I hope not. Even for one year at the vet min. As with Mason, it is simply time to move on.
Pretty sure spurs want to sign splitter 1st then worry about the other bigs left on the roster. Duncan,Splitter,Dice,Blair would be a solid front court. the 5th big isn't that big of a priority and frankly Bonner might not be a bad choice for that role. He knows the system well and can give solid minutes if asked during the regular season (of course im assuming that he wont crack the rotation in meaningful games)
What happens in the draft will also be a big factor for Mahinmi's potential future with Spurs.
While we are focused on Spurs drafting a SF, we can imagine a scenario where one of Whiteside, Orton or Patterson is available at #20. Spurs could also don't like the SFs available at #20 and go with a player like Larry Sanders. They could even really like a player like Jarvis Varnado or Craig Brackins and grab him somewhere in the second round.
What I've learned when I heard Ian's today, is that Spurs clearly haven't fully given up on him. Re-signing is an option but Spurs could also take another route and that's why they haven't made some kind of commitment to him.
As you were saying, MaNu4Tres...
Last edited by TD 21; 05-27-2010 at 01:17 AM.
You never get it. You try to ...but you don't
I was simply saying what was brought to my attention earlier this year. I could care less whether you believe me or not. I never said Mahinmi doesn't care about playing. I never said Splitter won't be a factor in his decision.
What I did say is exactly what Bruno had to say in regards of the situation, which was brought to my attention.
Fact of the matter is, you can never predict what will actually unfold prior to an off-season. You just can't. There's just many scenarios that could play out (A trade proposal that you can't turn down; a draft pick falling in your lap, ect.) There could be a 90% possibility of something to happen and it could go down the ter, if better opportunities present themselves. I figured you would be aware of that. I guess not.
Just do me a favor.... Save the immature mocking sentence until late July and perhaps early August when things actually unfold.
Last edited by MaNu4Tres; 05-27-2010 at 02:00 PM.
one thing for sure. Ian isn't a priority and not a plan A,B or C.
he might be back into consideration when Draft, Splitter, trades, even Bonner questions are answered. for sure there is a scenario that sees Ian with the Spurs next season (either draft no big, Splitter doesn't come, Bonner leaves, trade involves Dice) but I think the chance is very very small.
Well, that's just your opinion.
Signing Splitter and Mahinmi to go with a Duncan, Dice, Blair, Splitter and Mahinmi rotation could very well be Spurs plan A.
One thing for sure, you and me don't know Spurs' plan.
“If a team offers me a consequent playing time, I will thus sign with it. If the Spurs offered me a good project, I will stay in San Antonio. I would love to stay in San Antonio.”
Bruno or anyone have an idea what he means by good project?
Ian said "If Spurs have a good development plan for me, I will stay in San Antonio"
I like this at ude.
He's right in asking to Spurs F.O. at least a good development for him...he has already demostrated that the F.O. has made an error not exercising his option and, for what I understood, the F.O. has already told him that they were pleased of the way he played and behaved this season.
Ian has not played enough for let people have a real idea of what he really could do...but in my wiew he's a good person, with very good athletic ability, that knows the system, has already good relationship with the other players and, finally, has a lot of will to show what he's able to do.
Not a bad combination at all...
I would also hope Bonner doesn't factor into Ian's situation either. The tools and talent that this kid has are much more harder to come by. He's shown more in his short stints of playing time, than Bonner has all season.Same here, although I don't really have anywhere to speak it these days..
As for Ian, I hope he's back, but obviously it would make sense for him to want PT..TBH, I can see Mahinmi getting minutes here next year..Duncan's knees gave up on him again this season, so I'm assuming that Pop will rest him even more..McDyess doesn't play a lot during the regular season anyways..
There will be minutes available if both parties are interested IMO..I wonder how Bonner ties in here though..
If the coaching staff would make a commitment toward getting Ian productive minutes, I believe we'd see a year of solid, productive contribution from him.
As a result, the Spurs frontline would be that much more better and deeper from tapping into the investment that is Ian, as opposed to watching another year of Bonner's postseason failings.
I don't give a what you supposedly heard, I told you why it's highly unlikely Mahinmi will return and Mahinmi himself basically stated the exact same reasons. So how exactly do I not get it, supposedly? Because I didn't agree with your opinion, which only took into account a fan's perspective? You may not have said those things directly, but you certainly implied that those things wouldn't stand in the way. In fact, did you or did you not have Splitter AND Mahinmi in the same front court together?
I'm aware that you can't predict with 100% accuracy, but if you're knowledgeable and logical, you can generally piece things together. I may not be able to nail the exact player to fill certain roles, but I can nail the exact type of player that will. What you did was look at the Mahinmi situation strictly from a fan's perspective, while disregarding the player's and team's. Then when I brought those two relevant perspectives to light, you took issue.
Do me a favor and remember that I'm well aware of the scenario in which Mahinmi would re-sign. So, if that scenario plays itself out, I don't want to hear "I told you so". If, however, Mahinmi re-signs, in addition to Splitter signing and McDyess not being traded, then you can gloat all you want.
Answer me this: If the Spurs sign Splitter and don't trade McDyess, what makes you think Mahinmi would want to re-sign and what makes you think they'd re-sign him, given their infatuation with having a stretch four on the roster?
I did and I came to such consensus due to the information that was brought to my intention that
A) They loved his progression throughout the year and intend to retain him
B) That he loves San Antonio and it's highly unlikely another place would be his 1st option. (Assumption he loves San Antonio and staying in San Antonio still is a priority)
C) That there would still be minutes available for him, if you dissect the scenario, where Tim and McDyess' minutes are limited.
D) They want him to grow for the future with the young players. Mahinmi said playing time would be a factor. Well there will be more next year than this year for sure, and most definitely there will be some next year when McDyess retires.
Funny how Mahinmi was also quoted saying this.
“If a team offers me a consequent playing time, I will thus sign with it. If the Spurs offered me a good project, I will stay in San Antonio. I would love to stay in San Antonio.”
I want to think that I have pieced a lot of information together. Who knows maybe I'm unable to do that from your perspective.
*Why Mahinmi would want to resign?
Let me refresh your memory...
“If a team offers me a consequent playing time, I will thus sign with it. If the Spurs offered me a good project, I will stay in San Antonio. I would love to stay in San Antonio.” - Ian Mahinmi
*What makes me think they would want to resign him? Or in other words interested in bringing him back and have him grow in the program?
- Because of what was brought to my attention (even if it was 2 months ago). As simple as that is. It's the truth.
*In regard of the stretch 4?
-It just so happened that the Spurs' 2nd best big man from 2004-2008 was Robert Horry, and just because Matt Bonner was their 3rd or 4th best big man from 2008-2010 doesn't mean Spurs will dig to the bottom of the barrel to find a stretch 4.
The quality of a big man comes first in regard of who they want to add to their roster, if they can stretch the floor that's even more valuable to their team. But quality comes first. They aren't going to overlook quality just to find a damn 4 that stretches the floor. Sorry they are not.
And if they had to dig to find a stretch four, the addition won't be intended to help this year or possibly even next year's team. The signing would be for development purposes and be spending his first year on the inactive roster and in Austin.
Spurs have just about always carried a 5th big on their active roster with the intent that he could help now. Therefore, digging to the bottom of the barrel to find a stretch 4 for the 5th spot in the rotation is very unlikely (sp?)
Last edited by MaNu4Tres; 05-27-2010 at 08:08 PM.
I think they are.The quality of a big man comes first in regard of who they want to add to their roster, if they can stretch the floor that's even more valuable to their team. But quality comes first. They aren't going to overlook quality just to find a damn 4 that stretches the floor. Sorry they are not.
A Duncan+Splitter+McDyess+Blair+Mahinmi big man rotation lacks a big deal of versatility.
Up to a point, teams are willing to sacrifice some talent in order to gain some versatility.
Spurs have spent to much time invested to let him walk.
With Dyess playing minimal this year it only makes sense for him to be the 4th big man option.
I would hope Bonner walks. Size matters in the NBA now. We need a legit 7fter.
please elaborate this.
That's your opinion. Which I respect.
Although I disagree to an extent. Of course versatility is something teams look for. But do you dig to the bottom of the barrel just to add a 6'8"+ shooting big man that has the ability to shoot? I think not. And if you do would it make a difference in the grand scheme of things?
An example can be Scalabrine on the Celtics right now. Is his addition really as valued as you claim, in regard of teams value versatility over quality to a degree? I don't see it.
I'd much rather use Jefferson at the 4 than put my eggs into the basket of a Scalabrine or a Tolliver. That's just me though.
I buy A, B and D, but not C.
As I've said all along, I get it from the Spurs perspective.
You're not understanding what I'm saying. What I'm saying is I understand the scenario where Mahinmi would re-sign. I just think the likelihood of that scenario coming to fruition is unlikely. What Mahinmi is saying is no different than what Mason said and we all know he's not coming back.
Once again, taking what I said out of context. I said if Splitter is signed and McDyess retained, why would Mahinmi want to re-sign?
You're not piecing information together. If you were, you'd take into account how this regime has constructed teams in the past. You and I may not be obsessed or infatuated with having a stretch four, but they are. They've made that abundantly clear.
I hope you're right about the quality of the big man coming first and not digging to the bottom of the barrel to get a stretch four, but their history suggests otherwise. Buford talked about their three-point shooting slipping from their championship years, so it's hard for me to see them just bringing in one wing who can shoot the three and calling it a day as far as that's concerned.
I think you two are talking past each other a bit and are a lot closer in your view then the debate would leave one to believe.
Seems to me 'Tres is coming to his conclusions off of a little bit of insight he came across, which might not coincide with conventional wisdom or the best rationale. But conventional wisdom and rationale don't always consider loyalty, comfort and particular emotions that might supersede all the quan ative facts; minutes and role chiefly among them.
So I get where 'Tres is coming from and I want to believe he's correct. But I also see where TD 21 is coming from because he's speaking to recent history or how they've conducted themselves in the past, which would be conventional wisdom and sound rationale. I think the insight 'Tres was able to acquire is the biggest differentiation here and the argument might be completely reversed had TD 21 been given that insight and not 'Tres.
That's obviously a big concern but what would be the likelihood that the Spurs could find that skill-set in a big man they could afford? I think they'll go with people they believe can contribute when the chips are down and possibly a young big with D-League eligibility if they don't believe Mahinmi can be that type of player. I'm sure they'd love a stretch 4/5 to make life easier on Tim and their paint-living point guard but with the way the season ended and the way Timmy looked physically ... I believe it got the organization's attention.
They need Bigs to be big. Or, more appropriately, Tim needs them to be big.
And where did those stretch 4's rank in terms of quality big men on the team?
Bonner was the 2nd most productive big last year and was the 3rd big man in the rotation most of this past year.
In Horry's case, he was the 2nd best big man from 2004-2007.
Spurs never have dug deep in the barrel (in terms of talent) and added a stretch 4 to help now, disregarding their overall talent level.
Spurs always carry 5 bigs on their active roster. Always. If there's any year all 5 guys will need to be of quality and need to be able to contribute, it's next year with Tim and McDyess in father time. This makes me believe even more so that they won't overlook quality just for the sake of adding a stretch 4 that can shoot, disregarding the talent level.
Last edited by MaNu4Tres; 05-27-2010 at 09:30 PM.
Blackjack making peace.
Read my last post.
Spurs have never dug to the bottom of the barrel for the sake of finding a stretch 4, disregarding their overall talent level. So their history doesn't suggest otherwise.
Overall quality does play a vital part in their evaluation and will even more so next season. With only the minimum-LLE, they won't be able to attain a stretch 4 of quality. Unless it's Bonner because of the loyalty factor. If Bonner leaves for more money, the stretch 4's available for the minimum-LLE are no where near as valuable as Bonner (40% 3 point shooter) and would be of inferior quality.
Spurs need their 5th big to be of quality next year more than ever.
Last edited by MaNu4Tres; 05-27-2010 at 09:47 PM.
Remember Ferry?
What did you think Haislip was? You think they plucked him out of obscurity for no reason? It was a shot to see if they could find a cheaper, more athletic alternative to Bonner. The Spurs had planned for this situation a year ago.
The reality is the Spurs didn't plan on Blair falling to them. Had he not, the composition of this front court would look different than I expect it to look next season. But that's where a stretch four not being amongst the top four bigs got squeezed; Blair's spot. I don't think it was ever by design.
Sure they never had to, because they generally had one amongst their top four bigs. Like I said, had Blair not fallen to them, I still think they'd have a stretch four amongst their top four bigs. When I talked about their history, I meant in terms of having a stretch four period.
Until I see otherwise, I'm going to assume that a stretch four is going to be on this roster. As for candidates, guys like Kurz, Tolliver, Novak, etc. are all attainable. I've brought up Cook (though the more I've thought about it, I don't think they'll sign him). There are options. Limited and not necessarily good options, but options nonetheless.
Yeah I do, #35 bald guy who frequently competed with Malik on who could dive on the floor the most and get down and dirty. Had one of the purest set shots the silver and black has seen. That unfortunately never fell against the Lakers.
Ferry was a small forward. He wasn't a big man. He could have played the 4, but they never played him at power forward or the 4 spot. He always played the small forward position with Derek Anderson at the 2 and Terry Porter at point.
Making your point irrelevant. He wasn't a 4.
We were and are talking about the 5th spot in the rotation, assuming the successful pursuit of Splitter.
They didn't sign Haislip as their 5th big. He was a low risk;high reward small forward/power forward that they didn't expect to contribute. It was a low risk; high reward situation and he was the 7th big behind Mahinmi, Ratliff, Bonner, Blair, Duncan and Dyess.
Like I said before, Spurs will need their 5th big to be able to contribute right now. Quality will be the priority, regardless if they can stretch the floor or not for this spot on the active roster.
Now once they add their quality big man as their 5th big, like resigning Mahinmi for instance, then I can see the Spurs adding a project stretch 4 for the minimum as the 6th guy, who would be sporting a his best wardrobe from Men's Warehouse.
But since we are talking about the 5th big in the rotation ( not 6th, not 7th like Haislip, which is irrelevant in the grand scheme of things), I'm willing to bet anything they won't dig to the bottom of the barrel, overlooking overall quality, just to find a player of lesser quality that has the ability to stretch a defense out.(Kurz, Tolliver, Novak)
What you got?
50,000 VBookie cash? You down or what? Put your money where your mouth is.
What are we betting?
I'm betting Spurs won't dig to the bottom of the barrel and add a Novak, Kurtz, Tolliver, Cook for the 5th spot in the rotation.
You in or are you out?
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
