Via mysa.com.

Micheal Finley is 35.  He'll turn 36 during the 08-09 season.  Players typically do not improve from age 35 to 36.  Therefore, the Spurs just willingly got worse.  Which is great, because we really had surplus awesome last year.

Manu!

Fab!

Scola!

Chapu!

Uh... Delfino?

And... seven other guys I've never heard of!

Who's with me!

YEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHH!!!!

Represent!

Here's some terrible news to wake up to, boys and girls.

Pallacanestro Biella, ecco James Gist

Imminente l'annuncio dell'accordo con l'ala americana

La nuova Angelico è nata e fa già sognare i suoi tifosi. Con l’ingaggio di James Gist, ala grande di 206 cm, classe 1986 proveniente dall’Università di Maryland e protagonista delle ultime summer league, dopo essere stato scelto al secondo giro dai San Antonio Spurs col numero 57 all’ultimo Draft Nba, il mercato può considerarsi chiuso in entrata, mentre in uscita si aspetta di conoscere la destinazione in prestito del giovane Carlo Ona Embo (Spagna?). Così il gm Daniele Baiesi ha incassato un altro si da una seconda scelta Nba dopo aver convinto anche Trent Plaisted, chiamato a sua volta dai Supersonics al numero 46. Due rookie di grande spessore che giocheranno in squadra con Reece Gaines, il quale nel 2003 fu addirittura prima scelta al numero 15 (proprio davanti a Troy Bell...) degli Orlando Magic. Se poi si conta anche il percorso inverso fatto da Biella a Chicago da Thabo Sefolosha, scelta numero 13 nel 2006 (stipendio attuale 1.931.160 dollari...) si può affermare che il nome di Pallacanestro Biella cominci a “dire qualcosa” negli ambienti del basket professionistico americano. La nomea di squadra che fa maturare i talenti è stata decisiva nell’ottenere la benedizione delle due franchigie Nba che detengono i diritti di Plaisted e Gist, entrambi destinati ad essere attentamente valutati per “fare la squadra” all’inizio della prossima stagione Nba. Non a caso, fa parte dell’accordo, è prevista la venuta di tecnici americani per seguire il lavoro fatto da entrambi a Biella in diverse fasi della prossima serie A. Un bel colpo sotto il profilo diplomatico che ha visto il presidente Atripaldi stringere accordi di collaborazione soprattutto con gli ex campioni del mondo dei San Antonio Spurs. Relazioni e reputazione che influiranno anche sulle decisioni del prossimo Draft 2009 quando Jonas Jerebko sarà eleggibile. Le previsioni di oggi lo danno attorno alla scelta numero 46, al secondo giro, ma davanti a lui c’è una stagione da ala titolare per convincere gli osservatori delle sue potenzialità. L’Angelico ci spera, perchè nel mezzo ci sarebbe un campionato molto ben giocato... Gabriele Pinna

Basically, these days, if you find the name of an NBA player you like in an article with a bunch of foreign words you don't understand, it pretty much means he's not going to be playing in the NBA next season. Our Carl Landry/Paul Millsap/Brandon Bass wannabe is apparently going to the Italian League this year. What's worse is that it seems he's doing so with the Spurs full blessing.

I can't decide if I'm more stupefied or more angry. It's like 51/49 at this point. I have no idea what our front office is doing. I could rant and rave and try to turn the air blue, but you know what? I've got too much shit to do and I'm just too tired. I think I'll just watch a tape of the Argentina-Ivory Coast Olympic soccer game instead (Lionel Messi played!).

I'm sure when Matthew finds out about this he'll thrill you all with wonderfully creative profanity and several applications of the word "fuck" that you didn't even know was possible.

(Thanks to PtR member znimrod for the heads up on this.)

That is unequivocally the lamest title I've ever blogged.

I do not want Jannero Pargo on the Spurs.  Why, you ask?  Because he sucks.  The less sucky players, the better.  That's what I think.  Call me crazy.

Why does he suck?  He averages less assists per 48 minutes than Tony Parker.  He's a career 39.5% shooter from the field.  He's a career 36.5% shooter from 3.  You know how many players shot better than 36.5% from 3 last year?

65.  They're not hard to find.

His TS% last year was 46.8%.  That is absolutely pathetic.  You know who posted better numbers last year?

Jacque Vaughn.

No, I'm not making that up.

Jannero Pargo is going to get paid millions a year for multiple years.  You can shake a NBDL team a couple Jannero Pargos will fall out.  He's a replacement level talent, and the fact the Spurs are even thinking about him makes me sad and frustrated.

No one had anything to say? Nobody? Shame on all of us.

Anyway, I know CarinaGino20 posted about the Argentina Iran game, so I found the youtube highlights of it, including the two sick Manu dunks. He very much looks like he's got his hops and quicks back.

Argentina vs Iran (via chacobasket)

That's the good news. The bad news is they beat frickin' Iran by a whopping 10 points and got their asses kicked before that by Lithuania. They look pretty awful right now and even making the knockout stages (basically finishing in the top four out of a group of six including them, Iran, Lithuania, Russia, Croatia and Australia) might be a challenge. They'll beat Iran for sure, and probably the Kangaroos, but the three eastern Euro squads will all be tough.

Their first game will be at 4:45 eastern on August 9th, so I think that means it's the morning after opening ceremonies, right?

The following started out as a simple reply to a reply that PtR member Spurchief posited to AusTechSpur (Wayne) on Matthew’s last post. Follow all that? Good. As is my nature, my answer grew longer and longer, so I decided to make an entry out of it, partly to defend Matthew a bit (not that he needs defending for anything but his personal life) and partly because I’ve grown weary of seeing the same post headlining our sweet blog for a week.

Spurchief wrote to Wayne:

..but you have normally weighed in with rational viewpoints and this one is no exception. I don’t think this position is much different than Powell’s but he is much more indignant about the lack of moves by the FO than you (or I are). I choose to believe that the lack of progress by the FO is not the result of intent, but a lack of opportunities to improve given the parameters of:

1. Don’t exceed the cap
2. Find a guy who fits, chemistry-wise
3. Ability to defend is important
4. Defer to the Big 3 offensively
5. The team has to be contenders every year

Who in the last 3 years of free agency has fit that bill? And as for the draft, while I agree that RC’s rep is overblown in this regard (although a great season by Ian may change that), most rookies don’t make an impact and SA needed immediate impact (see #5 above).”

I never had pie-in-the-sky dreams for someone such as Maggette. All I wanted was Azuibuike and I think he would've fit in perfectly fine with conditions 1 thru 5 on your post. Anyway, it appears that's not happening now, and when the Clippers front office is more forward thinking than ours is (getting Camby for nothing? I mean, WTF?), it may indeed be a sign of the apocalypse.

So far all we know is that the Spurs drafted three young guys and signed another relatively young one in Roger Mason.

Now we have to play the waiting game. We'll have to be patient to find out if A) Pop and the FO drafted guys worth drafting in Hill, Gist and Hairston, B) if they have the guts to put a couple of second rounders (or maybe even an undrafted guy such as Powell or Tolliver) on the regular season roster and C) if Pop has the patience to ever play them (as well as Mahinmi) when the games count, instead of "proven" i.e. old and slow, veterans.

Past track record and all available evidence suggest that the answer to all three questions will be a big, huge, sloppy, NO.

I'm not sure if I'm on the same page with Matty, Wayne or the majority of PtR with their offseason wish-lists or battle plans. Obviously, some opinions matter more to me than others, but I haven't taken the time to research what everyone here thinks we should do and don't plan on doing so.

I think that Matthew's point in this post was that for some time now there has been a massive talent gap between the third best player on the roster and the fourth best and as our entire roster, especially the role players, continue to age, the gap continues to widen, which is not good, as I hope everyone would agree. The best chance for the Spurs to win a title in '08 and beyond is for the gap to narrow. Our fourth best player has to be able to hold Tony Parker's jockstrap, figuratively speaking (although if he literally wanted to do so, it would certainly create an interesting new angle on the team's locker room dynamic that would, I am certain, make the Spurs all of a sudden more "interesting" to ESPN and bloggers worldwide).

Anyway, the Spurs are going to stay under the cap. You know it, we know it, everyone knows it. To wish otherwise is akin to wishing for a bigger winky - grow up already, because it's just not going to happen. For the team to field a fourth (or fifth, or God help us, sixth) guy who can actually play he'll have to be young. Young players come cheap because they're not who they will be yet, known commodities, and with them you're just basically hoping and guessing. Veteran players who've proven themselves in the NBA are expensive. If you find yourself a cheap veteran player, like the Spurs have filled out their rosters with all these years, then guess what? It means, with the odd exception here or there, the guy sucks.

I don't think either Matthew or I are guilty of not having the proper respect and reverence for the past four titles. We're very thankful, believe me and personally, living in the Bay Area, I know it could be much, much worse. Here, people soil themselves just for making the playoffs and the Warriors have never been a legitimate contender in my two decades of following basketball.

I'm not going to cry or act like an asshole if the Spurs never win another one, but that doesn't mean I can't still root for them to win and criticize those responsible when I feel they're making mistakes. Pop's legacy is assured. For that matter so is Robert Horry's and Michael Finley's. Their lives will not be affected one way or another by me caring about their follies or foibles.

The point is, I have to care about their fuckups and call them on it. I have to. If I stop caring about it, then why be a fan in the first place? Why write about it? Blogging is no place for a "C'est la vie" attitude.

As Duncan and Manu continue to age, we need more help from the rest of the roster, not less. Barry had a good run as a Spur and Horry and Finley were serviceable. The time has come from new blood and the answer is youth, not experience. Our big three hid the weaknesses of the others by being young and in their prime. That luxury is gone forever and now a new formula is needed. Whoever will be the savior for the Spurs, if such a person exists, he will not be over 30 years old. For years now the big three have had to compensate for the lack of athleticism of their teammates, a task that has grown more difficult with their owned diminishing physical ability. I think they would welcome the chance and the opportunity for once to be the less athletic than their teammates and to instead compensate for their experience. You can teach people how to play team ball, you can't teach them how to run and jump.

While it appears that the Spurs have shown more commitment and willingness to give younger unknowns a chance this year, they haven't said they will do so definitively and the front office hasn't exactly established a track record of being honest with the press, especially the non-local press. Not that I blame them, as most of the non-local press are fucktards. Still, the only reason the Spurs now have all these roster openings this year for younger players is because not enough precautions were taken two years ago or last year during the off-season. The front office gambled with old, crappy players instead of mining for youth and exercising some patience, and two of the past three years, no matter how the losses transpired, the bottom line is they lost.

I'm not bitter about how 2008 ended the way I was about 2006. I'm convinced Pop blew that one with his Van Exel over Udrih foolishness, as well as his over reliance on Tinyball. 2008 was different, maybe less unavoidable, for a variety of circumstances. I just want to make sure that the front office has learned from past mistakes, that's all, and I think Matthew would tell you the same thing.

The Spurs were immediately placed on my mental back burner the minute I finished writing the recap of game 5 against the Lakers.  After coming back from Italy I found myself with what I believe is called “free time,” and my mind drifted back to the fact that the Spurs haven’t been quite right since the 05-06 season, the year of the infamous Manu Ginobili foul.  We all remember that moment and, thanks to Gregg Popovich, we know that if it weren’t for that foul the Spurs would have repeated as champions and gas would still be less than $2 per gallon.  The nagging question looping the recesses of my brain was how to illustrate exactly what is wrong the Spurs… and it came to me.  Not all of the sudden.  Not in a flash of light.  I was thinking about something I wrote in my journal (shut up) while in Italy…

"There’s a wasted life in the difference between striving for perfection and accepting nothing less."

The lesser point of that statement is that a small change in wording, thinking or acting can have big repercussions.

****

Do you agree with the following statement?

 The Spurs lost the WCF because Manu Ginobili was hurt.

I have a feeling most Spurs fans and Spurs management would agree with that statement.  That agreement is a symptom of the disease plaguing the Spurs.  The problem is not that the statement is false; the problem is what it implies.  It implies, similarly to Popovich’s numerous statements about the ’06 Dallas series, that the Spurs would have won if it not for one bad break.  That leads to the conclusion that there was only one variable controlling the Spurs fate; one flip of the coin.  It’s saying the odds of coming up heads four times in a row is one out of two, because you’re assuming the first three events turned in your favor.  The reality is that the Spurs lost to the Lakers because any one of the following four things happened:

1. Tim Duncan was less than 90%.
2. Manu Ginobili was less than 90%.
3. Tony Parker was less than 80%.
4. Bruce Bowen was less than 90%.

Any one of these events would have led to a Spurs loss against the Lakers (to argue otherwise is sheer ignorant idyllic idiocy).  The Ginobili injury just happened to be the obvious flip of the coin that turned up tails.

You could take any NBA championship contender and pick one player they could not win without.  The Lakers have Kobe, New Orleans has Paul, the Celts have Pierce, etc.  But could you pick four different lynch-pins for any of those teams?  You can’t.  The Lakers were without Bynum and made it to the finals.  Ray Allen played horrifically against the Cavaliers and the Pistons and Boston still came out victorious.

The Spurs did not lose because Manu Ginobili got hurt.  The Spurs lost because any of four different, independent events happened.  They had zero margin for random events, and this is entirely the fault of management.

****

The Spurs mistake has been their focus on finding “veteran role-players.”  Every player addition has been evaluated in the context of the Big Three and “fitting into the scheme.”  You may be thinking “Wait a second, that’s how it’s supposed to be done.”  Really?  Look at what that got us:

Michael Finley
Brent Barry
Bruce Bowen
Ime Udoka
Fabricio Oberto
Matt Bonner
Kurt Thomas
Jacque Vaughn
Robert Horry

Look at those guys a group.  Remove the context of Duncan, Ginobili and Parker.  Pretend you’re starting a team with those nine guys.  Who has a one on one game?  Who can penetrate?  Who has a post game?  Who do you run the offense through?  Who rebounds?  Who’s the interior presence?  Now pick any other team in the NBA, and look at their worst nine players.  Try to find a group worse than the Spurs.  It’s impossible to do amongst the playoff teams, and amongst non-playoff teams there are few, if any, obvious choices.

The supporting cast surrounding the Big Three is atrocious.  To say otherwise requires one to focus solely on how good they look playing next to Tim, Manu and Tony.  That futility and stupidity of that narrow-minded focus is laid bare by the realization of what, apparently, is a secret:

Every one looks good playing next to the Big Three.  (Except the Collective Detritus that is Robert Horry.)  They are by far the least selfish core in the NBA.  They play both ends of the court.  They say the right things.  They don’t show up their teammates or coach on the court or to the media.  They can create their own shot and create shots for others. 

Their diverse abilities, along with Pop’s stubbornness and his refusal to put with mistakes made by someone under the age of 30, have led to a focus on finding the smallest of pieces.  They have acquired players who “play the right way” or “play hard-nosed defense” or “do all the little things.”  When, instead, they should have simply gone after “good” players who, when called upon, can attempt to do the “bigger things” that have to be done when Manu / Tim / Tony gets dinged or the likes of Ray Allen has a bad stretch of games.

****

What frustrates me most about Spurs fans is that they evaluate the management in the same way they evaluate the players. 

In some respects I can understand refusing to admit just how horrible Michael Finley has become; pretty much all of us wanted to be an NBA player at one time or another.  Idolization of athletes, and ignoring their failures and faults, is no new thing.  (Not to mention criticism of any kind is getting discouraged more and more in every aspect of media.)  We look at the success of the Spurs, and we attribute some of the credit for that success to each member of the team.  We believe a team is a sum of its parts, but we ignore that some of those parts can be negative.  In the context of the Big Three, Michael Finley is a winner.  In the context of an average NBA team, he’s a waste of minutes.

What surprises me is that Spurs fans so willingly apply the same context to Spurs management.  The Spurs have won three titles in six years, so Pop must be a great coach and Buford must be a genius.  Give me a break.  I’m not saying Pop is a bad coach, but he’s been blessed with Tim Duncan, Manu Ginobili and Tony Parker.  Have the Spurs ever won a title they shouldn’t have?  Have they ever beaten a clearly superior team?  Have they ever pulled an upset?  Have they ever won when any of the Big Three suffered even the most minor of injuries?  Have the Spurs developed a single young player other than Tony Parker?  How hard is it to have a great defensive team when you have Tim Duncan guarding the basket?

Buford and Pop should be run up the freaking flag pole for their performance this past year.  Pop dicked around with lineups / game plans / time out calling / substitution patterns all year, openly admitting he didn’t care about home court advantage.  Well, hmm, that might have come in handy against New Orleans.  Maybe that series wouldn’t have gone 7 games.  Or maybe when the plane couldn’t take off after game 7 the Spurs could have driven home and slept in their beds.  Am I blaming Pop for a plane malfunction?  No.  I’m blaming him for ignoring the precariousness of the Spurs chances and undervaluing home court advantage for a group of old, slow players.

Pop spent the first 50+ games of the season with the JV as his backup.  Stoudemire is acquired, given 15 games and then essentially kicked to the curb.  The playoffs arrive and, wow, what a shocker, the JV is a total zero on offense, to the point Barry is thrust into PG duty despite having played about 5 minutes there all year.  Do I blame Pop for the JV sucking?  No.  I blame him for ignoring the suckage and therefore not playing Barry / Ginobili as the backup PG all year.

(And that, my friends, is the short list of Pop's blunders.)

Buford hasn’t been any better.  We haven’t drafted a useful player since Beno.  Scola was given away when he’d clearly be the second best big man on the Spurs.  Butler, Elson and Bonner contributed nothing to very little.

****

I see little reason to hope the Spurs will be any better next year.  That is not to say the Spurs won’t be good enough.  They’ll just be in the same position as 07-08:  helpless if anything goes wrong.  The writing, after all, is on the wall:

"The ‘getting younger’ thing is overblown," Popovich added. "If we knew Manu would stay healthy, Timmy (Duncan) would stay healthy and Tony (Parker) would stay healthy, we’d bring back the same doggone team. And if any of those guys are not healthy, we’re not going to win a championship anyway."

 Translation?  Three studs and a bunch of suck.

Via NBA.com.

The three draft picks are there. So is Mahinmi.  So is soon to be 27 year old Tom Whitworth.  I seriously cannot even find a picture of the guy.

A Peeteearrer mentioned the Spurs are apparently making an offer to Carlos Delfino.  I have absolutely no idea if this is true, but man, I hope so!  We need another guy who's great friends with Manu, who will come in and basically suck but no one will admit it because he's from Argentina and does "the little things" which is basically code for "cannot do the big things."

Here's the preliminary Spurs 2008-09 slogan: 

Three studs and a bunch of suck.

As you've undoubtedly heard, Maggette has agreed to a five year, $50 million contract with Golden State.

I'm not going to talk about options.  If you're a Spurs fan, you're familiar with them.  If you're not, you're not reading this blog.

If the Spurs bring the same general roster back from last year, if Finley sees meaningful minutes, or Horry sees any minutes, or if Buford and company sign Kurt Thomas and pretend he's anything short of another piece to throw on the scrap heap, I swear to everything that is holy that I will openly root against everyone not named Manu, Tim and Tony.  I will take every opportunity to rip ownership and every player not named Manu, Tim and Tony.  I will be the most negative blogger in the history of blogging.