Spurs to explore trading Parker

jeffb · 05-10-2010, 12:21 PM

Quote:

The Spurs are expected to consider trading Tony Parker to either give its three-man core a fresh look or find a younger big man to pair with Tim Duncan, after signing Manu Ginobili to a three-year contract worth nearly $40 million last month and with Duncan and Spurs coach Gregg Popovich under contract through 2011-12.

Duncan wouldn't be drawn on specific areas that need improvement, saying only: "We'll start doing whatever we've got to do to prepare for next year."

RealGM: Basketball Wiretap Archives: Spurs May Consider Trading Parker

gabe91 · 05-10-2010, 12:28 PM

Welcome aboard Tony Parker

**DuCa00795** · 05-10-2010, 12:34 PM

I don't think we we are going to get Tony Parker, we already have 2 potential starting point guards.

gabe91 · 05-10-2010, 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DuCa00795

I don't think we we are going to get Tony Parker, we already have 2 potential starting point guards.

One of them is gonezo

**DuCa00795** · 05-10-2010, 12:39 PM

So we bring in a back up, and use money on something we really need.

jeffb · 05-10-2010, 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DuCa00795

I don't think we we are going to get Tony Parker, we already have 2 potential starting point guards.

So keep 2 POTENTIAL PG's instead of Parker (not that we're getting him)?

BTW, if both JJ-Jose are still here come training camp we're fucked!

**DuCa00795** · 05-10-2010, 12:46 PM

I said get rid of one and bring in someone to fill in other positions we need filled, why bring in another PG and have two potential starting PG's instead of filling in other positions.

gabe91 · 05-10-2010, 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DuCa00795

So we bring in a back up, and use money on something we really need.

what we really need is a starting point guard that can play defense. Have you been watching games? You're saying Calderon is not an issue?

jeffb · 05-10-2010, 12:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DuCa00795

I said get rid of one and bring in someone to fill in other positions we need filled, why bring in another PG and have two potential starting PG's instead of filling in other positions.

We have no true starting PG. Jose in no way should be starting, Jack could be an ok starter but is more suited to be a sloid backup. So trade one away and somehow bring in a true starting PG that can make a difference at both ends. Not easily done obviously, but that would be ideal.

**DuCa00795** · 05-10-2010, 12:53 PM

I think the problem is we have been building a team around Bosh with a bunch of role players. Jack and Calderon were not the problem on the team, If anything Jack saved our asses many times. It's the build of our team and how we don't spend our money wisely. I think We keep one and use Banks as a good back up, or even pick someone up like Ridnour.

gabe91 · 05-10-2010, 12:53 PM

Maybe San Antonio would want Turkoglu?????

gabe91 · 05-10-2010, 12:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DuCa00795

I think the problem is we have been building a team around Bosh with a bunch of role players. Jack and Calderon were not the problem on the team, If anything Jack saved our asses many times. It's the build of our team and how we don't spend our money wisely. I think We keep one and use Banks as a good back up, or even pick someone up like Ridnour.

Man, Calderon was just a walking pylone. Jack was not the problem. And I wouldn't mind having Banks as our backup.

**Claudius** · 05-10-2010, 12:55 PM

What's funny jeff is that earlier in the day you were harping about 2 Steve Nash threads and now we have 2 Tony Parker threads.

I don't really care, but it's just funny you can't follow your own advice.

**DuCa00795** · 05-10-2010, 12:55 PM

Then what are you complaining about? If we got parker we would still be how were were. We would have good PG's and a PF and be short of the playoffs. Calderon will be in good shape come next season, but one one of the two has to leave or else we are going to be a 500 team once again.

gabe91 · 05-10-2010, 12:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DuCa00795

Then what are you complaining about? If we got parker we would still be how were were. We would have good PG's and a PF and be short of the playoffs. Calderon will be in good shape come next season, but one one of the two has to leave or else we are going to be a 500 team once again.

Man that just doesn't make any sense in relation to what i said

jeffb · 05-10-2010, 01:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Claudius

What's funny jeff is that earlier in the day you were harping about 2 Steve Nash threads and now we have 2 Tony Parker threads.

I don't really care, but it's just funny you can't follow your own advice.

I forgot about that. Can someone combine the two threads. Sorry man.

BTW, two threads essentially calling Nash a god isn't necessary either.

MangoKidHoops · 05-10-2010, 01:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeffb

I forgot about that. Can someone combine the two threads. Sorry man.

BTW, two threads essentially calling Nash a god isn't necessary either.

He's Canadian, a two-time MVP and played a quarter with basically one eye. How is that not amazing? That in itself is worth 4 threads.

jeffb · 05-10-2010, 01:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MangoKidHoops

He's Canadian, a two-time MVP and played a quarter with basically one eye. How is that not amazing? That in itself is worth 4 threads.

ok ahhh,...no it isn't.

MangoKidHoops · 05-10-2010, 01:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeffb

ok ahhh,...no it isn't.

Dude, stop being a hater.

jeffb · 05-10-2010, 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MangoKidHoops

Dude, stop being a hater.

I'm not a hater, i love Nash. But come on.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

05-10-2010, 12:28 PM	#2 (permalink)
gabe91 lol Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 1,221 Representing:	Welcome aboard Tony Parker

05-10-2010, 12:34 PM	#3 (permalink)
DuCa00795 back Administrator Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: The Maratimes Posts: 3,281 Representing:	I don't think we we are going to get Tony Parker, we already have 2 potential starting point guards.

05-10-2010, 12:39 PM	#5 (permalink)
DuCa00795 back Administrator Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: The Maratimes Posts: 3,281 Representing:	So we bring in a back up, and use money on something we really need.

05-10-2010, 12:46 PM	#7 (permalink)
DuCa00795 back Administrator Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: The Maratimes Posts: 3,281 Representing:	I said get rid of one and bring in someone to fill in other positions we need filled, why bring in another PG and have two potential starting PG's instead of filling in other positions.

05-10-2010, 12:53 PM	#10 (permalink)
DuCa00795 back Administrator Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: The Maratimes Posts: 3,281 Representing:	I think the problem is we have been building a team around Bosh with a bunch of role players. Jack and Calderon were not the problem on the team, If anything Jack saved our asses many times. It's the build of our team and how we don't spend our money wisely. I think We keep one and use Banks as a good back up, or even pick someone up like Ridnour.

05-10-2010, 12:53 PM	#11 (permalink)
gabe91 lol Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 1,221 Representing:	Maybe San Antonio would want Turkoglu?????

05-10-2010, 12:55 PM	#13 (permalink)
Claudius contemplating The Killing Joke Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Burkina Faso, Disputed Zone Posts: 9,075 Representing:	What's funny jeff is that earlier in the day you were harping about 2 Steve Nash threads and now we have 2 Tony Parker threads. I don't really care, but it's just funny you can't follow your own advice.

05-10-2010, 12:55 PM	#14 (permalink)
DuCa00795 back Administrator Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: The Maratimes Posts: 3,281 Representing:	Then what are you complaining about? If we got parker we would still be how were were. We would have good PG's and a PF and be short of the playoffs. Calderon will be in good shape come next season, but one one of the two has to leave or else we are going to be a 500 team once again.