re: Austin Rivers scores 42 at Orlando Pro-Am

quote:

---

he didn't suck last year.

---

Still pretty meh.

quote:

---

Where people shite all over the uncertainty of draft picks yet still hold out hope for Austin Rivers.

---

What other choice do we have? It's not like we have a draft pick to pour our hopes into I'm almost expecting the 2016 pick to get traded to move Gordon if he doesn't opt out and Demps has a SF target. Will we see a Demps Addendum to the Stepien Rule?

He's also a really solid defender and was top 10 in catch and shoot.

His passing also really improved.

His rookie year was bad because he should've been brought along more slowly than thrown to the wolves(EG's injury was the cause).

Explain.

quote:

---

I'm almost expecting the 2016 pick to get traded to move Gordon if he doesn't opt out and Demps has a SF target

---

Unless that target is a Robin to Davis's Batman, I would be pretty disappointed trading another 1st. When Davis's extension kicks in, they have to start taking advantage of rookie scale contracts, right?

quote:

---

quail man

---

I don't disagree with anything you said. It's not a slam on Rivers- he is what he is. A poor, young NBA player that has shown signs of becoming a mediocre one- there's nothing wrong with that at all. I hope he does better than that. It just makes me laugh a little seeing the dichotomy between the way people talk about him and Noel, MCW, etc. It's defending our guys because they're our guys. And I'm as guilty as everyone else in doing that. Fandom just makes me laugh sometimes.

I don't really agree with the comparison to the Spurs of the last couple of years. If we want to go back to the mid 2000s and look at their rosters, I think that is a better comp.

And I don't agree that a late 1st is equal to signing a Roberts or Ajinca on the whole. I just randomly picked the 22nd pick and looked up the draft over the past 10 years. Some busts of course, but useful guys like Jarrett Jack, Jared Dudley, Courtney Lee, and Faried were also picked there.

There's also a difference between offering vet minimums to Roberts and Ajinca and doing the same with guys like Mills and Green. Belinelli, for all the shite he gets here, is a solid NBA back up who made the same salary as Steamer last season. Diaw was making $4.5M and has proven to be very talented, if enigmatic over his career. They proved their value and the Spurs gave Diaw, Mills, and Green nice new contracts that pay them a combined $15M next season. Which leads to the main difference between these two teams:

The Spurs can afford to spend (and sometimes miss) on support players because their stars have taken way less money than they are worth for the past few years. Holiday, Evans, Anderson are nice players and are on, at the very least, reasonable contracts. But they aren't taking less $$ AND outperforming their deals the way Duncan, Parker and Ginobili have for a while now.

I'd rather max out another star player than have 3 or 4 B guys each taking up 12-17% of the cap.




Mark Deeks has a great write up on the Spurs detailing how they built a salary cap era dynasty. LINK

This part gets me every time

quote:

---

Manu took a mere $14.5 million over two years without testing the market, a $7.25 million average salary in the same market that gave O.J. Mayo $8 million.

---

And this strikes me as a key difference between the two franchises in player acquisition.

quote:

---

In addition to being able to lock down its stars without stagnating the roster, San Antonio's other strength comes from how it rarely overpays.

---

quote:

---

their stars have taken way less money than they are worth for the past few years.

---

Yeah, I posted Duncan, Ginobli and Parker's combined salaries back during the playoffs. It was astonishing when compared to LeBron, Wade and Bosh. It's not often that you'll find players of that caliber willing to sacrifice that much money. I don't think the Pelicans can count on it.

I think corndeauxs point is that it's easier to extend rookies coming off contracts than it is to sign free agents into cap space. One allows you to bump up closer to the tax line, the other forces you to be below of at the cap number. Though the flaw in his logic is that cap to tax room may get absorbed by Davis' extension early on so it may be a moot point.

It wasn't meant as a slam Demps post. You're right- he's found some good, cheap players. But the Spurs aren't the Spurs because of the role players. It's about the stars and the system there making it easier to find the right role players.

Demps has done a nice job of finding core players (even if I have my critiques of his acquisition methods), but TBD whether any of them can be a 2nd best player on a title team.

Like VOR says, I don't think you can plan on just following the Spurs blueprint or whatever. They have been the best team in the NBA since 1987.. It's unfair to Demps, Monty or any one else to judge them on what San Antonio has done. Certainly there are things to model, but the comps to the Spurs, regardless of where Demps and Monty have been, are worthless to me. Every team finds their own way.

quote:

---

ShamelessPel

---

quote:

---

that it's easier to extend rookies coming off contracts than it is to sign free agents into cap space.

---

That plays into it, but it's more that you get 4 years at a dirt cheap rate. I'd like to have some of the deep bench be guys the team can control for 4 years (McGary is 4/$6M) and perhaps see them vastly outperform their deals for a year or 2. The guy can also be moved (Fournier for Afflalo). Passing up on that seems silly to me. You can still sign a Jimmer or Smiht or whomever. But if your'e doing it right, the rookie should hold more promise than the vet.