What's new
By:

What is the least you would take for Big Al?

green said:
What is the difference between amnestying him before the season and letting him walk after the season? Besides another year of wasted development for Favors and Kanter.
Click to expand...

Paying 15 million dollars for nothing. Would you do that?
 
Cyrone Torbin said:
I guess that is easy to say when it isn't your money.
Click to expand...

It's Miller's money. Right now he has two players with the sky as their limit on rookie contracts...playing 20 mins and less than 20 mins a game. Favors is going to cost him a lot more than he is paying Al (hopefully) and is a much more rounded player.

The question is, why would you keep him?
 
green said:
It's Miller's money. Right now he has two players with the sky as their limit on rookie contracts...playing 20 mins and less than 20 mins a game. Favors is going to cost him a lot more than he is paying Al (hopefully) and is a much more rounded player.

The question is, why would you keep him?
Click to expand...
It's only one more year. Al isn't going to bring down the Franchise in one year. If he had more then I'd want to get rid of him at all cost. One thing to remember is even if Al is still on th team next year Favors minutes will still go up due to Ty knowing he can slide Milsaps to sf for stretches of the game
green said:
Marbury was traded twice for a bounty. He was traded for Terrell Brandon, with Cassell involved as well. Then he was traded for Jason Kidd. Crazy.
Click to expand...

this is probably my fault, but what are you trying to say here?
 
This thread inspires internal conflict. What is the LEAST I would take? Well, I'm not a very good business man if I start out only asking for a bag o chips. It's a counter-intuitive question. Maybe it's just for comic effect. We get it - you hate Jeffy.

Boring thread.
 
The only time you amnesty a player is when he has a long expensive contract, or if his character is extremely detrimental to the team. Big Al is neither of those things, so someone isn't going to pay him FIFTEEN MILLION DOLLARS to not play basketball.

Comparing him to Marbury, who was literally crazy, is ridiculous.
 
Cyrone Torbin said:
The only time you amnesty a player is when he has a long expensive contract, or if his character is extremely detrimental to the team. Big Al is neither of those things, so someone isn't going to pay him FIFTEEN MILLION DOLLARS to not play basketball.

Comparing him to Marbury, who was literally crazy, is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Let me ask you about his character then. Would he be ok playing behind Favors and Millsap and splitting time with Kanter? Would he be ok if his shots dropped from 18 a night to 5-8? His attitude the one or two times Corbin has left him out at the end of games would say otherwise.

In business, sometimes, in the long run, it is better to lose some money short term. And use lots of commas.
 
The least I'd take . . . hmmmm . . . a near-future lottery protected 1st round pick AND a decent role player that could actually contribute to the 2nd unit.
 
U Gotta Love It Baby said:
This surprises me.

So if it came down to the wire and the best offer was 2 second rounders, you would say no and keep Al the rest of the season?
Click to expand...

Of course. You would be a horrible GM buddy.....
Why the hell would you trade Al for a couple probably worthless second rounders? There's no way that you couldn't find a better deal than that.
 
green said:
In this situation, absolutely. That being said, Jefferson is good enough that some dumb team will do what the Jazz did. Trade semi-crappy picks for him.
Click to expand...


I agree with you so the bird rights to Hasheem Thabeet and JJ Hickson, and Portlands #40 pick sounds good to me.

But 10 cents on the dollar O'Connor won't go for it. The most likely scenario is the rights to Fran Vasquez and another TPE to shelve.
 
green said:
Let me ask you about his character then. Would he be ok playing behind Favors and Millsap and splitting time with Kanter? Would he be ok if his shots dropped from 18 a night to 5-8?
Click to expand...

C'mon, name one NBA starter who would be ok with that. Everyone wants to start. It has nothing to do with character. How happy was Millsap last year when Favors started?
 
green said:
Let me ask you about his character then. Would he be ok playing behind Favors and Millsap and splitting time with Kanter? Would he be ok if his shots dropped from 18 a night to 5-8? His attitude the one or two times Corbin has left him out at the end of games would say otherwise.

In business, sometimes, in the long run, it is better to lose some money short term. And use lots of commas.
Click to expand...

My2Cents said:
C'mon, name one NBA starter who would be ok with that. Everyone wants to start. It has nothing to do with character. How happy was Millsap last year when Favors started?
Click to expand...

Would he be "ok" with it, probably not. I'm sure he would be upset, especially if it didn't translate to wins. I don't think he would vocally complain or let it get in the way of team chemistry, which the media portrays that the group gets along very well together.

I know you think Big Al is some huge cancer to the team, but I don't think KOC sees it that way. I think he would like to trade him for some nice pieces, but he isn't giving him out for free

Even Ginobili wasn't happy being a 6th man at the beginning for the Spurs.
 
vslice02 said:
Not true.
Click to expand...

True.

They have talked about it numerous times during the playoffs how Ginobili was confused and disappointed he wasn't starting. Then other time he learned to accept it. They even said he enjoyed starting more than coming off the bench.
 
Cyrone Torbin said:
Even Ginobili wasn't happy being a 6th man at the beginning for the Spurs.
Click to expand...
vslice02 said:
Not true.
Click to expand...
Cyrone Torbin said:
True.

They have talked about it numerous times during the playoffs how Ginobili was confused and disappointed he wasn't starting. Then other time he learned to accept it. They even said he enjoyed starting more than coming off the bench.
Click to expand...
https://www.nba.com/nba_news/ginobili_sixth_070609.html?rss=true
Spurs’ Ginobili Doesn’t Mind Being Sixth Man
By ELIZABETH WHITE, Associated Press Writer
Posted Jun 9 2007
SAN ANTONIO, June 9 (AP) -- "Here comes Manu!''

Usually heard midway through the first quarter of home games, the refrain that Manu Ginobili is coming off the bench makes San Antonio Spurs fans respond unlike almost any other time during the game.

It also often means great things are about to happen for the Spurs.

"He gives that team a totally different dimension and a totally different look and those are big elements coming off the bench that really help teams win,'' said Cleveland's Daniel Gibson, who has emerged as the Cavaliers' top reserve during these playoffs.

Ginobili scored 16 points in the Spurs' 85-76 victory in Game 1 of the NBA finals. Game 2 is Sunday in San Antonio.

Along with Tim Duncan and Tony Parker, Ginobili is the final piece of the Spurs' top-scoring trio and the team's beloved sixth man, a role he's more than happy to fill.

Spurs coach Gregg Popovich moved Ginobili to the bench midway through the season in hopes of getting more offensive energy from his reserves. That helped the Spurs overcome some midseason struggles and go 23-6 after the All-Star break.

"It hasn't been tough. I took it very lightly since the first moment he told me,'' said Ginobili, in his fifth season with the Spurs. "Not very big changes for me, only the fact of not playing the first 5 minutes.''

The Argentine star was runner-up for the Sixth Man award to the Phoenix Suns' Leandro Barbosa. He started 36 games and played the reserve role for 39.

Among players who came off the bench for a majority of their games during the regular season, Ginobili, with an average of better than 16 points, ranked behind only Barbosa, who averaged about 18.

Ginobili has averaged 16.4 points during the playoffs. He made half of the Spurs' six 3-pointers in 28 minutes Thursday.

"I know that even when I start, I'm not a player that plays 38 to 40 minutes, so my minutes didn't drop,'' Ginobili said. "I still play the last 5 to 6 minutes, and I feel like I'm a very important player in this franchise.''

Ginobili's relaxed attitude about being a reserve stops there. He's known as physical player, even if a bit of a flopper, who called the bloodied and bruised eye he got during the Western Conference semifinals with the Suns "no big deal.''

While Ginobili can be somewhat inconsistent from game-to-game scoring-wise, when he's hot, he's often responsible for big runs and big wins.

In February in Atlanta, Ginobili came off the bench to score 24 consecutive San Antonio points in a 10-minute span of the first half. He finished the night with a season-high 40 points as the Spurs beat the Hawks 103-96.

After he got raked across the eye on a drive to the basket in Game 3 of the series with Phoenix, he went on to score eight of his 24 points in about the next 1 1/2 minutes.

"They taught me to release the reins a bit, and their play, their random play and their aggressiveness, their passion on the court meant an awful lot,'' Popovich said, also referring to Parker.

Popovich called the decision to bring the 29-year-old Ginobili off the bench a "seat-of-the-pants sort of thing.''

"The bench wasn't really producing a whole lot. I thought maybe it would be easier for Michael (Finley) or Brent (Barry) to play with the starting group,'' Popovich said. "And I'm fortunate in that Manu is the kind of guy that obviously cares more about the team. Sure, he'd rather start, but he'll do whatever he's got to do for the team and would take it well and not moan and groan about it.''
Click to expand...
 
Did you not read the last line were it says "Sure, he'd rather start....."

No one was saying Ginobili complained about it, but he would have preferred to be a starter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top