Official Caris LeVert Thread

[kamaze]

Well, OTOH, the Pop blueprint has worked better than any other recently (not counting getting big 3s talent)

It was pretty amazing that they won championships even when Duncan had declined. They were able to keep winning, draft low and get elite players. They are a small market team that doesn't spend but can get big FAs with unique team oriented recruiting.

Their former staff and players are pretty successful on multiple teams.

Duncan was a big part of it. No Duncan no Spurs culture, not just the player on the court.

Pretty much this I disagree with the last line he made things a lot easier though.

[MrDollarBills]

san antonios blueprint doesnt work in the real world where you dont have a top 10 all-time player on your team injury free for 20 years. there is, literally, no "blueprint" that doesnt work with a healthy tim duncan on your team.

We dont even have tim robbins, let alone tim duncan. this nickle and diming and being cheap and trying to outsmart people doesnt work with no talent and no picks. marks is going to look up in 3 years and have a team of role players with sub 30 wins and realize he'll never get talent if he keeps lowballing FAs and staying away from anyone who wants big money.

so are you saying you'd be fine offering bazemore 94 mil?

id have been fine offering him 84 million. i dont know if id max him though. i certainly wouldnt have offered him the same as other teams. i would have offered the max to parsons or barnes or both.

You think Bazemore at 84 mil nets this team over 35 wins?

[Prokorov]

so are you saying you'd be fine offering bazemore 94 mil?

id have been fine offering him 84 million. i dont know if id max him though. i certainly wouldnt have offered him the same as other teams. i would have offered the max to parsons or barnes or both.

You think Bazemore at 84 mil nets this team over 35 wins?

maybe? i think it gets us alot closer. especially if you are able to also get parsons or barnes with a max offer. to me that was the point of trading thad for cap space and cutting jack. so you can overpay a couple wings what they need in order to come here. im not going to pretend im some huge barnes or bazemore fan. but both of those guys are legit nba starters. you can say that about anyone but lopez and maybe lin right now.

Lin - Bazemore - RHJ - Barnes - Lopez would be a solid starting 5 with shooters and 2 way talent and excellent defense 2 through 4. even without barnes bazemore at least gives you antoher legit starter in the lineup.

if you liked bazemore at 18M i dont see why you dont like him at 20.5M. i say if you like the guy get him here. if that didnt get it done, fine, at least you made a real offer and not a joke offer.

[Prokorov]

Well, OTOH, the Pop blueprint has worked better than any other recently (not counting getting big 3s talent)

It was pretty amazing that they won championships even when Duncan had declined. They were able to keep winning, draft low and get elite players. They are a small market team that doesn't spend but can get big FAs with unique team oriented recruiting.

Their former staff and players are pretty successful on multiple teams.

Duncan was a big part of it. No Duncan no Spurs culture, not just the player on the court.

i wouldnt minimize duncans on court impact the last few years. even with less minutes, his oncourt impact was enourmous.

He was 2nd in DRPM this year, 2nd the year prior, and third the year before

Duncan was 12th in the league in RPM this year, 13th last year, and 9th the year prior.

they guy still made an enormoo
us D impact who was an elite team offensive player to boot.

i think we will see a big drop off this year with him gone. im not saying they suck, but i think 55ish wins is more likely then 60+ let alone 67 or whatever

[MrDollarBills]

i'm not sure how it was a joke offer since he took less to stay in a great location with a winning team. I told you before, once the offers for him got into the 70+ mil territory an extra two per wouldn't mean much if he was happy in a city that has great weather and a TON of women. he probably lives like a king down there. I wouldn't have left for the Nets either tbh.

I would sign up for that starting 5, but not at that cost. 94 is too much for Barnes who played terrible when defenses weren't even keyed in on him. imagine him here and being the what, 3rd option? pfft

[Prokorov]

Well, OTOH, the Pop blueprint has worked better than any other recently (not counting getting big 3s talent)

It was pretty amazing that they won championships even when Duncan had declined. They were able to keep winning, draft low and get elite players. They are a small market team that doesn't spend but can get big FAs with unique team oriented recruiting.

Their former staff and players are pretty successful on multiple teams.

Duncan was a big part of it. No Duncan no Spurs culture, not just the player on the court.

Pretty much this I disagree with the last line he made things a lot easier though.

you really CANT mess up haing a healthy top 10 player all time for 20 years. not top 10 player won fewer then 2 rings. and 7 of them won 3 or more. an elite alltime big wins a ton no matter what. spurs did things the right way, but you cant mimic that system without an all time great player... or you just end up with like the 40-45 win version with a glass ceiling

[Prokorov]

i'm not sure how it was a joke offer since he took less to stay in a great location with a winning team. I told you before, once the offers for him got into the 70+ mil territory an extra two per wouldn't mean much if he was happy in a city that has great weather and a TON of women. he probably lives like a king down there. I wouldn't have left for the Nets either tbh.

I would sign up for that starting 5, but not at that cost.

can we stop calling 2 milliont total and 500K per year "taking less". lets not pretend he left tens of millions on the table.

of course you arent leaving for the nets with a joke offer that is the same as everyone else offered. but if the nets offer you 2.5M per /12+ million more total, then you can at least consider the nets.

marks made a mockery of himself with the consistent lowball offers.

[ChokeFasncists]

Well, OTOH, the Pop blueprint has worked better than any other recently (not counting getting big 3s talent)

It was pretty amazing that they won championships even when Duncan had declined. They were able to keep winning, draft low and get elite players. They are a small market team that doesn't spend but can get big FAs with unique team oriented recruiting.

Their former staff and players are pretty successful on multiple teams.

Duncan was a big part of it. No Duncan no Spurs culture, not just the player on the court.

Pretty much this I disagree with the last line he made things a lot easier though.

Well, Pop has said many times that, if his best player didn't buy in, he wouldn't be able to implement what he wanted to do. He's lucky in that sense. He most likely wouldn't last so long if it's not for Duncan.

[kamaze]

they started with Tim Duncan... thats fantasyland for us. we dont have tim duncan, we dont have the means to get tim duncan and who knows how long before the league ever even sees another tim duncan.

this "do it the spurs way" stuff is not possible in the nets world. because dont have one of the 10 greatest players of all time on our team. there is little you can do when you have tim duncan that DOESNT work. all this praise of the spurs are great, but those things dont work out well when you are putting D tier "hard workers" around brook lopez instead of B and C tier hard workers around tim duncan.

No one's talking about Tim Duncan except you... They made moves a certain way before him and they'll continue now that he's retired.

and they won exactly ZERO NBA championships before duncan. they didnt become the winning machine they are now until Duncan arrived.

you cant have a commentary on the spurs way of managing and building a team and ignore that 90% of that revolved around having tim duncan, a top 10 player all time, on that team for 20 years without injury.

He's the best power forward/center combo ever of course he's better than David Robinson was but that's not what I was talking about smart ass.

you cant have a commentary on the spurs way of managing and building a team and ignore that 90% of that revolved around having tim duncan, a top 10 player all time, on that team for 20 years without injury.

Sure you can when I'm talking about the Nets front office trying to simulate the Spurs'...You want to deflect the conversation to Tim Duncan as if the management (Popovich GM & coach RC Buford came along later as the GM) wasn't in place before and to mock me.

The similarity we have with them is Sean Marks was part of SA front office and he's making moves like them now. The low profile way of doing things. Waiting for your next response smart ass....

[ChokeFasncists]

Well, OTOH, the Pop blueprint has worked better than any other recently (not counting getting big 3s talent)

It was pretty amazing that they won championships even when Duncan had declined. They were able to keep winning, draft low and get elite players. They are a small market team that doesn't spend but can get big FAs with unique team oriented recruiting.

Their former staff and players are pretty successful on multiple teams.

Duncan was a big part of it. No Duncan no Spurs culture, not just the player on the court.

i wouldnt minimize duncans on court impact the last few years. even with less minutes, his oncourt impact was enourmous.

He was 2nd in DRPM this year, 2nd the year prior, and third the year before

Duncan was 12th in the league in RPM this year, 13th last year, and 9th the year prior.

they guy still made an enormoo
us D impact who was an elite team offensive player to boot.

i think we will see a big drop off this year with him gone. im not saying they suck, but i think 55ish wins is more likely then 60+ let alone 67 or whatever

He was still pretty good. But he definitely wasn't the best offensively player on the team. (or second best) He wasn't playing at a all time great level, just a role player, a very good one of course.

The thing is, his and Pop's impact on the team was far greater than just his production on the court. They were a cultural phenomenon.

[Prokorov]

He's the best power forward/center combo ever of course he's better than David Robinson was but that's not what I was talking about smart ass.

Please point out where i mentioned David Robinson. not sure why your panties are in such a bunch. but the name calling is... yawn.

Sure you can when I'm talking about the Nets front office trying to simulate the Spurs'...You want to deflect the conversation to Tim Duncan as if the management (Popovich GM & coach RC Buford came along later as the GM) wasn't in place before and to mock me.

i'm not "mocking" anyone. im pointing out how the emulating the spurs doesnt work without an all-time great big. all of their success hinged on ducan being a hallf of fame big who stayed healthy and out of trouble. YES, pop was there pre-duncan. but they won ZERO championships until duncan was drafted to the spurs. the jauggernaut that has been the spurs dynasty is 90% Tim duncan.

The similarity we have with them is Sean Marks was part of SA front office and he's making moves like them now. The low profile way of doing things. Waiting for your next response smart ass....

Again, maybe you need like a timeout or something, you seem cranky with all the cursing and what not. Also, im sorry to let the facts get in the way of your temper tantrum.

The spurs "low profile" moves work when all you need to do is put complimentary pieces around a top 10 all-time players. they dont work so well when you put role guys around brook lopez instead. do that and you get a 20-30 win team that sucks balls. you need high end talent to win... and you need all time elite talent to win with a roster of underpaid role guys.

[Prokorov]

Well, OTOH, the Pop blueprint has worked better than any other recently (not counting getting big 3s talent)

It was pretty amazing that they won championships even when Duncan had declined. They were able to keep winning, draft low and get elite players. They are a small market team that doesn't spend but can get big FAs with unique team oriented recruiting.

Their former staff and players are pretty successful on multiple teams.

Duncan was a big part of it. No Duncan no Spurs culture, not just the player on the court.

i wouldnt minimize duncans on court impact the last few years. even with less minutes, his oncourt impact was enourmous.

He was 2nd in DRPM this year, 2nd the year prior, and third the year before

Duncan was 12th in the league in RPM this year, 13th last year, and 9th the year prior.

they guy still made an enormoo
us D impact who was an elite team offensive player to boot.

i think we will see a big drop off this year with him gone. im not saying they suck, but i think 55ish wins is more likely then 60+ let alone 67 or whatever

He was still pretty good. But he definitely wasn't the best offensively player on the team. (or second best) He wasn't playing at a all time great level, just a role player, a very good one of course.

The thing is, his and Pop's impact on the team was far greater than just his production on the court. They were a cultural phenomenon.

offensively, no... but the past 3 years he was a top 5 defensively player in the league and one of the best defensive anchors. and offensively still great at moving the ball and putting pressure on defenses. is impact was still pretty huge, although in less minutes.

i believe last year, minute for minute, he was better then aldridge, and i dont think aldridge can replace even the 2013-2016 version of duncan. that team will take a step back for sure

[Kaiser30]

I'd say the Hawks have been doing pretty well since Budenholzer took over and started to replicate the Spurs while having nowhere near a top 10 all-time player, not even a current top 10 player.

[sidestep]

it seems that Levert and RHJ are both left handed. kinda neat factoid.

[kamaze]

Sure you can when I'm talking about the Nets front office trying to simulate the Spurs'...You want to deflect the conversation to Tim Duncan as if the management (Popovich GM & coach RC Buford came along later as the GM) wasn't in place before and to mock me.

i'm not "mocking" anyone. im pointing out how the emulating the spurs doesnt work without an all-time great big. all of their success hinged on ducan being a hallf of fame big who stayed healthy and out of trouble. YES, pop was there pre-duncan. but they won ZERO championships until duncan was drafted to the spurs. the jauggernaut that has been the spurs dynasty is 90% Tim duncan.

Sure it can you just might not get the Spurs championships. I'd say a lot of their success has been finding good players in the second round (Tony Parker, Manu Ginobili), getting talent from europe (Bruce Bowen, Tiago Splitter, Boban Marjanovic) and players that didn't fit with other teams (Boris Diaw, Stephen Jackson) they also get the most out of their players. (Marco Bellinelli, George Hill).
The Nets are trying all of these methods.

Isiah Whitehead-check

Justin Hamilton-check (they tried to get Sergio Rodriguez, were looking at Malcolm Delaney more players will be rumored in the near future)-check

Joe Harris, Anthony Bennett- Check

You can see the similarities in how they approach free agency. The big difference is the Nets sucked when Marks took over and we're not getting a lottery pick thanks again Billy
San Antonio hasn't had a lottery pick since Tim Duncan in 1997 so Marks is perfect here.

[kamaze]

He's the best power forward/center combo ever of course he's better than David Robinson was but that's not what I was talking about smart ass.

Please point out where i mentioned David Robinson. not sure why your panties are in such a bunch. but the name calling is... yawn.

Sure you can when I'm talking about the Nets front office trying to simulate the Spurs'...You want to deflect the conversation to Tim Duncan as if the management (Popovich GM & coach RC Buford came along later as the GM) wasn't in place before and to mock me.

i'm not "mocking" anyone. im pointing out how the emulating the spurs doesnt work without an all-time great big. all of their success hinged on ducan being a hallf of fame big who stayed healthy and out of trouble. YES, pop was there pre-duncan. but they won ZERO championships until duncan was drafted to the spurs. the jauggernaut that has been the spurs dynasty is 90% Tim duncan.

The similarity we have with them is Sean Marks was part of SA front office and he's making moves like them now. The low profile way of doing things. Waiting for your next response smart ass....

Again, maybe you need like a timeout or something, you seem cranky with all the cursing and what not. Also, im sorry to let the facts get in the way of your temper tantrum.

The spurs "low profile" moves work when all you need to do is put complimentary pieces around a top 10 all-time players. they dont work so well when you put role guys around brook lopez instead. do that and you get a 20-30 win team that sucks balls. you need high end talent to win... and you need all time elite talent to win with a roster of underpaid role guys.

My bad I'm going through some things you're still a deuche though. We don't have any talent or draft picks yet I'm still a fan pass the TUMS.

[kamaze]

double post

[Prokorov]

Sure it can you just might not get the Spurs championships. I'd say a lot of their success has been finding good players in the second round (Tony Parker, Manu Ginobili), getting talent from europe (Bruce Bowen, Tiago Splitter, Boban Marjanovic) and players that didn't fit with other teams (Boris Diaw, Stephen Jackson) they also get the most out of their players. (Marco Bellinelli, George Hill).
The Nets are trying all of these methods.

those are great picks... but honestly those guys all look like run of the mill role players if they are on another team. like you pointed out... take tim duncan out of the mix and diaw and sjax looks really ordinary if not bad. same with splitter in the same system in atlanta. put manu and parker on other teams and they are just "solid" players and not champions.

the reason these guys do well on the spurs is because when you have tim duncan you can allow guys to just play small roles, and duncan will make up for the rest. toherwise, you get what you saw from diaw in charlotte and not the spurs.

You can see the similarities in how they approach free agency. The big difference is the Nets sucked when Marks took over and we're not getting a lottery pick thanks again Billy
San Antonio hasn't had a lottery pick since Tim Duncan in 1997 so Marks is perfect here.

san antonio didnt need picks. they had tim duncan. it doesnt matter who you put around ducan, he is so all time elite he makes everyone look good. with lopez those same guys flaws shine instead of get glossed over

[kamaze]

Sure it can you just might not get the Spurs championships. I'd say a lot of their success has been finding good players in the second round (Tony Parker, Manu Ginobili), getting talent from europe (Bruce Bowen, Tiago Splitter, Boban Marjanovic) and players that didn't fit with other teams (Boris Diaw, Stephen Jackson) they also get the most out of their players. (Marco Bellinelli, George Hill).
The Nets are trying all of these methods.

those are great picks... but honestly those guys all look like run of the mill role players if they are on another team. like you pointed out... take tim duncan out of the mix and diaw and sjax looks really ordinary if not bad. same with splitter in the same system in atlanta. put manu and parker on other teams and they are just "solid" players and not champions.

the reason these guys do well on the spurs is because when you have tim duncan you can allow guys to just play small roles, and duncan will make up for the rest. toherwise, you get what you saw from diaw in charlotte and not the spurs.



You can see the similarities in how they approach free agency. The big difference is the Nets sucked when Marks took over and we're not getting a lottery pick thanks again Billy
San Antonio hasn't had a lottery pick since Tim Duncan in 1997 so Marks is perfect here.

[quote="Prokorov]
the reason these guys do well on the spurs is because when you have tim duncan you can allow guys to just play small roles, and duncan will make up for the rest. toherwise, you get what you saw from diaw in charlotte and not the spurs.[/quote][/quote]

You're giving Duncan too much credit, every year they won it he was just one piece to the championship puzzle regardless how big or small a role he played.
Diaw, SJax, Bellinelli looked mediocre on other teams but on the SPURS; with Pop coaching; everyone had a role and stuck to the team philosophy.
If Tim Duncan got drafted by Minnesota he wouldn't have had the same success, unless you believe he's that good but you're smarter than that.

[kamaze]

san antonio didnt need picks. they had tim duncan. it doesnt matter who you put around ducan, he is so all time elite he makes everyone look good. with lopez those same guys flaws shine instead of get glossed over

When David Robinson, Sean Elliot, Bruce Bowen, Avery Johnson moved on they had to replace them they did so without lottery picks.
In order to win 5 championships since 97 you need a great front office we're a work in progress.
Tim Duncan is a center he doesn't bring the ball up, he can't get his without someone giving him the ball. The only player that imo made everyone else better by himself was Jason Kidd.