SI.com rumors & truths --- Any of these sound appealing?Or just down right silly

[Reality]

Question -

Would the Spurs still be considered a top western conference team if both Finley and Barry were playing elsewhere?

My guess would be yes.

Barry, Scola rights and Finley for Artest works for me.

[msc]

Barry, Scola rights and Finley for Artest works for me.

If I'm SA, I wouldn't trade Barry's jock strap for Artest.  How many times does one have to put their hand on a hot stove before they realize it burns?!?! 

1st Time (Chicago) - Team never reached potential with Artest and Brand, gee I wonder why? - ouch that burns!

2nd Time (Indiana) - Solid eastern conference contender, Artest's actions for all intents and purposes destroy an entire season, team trades Artest and is treading water in the Eastern conference - Man, that really burns! 

3rd Time (Sac) - Chemistry issues seem to have dragged down a once solid team -  Ouch! 

Why on God's green earth would any team want to take Artest?!!!  I guess I could see if you were struggling it might be worth the risk, I don't think I would, but I could make a case for it.  But a seasoned team of good guys like the Spurs.  Why would you throw a cancer in the mix? 

[Reality]

Barry, Scola rights and Finley for Artest works for me.

3rd Time (Sac) - Chemistry issues seem to have dragged down a once solid team -  Ouch! 

Kings before Artest and afterwords comparison?  Did you watch last years playoffs?  Before Artests ankle went out they were giving the Spurs all they could handle.  Artest was the backbone along with contract year Bonzi.  Are you reffering to this year?  See Jomal for explaination of Bibbys self need to be center of attention.

See also Bulls and Dennis Rodman.  (Along with CBS )

[westkoast]

Barry, Scola rights and Finley for Artest works for me.

If I'm SA, I wouldn't trade Barry's jock strap for Artest.  How many times does one have to put their hand on a hot stove before they realize it burns?!?! 

1st Time (Chicago) - Team never reached potential with Artest and Brand, gee I wonder why? - ouch that burns!

2nd Time (Indiana) - Solid eastern conference contender, Artest's actions for all intents and purposes destroy an entire season, team trades Artest and is treading water in the Eastern conference - Man, that really burns! 

3rd Time (Sac) - Chemistry issues seem to have dragged down a once solid team -  Ouch! 

Why on God's green earth would any team want to take Artest?!!!  I guess I could see if you were struggling it might be worth the risk, I don't think I would, but I could make a case for it.  But a seasoned team of good guys like the Spurs.  Why would you throw a cancer in the mix? 

I don't think it is fair to blame the chemistry issues soley on Ron Artest's shoulders in SAC.  There is/was alot going on up there in the last two seasons.  On top of that, Mike Bibby is the one who seems to be miffed.  Artest should be more of a focus on the offense.  With him on the block they are going to have no problem getting easy hoops isntead of jacking up jump shots.

I guess it falls under a Rahim type curse.  Rahim is not the reason why all the team he has been on have not done so well.  Just like it has not always been Ron Artest's fault for what is going wrong with this SAC squad.

[Lurker]

Question -

Would the Spurs still be considered a top western conference team if both Finley and Barry were playing elsewhere?

My guess would be yes.

Barry, Scola rights and Finley for Artest works for me.

Trading away your major outside threats for a headcase?  Where will Artest get his offense from?  If he is unhappy in Sac then what do you think he will feel when he is the #4 option on the Spurs?  Oh, I forgot...Duncan should be playing 18 feet from the rim.  Then Artest can be the primary low post player.  D'oh!

[msc]

Barry, Scola rights and Finley for Artest works for me.

3rd Time (Sac) - Chemistry issues seem to have dragged down a once solid team -  Ouch! 

Kings before Artest and afterwords comparison?  Did you watch last years playoffs?  Before Artests ankle went out they were giving the Spurs all they could handle.  Artest was the backbone along with contract year Bonzi.  Are you reffering to this year?  See Jomal for explaination of Bibbys self need to be center of attention.

See also Bulls and Dennis Rodman.  (Along with CBS )

Yes, I watched the playoffs last year.  As I recall Bonzi was killing the Spurs on the block.  I think Artest played pretty well too, but remember ... he was still in his honeymoon period after having to sit at home on his arse for half a season waiting for the phone to ring. 

Let's see, Bonzi leaves, Artest is still there, the Kings now stinking it up.  Hmmmm ... what changed?  Bibby may or may not be acting like a baby this year, but he seemed fine in previous seasons with every other teammate. 

Are you actually trying to tell me you don't see a pattern here with Artest?
 

[Reality]

Yes, I watched the playoffs last year.  As I recall Bonzi was killing the Spurs on the block.  I think Artest played pretty well too, but remember ... he was still in his honeymoon period after having to sit at home on his arse for half a season waiting for the phone to ring. 

Let's see, Bonzi leaves, Artest is still there, the Kings now stinking it up.  Hmmmm ... what changed?  Bibby may or may not be acting like a baby this year, but he seemed fine in previous seasons with every other teammate. 

Are you actually trying to tell me you don't see a pattern here with Artest? [/quote]
Excellent point about the honeymoon period.
Well, Rodman was also disruptive until MJ and Phil got ahold of him.  Remember when he tried his antics with the Bulls?  Missed a bunch of practices and slacked a few games.  Word was MJ was totally in his face and Bulls were prepared to move on without him.  So yes you have a point.
But, Bulls did get the best out of him.
I think Phil J would make Artest rock in L.A.

Back to SA, would Artest "honeymoon" with the Spurs for the rest of this season?  I will gamble and say yes.

[WayOutWest]

Oh, I forgot...Duncan should be playing 18 feet from the rim.  Then Artest can be the primary low post player.  D'oh!

Correction!!!  He should be FACING the basket from 18 feet setting up the bank shot!

LOL!!!!  

[WayOutWest]

I think Phil J would make Artest rock in L.A.

No way!!!  Kobe would het hammered in practice and be out for the season.  That would solve the "post presence" problem in L.A.  I admit I would drool if it was a possibility.

[msc]

I don't think it is fair to blame the chemistry issues soley on Ron Artest's shoulders in SAC.  There is/was alot going on up there in the last two seasons.  On top of that, Mike Bibby is the one who seems to be miffed.  Artest should be more of a focus on the offense.  With him on the block they are going to have no problem getting easy hoops isntead of jacking up jump shots.

I guess it falls under a Rahim type curse.  Rahim is not the reason why all the team he has been on have not done so well.  Just like it has not always been Ron Artest's fault for what is going wrong with this SAC squad.

I think it's totally fair to blame Artest given his track record.  He's single handidly sabotaged two teams and now it appears he's working on his third.  That said, I don't think team chemistry issues are ever 100% due to one thing, but rather a combination of factors.  However, one can't deny that Artest has been direcetly involved in chemistry issues everywhere he goes.  There is now an undeniable pattern.  

I don't think it's fair to compare Artest to Shareef Abdur Rahim.  For starters Shareef doesn't have a list of detrimental actions as long as the Nile River like Artest does.  As far as I can see, Shareef is a good guy, he maybe hasen't lived up to his on court potential, but he's not a bad apple.  The same can't be said for Artest.  He is the definition of a Bad Apple.  It's not like Artest is a Rod Strickland, or Sam Cassell type cancer.  No, this guy is the team cancer of all team cancers.  He has established himself as the cancer by which all other cancers will now be measured.  

[msc]

I admit I would drool if it was a possibility.

It was a possibilty just last year and I'm thankful every day it never happened.

Hindsight is 20/20, but this current Laker team appears to have developed a wonderful comeradere and chemistry and I'd hate to see that ruined by a d!@#-head like Ron Ron. 

[Reality]

When GNob went out for 5-6 games, 29% Findawg got the starts while .724 fga Barry still came off the bench and got less minutes.

If you really followed the Spurs then you would know that the reason Finley started was so that Barry COULD RETAIN HIS ROLE OFF THE BENCH!!!!!!!!!!  Pop does this regularly.  It just happened recently with Horry getting the start after Elson was injured.  By your outstanding NBA logic Fabs should have started.  But the eternally wiser Pop likes to try to maintain roles among his bench.

Your assessment of Findawgs D has me knowing you do not watch Spurs games or we have 180 degree different definitions of D.
Couldn't box out my grandmother, rebounds only those which come his way, never muscles up.
Barry not a good rebounder either but certainly at the least the equal of Finley.  How did the Spurs *hide* Barry during the 2005 Championship run?  Real Spurs watchers and outsiders alike seeing some of the best team D ever played on the NBA hardwood.

Barry wasn't a major defensive factor in the 2005 title run.  If you think so then you are definately in the minority.  Maybe it just the SoCal Spurs fans that honestly belive that all that matters is shooting percentages and rebounding.  Go back and watch all those games you claim to have tivoed.  Finley plays much better man-to-man as well as team defense than Barry.  Finley also atrtacks the rim and flushes the ball more than a former slam dunk champion.  Basically everyone but you who follows the Spurs...including common fans, sports commentators, asst coaches, national columnists, etc...all say that Finley is the better player.  But, of course, none of them have the sun-addled thought process that gives you a much better vision of the game.

If you really followed the Spurs then you would know that the reason Finley started was so that Barry COULD RETAIN HIS ROLE OFF THE BENCH!!!!!!!!!!  Pop does this regularly.  It just happened recently with Horry getting the start after Elson was injured.  By your outstanding NBA logic Fabs should have started.  But the eternally wiser Pop likes to try to maintain roles among his bench.

In the 2005 Championship season, Barry started several times at the point.  Worked out great, best one i saw was at Clippers later in the season as the Spurs secured homecourt.  Explain why Finley got equal minutes in Nov and Dec.

Barry wasn't a major defensive factor in the 2005 title run.  

 Nor did i ever quote or infer he was a "major" factor.  He certainly was a factor, playing 25 min per game including vs Detroit and including most of the 4th qtr of game 7.  You tell me how he was hidden as you claim he is such a crappy defender.

Basically everyone but you who follows the Spurs...including common fans, sports commentators, asst coaches, national columnists, etc...all say that Finley is the better player.  

 I'm just getting started but here is two:
"Bench Finley a la Steve Smith in '03. I've been calling for that recently and it's the right move. Finley is done. He gave all he could in last year's playoffs but his tank is empty."  LJ WOAI in San Antone.

"I agree that Finley is playing too much while not producing." Dec 13th.  Kori Ellis who also writes for WOAI and is wife of LJ.

They run a site and this is one of the hundreds of comments on Findawg, a mild one at that:
One of hundreds of non media quotes:  "The thing I just don't understand is "why" he seems to think he "has" to let Finley play through all of this. For chrissakes when Barry went through this he was BURIED never to be seen for a month, and Devin Brown was the replacement. Now, the Spurs can actually just plug someone in who can fill the void (Barry) yet, it just doesn't matter.

[Lurker]

Reality...let's make this simpler.

Finley was not a member of the Spurs in 2005.  So comparing what Barry did that year is foolishness.  Barry & Devin Brown were the backup swing spots.  And the Spurs were so desparate for another SF they signed Big Dog Robinson...who according to commentators looked impressive on defense.  So, yes, the Spurs were a strong enough defensive team to cover the weakness of Barry who got the minutes out of default.

Finley was signed during the offseason.  So Pop and the rest of the Spurs front office (regularly deemed one of the best in the NBA) obviously felt that Barry was not the solution as a backup at the swing spots.

Before the trade deadline last year the Spurs had a deal in place to ship out Barry but the 3rd team needed to make salaries work didn't return calls in time.  Finley's name has never come up in trade discussions...because the Spurs don't want to give him up!

BUT MOST OF ALL:  Barry does NOT play solid enough man or team defense to stay on the floor.  He could shoot 100% from the floor and still not get playing time due to his DEFENSIVE shortcomings.  In short Finley is the better player in terms of playing BOTH ENDS OF THE COURT.  What part don't you understand?



It is a real shame that all those idiots working for the Spurs' front office can't judge talent as well as you do.  The Spurs never would have lost a game and be on their way to a 20-something repeat.

[JoMal]

Question -

Would the Spurs still be considered a top western conference team if both Finley and Barry were playing elsewhere?

My guess would be yes.

Barry, Scola rights and Finley for Artest works for me.

Unless one of those players balloons up to 6'10" and 280 lbs, and becomes a rebounding and shot blocking freak, forget it.

[Reality]

Jomal

Unless one of those players balloons up to 6'10" and 280 lbs, and becomes a rebounding and shot blocking freak, forget it.

All right you're gonna play hardball.  Don't blame you, seeing Artests influence in the playoffs.  Okay you got it.
You get Matt Bonner.