Chris Graythen - Getty Images
Yesterday was the deadline for picking up team options on players on their rookie contract and it appears that the Spurs have decided not to secure the option for second year swingman James Anderson. This might not seem strange considering Anderson's inability to crack the rotation even with Manu Ginobili sidelined, but it is, in fact, very rare for teams to decline their options on first round draft picks.
Most teams keep those young players, even if their production doesn't match their potential, because their contracts are cheap and they might still develop over time. Even the biggest busts seem to get that extra year to prove that they belong on the league. And then there's the Spurs.
The Spurs have gone the draft-and-stash rout for years That is, if they even had a first rounder. At the peak of the championship wave, the Spurs were not particularly interested in bringing in rookies that couldn't contribute right away. In the 2005 NBA draft, the Spurs drafted Ian Mahinmi, with the intention of keeping him in Europe to develop. In 2007, the French center made his way to the States. Yawn was considered a good physical specimen with significant potential, but who was still very raw. After almost two years of not being able to get playing time because of foul trouble and so many experienced players in front of him in the depth chart, PATFO decided to cut ties with the intriguing 6-11 center and focus their attention elsewhere. Mahinmi went on to sign with the Dallas Mavericks on the cheap for two years and displayed some of the same problems he had with the Spurs in his first season with them. This season, he has found ample opportunities for playing time due to Tyson Chandler's departure and Brendan Haywood's ineffectiveness. In his 4th season in the league, Mahinmi is contributing substantial minutes to a team that has the third best defensive rating in the league.
Why am I bringing up Mahinmi? Because I think he exemplifies the risk a team takes when it does what the Spurs have been wont to do: give up on young players so soon. If you don't contribute from the get go, the Spurs are not interested in waiting for you to figure it out. As a result, the player the Spurs scouted, selected and developed, is now playing for their division rivals instead of strengthening their weak frontcourt. Now consider James Anderson. The Oklahoma State product hasn't exactly shown very much in terms of production in his NBA career, but he hasn't had a chance to either. He's never had a full training camp or summer league. Despite that, he was still doing just fine his rookie year until an injury caused him to miss most of the season. His shot has abandoned him this season, which has resulted in him being buried deep in the bench. As hard as it is to think that a guy who was such a good shooter in college can forget how to score, that's what seems to have happened to James. He's shown flashes of decent playmaking and his defense has been solid in the amount of playing time he's been allowed, but he hasn't dazzled anyone.
The problem is that I think it's hard to gauge Anderson's progress after nothing more than an injury-truncated rookie season and the few games he's played this year. The player the Spurs thought they were drafting - that dynamic scorer and willing defender - might still be in there somewhere. Under different circumstances, I would be the first to say that Pop knows a lot more about him than us, since he can see him in practice, but with the shortened season, practice time is almost impossible to find. That's why I'm having such a hard time figuring out what could have motivated PATFO's decision. Anderson still has latent and unexplored potential and is set to make a little over $1.5 million next season. Why prepare to let him go?
In a recent article, Buck Harvey thinks he has the answer: the Spurs think Danny Green is their wing of the future, not Anderson. I can't say I disagree with that. After all Green is a more complete player than James and one that can produce now, while still being relatively young. But I do have some questions:
1 - Why can't both be on the same roster? The Spurs have a lot of wings this season, but going forward they have a often injured and aging superstar in Manu Ginobili, an undersized shooting guard in Gary Neal, a shoe-in for the amnesty clause next season in Richard Jefferson and two young players who still haven't demonstrated that they can sustain their level of play. Unless Anderson asked the team to let him go or complained about his role (both possible scenarios), why not pick up his option and send him to the Toros? Why not keep Anderson for another season to see if he blooms? It's always possible to cut ties with him later if he doesn't develop as expected. Thinking about the future, wouldn't a rotation of Green, Kawhi Leonard and Anderson be better than one that features the undersized and defensively-challenged Neal?
2 - Why not try to get something back for him? In that same article, Harvey goes on to say that according to his sources, the Spurs looked for trade partners to deal Anderson but couldn't find one. Guess what? By not picking up the option, the Spurs have effectively killed any trade value he might get as the season progresses. If his stock was as low as it can be, why not wait a little before deciding against keeping him? He could've shown something in limited minutes that might have made a GM think he was worth the late first rounder it would take to get him. Now that scenario is practically impossible, since most teams would be much more willing to gamble on a young player with an affordable rookie contract that has two more years left, than a guy who will be an unrestricted free agent. If no one offered anything and Anderson didn't show improvement going into next season's training camp, the Spurs could have given him up for free to a team with cap space.
3 - What if Green continues playing well and gets a big offer from someone else this off-season that the Spurs are unwilling to match? If Danny continues to impress, a lot of teams will come knocking for his services. While the Spurs have a logjam at the wing spot this season, if they can't re-sign Green next season that won't be the case. And if the Spurs decide to use the amnesty clause on Jefferson? The rotation would consist only of Manu, Neal and Leonard.
4 - And what if Green can't keep up his level of play? He's been playing great and is showing great all-around skills that have some people comparing him to Manu. The problem is, he has never showed that he could play like this before. We are basing our projections on a ridiculously small sample size. Putting all the team's eggs in the Danny Green basket seems silly, especially when there's another young, talented wing on the roster that could be retained on the cheap in Anderson.
If Harvey is right and the Spurs didn't pick up Anderson's option because of Danny Green, that would be crazy; I don't think that's a valid reason. But after trying to come up with other explanations as to why they'd do it, I still can't think of a better one. I hope PATFO has one. Because a team that is about to transition from perennial contention to rebuilding mode, can't afford to lose one of its young pieces for nothing. Not every developing player shows his worth from the get-go, like George Hill and Leonard did. As Mahinmi shows, some need a little more time to develop.
It took years for most Spurs fans to get over losing Luis Scola. And now, it's only the amazing play of Tiago Splitter that has managed to calm the most fervent of Yawn's fans. Adding James Anderson to the list of players the Spurs gave up on before they should have, would be devastating not only to the fanbase, but potentially for the future of the team. Gone are the days when San Antonio was a even a semi-popular destination for veterans chasing a ring. The development of young players is of paramount importance for the Spurs' future. It's time to see the projects through.
1 recs | 168 comments
The Spurs giving up on prospects scares me. What happens when Tim retires? Are they going to tank again in hopes of the first pick and just build around from there?
KD1 - January 27, 2012
They have too much talent to tank. At least until Manu and Tim are both gone.
Tim C. - January 27, 2012
Completely agree. I think it’s Pop’s influence on the FO that has things like this happening. In my opinion he doesn’t like to develop players that don’t “get it” right away. I think he believes they are lost causes and therefore is willing to part with them despite the low risk of extending cheap contracts.
That said, why are these contracts due to renew mid-season? That is stupid.
Big50 - January 27, 2012
Normally, the deadlines are at the beginning of the season. I still remember that this happened to Yawn before the thrid game of the 2009-10 season.
Tim C. - January 27, 2012
The thing is Spurs actually didn’t used to give up quickly, on cheap contracts at least. This is what surprises me the most.
grego21 - January 27, 2012
Nice analysis, Edg5.
4Him - January 27, 2012
Yep. There has to be something else going on here.
SleepCrack - January 27, 2012 via mobile
I am not sure if I am there yet :O
LionZion - January 27, 2012
There ... until
I’m there until we play the rockets, then it’s wtf were these guys thinking.
agutierrez - January 27, 2012
Can’t we offer an extension to Green now, or has that deadline passed?
Great article. I had no idea Green would be FA this summer.
LionZion - January 27, 2012
I would pick up JA year and give Green a 2-3 extension now.
Also, isn’t Neals contract up at the end of this year too!!??
I really don’t understand this move by the FO. The sun is setting on Tim and Manu. Anderson has had zero time to develop. Give him one more year. Parker called him the surprise of camp like yesterday. What the heck is going on???
Spurs Yoda - January 27, 2012
Neal had a 3-year deal, so next season is the last one on his current contract.
Tim C. - January 27, 2012
The problem is that Pop likes to play veterans over young players, thats why I think that even if Tiago was healthy since training camp last year he would not have play much more.
There a lot of examples of this, like:
Playing Nick Van Excel over Beno in 06, that stopped Beno’s development as a Spur badly. Also NVE was done in 06.
Playing Bogans over Hairston in 09, when it was clearly that Hairston outplayed him in training camp.
spursfan87 - January 27, 2012
Honestly, I think Beno’s another good example of giving up on a young guy too soon. He was pretty good in Sacto.
Tim C. - January 27, 2012
Also thank God the JV retired, because only for that G. Hill got to play. Same as Splitter this season.
spursfan87 - January 27, 2012
ugh…..I had to rub his autograph off my Team Signed ball from 2008-2009 season. Don’t remind me.
Spurs Yoda - January 27, 2012
Well with Splitter he came in healthy. There’s no doubt in my mind Splitter would have played if he had training camp and was healthy. The problem is he never could get up to speed with the team. Honestly, last season would have been a better lockout season, for the Spurs at least.
grego21 - January 27, 2012
I really doubt that because Pop already had in mind his big man rotation of Duncan, Dice, Blair and Bonner. Splitter was in there to fill the Ian role.
Even at the end of the season when Duncan went out and it was clearly that Splitter was playing better than Blair, Pop decided to stick to his original 4 big man rotation until it was too late.
spursfan87 - January 27, 2012
Beno’s problem is he got stage fright and couldn’t even get the ball up court against pressure defense in the post season. He was never the same for the Spurs after that series.
grego21 - January 27, 2012
I have never been a fan of him and was quite surprised he was able to con SAC into paying him so much money.
alamobro - January 27, 2012
Also, I think Pop should step aside once Timmy and Manu are gone. He’s been great, but he’s not the right coach for a rebuilding team.
Tim C. - January 27, 2012
I don’t know. It’s different when you are re-building on the run. I think Pop would do fine. He has established the reputation. He’s also adapted a bit more. Now if he wants to go, sure, but I think he should have a fair shot with the team post TD/MG.
grego21 - January 27, 2012
I think he will stay for as long as Manu is on the team, but will then step aside.
Spurs Yoda - January 27, 2012
I scared of letting Anderson go, this guy just need to get out of his 3 point shooting slump and then he’s going to be a really good player, like he was early last season.
spursfan87 - January 27, 2012
I disagree. Anderson’s problem is not his shot, although it doesn’t help that he can’t hit anything. His problem is that he simply does not look like a good basketball player. There is absolutely nothing fluid about his game. He’s hesitant on offense. He looks extremely uncomfortable when he drives or is handling the ball on fast breaks. He often gets stripped. He has no mid-range game.
Defensively, I do not see it, either. He looks slow out there. He doesn’t anticipate well at all. Watch Kawhi and Green stick their man. Barring a great screen, they are in their opponent’s jersey and do not get shaken easily. They are quick, and again, Anderson looks uncomfortably slow. I’m normally not on the side of the Spurs FO, but in this case, I understand it completely. He simply hasn’t shown any potential since his injury last year.
Fred Silva - January 27, 2012
During the preseason, sans his shot, he looked pretty solid. He was even handling the ball with more confidence. It all went down hill once Manu went out though.
grego21 - January 27, 2012
I have seen absolutely no reason, in these two seasons, to think that James Anderson has any skills that will help him become a good NBA player.
cocanat - January 27, 2012
Gotta agree with ya Fred. Anderson just looks scared of the NBA. Scared of the pressure and of the players. Even when their shots aren’t falling, Green has his defense and passing to fall back on, and Leonard has his defense and rebounding.
Wings have to be aggressive, and Anderson just isn’t.
KA1Z3R - January 28, 2012
I’m not sure that he’s as scared of the NBA as he is of Pop pulling him for any misstep.
Alamo - January 28, 2012
This
spursfan87 - January 28, 2012
Danny Green is 24 and on his 4th season in the league. Anderson is 22 and in his 2nd season. Who is to say he can’t develop into a good player like Green did?
Edg5 - January 28, 2012
Exactly. Sometimes players need some time. Just ask Chauncy Billups.
grego21 - January 28, 2012
Jermaine O’neal also
gunnin' gervin - January 28, 2012
The possibility not mentioned is the injury factor. It wasn’t just foul trouble and veterans that kept Ian from getting an opportunity, but also injuries. He had a dleague All-Star year, and while he averaged 5 fouls per 36 minutes he also averaged 20 points and 10 rebounds. An injury kept him from playing but one game with Austin the following year. I’m not sure he was ever healthy for a summer league or a training camp. The year after missing a year, he may have played well in a pre-season game or two but then was back to being injured again. He was no longer eligible to play for the Toros, and thereafter was in the now familiar position of trying to find playing time during the season when coming back from injury. For a time he was the seventh big not even suiting up, He moved up a spot when Haislip returned to Europe after not getting much of an opportunity, and then again when the Spurs sent Theo Ratliff away in a trade. There was still Tim, Dice, Bonner and Blair; while the Spurs knew Tiago might join the team the following season. It could be that they felt that Ian was simply injury prone enough not to take any more time with him.
It’s possible that the Spurs might also be concerned about the type of injury Anderson suffered. There was a link to a story that discussed how various players had done poorly after coming back from the same injury. It was also mentioned that Anderson had suffered the same type of injury to his other foot in high school. It seems to me that his high school injury didn’t keep him from playing well in college, and he looked pretty fully recovered from last year’s injury. It might be possible that the Spurs feel that he might spend a fair portion of his career with foot problems based on past injuries? That would seem the one explanation that might make the most sense, though if they knew he had suffered the same type of injury in high school then it would seem they should have not drafted him to begin with. Though if you were to look over that year’s draft, there is hardly anyone that was drafted after him that has done much.
Alamo - January 27, 2012
Did not see it this way but that’s a pretty interesting thought. As for the 2010 draft (seen at the time as a heavy one) , see who was taken after &derson and gets consistent PT this season… Meh!
CafeCalva - January 27, 2012
As much as this move pisses me off, I am not sure what to think since we don’t know much information. I think Spurs should have taken the chance, but perhaps they are emptying their payroll so they can start clean, from scratch. That’s the only thing that really makes some sense.
grego21 - January 27, 2012
I don’t think Jefferson is getting amnestied. Even without Anderson, and if Green leaves, we’ll still have Manu, Kawhi, RJ, and Neal all capable of playing- to say nothing of the possibility of Bertans potentially coming over.
Maybe you should add him coming as a possibility- I know he’s big for a SG (a nice problem to have), but Kawhi has shown he can play at the 2. If Kawhi becomes Manu’s backup, Bertans can play at the backup 3, and then you’ve still got Neal on the bench.
And you’ve got Butler putting up decent numbers on the Toros.
We can also play the two PG lineup with Parker/Ford (if he stays) that worked well when Manu got hurt.
Bottom line, subtract Anderson and even admitting the possibility of losing Green, and we’ve still got depth at the wing. I don’t have a problem letting Anderson go- it’s likely what is best for him and shouldn’t negatively impact the team. If he leaves and becomes a superstar, well, that will suck- but if he stays it’s not likely he’ll develop to that point because he can’t get on the floor. Of course I’d rather get something back in a trade, but if it can’t be done it can’t be done. He’s got so little playing time, even with such a small contract, he doesn’t have much value.
SpursfanSteve - January 27, 2012
I dont know, they have Duncan huge contract coming off the books this season, if they amnesty RJ and sign TD for $5-8M contract they are going to room to sign somebody good.
spursfan87 - January 27, 2012
Assuming they want to sign with the Spurs!
grego21 - January 27, 2012
For the right price they will
You cant expect C.Butler to sign here for 5M when LA was offering 7M
spursfan87 - January 27, 2012
I didn’t think Butler would sign… For the right price, maybe, maybe not. Usually not. That’s why Spurs don’t usually do a lot in big name free agents…
They also don’t overpay much…
grego21 - January 27, 2012
I expect Anderson would only be missed when he plays well for someone else.
Alamo - January 27, 2012
i think that’s what everyone’s concerned about. =)
metalandganja - January 27, 2012
Am I the only one that is glad that we don’t have Mahinmi anymore?
Jordan Leithart - January 27, 2012
nope
SpursfanSteve - January 27, 2012
not since Splitter finally woke up in the last 6 games. Beginning of the year…….I was on the fence.
Spurs Yoda - January 27, 2012
Well, I think he would have been decent, but he couldn’t stay healthy back then. Was not worth sinking another contract in.
grego21 - January 27, 2012
A number of people last year were saying the Spurs should get rid of Tiago and include him in some trade to get someone like Anthony Randolph. We’ve still barely seen what Tiago can offer, and I don’t know that the Mavs have even yet seen what Ian can do. I think they’re reluctant to turn things over to Ian while they’re paying Haywood $7M year more. Ian is better than Haywood in a number of advanced statistical categories, He trails him in salary, games started and minutes played (though he’s catching him there). Blair’s stats are a bit better, though Blair has over 3 times the amount of career minutes played. It might have been interesting to see how Ian would be doing if he had been given the same opportunity,
Alamo - January 27, 2012
They should have been banned on the spot… That’s all I got to say about that.
grego21 - January 27, 2012
But Ian did get that opportunity and wasted it. Everyone has been given the opportunity to wrestle a spot. Anderson lost his to Green, that doesn’t mean that Anderson can never crack the rotation, it just means that he has to perform better to warrant a change.
Jordan Leithart - January 27, 2012
Although, Green out performed him, Neal did nothing to earn back his time. Obviously, the Manu injury changed how that would go, but he was called up even before JA’s first game..
Now of course, that game didn’t help him, but it is worth noting.
grego21 - January 27, 2012
Yawn was always hampered by injuries with the spurs and to be honest, as a fellow frenchman, I am really happy that he is finding his niche. But at the end of day I am much more fond of the Spurs than France, so I am really happy that Yawn get so much playing time with the mavs… ’cause that means they are really weak at the 5…
CafeCalva - January 27, 2012
Scary isn’t it???
Spurs Yoda - January 27, 2012
WHY are you doing this to us?? Have we done anything to upset you? We don’t deserve that.
ironm8 - January 27, 2012
LOL. Just wanted to show the worst possible scenario. Not trying to torcher anyone. Although CapHill might hate this.
Spurs Yoda - January 27, 2012
I like torcher…as against torture ;) This is worth to be in Lexicon. Boss man, make it happen
Heman - January 27, 2012
Ha! I tried to do this on photoshop so terribly\quick, and put it up too fast that I didn’t realize what I typed. Too funny!
Spurs Yoda - January 27, 2012 via mobile
I really don’t think I could handle this. One of my Top 5 favorite OSU players in a Lakers uniform. Not good.
CapHill - January 27, 2012
He needs more time. I wish we picked up his option.
Spurs Yoda - January 27, 2012 via mobile
Actually, that’s exactly who I can see pursuing him. Kobe doesn’t have a quality backup, and I almost wish the Spurs could have traded him for one of their two first-rounders if they aren’t planning to keep him anyway.
Tim C. - January 27, 2012
I agree. Thats part of the reason I choose LA. The other part was because their one of the top 3 teams we loath.
Spurs Yoda - January 27, 2012
The worst part
In the draft night … i remember he said, that his favorite player is kobe and that he wants to be like him (not his exaclty words)
cuentaluis1 - January 27, 2012
To be honest, looking up Kobe for his pure basketball skill set isn’t a bad thing though. His attitude towards team ball, is a wonky story though.
grego21 - January 27, 2012
Excellent analysis Edg5.
I also think the Spurs are giving up too soon on JA, especially since his option for next season is only $1.5M. He simply hasn’t received enough PT for PATFO to properly evaluate his game. My biggest disappointment with PATFO, though, is that with Manu out this was the perfect opportunity to see what they had in JA. Instead, Pop decides to play Neal who was not in basketball shape and who hasn’t played particularly well, then make the decision to not pick up JA’s option. With the team trying to build for the future, It will be a shame if JA signs and excels with another team next season.
It makes me wonder what plans PATFO have in store for next season. Are they trying to open up enough cap space to try to make a play for a top tier FA or possibly two 2nd tier FA’s? Are De Colo and Lorbek part of their plans? Whatever the case, only time will tell if not picking up JA’s option becomes a ‘wish we hadn’t traded him’ Scola type move.
MG99 - January 27, 2012
I think you said it yourself at the last part, De Colo is the guy. He is savvy enough to be a significant contributor from day one, also, the spurs have “dibs” on him, so they wont have to fight over him if Green flees[which is doubt he will, but you never know].
I think PATFO is very high on him, and rightly so, so they wanted to clear the path for him.
Now, here comes the tricky part. They cleared another 1.5mil of their checkbook, so now they have a little more to go into that pool of guys you really want on your team. Along with with Duncan signing on a veteran contract[i believe around 4-5mil] and the ability to let RJ go at once, the spurs have the potential to do anything AND nothing at the same time.
So the worst case scenario? The spurs retain Duncan on the cheap, keep RJ, and sign Lorbek and De Colo while losing Anderson and Green. in that scenario, the Spurs will have still have enough to go after another rotation guy with the spare change.
As I am fond of both Euro-guys I wouldn’t mind this scenario.
ironm8 - January 27, 2012
This feels like the right time to add, that the Spurs so-called “system” is very very Euro-like, especially at half-court situations:
As little ISOs as possible, lot’s of ball movement and off-screens, and very inclusive so every player on the court get the ball in almost every half-court set.
ironm8 - January 27, 2012
So Euro-guys feel right at home there.
ironm8 - January 27, 2012
I don’t feel like they move enough. They do it more this year, but RJ should be running off screens for the pick and pops now that his jumper is pretty solid. It also keeps him involved in the game.
grego21 - January 27, 2012
Part of the worst case scenario will be that in 2-3 years, James Anderson turning out to be a free agent that every team would love to sign. The 3 Big 12 POY prior to James Anderson were Kevin Durant, MIchael Beasley and Blake Griffin.
Alamo - January 27, 2012
Sometimes you take risks. I for example am not that high on anderson. I feel that he is not athletic enough to be a leader in this league. He is also not long or strong enough to be a defensive force worth keeping in a team with KL and Danny.
I also feel the Spurs have done a noble thing. They this that long-jam at the wing and felt that they just could assure JA the minutes he needed to develop, so they decided to let him go, or sign him, if he is still available after they used every big of their Cap for better more expensive players.
ironm8 - January 27, 2012
Green needs to be re-signed before we can think anything else in terms of his future
grego21 - January 27, 2012
Thanks peeps.
I think some of you guys have presented some good points as to why PATFO did this. His health, the possibility of Bertans, the fact that he didn’t show potential after his injury and probably others that I’m forgetting tight now.
The answer to all of those questions (even if I disagree with them) is: What was the downside of picking up his option? None. That’s why teams almost always pick those options up. The contract is low and it’s easy to dump in case anything goes wrong. We are not talking about a multi-year deal.
The other justification I’ve seen while reading about the subject in other sites is that this is a move to clear as much cap space as possible. Again, what’s the downside of picking up the option? if Anderson 1,5 mill is the difference between getting a free agent or not, you can dump him on a team with cap space.
By declining on the option the Spurs put themselves in the worst possible position. If he shows something this season, the Spurs will have a hard time retaining him. His trade value went from very, very low to non-existent. And if he puts it all together and becomes a quality rotation player, the Spurs won’t reap the rewards of drafting him.
Edg5 - January 27, 2012
What’s done is done. All we can do is speculate.
ironm8 - January 27, 2012
Although, I think I could argue he should be in Austin then. De’Sean Butler is in Austin, and he was cut due to injury recovery. I know it’s a more expensive way if they kept JA compared to Butler who isn’t with a contract…
grego21 - January 27, 2012
Just read George Hill isn’t being extend from the Pacers……. maybe we can get him back on the cheap.
Spurs Yoda - January 27, 2012
That’s a cap move by the Pacers. They did the same with Hibbert, but probably intend to match any offers for both.
Tim C. - January 27, 2012
This is why I think the Spurs will pick him back up. He was a good guy coming off the bench and he did alright when needed to start. So losing Anderson might not mean much to them. Though I think Anderson could do well in Jefferson’s spot.
Final Frame - January 28, 2012
Who? Hill? It would be not spending money wisely if Hill was brought back, unless Neal wasn’t coming back.
If you are going to sink money into bringing Green back, the other money should go towards big forwards or centers.
grego21 - January 28, 2012
He doesn’t fit with the team, in its current form. Not to his full effectiveness with the roster that the Spurs have.
grego21 - January 27, 2012
Edg5, this wasn’t in the Buck Harvey article. The only quote was “I know. It looks crazy.” All the rest of what Buck puts as the Spurs motivations come from him. My point is that nobody told Buck, not that I saw in that article, that they think Danny Green is the wing of the future or had anything to do with the Anderson decision.
I was shocked by the move, but you know they did it for a reason. That reason has to be either cap space or they didn’t think he would pan out.
Wayne Vore (ATS) - January 27, 2012
I think he is quoting a source there. I changed it anyway, just to be safe. Thanks.
Edg5 - January 27, 2012
Yeah, I just saw that and came to comment on it myself. I think your original point was valid. Buck certainly presents it as a fact that came from the team.
Sorry about that. I read the damn thing a couple times looking and missed it every time because it was a stand alone sentence.
W
Wayne Vore (ATS) - January 27, 2012
Either way, Spurs actions show a big shift focusing on Green.
grego21 - January 27, 2012
Maybe by “on staff” he meant the Express News staff.
Wayne Vore (ATS) - January 27, 2012
Warning - Rant Ahead
In my mind, both reasons are complete crap. Say Timmeh signs for only half of what he’s making this year – that’s an immediate $10 Million. RJ’s contract is worth $10 Million next year. Boom! $20 Million in cap space to pursue a free agent. Anderson’s contract option is $1.5 Million, so they’d only be saving $700-800k over the league minimum. Neal’s $850k is not guaranteed either. Granted, I’m an Anderson homer, but no one can tell me that Neal has played sooo much better this year than Anderson. There’s also no guarantee that Green will re-sign with the team – he’s a FREE AGENT! Some GM is bound to throw a lot of money at him. So you could possibly go from having a lot of young depth at the wings to being left with Manu, RJ, and Leonard.
Not to mention, they haven’t given Anderson a legitimate chance. Now maybe he shows something this season or not, but at least give him some time on the freaking court. This is a pet peeve of mine with a lot of coaches (in a lot of sports) – the inability to find time for or to develop young players. Why were Anderson and Thomas (for that matter) only inserted into the Atlanta game with less than 5 minutes left? The game was well in hand prior to that point. You know what you have in the rest of the team – why not give those two guys a chance to show something? If they suck, then bench them, but don’t preclude them the opportunity by giving up after a few games.
/Rant over
CapHill - January 27, 2012
I agree. I think the reason has a little of the cap space in it and a little bit of performcance. But, I don’t think it has anything to do with Danny Green. At all.
You can read the whole argument yourself.
As for the Atlanta game, the Hawks were still playing there starters until the point they got inserted. I don’t think Pop is ever comfortable playing that many unseasoned guys in a game against another team’s starters. He’d have had Cory, James, Malcolm, Kawhi, and Green (or Bonner or Blair).
Wayne Vore (ATS) - January 27, 2012
Well poo. My comment double-posted and got erased. Lovely.
Anyhow, I agree with you. I don’t really think it is cap space and I don’t think it is because he sucks. I also don’t think it is Danny Green. Not at all. I think it is a little money and little performance.
You can read the whole argument I have. I just put this together after posting my comment above.
I think the Atlanta game was more that the Hawks starters were playing until then. I don’t think Pop is comfortable with that many guys not knowing what they are doing. Having Cory and Kawhi out there is probably hard enough on his heart. Having Cory, Kawhi, Malcolm and James against the Hawks starters would probably kill him.
Wayne Vore (ATS) - January 27, 2012
Let me clarify, a bit, I think it is a little cap space. But, long term. Not next year.
Wayne Vore (ATS) - January 27, 2012
Looking at it long term, it does make some sense. But your hypothesis still doesn’t sufficiently explain the allocation of minutes this year (to me). Neal should be in Austin, getting into shape. If Anderson isn’t going to play, he should be in Austin. Just sitting on the bench doesn’t do either player any good.
CapHill - January 27, 2012
That’s something I agree with. Anderson should be in Austin given the fact that he hasn’t cracked the rotation yet.
Jordan Leithart - January 27, 2012
Now this I agree with. My wet dream is to see Dwight Howard in a Spurs uniform but I doubt that will ever be the case. Neal I think they know how he plays and thats why I isn’t required more time. Like Bonner he can be hot or cold with his shooting but not as hesitant as Anderson.
I really like our bench though, Ford going down really sucked.
Final Frame - January 28, 2012
Good rant.
He should at the very least be in Austin. Fully agree. Green is not a lock. Neal got non-deserved time and should have been in Austin, but got pulled, once Manu went down.
I also thought JA’s last few opportunities, he began to show more on the court. Not enough play time/small sample size, but it looked better. He was trying, relative to his court time and with no/few practices it was decent.
grego21 - January 27, 2012
Yes. I would much rather see him getting playing time in Austin than riding the pine with the Spurs.
quincyscott - January 27, 2012
I agree.
indiancharlie - January 27, 2012
I agree… depending where the spurs land in the 2012 draft. If they are in reach of a quality big I will blame them not taking another look at JA… After that, pretty sure the FO can land a good wing prospect in that draft…
CafeCalva - January 27, 2012
Yuh, should have read you post a bit better. I’m way out of topic…
CafeCalva - January 27, 2012
Ok Cap, I’ll bite.
No… Neal hasn’t played any better than Anderson this season, but he played WAAAAAY better than Anderson last year. Sure, Anderson was hampered by injuries, I’ll give you that, but Neal still outperformed him on the court.
$1.5 million isn’t that much, which means that there had to be something that Anderson hasn’t done to warrant them not picking it up.
Why does Pop have to give him a chance? If you have a player who doesn’t perform to his potential, why should you play him? In my mind, Anderson has had every chance to break into the rotation, even starting one game when Manu went down. He no showed. It’s Pop’s job to win games and if there are players who aren’t helping with that, he shouldn’t play them.
Maybe it’s because Tiago and Blair and company need those minutes too. Maybe it’s cause they’ve actually shown they’re willing to work hard while Anderson hasn’t (again maybe). Why should they suffer so that you can gift minutes to a player who hasn’t shown anything given roughly the same amount of time with the team?
Jordan Leithart - January 27, 2012
Maybe Anderson isn’t any good – I don’t believe that’s been shown yet, but it could be the case. Or maybe, as several people have pointed out, the Spurs are looking to re-sign him at a cheaper rate. Maybe there just isn’t any room for another young wing. I can (eventually) accept all of that. Last year, we were all screaming to give Tiago more minutes. Before that, we were screaming for George in the playoffs. That seems to be the MO with Pop – probably why Neal is playing, since he proved himself last year.
However, I have to rebut your last point:
I hate this speculative crap, and I see it all too often in sports. Impugning someone’s character/work ethic without any actual knowledge. There’s absolutely no indication of this at all.Okay, I should probably just shut up now.
CapHill - January 27, 2012
The problem is that speculative “crap” is all we’ve based this entire week on. In fact, the title of this post is “are the Spurs giving up too soon?”. Anderson has “speculative” potential. Speculatively, Anderson hasn’t proven himself. Danny Green is the best speculative thing since ice cream! The point is that we don’t know what’s going on inside the FO’s grey matter and there’s only been 1, maybe 2 times that they’ve gone really wrong in the last decade or so (Scola and it can be argued Udrih).
Jordan Leithart - January 27, 2012
I should have been a little clearer. Speculation is fine – questioning someone’s work ethic is not, IMO. You’re right in that we speculate constantly – I just don’t like when it touches on someone’s character without any actual knowledge. Does that make sense?
CapHill - January 27, 2012
I should clarify too. I don’t mean to disparage Anderson’s character. I was more of thinking along the lines of LeBron vs. Jordan. Anderson wouldn’t have made it into the NBA without having a phenomenal work ethic.
What I was trying to say is that other players might be working harder because they have a chip on their shoulder, etc. Hopefully this situation kicks Anderson in gear (if it’s an attitude problem).
Here’s a question though, if it was any player except Anderson, would you be taking this so hard? I mean, we chastise Blair’s eating habits all the time, and I don’t see you coming to his defense.
Jordan Leithart - January 27, 2012
No, I wouldn’t. I thought that was really obvious. :)
And yes, we chastise Blair’s eating habits, but those have also been specifically referred to by the organization in interviews. I’m probably just splitting hairs, but once something has been stated in the press or by the organization, I think you can discuss it. We also talk about Neal being about of shape, but since that is related to his appendectomy and has been acknowledged as such by the Spurs, it doesn’t reflect poorly on Gary or change our perception of him. This is just my opinion, reflective of personal experience.
CapHill - January 27, 2012
Fair enough. I’m honestly with you, I don’t want Anderson to go either.
Jordan Leithart - January 27, 2012
And it’s quite possible that I have been slightly irrational about the whole situation. Possible, but not likely. ;)
CapHill - January 30, 2012
No way that Beno was a mistake. He actually played in seasons.. They’ve made other mistakes, but Beno is not one of them.
grego21 - January 27, 2012
I suppose one of the things I have liked about the Spurs is that they have not depended upon signing big name free agents (other than their own). They have relied much more upon player development with an occasional trade or lower priced free agent signing. While the Spurs won championships, you could laugh at some of the teams that had big free agent busts. If the reason to let Anderson go was mainly to be able to aggressively pursue some free agent, it would seem a reverse of things.
Alamo - January 27, 2012
What motivation does &nerson have now? Oh yeah..he is looking for a job. UGLY.
indiancharlie - January 27, 2012
Or Spurs are trying to low ball him into playing next season, but for even cheaper. Spurs do like to penny pinch from time to time…
grego21 - January 27, 2012
I dunno… Very different situation than with Mahinmi. The Spurs was a tax team at the time. They won’t be next year…
CafeCalva - January 27, 2012
Well they didn’t want to give Ian another contract because he couldn’t stay healthy. Maybe it’s a similar story, to some extent, but Ian’s story was way more injuries.
grego21 - January 27, 2012
Sure, but with Ian that fourth option was worth 3 to 4 millions (including tax). that’s a tough pill to swallow for somebody that hadn’t contributed yet.
CafeCalva - January 27, 2012
year*
CafeCalva - January 27, 2012
Oh, I don’t think they made the wrong move with Ian at all.
grego21 - January 27, 2012
I don’t know a thing about how these contract decisions work. But I have two initial reactions about all this. Well, maybe three. One, I really like Anderson, and I want him to succeed, preferably for the Spurs. Two, my team cannot have every player that I want them to have, and decisions get made weighing a complex set of factors of which I am not privy. And three, I really don’t ever put a whole lot of weight in anything written by Buck Harvey. When Jeff McDonald writes about this issue, let me know.
quincyscott - January 27, 2012
OK, here you go, Quincy.
quincyscott - January 27, 2012
Hi Quincy #2
grego21 - January 28, 2012
As much as I hate to say it, I saw this coming, as many of you guys did, when Neal came back. Guy didn’t get a real shot, but it’s the short season’s fault. Hate to see such talent let go…
roni_g - January 27, 2012 via mobile
Spurs usually don’t just let guys play based on rep (aside from the main core), but Neal really didn’t deserve big time minutes. He still really doesn’t.
grego21 - January 27, 2012
I disagree. He needed time after surgery. We called him back early, and he’s not getting huge minutes now. He’s still clutch. Look at the orlando 3 to basically win the game on the road. To me Neal needs minute comparable to last year .
Spurs Yoda - January 27, 2012 via mobile
He was getting big minutes when he first came back. It has now lessened, as Spurs got smart.
He should have been in Austin when he first got back to being able to play though.
grego21 - January 27, 2012
good article. i would hope the PATFO would have something up their sleeve. i like Anderson, and from what i’ve seen, i know he has potential. it would suck to lose him, but i’m not losing out hope yet. and is Green restricted or unrestricted?
RG8907 - January 27, 2012
Green is unrestricted, as far as I know.
grego21 - January 27, 2012
Restricted with a qualifying offer of $1.06M, I believe.
Wayne Vore (ATS) - January 27, 2012
Sure? I thought that you’ve have to stay 3 years with your team to be restricted (barring trade…, Marc Gasol first contract, Tiago…). Hopefully the spurs won’t face a Wesley Matthews situation…
CafeCalva - January 27, 2012
Wayne’s right. i just went to go look it up on ESPN, and according to their list of free agents of 2012, Green is restricted.
RG8907 - January 27, 2012
Thanks! Although that may not dissuade another team to make him a big offer.
CafeCalva - January 27, 2012
agreed. as long as he continues to play well, it wouldn’t suprise me to see him get a good offer.
RG8907 - January 27, 2012
The shooting guard crop is so weak in the nba right now, that’s crazy (after the top 3 + ray allen, things go south…)
CafeCalva - January 27, 2012
you mean top 3 as in the best SGs in the league or in the free agency? sorry, i’m just a little confused. lol.
RG8907 - January 27, 2012
Sorry. In the league…
CafeCalva - January 28, 2012
Interesting. Didn’t realize they got that with his current contract.
grego21 - January 27, 2012
I remember what my Sgt. said my first day at work: In DPS, it’s sink or swim.
We have plenty of wings, do we really need to baby sit a player until he gets it? Spurs are not going to sacrifice mediocre play for the sake of a possible good future. Something I love about the Spurs (since Pop took over) is that he wants to results, he wants to win and he wants it now. The only long term planning he has is interested in, is resting players a game or so, in order to win the war of the season. I don’t think Pop has any interest in turning a season into a battle. The season is the war and the games are the battles.
Does that mean he won’t go somewhere, improve and contribute to a team? No, he could very well do that. Do we have to regret it for years? No! Year in and year out, the Spurs are trying to win and they have little time to coddle a player that is not strong between the ears.
TrooperJoe73 - January 27, 2012
On a side note regarding Green impending FA. Afflalo just scored a 40 million guaranteed deal and I’m green can be as good as him as nearly as next year… So , what’s a good prize for him? (considering quality shooting guards in this area are a rare thing)
CafeCalva - January 27, 2012
So many mistakes in this post, I feel ashamed (or maybe I need to stop that alcohol thing…)
CafeCalva - January 27, 2012
Affalo showed more to get him that contract though. Green still has shown a little in a short period of time. Obviously, playoffs always speak big though.
grego21 - January 27, 2012
Seriously, no one in the league knows who the fuck is James Anderson. And without playing time this season, that wont change soon. If the spurs want to keep him, they will resign him in the offseason for cheap.
Chilai - January 27, 2012
Three SG’s were selected prior to Anderson in the 2010 draft: Evan Turner, Xavier Henry and Avery Bradley. Their respective 3 point percentages are .211, .118 (last year, doesn’t have an attempt this year) and .091. So Anderson is off to a pathetic start at .214. Turner’s combined for two season’s (career) % is .286 while Bradley’s is .063 and Anderson’s .324. Now this might cause every team to throw out their scouting reports from that draft, but I expect they might recall having seen him play in college when he was healthy. John Hollinger of ESPN tweeted: “I lost this in the shuffle the past 48 hrs, but very surprised that Spurs didn’t pick up James Anderson’s option.” I have a feeling there might be some team out there that knows who he is and understands that he was injured last year after starting out pretty well in his first 6 NBA games. Various NBA players that worked out with him during the lockout were impressed by him. I’d be surprised if there’s not one team out there that might think they could use a 22 year old SG with his potential.
Alamo - January 27, 2012
Some teams will know who he is. But no one is going to offer much to him.
“So this kid got dumped by this Spurs eh? BIG RED FLAG”
Chilai - January 27, 2012
Well, i can assure you that prior to that decision, the Spurs scouts sat and watched every little bit of JA games from college and pros. They looked if they missed anything, they were asking themselves: " What were we expecting from him when we drafted him?" and they would adjust that with his current situation.
Yes, he got unlucky we Green stepping up, but i feel like Pop and the guys shown that they are really good judges of talent. Everybody makes mistakes, Ian was one, but when you have that pressure of winning ‘now’, sometimes your oft-injured mostly-a-potential guy takes a roster spot for some rotation vet who can help you win right ‘now’. Since you can’t stash player in the D-league without having they contract heavy on your cap, you have to take the risk and cut the cord.
ironm8 - January 28, 2012
The thing is, the Spurs will have a pretty favorable cap situation next season. No luxury tax worries at all. I’m sure PATFO have done their homework, but I think what you can learn about a guy that missed most of his rookie season due to injury and has gotten a handful of minutes against NBA talent is limited.
What was the downside of picking up his option? I just can find an answer to that question.
Edg5 - January 28, 2012
Since they probably sniffed around and there was absolutely no demand for him, they might want to take the risk and resign him even cheaper, or maybe they are so sure that no team will pick him up, that they would rather risk it and have all that cap room [for obvious reasons] and then resign him only if they weren’t able to score anyone better from FA.
I feel those are the most viable options. They at least make sense while not making PATFO look stupid.
ironm8 - January 28, 2012
I don’t think Ian was a mistake. He couldn’t stay healthy. You can’t keep paying a guy who couldn’t stay healthy and was way behind the curve.
grego21 - January 28, 2012
I agree. You make decisions at the time that make the most sense, but nobody has a crystal ball.
quincyscott - January 29, 2012
One thing to the Spurs credit is that I’d have a difficult time trying to think up an All-Star team of former Spurs that they gave up on too quick.
Alamo - January 27, 2012
Entering the season, everybody was raving about Anderson. I really have to wonder what the hell happened. Sure, we have Green and Neal and Leonard, but it’s not like any of them are playing all that great of late, and Manu is hurt, and yet Anderson gets nothing but four minutes of garbage time against the hawks and a big fat DNP tonight. It just looks like they have given up on him. Why?
quincyscott - January 27, 2012
I think Pop thought we only have space for one young shooting guard. The plan was always to play Manu with Neal taking the minutes behind him. And that will probably be the case when manu comes back.
Pop maybe figured out that its useless to have two guys fighting to be the third string shooting guard. So he choose the one that showed that even when his jumper isnt falling, he can contribute in a variety of ways. Green showed also that he can credibly defend 3 positions. That was the deal breaker I think. Anderson was nonexistent when he couldnt score.
Chilai - January 28, 2012
I definitely agree with your post 100%, but when Neal’s shot is not falling, he’s pretty bad, if not worse since he can’t defend a lick, especially this season when he’s slowed by his surgery.
grego21 - January 28, 2012
I agree, but that’s the point about Neal: a lot more often than not, his shot will fall. He has demonstrated to be one of the best shooters in the NBA. You use a guy like that, and for 10-15 minutes a night he is more than ok. Just dont ask him to play big minutes or be your PG.
Chilai - January 28, 2012
I agree, but he got way too much burn when he just got back. And he suffered with his shots not falling after he lost his legs. Luckily, Joseph/Green combo is able to handle the backup a little bit. Not ideal, but better than Neal.
But yes, you are right. Neal is very lethal if he’s on. However, if we are going to knock Bonner for his D and how his offense doesn’t make up for the fact that his D gives up a lot, Neal does the same, just from another position…
Again, without Manu and TJ, Pop is left scrambling for guys who can make something happen in games.. So it makes sense at least in the idea of what he’s trying to achieve.
grego21 - January 28, 2012
My gut feeling is that JA doesn’t want to be with the team. Every time he steps on the court he looks like he would prefer to don a different uniform. Even when we were trashing Atlanta, and everyone was happy, he looked dejected. The Spurs won’t keep a pouting player just for the sake of having a warm body on their bench. If he wants to go, they’ll let him go. For now,he is just a roster filler, without any future with the organization. While his injuries and struggles didn’t help, I think this is his attitude that caused the divorce with the Spurs. Think of him as the reincarnation of RMJ.
Kondor - January 28, 2012
Interesting and believable take, if he was in fact pouty, even in the face of a big win.
alamobro - January 28, 2012
Wasn’t that the final day to receive an extension? It seems understandable if that was the day.
grego21 - January 28, 2012
A chicken getting mistaken for an egg, perhaps.
quincyscott - January 28, 2012
I see.
alamobro - January 28, 2012
I can understand JA unhappiness with his situation. I can also understand FO unhappiness with him being unhappy. Who is chicken and what is an egg? I don’t know, it just looks like a divorce to me.
Kondor - January 29, 2012
I can live with this. He’s clearly not living up to his potential, and this may be the kick in the ass he needs in order to refocus his priorities back on his game. At this moment, JA’s blockers are all mental, and he needs a shock to the system.
Now he’s got no contract for next year, and when the chips are down later in the year it’ll be self evident whether or not he’s decided to turn things around for himself.
Renn - January 28, 2012 via mobile
It completely sucks that James wasn’t picked up for his third year. I’m a big advocate of him getting minutes but I think people are being too hard on Pop. Understand people, the Spurs are still competing for rings and, in a season without much practice time, we need players who “get it” quickly. Pop doesn’t really have the time to wait for James to find his game back. He doesn’t have the luxury or giving him a few minutes here and there in the hopes that he finds it. The man is trying to win games without his best player right now and has a very small margin for error. This move might have simply been a way of allowing James to get the pt he needs to develop since he’s not getting it here (it’s happened before). I think it absolutely sucks that James might not be on the team next year but with Pop trying to win a ring NOW he might not get a chance to prove himself.
bj1der - January 29, 2012
I don’t think Anderson should be given minutes just for the sake of development, Ws be damned. The CBA has built-in advantages for teams to keep their young players until they are absolutely sure what to do with them. Anderson was eligible to spend this season in Austin and he was going to make close to the league minimum next season.
I wasn’t advocating for Anderson to start or even to get minutes this season. I was just trying to point out that I can’t find a reason why picking up his option was not the best way to go.
Edg5 - January 29, 2012
I suggest you to read Wayne’s Vore piece at his own blog, the big fundamental. Some interesting thoughts about the possible reasons behind the Anderson decision.
Chilai - January 29, 2012
I’ve read it. I respect Wayne, but I don’t think he is right. If Anderson returns to the Spurs next season for the option price and shows enough progress for the Spurs to want to retain him, there’s no way in hell he resigns for the money Wayne proposes. James would be 23-year-old up-and-coming unrestricted free agent and someone is going to offer him a better contract than the 3-year 1.5 mill per Wayne suggests. If he returns for the option price and sucks, the Spurs are in the same spot they would have been if they picked up his option, but without the ability to trade him. And that’s assuming he even comes back next season.
Edg5 - January 29, 2012
I disagree, and I think Wayne is right. When was the last time an NBA team gave a 20th pick who hasnt show ANYTHING and plays at the SG position more than what Wayne suggests? There is a precedent but only with bigs (because "you cant teach height). But SG’s ? Correct me if im wrong.
Chilai - January 29, 2012
IF he show enough progress for the Spurs to want to retain him. It would only make sense for the Spurs to sign him long term if he’s made progress. If he’s made progress i.e.: cracked the rotation, other teams would be interested. Gary Neal, Danny Green and Kawhi, the rotation wings, would command more than 1.5 million per year on the open market.
Edg5 - January 29, 2012
That’s not necessarily true. He’s show enough in limited minutes that the Spurs could consider him a project and sign him to a deal similar to Neal’s. Maybe a little more expensive.
Neal and Green have both made clutch plays on national television. Kawhi is already one of the 10-15 best defensive wings in the league. Green is right there with him.
What special skill does Anderson have? He can shoot, but not like Neal. He can defend, but not like Green or Kawhi. SG’s are a dime a dozen. He won’t get more than his 1.5 million in the open market unless he starts getting major minutes and proving he’s worth it. With Manu coming back in the next couple weeks, he’s pretty much out of time to do that. He’ll either be back with us or be somewhere else for 1 million/year.
SpursfanSteve - January 30, 2012
Of course, if we amnesty RJ next year, he doesn’t even have to show much for the Spurs to want to retain him- and he’d likely come 9x cheaper relative to RJ’s contract. He and Neal would back up Manu, Green and Kawhi would fight for the starting SF spot. We’d retain a great deal of depth.
SpursfanSteve - January 30, 2012
The scenario refers to next season. Wayne assumes that Anderson will be back next season for the option money. After next season is when the Spurs would sign him long term. If Green or RJ are gone and Anderson cracks the rotation, he would almost certainly command more than 1.5 mill.
Edg5 - January 30, 2012
I must have misunderstood- I’m assuming we’ll sign him to a 3 year deal, with the third being partially guaranteed, this offseason.
SpursfanSteve - January 30, 2012
No, the Spurs can’t offer him more than the option money.
Edg5 - January 30, 2012
I heard maybe making room for DeColo and Lorbak. What about Ryan Richards? Are the Spurs trying to make room for these guys next year?
spurlover - January 29, 2012 via mobile
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Pounding The Rock to post a comment.