There are a number of potential Spur jersey retirement decisions that will arise in the coming years. Notable candidates at this time are:
- LMA
- D.Green
- P.Mills
- Kawhi
How do people feel about these guys getting their jersey retired? For me it's LMA and Green and that's it. Mill's embodies Spurs qualities, but I dunno if we should be retiring the jersey of a guy who isn't even a starter on a good team at his peak. D.Green deserves it at least as much as Bowen who was here the same number of years, Green was the better player frankly. Green was here 8 years and played 520 games, 464 as a starter, key role player on a title team, and plenty of contending teams.
LMA got a bad rap when he first got here because people focused on what he wasn't, but the fact remains he was the 2nd best player on two 60+ win teams for us, and the best player on 2 other Spurs playoff teams. In his 6 and a half years here he made 3 all-star teams, and 2 all-nba teams. Alot of people don't realise this but the A-Train is actually 10th leading Spurs scorer all-time. He also grew alot in his time here. His attitude improved, he became more of a leader, he got himself into better shape so he was leaner and quicker, and his defense improved substantially. He even developed a 3pt shot towards the end as the game was changing around him. He's a pretty easy yes for me too.
Kawhi is a no. We don't need to retire the jersey of a guy who stabbed the franchise in the back and cost us extending the all-time playoff streak (and potentially cost us another title) with his prima donna antics and gross lack of professionalism. I don't mind when guys like Durant leave, but when you milk an injury as an excuse to sit out then ghost your team it's hard to walk that back no matter what you did before.
Upcoming Spur number retirements
Moderator: G R E Y
Upcoming Spur number retirements
-
DWhiteMamba
- Junior
- Posts: 482
- And1: 95
- Joined: Aug 21, 2021
Re: Upcoming Spur number retirements
-
G R E Y
- Senior Mod - Spurs
- Posts: 51,321
- And1: 39,144
- Joined: Mar 17, 2010
- Location: Silver and Black
-
Re: Upcoming Spur number retirements
Awesome thread, DWhiteMamba!
I voted for Patty and Danny though you've made a good case for LMA.
#2 - lol No team will have that number hanging in its rafters.
I think LMA is tricky because although he asked out, he and Pop worked things out and Pop reworked the O to cater to LMA. Although LMA shouldered the team when #2 went full diva weirdo mode, LMA also went full Cancun mode when he ignored Pop's flying limbs like windmills on the sideline calling for a timeout. Although LMA talked about accepting a new role in the more transition-oriented style we started this season, it failed badly and he looked equal parts incapable and unmotivated to adjust. When he got to Brooklyn he was far more willing to accept a smaller role next to three superstars. And in an interview after his health forced him to leave the team, he talked about the friction of being the #2 draft pick but having to take a back seat to Dame - that type of need to be respected at once helped us stay afloat (which probably maxed out his abilities and showed us the ceiling with him unless we kept absolutely catering to his game) but also probably kept us from moving forward to strengths of others a bit sooner.
LMA's one of the best if not the best FA we've signed, but his peak years were matched by what-if hypotheticals. We've had some great seasons with him post-Timmy. If he was to be the transition player, once the other two of the big three left (and these coinciding with #2's gross extended departure didn't help). I think part of it was poor timing and part of it was that he's rather enigmatic and not easy to know, doesn't really let the fans in as much and there was this barrier that was never completely bridged.
Maybe it's unfair to judge him on the at times stumbling success of that bridge from one era to another, or on how accessible he came across as when he was mostly a pro (even if it was ever on his terms, and when it wasn't he left) but it was, I think, a too short, too inconsistent tenure to warrant his number hanging in the rafters.
It's interesting to read others POV of Patty. Yes he was a bench player on the best Spurs teams, but was an increasingly key contributor off the bench. And his value as the culture and vet presence that never wavered, his work in the community, his support of local places, his immersion in SA life and culture made him increasingly and singularly the Mr. Spur, torch carrier into the new post-big three era. When he started he was criticized by some fans for not being good enough, when he was off the bench he was criticized for taking minutes from developing young guys. Regardless of his role he was a steady presence on teams that sorely needed it. And his passing the pro example that he learned from those Spurs before him were soaked up by the young guys. His value extends well beyond the bench role guy in the locker room and in the community. The outpouring for him has been unlike any for the other recently departing vets.
Longevity, consistency, accessibility, genuine concern and a great example of Spurs values and culture on and off the court I think make Patty having a solid case for his number hanging in our rafters.
I watched him take in the Timmy HOF number being unveiled. He was sitting on the back tables then on the court absorbed in the moment. He's part of that, of taking it in and benefiting from it, and he's been a valuable part of disseminating is as well. I think overall he's done enough to get to one day be honoured with seeing #8 alongside those he admired, learned from, and taught to others.
I voted for Patty and Danny though you've made a good case for LMA.
#2 - lol No team will have that number hanging in its rafters.
I think LMA is tricky because although he asked out, he and Pop worked things out and Pop reworked the O to cater to LMA. Although LMA shouldered the team when #2 went full diva weirdo mode, LMA also went full Cancun mode when he ignored Pop's flying limbs like windmills on the sideline calling for a timeout. Although LMA talked about accepting a new role in the more transition-oriented style we started this season, it failed badly and he looked equal parts incapable and unmotivated to adjust. When he got to Brooklyn he was far more willing to accept a smaller role next to three superstars. And in an interview after his health forced him to leave the team, he talked about the friction of being the #2 draft pick but having to take a back seat to Dame - that type of need to be respected at once helped us stay afloat (which probably maxed out his abilities and showed us the ceiling with him unless we kept absolutely catering to his game) but also probably kept us from moving forward to strengths of others a bit sooner.
LMA's one of the best if not the best FA we've signed, but his peak years were matched by what-if hypotheticals. We've had some great seasons with him post-Timmy. If he was to be the transition player, once the other two of the big three left (and these coinciding with #2's gross extended departure didn't help). I think part of it was poor timing and part of it was that he's rather enigmatic and not easy to know, doesn't really let the fans in as much and there was this barrier that was never completely bridged.
Maybe it's unfair to judge him on the at times stumbling success of that bridge from one era to another, or on how accessible he came across as when he was mostly a pro (even if it was ever on his terms, and when it wasn't he left) but it was, I think, a too short, too inconsistent tenure to warrant his number hanging in the rafters.
It's interesting to read others POV of Patty. Yes he was a bench player on the best Spurs teams, but was an increasingly key contributor off the bench. And his value as the culture and vet presence that never wavered, his work in the community, his support of local places, his immersion in SA life and culture made him increasingly and singularly the Mr. Spur, torch carrier into the new post-big three era. When he started he was criticized by some fans for not being good enough, when he was off the bench he was criticized for taking minutes from developing young guys. Regardless of his role he was a steady presence on teams that sorely needed it. And his passing the pro example that he learned from those Spurs before him were soaked up by the young guys. His value extends well beyond the bench role guy in the locker room and in the community. The outpouring for him has been unlike any for the other recently departing vets.
Longevity, consistency, accessibility, genuine concern and a great example of Spurs values and culture on and off the court I think make Patty having a solid case for his number hanging in our rafters.
I watched him take in the Timmy HOF number being unveiled. He was sitting on the back tables then on the court absorbed in the moment. He's part of that, of taking it in and benefiting from it, and he's been a valuable part of disseminating is as well. I think overall he's done enough to get to one day be honoured with seeing #8 alongside those he admired, learned from, and taught to others.
The Spurs Way
Thinking of you, Pop
#XX
Re: Upcoming Spur number retirements
-
DWhiteMamba
- Junior
- Posts: 482
- And1: 95
- Joined: Aug 21, 2021
Re: Upcoming Spur number retirements
Pretty sure Kawhi is getting his number retired by the Clippers.
I think you're selling LMA short. Yes, he asked out, but they sorted it out too and he stayed on to be an important anchor for us. Plus Duncan almost left himself, and if Manu hits free agency in 2005 instead of 2004 we probably lose him (or if teams are smart enough to see ahead of the curve and offer him 2005 performance money, we'd definitely have lost him due to not having his Bird rights).
You don't retire guys jerseys for their attitudes, or else Bonner would be in consideration too. Sullen when he first got here, and at times prickly, LMA was still a great player for us and IMO meets the threshold. Would I want to go to dinner with LMA? Probably not? Would I want him on our team? Definitely. I would have preferred he come off the bench for his final year with us rather than get traded, but when you see how much money he gave back it's hard to complain. The Spurs got the better end of that deal.
I think you're selling LMA short. Yes, he asked out, but they sorted it out too and he stayed on to be an important anchor for us. Plus Duncan almost left himself, and if Manu hits free agency in 2005 instead of 2004 we probably lose him (or if teams are smart enough to see ahead of the curve and offer him 2005 performance money, we'd definitely have lost him due to not having his Bird rights).
You don't retire guys jerseys for their attitudes, or else Bonner would be in consideration too. Sullen when he first got here, and at times prickly, LMA was still a great player for us and IMO meets the threshold. Would I want to go to dinner with LMA? Probably not? Would I want him on our team? Definitely. I would have preferred he come off the bench for his final year with us rather than get traded, but when you see how much money he gave back it's hard to complain. The Spurs got the better end of that deal.
Re: Upcoming Spur number retirements
-
G R E Y
- Senior Mod - Spurs
- Posts: 51,321
- And1: 39,144
- Joined: Mar 17, 2010
- Location: Silver and Black
-
Re: Upcoming Spur number retirements
Not sure what Clippers putting up #2's number is based on. Right now he has at least as good if not a better chance at getting Griffined than getting into the rafters. But other than than, I already regret mentioning it beyond stating unequivocally that it won't ever be hanging in our rafters, at least not with his name on it.
I already stated that LMA and Pop worked it, but tried to establish a pattern of here but at times not really fully bought in unless it was mostly catering to his game, and the reasons behind it, including his own words about how he took pride in being the #1 guy wherever he was or felt disrespected otherwise.
Disagree about attitude not being a factor, although I didn't say it was the only factor or that it should be more of a factor than playing contributions. There's no doubt that Patty's impact off the court and in the locker room counted for more than that of your average player's, and the outpouring of gratitude and affection from the team and various community organizations attests to it.
In blending the above two points, the reason LMA coming off the bench didn't work is because after the few games that it happened LMA *asked out*. Perhaps it was a soft way for the team to accelerate the process? Perhaps it was just the natural progression after starting clearly wasn't a good fit any more, especially on D. But either way, it lasted such a short time because LMA and the team released a statement he'd be off the team as both parties worked something out that was best for both sides, but clearly it was no longer to be together. Agree that we got the better end of that deal. Don't think he did enough here to justify it. Just always felt like there was something left unfulfilled or given or something.
I think threshold is an interesting point: for me it's longevity and consistency and willingness to adjust combined with being the example of the team values and dissemination of culture. But I do wonder whether the team itself has had the same standards over time or if they've changed over time or what criteria have been added or removed or if it's different for each player in a given time.
I already stated that LMA and Pop worked it, but tried to establish a pattern of here but at times not really fully bought in unless it was mostly catering to his game, and the reasons behind it, including his own words about how he took pride in being the #1 guy wherever he was or felt disrespected otherwise.
Disagree about attitude not being a factor, although I didn't say it was the only factor or that it should be more of a factor than playing contributions. There's no doubt that Patty's impact off the court and in the locker room counted for more than that of your average player's, and the outpouring of gratitude and affection from the team and various community organizations attests to it.
In blending the above two points, the reason LMA coming off the bench didn't work is because after the few games that it happened LMA *asked out*. Perhaps it was a soft way for the team to accelerate the process? Perhaps it was just the natural progression after starting clearly wasn't a good fit any more, especially on D. But either way, it lasted such a short time because LMA and the team released a statement he'd be off the team as both parties worked something out that was best for both sides, but clearly it was no longer to be together. Agree that we got the better end of that deal. Don't think he did enough here to justify it. Just always felt like there was something left unfulfilled or given or something.
I think threshold is an interesting point: for me it's longevity and consistency and willingness to adjust combined with being the example of the team values and dissemination of culture. But I do wonder whether the team itself has had the same standards over time or if they've changed over time or what criteria have been added or removed or if it's different for each player in a given time.
The Spurs Way
Thinking of you, Pop
#XX
Re: Upcoming Spur number retirements
-
DWhiteMamba
- Junior
- Posts: 482
- And1: 95
- Joined: Aug 21, 2021
Re: Upcoming Spur number retirements
They'll retire Griffin's number too. It's the Clippers, they need some history, and to show they have franchise players for fans to remember fondly. He's been there 2 years now, and they made it to a conference finals finally. Practically a championship by Clipper historical standards. Anyway, we'll see.
Attitude should be a disqualifying factor, like if you were a murderer or a toxic player, but it shouldn't be a reason to put in a guy who otherwise has really no case at all. I like Mills, but the guy wasn't good enough to be a starter on a good team. It's not like when Many came off the bench as a strategic thing, but clearly was good enough to start.
I suspect alot of others will agree with you on A-Train, but I came to respect him as time went on. He became more of a leader for us, and I can understand him sitting out to some degree. His agent would have been in his ear saying if he became a bench player it'd kill his market in free agency. I didn't like it, but given how much money he agreed to give up I can't complain much. He was here 6 and a half years. For me that hits the threshold given all the stuff he did while he was here. Compare him to other retired Spurs, there are alot of less worth picks than him. Elliot scored 2000 more points, but was a worse player. He only made 2 all-star teams, and if he hadn't been a bit player on the 99 title team would his case really better (Elliot put up terrible numbers in the finals that year, and looked invisible for the most part). Bowen and Avery were much worse players, even if they were here a bit longer.
Attitude should be a disqualifying factor, like if you were a murderer or a toxic player, but it shouldn't be a reason to put in a guy who otherwise has really no case at all. I like Mills, but the guy wasn't good enough to be a starter on a good team. It's not like when Many came off the bench as a strategic thing, but clearly was good enough to start.
I suspect alot of others will agree with you on A-Train, but I came to respect him as time went on. He became more of a leader for us, and I can understand him sitting out to some degree. His agent would have been in his ear saying if he became a bench player it'd kill his market in free agency. I didn't like it, but given how much money he agreed to give up I can't complain much. He was here 6 and a half years. For me that hits the threshold given all the stuff he did while he was here. Compare him to other retired Spurs, there are alot of less worth picks than him. Elliot scored 2000 more points, but was a worse player. He only made 2 all-star teams, and if he hadn't been a bit player on the 99 title team would his case really better (Elliot put up terrible numbers in the finals that year, and looked invisible for the most part). Bowen and Avery were much worse players, even if they were here a bit longer.
Re: Upcoming Spur number retirements
-
Aliasego
- Sophomore
- Posts: 217
- And1: 114
- Joined: Aug 11, 2010
- Location: Ottawa
-
Re: Upcoming Spur number retirements
None?
I like all of those players, and they certainly had meaningful contributions to the team, but none of them really have the combination of longevity AND peak performance that you think of with jersey retirements.
I like all of those players, and they certainly had meaningful contributions to the team, but none of them really have the combination of longevity AND peak performance that you think of with jersey retirements.
Re: Upcoming Spur number retirements
-
DWhiteMamba
- Junior
- Posts: 482
- And1: 95
- Joined: Aug 21, 2021
Re: Upcoming Spur number retirements
Every team has their own standards. How do they compare to Bowen or Avery or Sean Elliot? There you go.
Re: Upcoming Spur number retirements
-
batmana
- Sixth Man
- Posts: 1,824
- And1: 1,425
- Joined: Feb 18, 2009
-
Re: Upcoming Spur number retirements
I voted only for Mills and was surprised to see that Green was considered above Mills.
Leonard is a hard no and should stay that way.
I've always been an Aldridge fan and was ecstatic when we signed him but unfortunately the team quickly became mediocre so he didn't have as many marquee moments. Not to mention that number was already retired for Bowen and to retire it for the second time would warrant something more special IMO.
My reasoning for Mills over Green:
Green was a role player on the teams that had plenty of signature people ahead of him. Had we won in 2013, he would probably be a lock to have his number retired (ironic since he played with the 4 before the 2014 season)... Not to mention I soured on him after he went partying with LeBron immediately after they beat us in 2013, I could never get over this even though I loved his game and always defended him, even through the shooting slumps.
Patty was a less significant player on the title team but eventually turned into our sixth man and the heart and soul of the team. He became the most beloved player on the team after Manu's retirement since DeRozan never really became that guy and Aldridge was declining plus he wasn't viewed in the same light by the fans. Patty also established himself as the face of the team off the court as well and that is also worth considering.
Leonard is a hard no and should stay that way.
I've always been an Aldridge fan and was ecstatic when we signed him but unfortunately the team quickly became mediocre so he didn't have as many marquee moments. Not to mention that number was already retired for Bowen and to retire it for the second time would warrant something more special IMO.
My reasoning for Mills over Green:
Green was a role player on the teams that had plenty of signature people ahead of him. Had we won in 2013, he would probably be a lock to have his number retired (ironic since he played with the 4 before the 2014 season)... Not to mention I soured on him after he went partying with LeBron immediately after they beat us in 2013, I could never get over this even though I loved his game and always defended him, even through the shooting slumps.
Patty was a less significant player on the title team but eventually turned into our sixth man and the heart and soul of the team. He became the most beloved player on the team after Manu's retirement since DeRozan never really became that guy and Aldridge was declining plus he wasn't viewed in the same light by the fans. Patty also established himself as the face of the team off the court as well and that is also worth considering.
Re: Upcoming Spur number retirements
-
DWhiteMamba
- Junior
- Posts: 482
- And1: 95
- Joined: Aug 21, 2021
Re: Upcoming Spur number retirements
I don't think you're being objective when you say that Green gets retired if Ray Allen misses a 3, or Kawhi hits a FT. That shouldn't be the test for retiring a guys jersey.
Re: Upcoming Spur number retirements
-
batmana
- Sixth Man
- Posts: 1,824
- And1: 1,425
- Joined: Feb 18, 2009
-
Re: Upcoming Spur number retirements
DWhiteMamba wrote:I don't think you're being objective when you say that Green gets retired if Ray Allen misses a 3, or Kawhi hits a FT. That shouldn't be the test for retiring a guys jersey.
I probably should have elaborated a bit but Green was one of the best players of the series which was/is completely out of character for a career role player. Duncan probably would have won Finals MVP because of his big outing in game 6 but Green was a legit MVP candidate and would have probably won if the Spurs won in a different manner (for instance balanced scoring or something of the sort). I think a potential Finals MVP cements the number retirement. However a big question mark is what number gets retired since he won #4 that season and switched to #14 since.