The 2010 Free Agency: 10 difference makers at MLE

Here's the deal, it's the 2010 free agency, and as much as I'd love to add LeBron James, Dwayne Wade, and/or Chris Bosh to the roster, frankly Spurs don't really have much in terms of cap room available.  I understand that there are more roster needs, but these are some names that I'm willing to spend a good chunk of the MLE on.  Generally speaking, I think we need bigs to play next to Timmy, so these 10 are those bigs I think we can make a run at in the FA.

1.) Brendan Haywood

Haywood is a starting caliber center, an above average defender, with a decent back-to-the-basket game.  He's a legit 7-footer who can fit well next to Duncan.  He probably doesn't have a great mid-range game to compliment Timmy's post game, but then, he's probably a step up from Nazr Mohammed.  Seriously.  I like Haywood here, but he could be pricey.

2.) Zydrunas Ilgauskas

Besides his age, Big Z is actually a fairly ideal player to play next to Timmy.  He's a decent mid-range catch-and-shoot face up shooter, for a big man, he's also a decent defender.  He's obviously not the most ideal candidate, and we know that he couldn't hack it as LeBron's second string.  However, he fits precisely the mold that the Spurs are looking for.

3.) Udonis Haslem

Kelly Dwyer from Yahoo's Ball Don't Lie blog calls Udonis Haslem one of the better defenders out there.  He's not a shot blocker, but he's a top notch rebounder and he and has a solid, legitimate offensive game.  For the pessimist, he's kind of an Antonio McDyess upgrade, but I trust Dwyer, and if he says that Haslem has got one of the stellar defensive games in the league, for a big man, then I'm sold.

4.) Channing Frye

A 6-11 Matt Bonner, who plays defense.  Frye torched the Spurs in the playoffs and did a decent job against Timmy on defense.  Another one of those players I'm not sure if we'd be able to get for the MLE, but someone I'm willing to take a swing at.

5.) Jermaine O'Neal

O'Neal is old, he's got no knees, but he's a decent center and defender.  If he's healthy.  Pretty big "if" but it's a risk I'm kind of willing to take.

6.) Brad Miller

American, druggy version of Big Z, minus the defense.

7.) Darko Milicic

Darko has to be among the most maligned big men in the league.  He's definitely up there next to the likes of Kwame Brown and Eddy Curry.  He at least tries on defense, while he had his shot at Minnesota, and he didn't seem like much, I still think he has a decent chance to be something, not a second overall pick, but something, under the influence and leadership of Timmy.

8.) Johan Petro

Petro showed some promise this past season with the Nuggets when Kenyon Martin got injured.  He's shown he's a solid defender and decent rebounder.  Not a bad take, could do worse, I might not spend the entire MLE on him, but he's worth looking at.

9.) Shelden Williams

A body that can produce relatively well, he had a couple of good games with Boston when he got playing time through Kevin Garnett's injuries.

10.) Chris Hunter

Another one of those Warriors D-League projects.  You have to take his production with a grain of salt as it was on the Warriors, but hey, I like his game.

Update: Trade Picture

Guess Brendan Haywood is out of the picture...

So's Marcus Camby apparently...

The Mid-Season Trade Scene

So, as I've stated before, the primary need I feel needs to be addressed at the moment would be the need of a shot-blocking big man to play next to Tim Duncan. While Antonio McDyess and DeJuan Blair are good, they're skillsets don't allow them to be more than good backups. Matt Bonner as well has only been suitable in spot situations and Ian Mahinmi has not really proven themselves enough to Pop to warrant floor time beyond garbage time, which, at this point in time, if the Spurs were ever in a game where there is garbage time, it's because Pop has given up more than any unsurmountable lead built by the Spurs. While the backcourt of Tony Parker, George Hill, Manu Ginobili, Roger Mason, Keith Bogans, Richard Jefferson, and Michael Finley hasn't really played up to par, I don't know that it's an issue that I'd want to address via trades at this point in time. I still haven't given up on entirely on Richard Jefferson, I think it's a mind-over-matter issue, but we don't have the luxury of time, and I'm sure everyone understands that. Nonetheless, I still believe that the move to make is not a major restructuring move, but something akin to the Nazr Mohammed trade in 2005. Now the question is who is available that fits our needs?

Obviously, if I were to make a legitimate list of players I want Timmy to play next to, at the top would be the likes of Kevin Garnett, Chris Bosh, Rasheed Wallace, etc... but such players aren't available, and if I wanted a list of young players I wanted Timmy to develop I'd start with LaMarcus Aldridge, Al Jefferson, Al Horford and the like, but those aren't really options either... I suppose the first thing we need to consider are the assets we have available to trade, personally, I think the things we have to offer are: the expiring contracts of Roger Mason, Michael Finley, and Matt Bonner, that's about $10 million in salary, plus or minus the contracts of Theo Ratliff, Keith Bogans, and Ian Mahinmi which I believe can be expended. I'm leery of trading George Hill, but less so than Manu Ginobili.

So with that, who's available? Let's have a look see...

Marcus Camby

I think this might be a stretch, especially with the injury to Blake Griffin. I'm not entirely convinced that the Clippers are giving up on a playoff run, so it's possible there's no firesale going on, especially with Mike Dunleavy Sr. leaving the coaching bench. I don't know that slightly more in 3 expiring contracts is anymore desirable than one single expiring contracts, perhaps throwing in some picks. The reasons I want someone like Camby are fairly obvious, while he doesn't meet the idea of the Spurs getting younger and more athletic, his skillset fits that of a player next to Duncan perfectly. He rebounds, he blocks shots, he can hit a decent 15-foot jumper. He's not someone you would look to on the offensive end, so in that respect, you don't really have to draw up plays for him, and while he's not a formidable post defender, he's great at rotating, and generally the Spurs won't be asking him to guard the more potent post presences in the league. Furthermore, he fits in the Spurs' recent trend of getting players from teams they've beaten in the Finals in the past (Jefferson originally on the Nets in 2003, McDyess originally on the Pistons in 2005, and now Camby originally in the Knicks in 1999).

Darko Milicic

About 50% of you are probably thinking What?! Darko?! and I will warrant that, so long as you continue reading enough to let me explain. First, prior to being traded for Zach Randolph, Darko was probably one of the better post defensive presences on the Grizzlies. I don't know if that says a lot, but one thing can be said for sure, Darko isn't bad as a defensive big man. While he may still be considered one of the biggest draft busts, we need to look past the fact that maybe he wasn't a suitable 2nd overall pick (like Joe Smith and Kwame Brown weren't suitable 1st overall picks) and see him for what he is, someone that can board and block, and I think he's semi-decent offensively too. Again the issue of expiring for expiring comes into play and whether or not the Knicks really want to deal, but as it is, Darko just kind of veges at the end of the bench, I think that as a starter next to Tim Duncan, with Timmy helping direct him, he might find some motivation and direction, and become a solid piece. In the short term, he has the skills and abilities necessary to make a positive impact on the team.

Brendan Haywood

One thing I know for sure is that with all these trade rumors of Caron Butler and Antawn Jamison floating around, Washington is definitely in rebuild mode. I'm sure the front office there is hoping to be able to waive Gilbert Arenas as well after this gun fiasco. Obviously with that,, comes a firesale, and Brendan Haywood is obviously not in the future. What does Haywood bring to the floor? He's a decent defender and also not a bad post scorer. He's probably not ideal for what the Spurs need, but there isn't really a whole lot in terms of availability.

Fabricio Oberto

Obviously Fab already knows the system, we know what he brings to the table, the only question remains: will it be enough?

Chris Wilcox

I'm pretty sure at this point in time, somehow, Kwame Brown is ahead of Wilcox on the depth charts. Especially with the advent of rookie Jonas Jerebko, there doesn't seem to be much room in John Kuester's rotation for Wilcox. Wilcox obviously fits in the realm of younger and more athletic, however, he also appears to lack in the two things that we're really looking for in rebounding and shotblocking. Nonetheless, he's an interesting piece who could serve to be like a second Nazr Mohammed on the team, as I see his potential to be high. I still have some hopes that he can make a difference, especially working under the tutelage of veterans Duncan and McDyess.

Jeff Foster

I probably know less about Indiana than anybody. Nonetheless, they don't appear to be going anywhere, and if they're shopping Troy Murphy then I don't see why Jeff Foster isn't really available as well, though I can kind of understand how Foster might be more insurance for Roy Hibbert. From what I do know, I read that Foster's game is pretty plain vanilla, he's got a decent jumper, rebounds pretty well, swats a couple of shots, and honestly, I think that plain vanilla game is just what we need.

Tyrus Thomas

Tyrus Thomas is another one of those that fits the bill of "younger and more athletic" but I'm not sure about much else. Being a top 5 pick he must have a bit of potential, so I can see good things happening with McDyess and Timmy working with him, but as of now, I don't know that he adds a whole lot to the squad as is now. It might be worth a gamble, but I wouldn't put him that high on my list, though he is available. Still, I'm not sure what the Bulls are looking for so I'm not really sure what exactly should be offered.

Al Harrington

So... yeah, I know, how the heck would Al Harrington help us? If he melds, he's at best everything Matt Bonner is supposed to be, if not he'd be kind of a Matt Bonner/Drew Gooden fusion. While his skillset fits closer to the mold of Robert Horry, it's still at least something of an upgrade.

While I can think of other people, I don't know that they are very realistic nor very viable from a long term perspective. This is at least what I think. I've considered also maybe someone like Yi Jianlian, but not very seriously. Honestly, the biggest windfall would be if Marc Gasol were somehow available, but aside from that, maybe waiting for Tiago Splitter might be the best options and we should look at buffering other parts of the roster.

To Tank or Not to Tank?

I can hardly believe that I'm actually writing this about the Spurs, but if you haven't already, please read Adrian Wojnarowski's column about Richard Jefferson and then Tim Varner's take on the need for chemistry. Once you do that, you can understand the gravity of this question, and the seriousness with which I present it. I grant, the Spurs have not been excluded from a playoff since drafting Tim Duncan in 1997, with winds of fortune landing the Spurs the first overall pick in the wake of a dismal season behind a season-ending foot injury to All-Star David Robinson. I guess you can say that's something of a similar situation, but I don't know that I'd completely parallel it. Honestly, I have no idea of what to really look for in the draft beyond what I read on the internet. Therefore, I can't really say that I have a comprehensive knowledge about who to take, in fact, the only name that I vaguely recognize is John Wall, and that's because he was supposed to be in the draft last year if it weren't for the 1 year rule. Honestly, I don't know if it's globalization or the fact that the Spurs have been so successful, but I've been somewhat disillusioned with the draft in years past, despite there being some tremendous talent, I don't see them falling to the Spurs, unless it's another windfall somehow, which the conspirator theorist in me says David Stern would never allow happen, the Spurs haven't really done anything in the draft for a while. If we trace back to since Duncan, here are the Spurs' picks:

1997: Tim Duncan (F/C, 1st overall pick)

1998: Felipe Lopez (SG, 24th overall pick, traded to Grizzlies for Antonio Daniels), Derrick Dial (SG, 52nd overall pick)

1999: Leon Smith (PF, 29th overall pick), Manu Ginobili (SG, 57th overall pick)

2000: Chris Carrawell (PF, 41st overall pick), Cory Hightower (G, 54th overall pick, traded to Lakers for 2 future picks)

2001: Tony Parker (PG, 29th overall pick), Robert Javtokas (C, 56th overall pick), Bryan Bracey (SF, 58th overall pick)

2002: John Salmons (G/F, 26th overall pick, traded for Speedy Claxton), Luis Scola (PF, 55th overall pick, traded for Vassilis Spanoulis), Randy Holcomb (PF, 56th overall pick, traded for Speedy Claxton)

2003: Leandro Barbosa (SG, 28th overall pick, traded for future pick),

2004: Romain Sato (SG, 52nd overall pick), Sergei Karaulov (C, 57th overall pick)

2005: Ian Mahinmi (F/C, 28th overall pick)

2006: Damir Markota (F, 59th overall pick)

2007: Tiago Splitter (F/C, 28th overall pick), Marcus Williams (F, 33rd overall pick), Georgios Printezis (F, 58th overall pick, traded to Toronto for future pick)

2008: George Hill (G, 26th overall pick), Goran Dragic (G, 45th overall pick, traded to Phoenix), James Gist (F, 57th overall pick)

2009: DeJuan Blair (PF, 37th overall pick), Jack McClinton (SG, 51st overall pick), Nando de Colo (PG, 53rd overall pick)

The jury is still out on George Hill and DeJuan Blair, but generally I like what we're seeing out of them, but I don't think they'll be difference makers. If I were to compare them to previous Spurs players I'd say they're closest to probably Mario Elie and Malik Rose, great role players, but not much beyond that. The fact that I only recognize a handful of the names is pretty disappointing, and honestly I really don't expect a knockout pick every year in the draft. However, after about 27 picks over the past 12 drafts or so, there have to be more than just 3 impact players on the team somehow. We're never going to get a steal like Manu Ginobili or Tony Parker again, but I can't say that we've done enough with the picks that we have had to be able to say we've done a good job about it. The most notable names outside of Ginobili and Parker were traded away: John Salmons, Luis Scola, and Leandro Barbosa. Maybe I'm reading too much into this but I no longer have much confidence in our drafting an impact rookie that will make the difference we'll need. We're still waiting out on Tiago Splitter, considered one of the premier centers in the European league, because we don't want what happened with Luis Scola and Leandro Barbosa to happen all over again, that is, have their rights traded and then come into the league and become studs.

Okay, so why am I going about this? Well, obviously, it means we have to retool our roster somehow, in some way, in some form. I grant that if next season we can get Tiago Splitter to enter the NBA, and his game translates half as well as what we've heard and expect, then Spurs have once again a frontcourt that can compete and contend night in and night out. However, in order for a successful retooling of the Spurs roster it takes an understanding of what the Spurs need. I agree with Pop and Tim Varner that chemistry is important, we can't just try to find the most talented guys and throw them around Timmy and hope for the best, the team has to gel play well together on the hardwood. Honestly, I can't say I know enough about the personality of the players to say who would meld well with the system, with each other, with Pop. Now I can name a list of players that Spurs are likely not going to get that I would've loved to see Duncan mentor, names like Al Horford or LaMarcus Aldridge or even Emeka Okafor, but the Spurs weren't and likely aren't going to get a top 5 pick. I can't say that I have anything I can hoist out of my brain and into the Trade Machine, and so while I know this probably isn't really doing much to remedy the situation, it's my analysis of it, and maybe you can come up with something.

Wow, that was a pretty hefty preface to this, but I think a necessary one. Now, before we rail on RC Buford and throw out suggestions, I recommend we look at the needs that the Spurs have been trying to address in this past off-season. Basically it can be summed up as: younger and more athletic. To address this need the moves made were thus: trading Kurt Thomas, Fabricio Oberto, and Bruce Bowen for Richard Jefferson, drafting DeJuan Blair, signing Marcus Haislip, Keith Bogans, Antonio McDyess, Marcus Williams, Malik Hairston, and Theo Ratliff. Were we successful? Well, I'd say generally, the Spurs achieved their goals, they got younger, while still retaining a veteran core. However, I don't think we can really ascertain the success of the off-season via how well the front office filled some general needs.

So what exactly did the Spurs need? Well, I've kind of gone over this before, but the needs for Pop's system are fairly simple, a wing defender, preferably one that can hit threes, and an shot-blocking presence in the paint. At the beginning of the season I was willing to say that the Spurs had foregone the latter in pursuit of the former. What do I mean by that? Well, the focus was more on getting that wing player to replace Bruce Bowen, than that shot blocker to play next to Tim Duncan. While I don't think the additions of McDyess and Ratliff are insignificant, I don't see them as the difference makers, the improvement over Kurt Thomas is I feel, marginal at best. Therefore, the obviously large acquisition of the off-season was the bolstering of the wings in Richard Jefferson, and to some degree the signing of Keith Bogans.

So now that we have this bloated backcourt rotation what's the deal? Shouldn't we be incredibly deep? It hardly seems the case as the Spurs stumble into the All-Star break barely taking the 6th seed in the West with a barely respectable 29-20 record. What's going on? I think I might blame part of the fact that there are at least 7 players (Parker, Ginobili, Hill, Bogans, Mason, Jefferson, and Finley) vying for playing time at 3 spots (PG, SG, SF), this isn't counting the D-Leaguers Malik Hairston and Marcus Williams, and the potentiality of playing Marcus Haislip as a tweener forward. Normally, that doesn't seem like too bad of a depth chart, but the fact of the matter is, the entire system gets screwy because Pop uses them all fairly interchangeably, especially once you get past Parker and Ginobili. It's probably not as uncommon as we'd like to see four of the above named players on the floor at the same time. This raises two issues:

1) Learning the chemistry of various rotations, which I suppose should be expected of players of this caliber

2) Lack of a specified role. The best example of this is George Hill. Is he supposed to be a defensive specialist? a backup point guard? I'm not really sure anymore. From all appearances, he appears more the former than the latter, something along the mold of Delonte West.

Beyond this simple issue is the fact that no one outside of Parker and Ginobili are really super effective at creating offense, either for themselves let alone for the rest of the team. Hill has had some success, but Jefferson at the very least has been a major disappointment. Part of it I think is that he's thinking and trying too hard, and not really playing in his game. He's tense because of the pressure, probably, at least that's my guess, I honestly can't say. As well as Bogans has been playing defense, as much promise as George Hill is, as nice as Roger Mason's shot is, to be honest the only facilitators in the backcourt still remain Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili. You could argue that this is a backcourt comparable to the 2003 championship team, where Bogans and Jefferson are likened to Bruce Bowen and Stephen Jackson respectively. While Bogans is the defender that can hit threes, and it's irrelevant whether he's actually as good as Bowen was, there remains a crucial flaw in the comparison: the difference between Stephen Jackson and Richard Jefferson. For all his foibles, there is one thing that Jackson was and still is that Jefferson isn't and won't be, and that was painfully obvious when they faced off in the 2003 Finals: Jackson is very underrated as a play-maker and passer. At best I find Jefferson to be something akin to a Vince Carter that can't/doesn't pass, he's an aggressive finisher that can become instant offense, but once he loses even that, he's just a behemoth contract that has some flashy plays and dunks here and there. Jefferson needs to find his game again, he needs to find that aggressiveness from his time with Jason Kidd. While he's not going to get the easy cuts and flashy looks that Kidd would've gotten him, he's a player that's good enough that he can do it with the likes of playmakers like Parker, Ginobili, and Duncan. This was Buford's answer to the issue of athleticism in the wings, and it was the wrong one, so far. I don't know that I've completely given up on Jefferson yet, but, he's got a lot of work to do turn the whole thing around. It'd be a wonderful Cinderella story.

The second issue that wasn't, I feel, as aptly addressed by the front office was the issue of who plays next to Tim Duncan. The general consensus is that if Duncan can have a legit 7-foot, shot-blocking presence next to him, then the frontcourt is solid. Duncan of course had the luxury of playing with the legendary David Robinson for the first 5 years of his career, albeit an aging, declining, post-injury Robinson, that doesn't make him any less legendary, and in the meanwhile, earned two championships. Now why were the Twin Towers so fearsome? It was perhaps because they were the most complete inside-outside big men in the entire league. Either could hit mid-range jumpers and thereby spread the defense allowing the other isolate in the low post. During those years, Popovich was content to leave the rotation to Duncan, Robinson, and Malik Rose, however in later years after the retirement of The Admiral, only one of the Twin Towers remained. To compensate, RC Buford acquired the veteran services of Robert Horry to fill in the holes in the offense. Added for his defense, rebounding, and hustle was Nazr Mohammed, who later was replaced with the serviceable all-around play of Francisco Elson as well as the smart passing of Fabricio Oberto. While I believe that Antonio McDyess and DeJuan Blair are overall more attractive players than Nazr Mohammed, Francisco Elson, and Fabricio Oberto, they both lack something the latter three have: height. As good as McDyess and Blair are, they will never be shotblocking deterrents in the paint, ultimately, in the system, they don't prove to be a significant improvement over Kurt Thomas. I still find the rotation next to Duncan of McDyess, Blair, and Bonner to be inferior to that of Elson, Oberto, and Horry. While I think Ratliff helps a little, I get the feeling he's more of an insurance signing than anything else. Additionally, as the gambles on Mahinmi and Haislip both haven't panned out, the somewhat lateral movement in the direction of the frontcourt does nothing to mitigate the advancing age of Duncan.

If we could somehow land a big man that could make plays like Duncan and Robinson did, we can get away with not having another playmaker in the wings. However, the essential thing is finding that other playmaker, which is difficult, unless Jefferson pans out. Especially as the minutes of Duncan and Ginobili will continue to be limited due to age. I don't necessarily believe that flushing out our backcourt will bring us a viable solution, I believe we do need some more structure there, unfortunately there really isn't anyone right now outside of Parker and Ginobili that Pop seems to be able to trust outside of spot situations. I'm still firmly of the belief that the frontcourt situation needs to be addressed and remedied, and while I have no doubt of Antonio McDyess's work ethic, desire, or ability, I don't necessarily see him as a the answer to the problems. Of course, given the current assets that are available for trade it's also difficult to ascertain a workable solution. The most obvious answer is to search for a team trying do a firesale and ultimately pick up something along those lines. However, that will be costly in the long run. Ultimately I feel our most worthwhile trade assets are the expiring contracts of Michael Finley, Roger Mason, Matt Bonner, and if necessary Manu Ginobili. Like most Spurs fans I'm fairly reticent about trading Ginobili, unless we get a big man that is a playmaker, and I believe maybe Buford is holding out for Tiago Splitter. Therefore, if we limit it to expiring contracts, throwing in the possibility of Hill, Hairston, and Williams, what can be had doesn't seem like a whole lot. Some have mentioned the possibility of taking on Corey Maggette's contract with the possibility of snatching up the high potential of Anthony Randolph. I'm not entirely against that, but it's a matter of what's being given up. I don't doubt Maggette's abilities as a pure scorer possibly rate up there as much as Jefferson's, but it's been said he's a poor shooter of corner threes and I'm not convinced of his defense or playmaking beyond trying to shoot free throws on every possession. Since we're not giving up Jefferson for Maggette, the comparison is irrelevant. It's got it's merits, Randolph is a very high reward player whose rookie per 36 numbers rivaled David Robinson's, and I believe with Duncan's guidance, could become a great player, but I don't know that it might make the immediate difference. Honestly, I don't have a solution, something of a patch may help, but is it worth the sacrifice of future budget flexibility? Perhaps Brendan Haywood or perhaps Andray Blatche from the Wizards could be had for expiring contracts? Is Marcus Camby available from the Clippers (I doubt it but maybe)? Jeff Foster or Troy Murphy? I'm really just kind of floundering for ideas here, but something has to change, it could be as easy as Jefferson finding his game, or as drastic as trading Ginobili, but it needs to happen fast if Spurs don't want to be faced with the ugly decision of trying their luck again in the draft.

The Trade Mongering...

Sorry that I've been neglecting you guys all this time, and I'm hoping that I can get back into the swing of things, but I've been swamped with real life. I haven't even watched as many games as I've wanted, heck I haven't even had enough time to watch Chuck, Kenny, and EJ on TNT OverTime on NBA.com. Okay, so the big news nowadays is this:

The Spurs' pursuit of Amar'e Stoudemire.

Ultimately, the trade would come down to probably Manu Ginobili and stuff for Amar'e. I'll admit, that the Spurs have been dismal at the start of this season. Richard Jefferson is having a hard time figuring out what to do, and while Tony, Manu, and Timmy are all doing what they can to keep the Spurs in contention, the inconsistencies of everyone else is really hurting them. My first cursory assessment is simply that they really don't have the interior presence to keep up with other contending teams. While DeJuan Blair has been a pleasant surprise and Antonio McDyess certainly has been getting back in the groove of things, neither one is really THE big man that can be paired with Timmy. Spurs are lacking in that 2nd big man that can start and make a difference alongside Timmy and provide that offensive threat when Timmy is resting, even more so now than before. To put in terms of history, it's like we have a frontcourt rotation of Timmy, Robert Horry, and Malik Rose. Sure Horry and Rose were both part of the championship rotations, but they had Nazr Mohammed's decent inside game, Francisco Elson's decent shot-blocking and Fabricio Oberto's passing, and David Robinson. Will Amar'e add that?

The last major mid-season acquisition made by the Spurs I think was Nazr Mohammed, and even he, while supplanting Rasho Nesterovic's starting role in the playoffs and finals, wasn't that involved at least from an offensive end, and that's my biggest question. Can Amar'e fit in in an offensive set that isn't run-and-gun? Well, I guess one of my biggest questions. I can't say that I've seen enough of Amar'e playing to know what I'm exactly talking about, but these are the five questions that I think needs to be answered:

1.) Can Amar'e fit into Popovich's offensive and defensive schemes?

There's no doubt that Amar'e can rebound, block shots, and score, the issue is, can he do it consistently without Steve Nash? Can he live without the ball? Can he be that extra shot blocking presence that the Spurs so desperately need next to Tim Duncan? Amar'e is probably up there on a list of 10 players that I would love to see Timmy play next to, but the issue is is it enough or is it too little to late? Especially given the mid-season trade issue, the question more perhaps than whether or not he can do it, is whether or not he can do it in the short period of time post-trade and pre-playoffs.

2.) Can Amar'e be effective without the ball?

What made the Twin Towers of Duncan and Robinson so effective was that both were so willing to defer to the other. They both played the high and low post positions so well that they could continually split the offensive load of going down low. While I know that Amar'e has a nice jumper, I have to again claim ignorance on his low-post game if he does have one. From what I've seen, it's generally a face-up, dribble-drive kind of thing. I think that can work, but can he put himself in a place in the offense for that to work, even if he's not the one scoring the points.

3.) Can Amar'e pass the ball?

Popovich's offense has generally been based on drawing double-teams and kicking the ball around the trailer or open three-point shooter in the wings. Generally the one to draw such double teams has been Duncan, since most players can't effectively single cover him in the low-post, the best defender I've seen on Duncan would've been Rasheed Wallace in the 2005 NBA Finals and even then, he wasn't completely contained. While Fransisco Elson and Nazr Mohammed are anything but stellar passers, they weren't in the game to have the ball in their hands a lot, and when it was, it was to put it in the bucket off a put back or on an open look. Amar'e figures to be a major part of the offense, and therefore, will be one of those drawing the double team, so the question begs whether he can know when to kick it out and when to take it up strong.

4.) Can Amar'e play defense?

He blocks shots, but can he guard the big guy not being guarded by Tim Duncan? So the Rashard Lewises, the Kendrick Perkinses, the Mehmet Okurs, the Kenyon Martins, etc... I know we like to lump all Suns from the D'Antoni era except Shawn Marion and Raja Bell into "the Suns don't play defense" kind of mold, but we need to know for sure before going into this, how exactly is Amar'e's man-defense? How is his help defense? Part of that goes into knowing how Popovich's defense works but part of that is just work on his part. Ultimately, the question is, is Amar'e willing to do more behind the scenes stuff (score less, play more defense) to win?

5.) Can the backcourt make up for whoever is given up?

I don't see this really happening without Manu Ginobili, honestly, I don't know that it's financially possible without Manu Ginobili, as the Suns probably won't want the long term contracts of Antonio McDyess or Richard Jefferson. So, assuming that it's something like Ginobili, Hill, and Bonner for Amar'e, the Spurs lose a lot. First, they lose a play-maker in Manu. I'm sure some Spurs fans are probably having some sort of apoplectic fit just at the thought of the Spurs trading Manu, but hey, sometimes getting better hurts. What that means though, is that players like Roger Mason and Richard Jefferson have to step up a lot on the offensive end. While Amar'e hopefully makes up for some of that, the interior becomes a little more clogged, and only leaves the lone triple threat offensive piece of Tony Parker. Unless Jefferson can start making people guard him, it's a problem. Secondly, George Hill has turned out to be a defensive (and offensive) stalwart through it all. It probably hurts a lot to give up someone as talented as George Hill, and honestly, at this point in time he probably is the best perimeter defender on the team. Onus is once again on Jefferson to step it up.

Ultimately, it's not something I would dismiss offhand but also definitely not something that I would take in a heartbeat as well. While Amar'e is among those that I would love to see play with Duncan, and I think Duncan would do great wonders to developing and mentoring Amar'e, my biggest concern is that we might be blowing another hole in our team just to patch an existing one. While I believe that the big man issue was more important than that of the wings, we still need solid wing players to keep it up. If you were to ask me this at the beginning of the season I would've been more inclined to take the trade, but honestly, at this point in time, I'm so disappointed in Richard Jefferson's performance that I can't honestly say that it'll really make things better. This is where the help defense issue comes in I guess, if the help is good enough, it makes up for some of the loss in perimeter defense. I trust Pop and Buford though in their decision, I believe that whatever they decided to do, it will be what they think is best. Just wish they thought of this sooner.

A Lingering Problem

The Spurs have had this problem forever, well, it seems like forever, and it's something that's pretty hard to address, but something that we as Spurs fans need to continually realize. It comes on and off, and it's forgotten often when we win, but it's the most frustrating thing in the world. Some of you might have guessed what I'm talking about in the wake of the harsh 92-85 loss to the Chicago Bulls. It wouldn't hurt so much if this were a gritty, duke 'em out, the other team just played better than us, kind of loss to the Celtics or Lakers or even someone like the Nuggets. This was the Bulls. If you look at the box score, you can't even say that Derrick Rose or Luol Deng beat us, why? 6 players scored in double digits, Brad Miller was one free throw away from making it 7. Sure, Duncan had 28 points, 16 rebounds, 2 assists, 2 steals, and 3 blocks and while that's great for the older Duncan, that's always been kind of par for him over the course of the years.

So what is this problem? Is it injuries? Obviously not since Manu is playing like Manu and everybody is healthy. While Pop is running an 11-man rotation, and there's a little confusion in working out a solid rotation, that's not really the problem either. What's the problem? Inconsistency on offense. This has always been an issue, and it's almost cliche to say that the Spurs are dependent on their role players. Yet while it's cliche, it's true, it's probably true of all contender teams, but I would say more so of the Spurs than any other. Duncan will get his own, that's just how good Duncan is, but we can't be asking Duncan to take over games, there's no doubt that Timmy probably could, but he's so respected that defenses throw a ton of attention on him, and honestly, it's not super fair to ask him to do that as sort of insurance when the other players can't deliver. It's something that is one of the most frustrating thing as a Spurs fan to deal with, and it's something I hope we can address soon. If we look back at Spurs success, the games we've won have often just ended up being whether or not our bench/role-players stepped up. Duncan doesn't often carry us through games, and I don't think it's fair to expect him to, and I don't know that it's fair to ask that of TP or Manu either. When the Spurs won it has been when players like Jarren Jackson, Avery Johnson, Sean Elliot, Steve Kerr, Nazr Mohammed, Robert Horry, and now Roger Mason and Michael Finley have stepped up to deliver. We need the players on our roster; McDyess, Mason, Blair, and especially Jefferson to step it up, keep it stepped up. Welcome to the big leagues fellas. This is what being a contender is about, sure McDyess and Jefferson have been there (Detroit and New Jersey respectively) but it's high time they remember what that's like.

How the Matchups Fall: Cleveland Cavaliers

Sorry for the lack of posts. Things have been pretty crazy, you know, with real life and all that. Still, NBA season is coming up, and I feel bad about neglecting you readers. So without further ado let's just jump into it.

A lot of people are on the Cleveland bandwagon after they acquired Shaq. Shaq does indeed give Cleveland an interior scoring punch they desperately needed. However, I'm not as convinced as others that Shaq is the answer. However, I do believe it was a smart move, low-risk, high-reward, you can't really ask for much more, well, except, a guarantee at a championship. While I'm not convinced that Shaq really puts Cleveland over the top, I still concede that they are contenders, though I would argue the weakest of the five that most pundits have listed out there (Lakers, Celtics, Magic, and Spurs being the other four). I might be somewhat biased, but I honestly don't see what's so great about the Cavs, especially considering they lost their offensive coordinator John Kuester to the Detroit Pistons, he was the one who purportedly revolutionized the Cleveland offense and was one of the primary factors that enabled them to make such a strong push last season. Naturally, they sought to improve this off-season, and I think they have, however, replacing 2 of your 5 starters there's probably a bit of an issue, in terms of chemistry, but that's something developed through the season, and we're talking post-season here, so I'm not really going to say a whole lot about it. There's the whole Shaq-LeBron ego thing, but let's not get into that.

San Antonio Spurs

PG - Tony Parker, George Hill

SG - Roger Mason, Manu Ginobili, Malik Hairston, Keith Bogans

SF - Richard Jefferson, Michael Finley

PF - Antonio McDyess, DeJuan Blair, Marcus Haislip, Matt Bonner

C - Tim Duncan, Ian Mahinmi, Theo Ratliff

Cleveland Cavaliers

PG - Mo Williams, Daniel Gibson
SG - Delonte West, Anthony Parker
SF - LeBron James, Jamario Moon, Jawad Williams
PF - Anderson Varejajo, Leon Powe, J.J. Hickson, Darnell Jackson
C - Shaquille O'Neal, Zydrunas Ilgauksas

So I swapped out Keith Bogans for Marcus Williams since it seems like Bogans is guaranteed whereas Williams isn't, though I could be completely off base. Anyways, it's only a 15-man roster with 13 active, so I highly doubt it really makes a huge difference who it is that sits at the end of the bench. The thing that Cleveland definitely has going for them is that they are, like all the other contending teams, ridiculously deep. While I'm not of the mind that one All-Star reaching his prime with another quickly fading are enough to necessarily carry the team, the fact that they have so multiple viable, near starting caliber yeoman options at each position gives them something of an advantage, especially in a slug-em out war of attrition. While the likes of Gibson, Parker, Moon, Powe, and Ilgauskas aren't anything that would normally have you trembling in fear, when you consider that this is entirely their second squad, it's actually farily impressive.

Naturally, the issue of how these matchups breakdown again revolve around the issue of first, how well LeBron can be contained, and secondly, how uncontainable our offense can work. I was watching some of the 2007 Finals against Cleveland, and I can see why their offense needed the revamping. Overall, the offense was horribly stagnant and revolved around a lot of standing and watching whoever has the ball try an isolation play against 4-5 Spurs defenders. Nauturally, given all the hype, it seems that the Cavs have moved away from that. In terms of pure matchups, Cleveland and San Antonio are fairly even, though I would give a slight edge to Cleveland's bench, as we still have the unproven factors of Blair, Haislip, Hairston, and company, however, overall the comparisons are fairly apt, with the advantage slightly trending towards San Antonio.

While a lot of people are going to draw attention to the whole "Can Richard Jefferson really contain LeBron?" story, it again comes back to a duel between big men, those being Shaq and Tim Duncan, which will probably be up there as a second headline of sorts. At this point in time, I think Duncan still has much more to offer than Shaq, at least on the defensive end. Offensively, both will get their own, they'll get their fair share of rebounds, their points, their passes out to shooters for assists, etc... From all this talk, it seems like it'll be something of a wash, and it probably will be. The issue ends up being who gets more minutes and who can exploit those minutes when the other big fella isn't on the floor? Duncan will probably see some combination of Varejao, Shaq, and Ilgauskas being thrown at him, I'm not sure what Pop will do on Shaq, but I would guess something along the lines of Duncan, McDyess, and maybe Ratliff, with a lot of help. While I like Duncan over Shaq, the issue in the frontline isn't necessarily with talent, but depth. While I think Blair can match up with Powe fairly well, the x-factors really become Varejao and Ilgauskas, and it really becomes the burden of McDyess, Haislip, and possibly Mahinmi to really work at containing these players. Naturally, Blair isn't tall enough to contend with either player, and already, McDyess is on the shorter side. While neither Varejao nor Ilgauskas are the most formidable of offensive powerhouses, games where they start getting double-doubles will prove to be deadly for any team.

If we take a look at the positional matchups, I believe that the most obvious advantage for the Spurs lies within the point guard position. While Mo Williams and Daniel Gibson are serviceable, they're really more three point specialists than anything else, Tony Parker and George Hill need to realize, that both aren't really good defensively, and need to constantly attack them, either making big shots and carrying the team or taking a lot of defensive pressure off other players by forcing help in the lane. Tony Parker has got to be the man this year and especially in this matchup because all the other matchups are so even, or possibly even disadvantageous for the Spurs.

Like all of my previous posts, my current stand is this, the wings just have to keep attacking. The comparisons between the Spurs wings (Mason, Manu, Jefferson, and Finley) are so simiar to those of the Cavs (West, Parker, LeBron, Moon) that the Spurs really just have to play within their game and not make stupid mistakes. Of the wings from Cleveland, all four have defended the premier players of opposing teams, and all four have done at least serviceable jobs of it, there isn't a whole lot of inherent advantage in there, especially since all four are fairly interchangeable (especially between West and Parker). If Hairston steps up to be a big time defender, that'll be a plus for the Spurs, but due to the depth of this lineup it's goin to be a tough matchup for the Spurs. Ultimately, it all comes down to how well Tony Parker can work Mo Williams, if he forces Mike Brown to put Delonte West on him, then it's all about recognizing the mismatches, ultimately, it's a matter of attacking Mo Williams on defense, that's the key.

Key Matchups:

via TheFreshxpress

via Zimbio

via Detroit Bad Boys