Sports is our Business
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2417083
Blame Rasho wrote:The cavs are doing great and people underrate chemistry. People always think that adding a potential rotation player helps. I think that you then marginalize the players in your current rotation from growing even more. Adding Johnson doesn’t add size and he is a small small forward.
The Spurs need Johnson and has a friendly contract to boot. I also think they they are giving up the better assets for marginal returns.
Anyways mis dos centavos…
jbk1234 wrote:Champagnie came pretty close to not making the Spurs final roster coming out of camp and I have Strus as a much better two-way player than K. Johnson. Also, the Cavs like Strus so this DOA.
You shouldn't come off as so authoritative on the Spurs when you clearly know very little about them.wemby wrote:jbk1234 wrote:Champagnie came pretty close to not making the Spurs final roster coming out of camp and I have Strus as a much better two-way player than K. Johnson. Also, the Cavs like Strus so this DOA.
Champagnie not making the final roster?
tcheco wrote:Spurs wouldn't do this imho. I have Kelson with more upside and better today than Max and Champagnie has been starting and is better than Niang too.
jbk1234 wrote:wemby wrote:jbk1234 wrote:Champagnie came pretty close to not making the Spurs final roster coming out of camp and I have Strus as a much better two-way player than K. Johnson. Also, the Cavs like Strus so this DOA.
Champagnie not making the final roster?
https://www.poundingtherock.com/2024/8/5/24214045/spurs-julian-champagnie-harrison-barnes-trade-kicker
If Barnes didn't wave his trade kicker, Champagnie was gone. I don't make things up.
jbk1234 wrote:tcheco wrote:Spurs wouldn't do this imho. I have Kelson with more upside and better today than Max and Champagnie has been starting and is better than Niang too.
How is Keldon better than Max. Seriously, name a single skill set?
tcheco wrote:No use answering this excuse of a user that uses random people on the internet as SOURCES. (Please Use More Appropriate Word)
wemby wrote:jbk1234 wrote:wemby wrote:Champagnie not making the final roster?
https://www.poundingtherock.com/2024/8/5/24214045/spurs-julian-champagnie-harrison-barnes-trade-kicker
If Barnes didn't wave his trade kicker, Champagnie was gone. I don't make things up.
Oh, you do make up stuff. One, because you said he came pretty close to not making the final roster coming out of camp, as in implying he wasn't good enough to be in the Spurs roster. That is something only someone who makes his opinion reading random poor quality internet articles can say. Second, the article you bring up is 1) opinion by a random internet dude who has no particular credibility, not information and 2) not saying what you're trying to pass it as, since it basically says Spurs may have had to waive Champagnie to make the Barnes trade (if they needed to shed salary since his contract was partially guaranteed), that landed the Spurs an unprotected swap besides Harrison Barnes, so in the writers opinion (I don't agree and I don't even know who he is) making the trade could have been higher priority than keeping Champagnie. So yes, your assertion that "Champagnie came pretty close to not making the Spurs final roster coming out of camp" is pretty weak and baseless. All in all, you come across as someone whose stance simply echoes random stuff you read online rather than actually watching games to know what you're talking about.
wemby wrote:jbk1234 wrote:wemby wrote:Champagnie not making the final roster?
https://www.poundingtherock.com/2024/8/5/24214045/spurs-julian-champagnie-harrison-barnes-trade-kicker
If Barnes didn't wave his trade kicker, Champagnie was gone. I don't make things up.
Oh, you do make up stuff. One, because you said he came pretty close to not making the final roster coming out of camp, as in implying he wasn't good enough to be in the Spurs roster. That is something only someone who makes his opinion reading random poor quality internet articles can say. Second, the article you bring up is 1) opinion by a random internet dude who has no particular credibility, not information and 2) not saying what you're trying to pass it as, since it basically says Spurs may have had to waive Champagnie to make the Barnes trade (if they needed to shed salary since his contract was partially guaranteed), that landed the Spurs an unprotected swap besides Harrison Barnes, so in the writers opinion (I don't agree and I don't even know who he is) making the trade could have been higher priority than keeping Champagnie. So yes, your assertion that "Champagnie came pretty close to not making the Spurs final roster coming out of camp" is pretty weak and baseless. All in all, you come across as someone whose stance simply echoes random stuff you read online rather than actually watching games to know what you're talking about.
jbk1234 wrote:I could post other articles from San Antonio outlets wherein they noted that Vassell getting injured probably saved Champagnie's spot, but apparently no one who reports on the Spurs from S.A. has any idea what they're talking about.
Texas Chuck wrote:This post is also needlessly personal, but does at least provide some substance. But let's please work on posting our disagreement without the need to take little personal digs at the other posters please.
wemby wrote:jbk1234 wrote:I could post other articles from San Antonio outlets wherein they noted that Vassell getting injured probably saved Champagnie's spot, but apparently no one who reports on the Spurs from S.A. has any idea what they're talking about.
Yes, please do and post articles that state he was in risk of being cut because there was no spot on the roster for him. And please make sure it actually says that and not something else like the previous one. One more request, since apparently it needs to be made: an actual source to information, not speculation by a random user on a blog.