouts in the league.
I realize now looking at my post
that I focused on the east. So, anybody who wants to expand on this include more teams from the west…I also would like to reiterate what someone said earlier up post about management being more than drafting. We have consistently scouted talent, through draft or otherwise, and developed that talent to make contributing members to the Spurs team. Considering the market and the money, Spurs FO has managed to not only find stars but to put solid roleplayers around our stars without spending a butt-ton of money in trades. Granted, Tim Duncan draft was a fortuitous stroke of luck for the Spurs but otherwise, we have actually developed a team not ordered one ALA Miami
If you are talking about Draft
The lakers have a big History of winning championships signing players not neccesary drafting
Yes I know Magic Johnson, Jerry West and George Mikan
But what about shaq, wilt, kareem and kobe was not drafted by the lakers and i have to mention pau
Right Now the Lakers can say “Draft is for losers”
I will not surprise if Blake Griffin or a future All-Star sign with the lakers
While the Spurs Championships are thanks in a big part of the Draft and if you win championships with 3 or 4 players that you drafted (including 2 round players) then you get a reputation of a good drafting organization
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
NBA Playoffs Content Module
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
- ‘Deep Thoughts’ and Cheap Thoughts: San Antonio Spurs vs. Oklahoma City Thunder
- C-a-C: This is probably as close to LeBron James working with John Waters as we’ll ever get
- Dwyane Wade’s hot pink pants: The kind of thing you can get away with when you drop 41
- Lamar Odom to New York? Dwight Howard on the move? For now, it’s all talk
- David West hilariously denies each and every one of his young fans a high-five (VIDEO)
