# T-Mac



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

They've been talking about T-Mac to the Spurs on PTI and Around the Horn...besides whether or not it would actually happen...would it be a good move for the Spurs?

I think it would put the Spurs waaaay over the top. Duncan and T-Mac could coexist better than Shaq and Kobe, just because of how Duncan plays.

T-Mac would also answer the shooting problem. He would get very quality looks.

I would go as far as to say the Spurs could lose Parker and Manu, but if that got them Mcgrady it would be enough to make them better. You fill in around Duncan and Mcgrady like the Lakers filled around Shaq and Kobe...

No team except for the Lakers has two superstars. And the Spurs would have both in the primes of their career.


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

T mac would be great with the spurs , id take him in Portland


----------



## texan (Jul 10, 2003)

tmac would be great to have but to lose parker AND ginobili is still hard to bear.


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

Tmac on the Spurs would be scary. If Pop can make an average athlete who was pathetic on defense before he came to SA a good defender, imagine what he can do with McGrady and his unbelievable athleticism and length. 

I think they would have to get rid of Parker and Manu to do it, but it would be worth it because Tmac is what, 24? Parker is only 3 years younger and isnt half the player Tmac is. Tmac would provide much more now, and still has a whole lot of good years left, probably atleast 10. 

They would need a point guard, but who better to fill that spot than the sharpshooting 6'6 unselfish Brent Barry? 

Imagine:
PG - Barry
SG - McGrady
SF - Bowen
PF - Duncan
C - Rasho

Thats scary, straight up. Especially when they are coached by a guy who knows how to get the team to play consistent on defense every night, adding such superb offense makes it intense. Spurs need shooting, ballhandling and a perimeter player who can create his own offense. Who better to do that than a good decision making point guard who shoots the three ball at *45%*, and a player who is the best in the league at creating his own offense. 

I got my hopes up over this the other day, and I'm doing it again haha. I wish it would happen, but I just dont see it going down. It would be great if it did though. It would be like watching a consistent version of the Lakers who actually play excellent defense every night.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Brent Barry is going to stay on the West Coast most likely. I think it is way more likely he goes to Golden State or Denver than San Antonio.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>John The Cool Kid</b>!
> 
> 
> Imagine:
> ...


:drool: 

Yeah. Maybe it's best to just push this whole thing out of ones mind. The only way I see it happening is if T-Mac chooses San Antonio. Because I don't know that Manu and Tony would be enough to get T-Mac...though that would probably clear some cap space for the Magic, and if they drafted Okafor they'd have a nice solid base of a team.

Can you imagine Parker and Ginobilli on a team in a situation where they would have free reign to do whatever they want? That'd be fun to watch.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Hong Kong Fooey</b>!
> Brent Barry is going to stay on the West Coast most likely. I think it is way more likely he goes to Golden State or Denver than San Antonio.


Why? Why wouldn't he want to go play with the Spurs? It seems like the perfect situation to end his career on? Especially if they give him the same money as Golden State or Denver...


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>futuristxen</b>!
> 
> 
> Why? Why wouldn't he want to go play with the Spurs? It seems like the perfect situation to end his career on? Especially if they give him the same money as Golden State or Denver...


He brought a new house on the west coast and has said he wanted to stay in that area, but if San Antonio is willing to give him the 4 years he is looking for, then he probably would go there. Would San Antonio give him 4 years though?


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

This is too much of a reach. The Spurs are only 1-2 players away from a championship with this team, and we don't need to add a guy like T-Mac to put us over the edge. 


Who's going to replace Parker? Is there any PG available that will do better than Parker did? No. We will be stuck with a guy in the range of Kenny Anderson at starting PG, and T-Mac or not, we're not going to win with a sub-par PG. Sure, you can say Nick Van Exel, Brent Barry, Jamal Crawford, etc, but we all know the chances of those signings happening. Back on Parker: This guy is a good player now, and he's still very young. I just know that trading him would come back and bite us on our ***.


To me, we are not this desperate for a huge change like this. I heard Sean Elliot comment on this from the Spurs point-of-view, and he said that chemistry has always been a huge factor for the Spurs, and this kills it. Anyway, I refuse to believe we are this desperate. We're weren't too far off from a championship this season, and our core players should be back for next season, so I say keep the youngster in Parker, keep Manu for a reasonable price, and add a couple of shooters and another big body to replace Horry.


----------



## XxMia_9xX (Oct 5, 2002)

t-mac is great but losing parker and manu? the main reason y i love the spurs is because of parker and manu i just awesome....i say keep the core of the spurs duncan, parker, manu, and get like a good shooter, that's all the spurs need. too much talent can cause problems like team chemistry.... i dont see t-mac coming to SA anyways....


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

Jesus, are you guys kidding? You put Tmac, Duncan, and other solid role players together with Pop coaching and you can start counting the rings. 

As a Laker fan, I *hope* this doesn't happen. 

And no, if anything Brent Barry is more likely to go to the Lakers than the Spurs. He said as much when asked what teams he'd like to play for next season, and he said the Lakers (besides Seattle). He said west coast only, so that may not include SA.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

Brent Barry is going to be a hot commodity this offseason I think. Who wouldn't want this guy? Especially if you are in that top part of the Western Conference.

But yeah seriously, how could you say no to T-Mac? T-Mac and Duncan showed plenty of chemistry in the olympic qualifiers. T-Mac is a better shooter than Manu and Parker put together. He would love the open shots playing with Duncan would afford. And defensively, he showed in Toronto he can be a monster, Popovich could turn him into an all-defensive player...his shotblocking and rebounding could get really good.

As far as replacing Parker, a combo of Charlie Ward and Jason Hart would probably be all you needed at the point guard slot with T-Mac there. You would really just fill in the gaps on the roster with role players. You would still have Bowen and Rasho.

I think that's a significant and major upgrade. If the Lakers brought back Shaq and Kobe for another go next year that would be the most marquee game the NBA has had in probably 10 years...T-Mac and Duncan vs. Shaq and Kobe...4 of the top 5 players playing the game today all on the floor going at it. For the good of the game, David Stern should order the Magic to make this happen.

But yeah. There's no way this happens. It's even more far fetched than A-Rod to the Red Sox.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>EHL</b>!
> Jesus, are you guys kidding? You put Tmac, Duncan, and other solid role players together with Pop coaching and you can start counting the rings.
> 
> As a Laker fan, I *hope* this doesn't happen.
> ...




Yes, McGrady is a great talent and great player. However, he's not worth Parker and Ginobili, unless both Ginobili and Parker want double digits per year on their new contracts. 


Again, I just don't think this kind of radical change is necessary. We can just add a few role players with this team and we'll be fine.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

Another reason to get T-Mac...if the Spurs don't, another Western Confrence team will.

You don't want Houston to get him. And you certainly don't want the Lakers to get him. You maybe could live with him going to Phoenix provided Kobe doesn't go there as well.

Frankly put, if T-Mac is on the market, part of the Spurs strategy has to be to keep him off of other teams as much as it is to get him on the Spurs.


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

I dont understand why Parker and Manu is considered such a steap price for McGrady. Name a player whos slightly better than Manu, and slightly better than Parker, and ask yourself if you would trade them two for McGrady. To me, its a no brainer. Parker and Manu are fine players, but they are roleplayers. McGrady is the best guard in the league.

I dont think McGrady will be on the Spurs next year, but if its on the table, you have to do it IMO.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

well I think part of it is the same with any team you like, you don't like to see players you've grown attatched to traded away. Yes Parker is good, yes he will most likely make the Spurs regret trading him, to some extent. But you have to give up good players to get good players. I don't think the Spurs have enough as it is to get T-Mac, but they certainly don't have enough if Parker isn't on the table. I would think Parker is the most attractive piece the Spurs could offer Orlando...

And really if you have Duncan and Mcgrady, is Parker even the point guard you want?


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>John The Cool Kid</b>!
> I dont understand why Parker and Manu is considered such a steap price for McGrady. Name a player whos slightly better than Manu, and slightly better than Parker, and ask yourself if you would trade them two for McGrady. To me, its a no brainer. Parker and Manu are fine players, but they are roleplayers. McGrady is the best guard in the league.
> 
> I dont think McGrady will be on the Spurs next year, but if its on the table, you have to do it IMO.



Parker is on his way to being one of the best PG's in the league. He's a role player now, but in 2 years, he'll be a lot more than just a role player. As for Manu, if we can keep him at a reasonable price (6-7 mill per season) then I like the look of this team for the future. With T-Mac and Duncan eating at our cap for a long time, how are we going to bring in new, young talent for the future? This T-Mac/Duncan idea is being based on the Kobe/Shaq idea, so I'll go with the current state of the Lakers as opposed to the potential state of the Spurs with this T-Mac deal being done. The Lakers have won three titles in five years, and are well on their way for a fourth. However, what kind of talent will make this team as competitive in 4-5 years? Kareem Rush? Brian Cook? Bottom-of-the-barrel first round picks are all you are going to end up with when you have a small number of players eating a large piece of your cap. We'd have Duncan, McGrady, Rasho, and Rose with very long term deals, and just those 4 players puts us at $40 mill next year, with that number increasing as the years progress. So, my beef with this is: Are those four players and a bunch of role players enough to win a championship? I mean, we'd pretty much be living off MLE's and late 1st rounders for years to bring in new talent, and with the exception of Payton and Malone this year, look at what kind of players it has brought them. I don't want the Spurs to look into the future and see guys like Kareem Rush, Brian Cook, and Luke Walton are going to surround our superstars. The Lakers can pull this off with Payton and Malone, a once-in-a-lifetime situation, but I doubt the Spurs can win championships for years to come with two stars and a bunch of average players.



If you're not getting any of this, then I'll try to sum it up in this paragraph. To me, sticking with Parker and Manu at reasonable prices (15-20 mill year combined) will do just as well as playing one player basically the same amount of money. I just like the idea that we'll have more talent and more depth with two good players instead of one great player, especially since we've proven that we can win it with one great player and two other good players. Again, I certainly think we aren't desperate enough for this. It's not like we are in the position the Wolves were in before this season; We've won two championships, and we were among the best teams in the league this year, and we just add on to the already solid core we have for the future.


----------



## Luiz_Rodrigo (Dec 2, 2003)

To end this subject...

McGrady is an amazing player, no doubts about it! He´s a perennial all-star, a very good shooter and a player that likes to play under pression.

He and Duncan would be the most powerful in the NBA, and Spurs would be the favorite to win the ring and become a dinasty.

But there are some observations to be done:

1) McGrady won´t come to Parker + Ginobili. It simply will not happen, because you just trade a star for another star.
2) Parker in 2 or 3 years will be in the level that Marbury is right now, and probably in 2005 will be an all star player.
3) We need a good shooter and a backup pg. Withouth Horry and Turkoglu (perhaps Malik Rose too) will have money to hire those guys and resign Ginobili.

But I´ll repeat... McGrady is an amazing player, and I won´t be sad if he comes to the Alamo city.


----------



## shazha (Nov 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>John The Cool Kid</b>!
> I dont understand why Parker and Manu is considered such a steap price for McGrady. Name a player whos slightly better than Manu, and slightly better than Parker, and ask yourself if you would trade them two for McGrady. To me, its a no brainer. Parker and Manu are fine players, but they are roleplayers. McGrady is the best guard in the league.
> 
> I dont think McGrady will be on the Spurs next year, but if its on the table, you have to do it IMO.


i think its more because ginaboli and parker know the spurs offense, they play well in the team system and compliment duncan well.

Having macgrady means the whole team has to adjust, and their offensive system may have to change. you cant just plug in a superstar and hope all the systems will remain the same. It just doenst work that way, scrubs can fit in anywhere, but tmac is someone who is such a focal point of any offense. Not to mention it might take shots away from other players, or his personality, which often is negative towards his own team mates.

A great player, but i also think they need to hang on to a blossoming parker and good 6th man in manu. If they can sign a decent player out right in free agency they might be back in contention.


----------



## Sánchez AF (Aug 10, 2003)

T-MAC and Duncan Great


----------



## Knicksbiggestfan (Apr 29, 2003)

Yeah I don't know what the schematics are, but two things.


1. Parker isn't going to be like Marbury, unless he really really hits the weight room. I know he's amazing and all of that but physically speaking I don't see him developing that kind of strength. Though I think he will be as quick.

2.

Tmac, and Duncan, wow. 

What more do you need to secure a dynasty than the two most talented players at their position(s).

Think about, everytime Duncan is double teamed, he throws it out to Tmac on the wing.

Tmac on the wing.

That's nuts.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Knicksbiggestfan</b>!
> Yeah I don't know what the schematics are, but two things.
> 
> 
> ...






What more do you need? How about role players. You don't just simply win by throwing out two superstars on the court. The Lakers had the perfect system and the perfect role players to fit that system, so they didn't just throw Kobe and Shaq out there and win. Yes, they had a huge, huge part on the championship, but let's not forget there are 3 other players on the court.


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

how can i get T mac to come to Portland


----------



## John (Jun 9, 2002)

Spurs need role players playing out of mind to win a championship, Lakers dont have to. That's why Lakers did go 3 peat but Spurs didnt.

I think T-Mac could be a great choice for him as Tim Duncan is here, T-Mac doesnt have to always take the last shot.


----------



## Luiz_Rodrigo (Dec 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>John</b>!
> Spurs need role players playing out of mind to win a championship, Lakers dont have to. That's why Lakers did go 3 peat but Spurs didnt.
> 
> I think T-Mac could be a great choice for him as Tim Duncan is here, T-Mac doesnt have to always take the last shot.


No doubts that T-Mac is a great player, and he and Duncan would be scary for the other teams, but it won´t happen.

Magic would never accept Manu + Parker for McGrady.


----------



## texan (Jul 10, 2003)

I would do Parker, Ginobili and Rose/other for McGrady in a heartbeat. Yes, I think Parker will be one of the best point guards in the league in a couple years but he will never be as good as Tmac. We can always find someone to replace Parker but Tmac is a one in a million player. We still would have Rasho and Bowen and Devin Brown and those are some good role players to put in around Tmac and TD. Add in a decent PG(could possibly come from the draft)(Chris Duhon anyone?) and you got yourself a great dynasty.


----------



## maKINGSofgreatness (Aug 17, 2003)

as a kings fan with no vested intrest in the spurs, the magic, mcgrady, parker, or ginobili, I would do parker and ginobili for tmac in a second, unless I was Orlando...


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

BUMP. 

Props to KoKo and others for sticking to their guns on this one. Looking back on the thought of a McGrady for Parker/Ginobili trade, I would never do it.


----------



## Rique (May 12, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Johnny Mac</b>!
> BUMP.
> 
> Props to KoKo and others for sticking to their guns on this one. Looking back on the thought of a McGrady for Parker/Ginobili trade, I would never do it.


Agreed, I've liked T-mac, but there is just something about his game where he doesn't make the players around him better. He's a great one-on-one player, or a one-on-two or three, but I think he's far worse as a team player. Let's face it, most other all-stars of McGrady's level would never allow their team to achieve the record that the Magic did last season. Now look at what's happening to H-town. There is just no Chemistry there. Yao looks very unhappy and his performance has dropped when compared to last season. Yao probably sits at home after every game fantasizing about H-town announcing that they are reversing the trade that seperated him from the Franchize and Mobley.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Johnny Mac</b>!
> BUMP.
> 
> Props to KoKo and others for sticking to their guns on this one. Looking back on the thought of a McGrady for Parker/Ginobili trade, I would never do it.





Damn, I completely forgot about this thread. Nice bump. It's interesting to see what I said back in May, because it's still the same thing I'd say right now if the proposal came around again. T-Mac is a great talent, but the Spurs need/want character guys who have already been brought-up in the Spurs system. Parker and Manu are those guys.


----------

