2 unrelated thoughts:
1) An acquaintance of mine who has been involved in the pageant culture and used to compete herself made an interesting point regarding Sarah Palin's often-mocked promise to "get back to" Katie Couric on any examples of John McCain being a regulator. She said that pageant contestants are commonly told, if they don't know the answer to a question during the Q&A portion, to say "I'll get back to you on that." She said the theory is that it gets the contestant out of the immediate bind she's in and allows for some levity if said in a charming manner.
Now obviously, someone running for Vice President can't get away with that kind of answer when being asked about issues of national importance that SHE, unlike a pageant contestant, might actually have influence on. But one wonders: Did Palin, in a moment of deep discomfort and uncertainty, simply revert back to her beauty pageant training? If so, that's not stress management we can believe in.
2) In light of the apparent strong and consistent trend toward Obama in most recent state and national polls, I'm hearing from pundits all over the news today that McCain is in real danger of having these numbers solidify UNLESS he comes up with a game changer. They say he needs to hit Obama with an onslaught of negative stuff, now.
Some say to invoke Reverend Wright. Others suggest reviving William Ayers. I think the campaign's recent track record indicates pretty definitively that they don't need plummeting poll numbers as an excuse to make rash, objectionable decisions. But it might be interesting to brainstorm exactly what form the next round of inevitable Obama-bashing will take.
My prediction? They'll hit hard on the idea that Obama is an internationalist, one-worlder type. You know, the kind of UN-loving, culturally "complicated" fellow who puts global interests before America's. On the surface, that may not sound any more objectionable than the stuff they've already been doing. But it's just a short hop from "internationalist" to "other" to "interloper" to "uppity black Muslim." I think that if the McCain campaign hits the first two labels really hard, it'll signal their surrogates to go even further with latter two.
That's really what I think it's come down to at this point- an imminent not-so-subtle full court press playing into latent racial and religious discomfort among many lower-middle-class upper Midwesterners of a certain age.
I think the last two weeks of this campaign are going to include ads that show endless images of Obama alongside vulnerable white women and children. That is, when his face isn't being dissolved into images of Islamic militants and gang members. I think it's coming. Soon. And I fear, despite the current polling trend, that it just might work.
Wednesday, October 01, 2008
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Veepstakes Round 2: The New Top 20- 7/9/08
As we proceed with our second round of Veepstakes Rankings, the most interesting thing to note is how what initially seemed like a really deep crowd of potential VPs has thinned out considerably. That's primarily a result of missteps on the part of possible running mates. Additionally, a few folks have indicated they aren't interested, although only one of them has made a Shermanesque statement that he would definitely not accept the offer and has told Obama as much.
With that in mind, Let's dive in:
THE CURRENT CREAM OF THE CROP
1) JOHN EDWARDS- (formerly #4 in the original 6/4/08 rankings) The former NC Senator is not a dream choice but a solid one. He reinforces Obama's message of change generally, and more specifically, his opposition to special interest influence. His focus on poverty and the downtrodden speaks to many low income and rural voters who might view Obama as an "elitist." His Southern roots won't hurt, even if they likely won't help Obama actually win North Carolina. His wife is an incredibly popular, sympathic figure who is also an effective advocate for national health care. She might also help with older women who supported Hillary and have yet to embrace Obama. As I mentioned in the last rankings, he wasn't a super running mate for Kerry in '04, but one senses his enthusiasm for Obama is more genuine than for Kerry and that he would be a better surrogate this time around. And from a purely optics-oriented perspective, the two men looked awfully well-matched when Edwards endorsed Obama in Michigan in May.
2) BILL RICHARDSON- (formerly # 3) As mentioned previously, the current NM Governor's resume is impeccable- former UN Ambassador, former Sec. of Energy, former Congressman. He's got foreign policy experience, executive experience and credibility as a westerner (he's a gun rights advocate). Unlike a military man running mate, he can still reinforce the national security message effectively without highlighting Obama's lack of experience in that arena. He's from a swing state and being a Hispanic westerner will also help in Colorado, Nevada and even Arizona. A bit of a DC insider, that concern is effectively mitigated by his ethnicity and recent time outside Washington. Still, he's been known to go off message, say silly things, engage in unneeded resume puffery and is rumored to be a bit of a pig when it comes to the ladies. I also remember him stumbling badly though a question about gay rights in a debate last fall- he didn't seem to understand the question being asked. Still huge electoral and policy pluses may outweigh those minuses.
3) EVAN BAYH- (formerly # 11) Ugh. The IN Senator moves up almost by default. The same blandness that makes him unobjectionable to most also makes him a pretty uninspiring choice. But from a purely strategic perspective, he makes a lot of sense. A former Governor, he has executive experience. He has some foreign policy knowledge from his Senate service. Attractive and still relatively young, he jibes with Obama's generational message. He was a big Clinton supporter, which may help heal wounds between the two camps. Plus, he's from a possible swing state. Then again, his support for Hillary didn't seem to help her much in the state, as Obama nearly stole it form her in the primary. This dullard would be a boring, safe choice. But maybe Obama feels he offers enough excitement on his own and would prefer boring and safe for the number two slot.
4) TIM KAINE- (formerly # 7) Current VA Governor lepas to the top of the Virginia Three, mainly because of Warner aand Webb's asserted lack of interest in the job. Moderate views and executive experience could help nationally, but especially in his own potential swing state. No foreign policy background though and progressives don't love him.
5) SAM NUNN- (Formerly #2) Former GA senator still regarded as a steady hand with vast foreign affairs knowledge. But he's 70, almost as old as McCain, which doesn't mesh with Obama's message of generational change. Plus, his early '90's opposition to gays in the military still rankles many progressives. Depending on one's level of idealogical purity, that can be either a good or a bad thing.
THE SECOND TIER
6) MARK WARNER- (formerly #1) This former VA Governor and current senatorial candidate topped the rankings last go-round. Nothing has changed to make him less appealing- executive experience, business experience, Southerner froma swing state. But he has indicated pretty strongly that he wants to focus on winning the his Senate race. Beyond that, he's promised his teenage daughters he wouldn't seek national office until they all graduated high school. Still, hard to imagine he'd say no if Obama asked.
7) JOE BIDEN- (new) The longtime Delaware Senator makes a huge leap from nowhere to serious contender. Highly respected for his foreign affairs knowledge and an eloquent voice for Obama's messge, he knows the world of DC intimately. That's also the problem- he screams Washington insider, which undermines Obama's change message. Additionally, Delaware isn't exactly a swing state. Finally, Biden is known for his tendency to go on and on ...and on. He' s kind of a blowhard, albeit a very smart blowhard.
8) HILLARY CLINTON (formerly # 8) The clamor to pick the NY senator has diminished significantly in recent weeks. She remains a polarizing figure who may motivate conservatives more than she helps Obama, but for all the obvious reasons (passionate supporters, image as a tough, experienced hand), she still has to be considered a real possibility.
9) CHUCK HAGEL- ((formerly #10) Outgoing Republican NE senator remains on the list because of his opposition to the war and his ability to effectively match McCain's war hero bona fides. But despite his seeming openness to the position, he is a social conservative, which makes his selection awfully hard to see reaching fruition.
10) TOM DASCHLE- (new) Former SD Senator and Democratic leader has supported Obama since the very beginning. He's respected and has loads of experience. But if anyone ever contradicted Obama's messgae of moving on from the same old thing, it's Daschle.
LEGIT BUT LONGSHOTS
11) KEN SALAZAR- (formerly #15) Moderate CO Senator moves up because he's Hispanic, from the west and hasn't screwed up his chances yet. Still a longshot.
12) BRIAN SCHWEITZER- (new) Montana Governor is my new darkhorse. From a western state, the farmer and rancher has got executive experience and has worked all over the world, including seven years in Saudi Arabia. Still an unlikely choice, but getting less so.
13) ED RENDELL- (formerly # 5) PA Gov. may be charming, politically astute and from a swing state. But he' still Jewish, which remains tough to imagine working for a wide swath of voters in conjunction w/ an African American at the top of the ticket. Plus, he's said publicly that he wouldn't be a good number two.
14) KATHLEEN SEBILIUS- (formerly # 13) Big-time Obama supporter from a midwestern state but offers little else. Besides, as with all other female possibilities, it's hard to justify anyone other than Clinton.
15) JANET NAPOLITANO- (new) Arizona Governor may mitigate McCain's edge there and help in the west generally. But see Sebilius above.
DON'T HOLD YOUR BREATH
16) MIKE BLOOMBERG- (formerly # 17) Still a Jew from New York so hard to see it, although the attrition rate of other contenders keeps his hopes alive.
17) CLAIRE MCCASKILL- (new) Missouri senator is a big Obama supporter. She might help swing the state but see Napolitano and Sebilius above. May be more helpful in the Senate anyway.
18) RICHARD GEPHARDT- (new) The former Missouri congressman, House minority leader and presidential candidate has been mentioned lately as political veteran who can help in the Show Me state. But his insider status and repeated failure as a national candidate give him the stink of a loser.
19) AL GORE- (formerly #16) Still a near impossibility, but "near" isn't the same as "total".
20) TED STRICKLAND- (formerly # 9) OH Gov. and Clinto supporter says he's not interested. Unless we hear something different, best to take him at his word.
OFF THE TOP 20 LIST COMPLETELY:
JIM WEBB- (formerly #6) He of the Shermanesque statement, the VA senator now says he will not accept. Rumors suggest he may have balked at some of the info required during the vetting process. Latent problems with women's groups probably doomed him anyway.
CHRIS DODD- (formerly #14) Always a longshot, the CT senator's preferential mortgage loan makes his selection politically unfeasible.
WESLEY CLARK- (formerly #12) Whatever the merits of this retired general's claim that being a POW and war hero doesn't inherently qualify McCain for President, the comment moved him from 'unlikely" to "untenable."
With that in mind, Let's dive in:
THE CURRENT CREAM OF THE CROP
1) JOHN EDWARDS- (formerly #4 in the original 6/4/08 rankings) The former NC Senator is not a dream choice but a solid one. He reinforces Obama's message of change generally, and more specifically, his opposition to special interest influence. His focus on poverty and the downtrodden speaks to many low income and rural voters who might view Obama as an "elitist." His Southern roots won't hurt, even if they likely won't help Obama actually win North Carolina. His wife is an incredibly popular, sympathic figure who is also an effective advocate for national health care. She might also help with older women who supported Hillary and have yet to embrace Obama. As I mentioned in the last rankings, he wasn't a super running mate for Kerry in '04, but one senses his enthusiasm for Obama is more genuine than for Kerry and that he would be a better surrogate this time around. And from a purely optics-oriented perspective, the two men looked awfully well-matched when Edwards endorsed Obama in Michigan in May.
2) BILL RICHARDSON- (formerly # 3) As mentioned previously, the current NM Governor's resume is impeccable- former UN Ambassador, former Sec. of Energy, former Congressman. He's got foreign policy experience, executive experience and credibility as a westerner (he's a gun rights advocate). Unlike a military man running mate, he can still reinforce the national security message effectively without highlighting Obama's lack of experience in that arena. He's from a swing state and being a Hispanic westerner will also help in Colorado, Nevada and even Arizona. A bit of a DC insider, that concern is effectively mitigated by his ethnicity and recent time outside Washington. Still, he's been known to go off message, say silly things, engage in unneeded resume puffery and is rumored to be a bit of a pig when it comes to the ladies. I also remember him stumbling badly though a question about gay rights in a debate last fall- he didn't seem to understand the question being asked. Still huge electoral and policy pluses may outweigh those minuses.
3) EVAN BAYH- (formerly # 11) Ugh. The IN Senator moves up almost by default. The same blandness that makes him unobjectionable to most also makes him a pretty uninspiring choice. But from a purely strategic perspective, he makes a lot of sense. A former Governor, he has executive experience. He has some foreign policy knowledge from his Senate service. Attractive and still relatively young, he jibes with Obama's generational message. He was a big Clinton supporter, which may help heal wounds between the two camps. Plus, he's from a possible swing state. Then again, his support for Hillary didn't seem to help her much in the state, as Obama nearly stole it form her in the primary. This dullard would be a boring, safe choice. But maybe Obama feels he offers enough excitement on his own and would prefer boring and safe for the number two slot.
4) TIM KAINE- (formerly # 7) Current VA Governor lepas to the top of the Virginia Three, mainly because of Warner aand Webb's asserted lack of interest in the job. Moderate views and executive experience could help nationally, but especially in his own potential swing state. No foreign policy background though and progressives don't love him.
5) SAM NUNN- (Formerly #2) Former GA senator still regarded as a steady hand with vast foreign affairs knowledge. But he's 70, almost as old as McCain, which doesn't mesh with Obama's message of generational change. Plus, his early '90's opposition to gays in the military still rankles many progressives. Depending on one's level of idealogical purity, that can be either a good or a bad thing.
THE SECOND TIER
6) MARK WARNER- (formerly #1) This former VA Governor and current senatorial candidate topped the rankings last go-round. Nothing has changed to make him less appealing- executive experience, business experience, Southerner froma swing state. But he has indicated pretty strongly that he wants to focus on winning the his Senate race. Beyond that, he's promised his teenage daughters he wouldn't seek national office until they all graduated high school. Still, hard to imagine he'd say no if Obama asked.
7) JOE BIDEN- (new) The longtime Delaware Senator makes a huge leap from nowhere to serious contender. Highly respected for his foreign affairs knowledge and an eloquent voice for Obama's messge, he knows the world of DC intimately. That's also the problem- he screams Washington insider, which undermines Obama's change message. Additionally, Delaware isn't exactly a swing state. Finally, Biden is known for his tendency to go on and on ...and on. He' s kind of a blowhard, albeit a very smart blowhard.
8) HILLARY CLINTON (formerly # 8) The clamor to pick the NY senator has diminished significantly in recent weeks. She remains a polarizing figure who may motivate conservatives more than she helps Obama, but for all the obvious reasons (passionate supporters, image as a tough, experienced hand), she still has to be considered a real possibility.
9) CHUCK HAGEL- ((formerly #10) Outgoing Republican NE senator remains on the list because of his opposition to the war and his ability to effectively match McCain's war hero bona fides. But despite his seeming openness to the position, he is a social conservative, which makes his selection awfully hard to see reaching fruition.
10) TOM DASCHLE- (new) Former SD Senator and Democratic leader has supported Obama since the very beginning. He's respected and has loads of experience. But if anyone ever contradicted Obama's messgae of moving on from the same old thing, it's Daschle.
LEGIT BUT LONGSHOTS
11) KEN SALAZAR- (formerly #15) Moderate CO Senator moves up because he's Hispanic, from the west and hasn't screwed up his chances yet. Still a longshot.
12) BRIAN SCHWEITZER- (new) Montana Governor is my new darkhorse. From a western state, the farmer and rancher has got executive experience and has worked all over the world, including seven years in Saudi Arabia. Still an unlikely choice, but getting less so.
13) ED RENDELL- (formerly # 5) PA Gov. may be charming, politically astute and from a swing state. But he' still Jewish, which remains tough to imagine working for a wide swath of voters in conjunction w/ an African American at the top of the ticket. Plus, he's said publicly that he wouldn't be a good number two.
14) KATHLEEN SEBILIUS- (formerly # 13) Big-time Obama supporter from a midwestern state but offers little else. Besides, as with all other female possibilities, it's hard to justify anyone other than Clinton.
15) JANET NAPOLITANO- (new) Arizona Governor may mitigate McCain's edge there and help in the west generally. But see Sebilius above.
DON'T HOLD YOUR BREATH
16) MIKE BLOOMBERG- (formerly # 17) Still a Jew from New York so hard to see it, although the attrition rate of other contenders keeps his hopes alive.
17) CLAIRE MCCASKILL- (new) Missouri senator is a big Obama supporter. She might help swing the state but see Napolitano and Sebilius above. May be more helpful in the Senate anyway.
18) RICHARD GEPHARDT- (new) The former Missouri congressman, House minority leader and presidential candidate has been mentioned lately as political veteran who can help in the Show Me state. But his insider status and repeated failure as a national candidate give him the stink of a loser.
19) AL GORE- (formerly #16) Still a near impossibility, but "near" isn't the same as "total".
20) TED STRICKLAND- (formerly # 9) OH Gov. and Clinto supporter says he's not interested. Unless we hear something different, best to take him at his word.
OFF THE TOP 20 LIST COMPLETELY:
JIM WEBB- (formerly #6) He of the Shermanesque statement, the VA senator now says he will not accept. Rumors suggest he may have balked at some of the info required during the vetting process. Latent problems with women's groups probably doomed him anyway.
CHRIS DODD- (formerly #14) Always a longshot, the CT senator's preferential mortgage loan makes his selection politically unfeasible.
WESLEY CLARK- (formerly #12) Whatever the merits of this retired general's claim that being a POW and war hero doesn't inherently qualify McCain for President, the comment moved him from 'unlikely" to "untenable."
Thursday, June 05, 2008
Obama Veepstakes 6/04/08
Now that the Democratic presidential nominee has been determined, it's time to move on to the next big parlor game: Who's Obama going to pick as his Vice Presidential running mate?
What follows are the preliminary "Lyons Veepstakes Rankings," as of June 4, 2008. They may change as the summer progresses. But as of now, this is the best cheat sheet you're gonna find.
I should make it clear up front that these rankings are not based on personal preference, but are instead a prediction of who the most likely selectee will be, based on careful analysis and keen insight.
You're welcome.
-Andirant
THE RANKINGS
1) MARK WARNER- Former Virginia governor who is currently running for the Senate seat of retiring Senator John Warner (no relation), he brings moderate views, executive experience and a business background. A Harvard Law grad like Obama, this politically astute campaigner could help steal VA, a borderline swing state. An IT and telecommunications expert (he was an early Nextel investor), this 21st century politician reinforces Obama's message of generational change. Unlikely to alienate anyone, he won't hurt with downscale whites either.
2) SAM NUNN- Former moderate Georgia senator is a foreign policy expert who is highly regarded in DC. He may appeal to southern white men and help make GA competitive. He's been out of office long enough that he doesn't have the stink of incumbency. But he's older and doesn't exactly reinforce the change message. Sort of a Dick Cheney without the dickishness, he's a safe, smart but unspectacular choice.
3) BILL RICHARDSON- Former presidential candidate and current New Mexico Governor came out for Obama despite massive pressure from the Clintons. He has a superb resume as a UN Ambassador, a Cabinet member and a former US representative. As a Hispanic, he could help buttress Obama with a group that hasn't taken to him in droves. Plus NM is a serious swing state. But he's sometimes clumsy with his words, is prone to gaffes and has a reputation for being a little too chatty with the ladies. He also padded his pre-politics resume regarding his baseball career and whether he'd been drafted.
4) JOHN EDWARDS- This southern white male certainly offers strengths where Obama is weak. The former North Carolina senator complements the nominee's change theme nicely and is viewed as a fighter for the downtrodden. But he didn't do well as an advocate for John Kerry when he was the VP candidate in '04 and he couldn't help carry NC for the Dems that year. His time may have passed. Besides, word is he'd rather be Attorney General.
5) ED RENDELL- Politically savvy, charming, popular Governor of Pennsylvania, a state Obama must win. A Clinton advocate, he might help win back alienated supporters of her. But Obama should not need him to secure PA, and oh by the way, he's Jewish. That may help in Florida. But a Black & Jew combo may be too much for even some Democrats people to handle (said a fellow Jew).
6) JIM WEBB- Former Reagan Navy secretary brings military experience, a moderate reputation and support from a possible swing state (Virginia). Also brings a surly demeanor- he's a bit of a loose cannon. Why give up a Democratic Senate seat if there are other, stronger options from that state?
7) TIM KAINE- Current Virginia Governor could also help in the swingable state. He has executive experience and appeals to conservatives, in part because he's pretty conservative himself, maybe too much so. But as with Webb, why give up a current Democratic office-holder in a state where they rarely get them.
8) HILLARY CLINTON- Experienced and respected for her command of the issues, selecting her could quickly unify the party. She would bring in millions of passionate supporters. But she would also alienate many Obama supporters and seriously undermine his change message. Beyond that, currently uninspired conservative Republicans will finally have a reason to turn out to vote. Plus, there are lots of questions about potentially sketchy financial sources of Bill Clinton's foundation and library. And does Obama really want Bubba loitering around the White House again?
9) TED STRICKLAND- Another Hillary surrogate, the Ohio Governor helped her win that state and could do the same for Obama. But that's not a sure thing and other than executive experience and geography, he doesn't offer much to compensate for his bland demeanor.
10) CHUCK HAGEL- Retiring Nebraska senator is a Vietnam vet, a strong opponent of the Iraq war, and oh by the way, a Republican. Picking him could prove that Obama is trying to end the partisan gridlock in Washington. But Hagel is a traditional conservative on most non-war issues, including abortion. It's hard to imagine rank and file Democrats would go for him. He might get consideration for Secretary of Defense but probably not VP.
11) EVAN BAYH- Current senator and former Governor from Indiana, this strong Hillary supporter offers a pretty face, some influence in an almost-swing state and little else.
12) WESLEY CLARK- The former general and '04 presidential candidate, this Hillary supporter would offer military experience and the chance to compete in his home state of Arkansas. But he has little experience in the political trenches, ran an unmemorable campaign when he ran for President and highlights rather than mitigates Obama's lack of military chops.
13) KATHLEEN SEBILIUS- Kansas Governor could appeal to women and offer support in a typically red state. But she's unlikely to turn KS blue and Obama might alienate lots of Hillary supporters if he picks a woman other than Clinton.
14) CHRIS DODD- Connecticut senator and former presidential candidate came out early for Obama so he'll get a look. But he is unlikely to guarantee CT for the nominee and a Dodd VP would mean one less Democrat in the senate. Besides the fact that he just doesn't give off a presidential vibe, the long-time legislator doesn't reinforce the "change Washington" mantra.
15) KEN SALAZAR- Like Richardson, the Colorado senator is also Hispanic and also represents a possible swing state. Unlike Richardson, his resume is thin, he's very conservative and him joining the ticket would mean one less Democratic Senator.
16) AL GORE- Mentioned here mostly as a formality, he'd provide executive experience, respect from virtually every Democrat and star power. But why would this Oscar and Nobel saturated media darling want to be a second banana again? He wouldn't.
17) MIKE BLOOMBERG- Also a Jew. From New York. Who's rich. And short. Not gonna happen.
What follows are the preliminary "Lyons Veepstakes Rankings," as of June 4, 2008. They may change as the summer progresses. But as of now, this is the best cheat sheet you're gonna find.
I should make it clear up front that these rankings are not based on personal preference, but are instead a prediction of who the most likely selectee will be, based on careful analysis and keen insight.
You're welcome.
-Andirant
THE RANKINGS
1) MARK WARNER- Former Virginia governor who is currently running for the Senate seat of retiring Senator John Warner (no relation), he brings moderate views, executive experience and a business background. A Harvard Law grad like Obama, this politically astute campaigner could help steal VA, a borderline swing state. An IT and telecommunications expert (he was an early Nextel investor), this 21st century politician reinforces Obama's message of generational change. Unlikely to alienate anyone, he won't hurt with downscale whites either.
2) SAM NUNN- Former moderate Georgia senator is a foreign policy expert who is highly regarded in DC. He may appeal to southern white men and help make GA competitive. He's been out of office long enough that he doesn't have the stink of incumbency. But he's older and doesn't exactly reinforce the change message. Sort of a Dick Cheney without the dickishness, he's a safe, smart but unspectacular choice.
3) BILL RICHARDSON- Former presidential candidate and current New Mexico Governor came out for Obama despite massive pressure from the Clintons. He has a superb resume as a UN Ambassador, a Cabinet member and a former US representative. As a Hispanic, he could help buttress Obama with a group that hasn't taken to him in droves. Plus NM is a serious swing state. But he's sometimes clumsy with his words, is prone to gaffes and has a reputation for being a little too chatty with the ladies. He also padded his pre-politics resume regarding his baseball career and whether he'd been drafted.
4) JOHN EDWARDS- This southern white male certainly offers strengths where Obama is weak. The former North Carolina senator complements the nominee's change theme nicely and is viewed as a fighter for the downtrodden. But he didn't do well as an advocate for John Kerry when he was the VP candidate in '04 and he couldn't help carry NC for the Dems that year. His time may have passed. Besides, word is he'd rather be Attorney General.
5) ED RENDELL- Politically savvy, charming, popular Governor of Pennsylvania, a state Obama must win. A Clinton advocate, he might help win back alienated supporters of her. But Obama should not need him to secure PA, and oh by the way, he's Jewish. That may help in Florida. But a Black & Jew combo may be too much for even some Democrats people to handle (said a fellow Jew).
6) JIM WEBB- Former Reagan Navy secretary brings military experience, a moderate reputation and support from a possible swing state (Virginia). Also brings a surly demeanor- he's a bit of a loose cannon. Why give up a Democratic Senate seat if there are other, stronger options from that state?
7) TIM KAINE- Current Virginia Governor could also help in the swingable state. He has executive experience and appeals to conservatives, in part because he's pretty conservative himself, maybe too much so. But as with Webb, why give up a current Democratic office-holder in a state where they rarely get them.
8) HILLARY CLINTON- Experienced and respected for her command of the issues, selecting her could quickly unify the party. She would bring in millions of passionate supporters. But she would also alienate many Obama supporters and seriously undermine his change message. Beyond that, currently uninspired conservative Republicans will finally have a reason to turn out to vote. Plus, there are lots of questions about potentially sketchy financial sources of Bill Clinton's foundation and library. And does Obama really want Bubba loitering around the White House again?
9) TED STRICKLAND- Another Hillary surrogate, the Ohio Governor helped her win that state and could do the same for Obama. But that's not a sure thing and other than executive experience and geography, he doesn't offer much to compensate for his bland demeanor.
10) CHUCK HAGEL- Retiring Nebraska senator is a Vietnam vet, a strong opponent of the Iraq war, and oh by the way, a Republican. Picking him could prove that Obama is trying to end the partisan gridlock in Washington. But Hagel is a traditional conservative on most non-war issues, including abortion. It's hard to imagine rank and file Democrats would go for him. He might get consideration for Secretary of Defense but probably not VP.
11) EVAN BAYH- Current senator and former Governor from Indiana, this strong Hillary supporter offers a pretty face, some influence in an almost-swing state and little else.
12) WESLEY CLARK- The former general and '04 presidential candidate, this Hillary supporter would offer military experience and the chance to compete in his home state of Arkansas. But he has little experience in the political trenches, ran an unmemorable campaign when he ran for President and highlights rather than mitigates Obama's lack of military chops.
13) KATHLEEN SEBILIUS- Kansas Governor could appeal to women and offer support in a typically red state. But she's unlikely to turn KS blue and Obama might alienate lots of Hillary supporters if he picks a woman other than Clinton.
14) CHRIS DODD- Connecticut senator and former presidential candidate came out early for Obama so he'll get a look. But he is unlikely to guarantee CT for the nominee and a Dodd VP would mean one less Democrat in the senate. Besides the fact that he just doesn't give off a presidential vibe, the long-time legislator doesn't reinforce the "change Washington" mantra.
15) KEN SALAZAR- Like Richardson, the Colorado senator is also Hispanic and also represents a possible swing state. Unlike Richardson, his resume is thin, he's very conservative and him joining the ticket would mean one less Democratic Senator.
16) AL GORE- Mentioned here mostly as a formality, he'd provide executive experience, respect from virtually every Democrat and star power. But why would this Oscar and Nobel saturated media darling want to be a second banana again? He wouldn't.
17) MIKE BLOOMBERG- Also a Jew. From New York. Who's rich. And short. Not gonna happen.
Spurs breakdown 2008-09
You thought I was going to talk about the NBA finals? I don’t think so.
Rather, let’s focus on what’s important- how to get the Spurs back in the winner’s circle in 08-09. The pieces remain for a very competitive team. But for the first time in three or four years, SA is unlikely to be considered one of the top threats to win a championship next season.
The Lakers will only be stronger with the return of Andrew Bynum from injury. The Jazz and Hornets are both likely to be as good, if not even better, than they were this year. The Suns and Mavs may be a step below those others. But both are still 50-win teams and may be better than that with a full season to incorporate their big-name mid-season acquisitions. Houston will have Yao Ming back at full strength. Denver and Golden State will remain competitive. And next season, with a healthy Greg Oden, Portland is likely to make the leap into the middle of the Western Conference playoff pack. That’s nine quality teams for the Spurs to compete against. And that’s not even including the Pistons or Celtics, nor the ever-improving Magic.
So what must the Spurs do to return to the mountaintop? After careful analysis, and with the research assistance of the good folks at the Express-News and espn.com, I’ve come up with our areas of deficiency and some possible solutions.
Let’s first acknowledge where the Spurs faltered this year.
-They were too dependent on their three top players, often requiring all three of them to play their best in order to win against elite teams. If one of them was injured or had a bad game, the chances of victory dropped precipitously. The Spurs need an additional, consistent scorer, someone who can provide 12-14 points a night, preferably a wing player who can break down defenses by creating offense on his own, but who can still hit the open three that’s so crucial to the Spurs’ offensive philosophy.
-They only had one legitimate post-up threat. Other than Tim Duncan, there was no one the Spurs could consistently rely on to get a bucket down low in a back-to-the-basket situation. That limitation forced the team to change its offensive scheme any time Timmy wasn’t on the floor. The team needs to acquire another post player who can provide some sort of offensive punch. It would be great if he could also fit into the Spurs “force the driver baseline to the post defender” defensive scheme. But at this point that’s almost secondary to finding a player who can relieve some of the low post offensive workload when Tim’s resting.
-The backup point guards this season were abysmal. Jacque Vaughn could have applied for membership in the bricklayers union and Damon Stoudamire was a waste of space. The team needs a reliable backup point guard who can provide some semblance of an offensive threat. Vaughn, who will likely be back next year, is serviceable defensively and can make a decent third string PG, but the team needs a player who can at the very least, hit an open jumper when left unguarded.
-The team is old. This was the year the Spurs crossed the line from veteran to aged. No one can blame the front office for trying to squeeze one more year out of a group that won a championship last year. But ultimately, the wear and tear, as well as the lack of youthful energy, was too much to overcome. The Spurs need to better incorporate the few younger players they do have into the regular rotation and add some others. It would be nice if at least two of the three needs I mentioned above were addressed with players closer to 25 than 35. I’d actually prefer a veteran backup at the point, but greater youth at the wing and in the post would be wise additions.
Now that we know what the team needs, let’s look at what they currently have and how to add to that.
According to the Express News (EN), the following are players who are under contract next season. The players with a (p) next to their names have player options according to espn.com:
Tim Duncan
Manu Ginobili
Tony Parker
Bruce Bowen
Ime Udoka
Fabricio Oberto
Matt Bonner
Ian Mahinmi
Brent Barry (p)
Jacque Vaughn (p)
The following are unrestricted free agents:
Kurt Thomas
Michael Finley
Damon Stoudamire
Robert Horry
DeMarr Johnson
They have the mid-level exception, which provides about $5.8 million to spend on free agents.
They also have three draft picks- the 26th in the 1st round and the 45th and 57th in the 2nd.
And finally there’s Tiago Splitter, last year’s first round draft choice, who was supposed to be the heir apparent next to Tim Duncan (the reason we didn’t sign Scola), but who appears ready to re-sign with Tau Ceramica for the next two years for much more than he can make here (damn you, value of the American dollar!)
So let’s look at the Spurs depth chart, first based on who the team actually has signed:
POINT GRD SHOOTING GRD SML FORWD PWR FWD CENTER
T. PARKER M. GINOBILI B. BOWEN T. DUNCAN F. OBERTO
J. VAUGHN I. UDOKA B. BARRY M. BONNER
I. MAHINMI
There are obvious strengths to the team as it stands now. Every starter (if you include Manu) returns, including the team’s top three players, all of whom are locked in through at least 2010. There is depth and flexibility at the wings with four players who can play multiple positions. And there is a wealth of battle-tested veterans who know how to win.
But this chart shows some equally obvious flaws with the Spurs’ squad as currently constituted. There is little depth at point guard. Every wing player is 30 or older and none is taller than 6-7. There is no quality depth at either post position and what depth there is includes players with little experience, no bulk and minimal low-post offensive skill.
Some of these problems can be addressed with free agents who played for the Spurs this last season. The fallout from Splitter’s apparent decision to remain in Europe means the team is likely to do everything it reasonably can to re-sign Kurt Thomas, who provides toughness, rebounding, credible defense and a decent mid-range jumper.
He does little to make the team younger, but considering the Spurs’ dire situation down low, there’s not much choice. There are other free agents available on the market and I will address our options there momentarily. But for the time being, let’s assume Thomas gets re-signed.
A note on the Splitter situation: Reports suggest that the Spurs didn’t sign Luis Scola last summer in large part because they believed Splitter was a better fit next to Duncan. But that maneuvering was too cute by half. Scola, an Argentinian who has played for years with longtime teammates Ginobili and Oberto, ended up finishing third in rookie of the year voting for a DIVISION RIVAL. And now Splitter is probably not an option until 2010, if at all.
Based on all this, it can be reasonably said that the Spurs’ (generally justifiably) vaunted front office team truly screwed the pooch on this one. Letting a player of Scola’s ability go for nothing and then losing the player who justified the decision to let him go may go down as the single worst player personnel decision them team made in the last decade. Scola sure would have come in handy during the recent playoff run and one can’t help but wonder if having him in the lineup might have complicated things for Gasol, Odom et al. The Spurs sheen of management invincibility has clearly started to fade. They need to find a way to buff it up.
Let’s move on to the other free agents. Damon Stoudamire is clearly gone. DeMarr Johnson would likely have been gone even before his recent DUI arrest. Now we can remove the “likely.” There’s been lots of speculation about Robert Horry retiring. Regardless of what he decides, the team should and will end their fruitful association with him. That leaves us with one big question mark- Michael Finley.
There’s a decent argument for retaining him. He knows the Spur system. He’s still a gunner who can heat up quick. He can play two positions. He’s improved defensively in his time with the team.
But none of that mitigates the more compelling reasons to dump him. If ever there was a Spur that epitomized the transitional position the Spurs are in, it’s Finley. He can still play some and he’s the kind of player the Spurs have repeatedly plugged in with great success in recent years- veteran, skilled, professional. But he’s also old, at risk of injury, prone to long droughts of ineffectiveness and likely to going to cost more than the team wants to spend.
This is exactly the opportunity for the team to get younger and more athletic, whether through free agency, a trade or the draft. SA still has enough quality 3-pt shooters that they can sacrifice Finley for a player who may not hit from beyond the arc but can play above the rim. So let’s thank him for his service and dump him.
Assuming we re-sign Thomas, that leaves us with 11 players under contract. We need four more.
So we’ve solved part of our post problem but not our wing or PG issues. If we sign Thomas, that will likely allow us to sign only one other free agent, two at most, and probably not for much. We’ll have to fill the other hole through the draft.
We could fill the point guard hole with a veteran free agent (my preference) or we could go for a wing player. If we go the point guard route, our options will include Chris Duhon, Lindsey Hunter or Tyronn Lue. My favorite would be Duhon, who fits the Spurs mold, has experience but is still in his twenties. I’d pick Lue next. And 38 year old Hunter only as a last resort.
If we decide to spend free agent money on a wing player, there are a number of options. The EN mentions both Mickael Petrius of GS and Carlos Delfino of Toronto as possibilities, although espn.com says Delfino has a player option w/ Toronto, which may affect things.
Unfortunately, neither has played big minutes in the league and both are listed at 6-6, a little short to go up against the likes of Tayshaun Prince, Lamar Odom and other lanky threes. It’s hard to see either being that 4th scorer I said we need. Of the two, I’d prefer Delfino, who’s offensive numbers are better and who is from Argentina and has played a lot w/ Manu and Fab.
Other possible wing players to consider:
Quinton Ross- more of a 2 than a 3 at 6-6, but would come cheap. He can defend and hit treys. Kind of a skinny Udoka, which may make him superfluous.
Eduardo Najera- plays more 4 than 3, but is a tough, hustling rebounder with a mean streak. Could also be an option if Thomas falls through.
Trevor Ariza- He has a player option so one would think he’d like to stick with the Lakers. But if nabbed he would be a good Bowen-in-training. He’s 6-8, athletic and a superior defender. Not much for offense though.
Stromile Swift- I mention him because he’s available, although his inconsistency and the money he would demand make him doubtful.
There are also a few power forwards and centers that might be available if Thomas passes on us or even if he sticks around at a reasonable price. They include two guys who wouldn’t require much time to get up to Spur speed. But first:
DeSegana Diop- Wouldn’t add a thing offensively but could really work for the defensive system, esp. if we got Thomas too.
Francisco Elson- He was marginally effective the first time around and would probably come even cheaper than before. Not a solution but a stopgap option.
Rasho Nesterovic- I actually like this idea a lot. Nesterovic played his role perfectly when he was a Spur. It’s just that didn’t seem to do enough for the money he made. But if he provided the same thing (good mid-range jumper, solid defense, surprisingly effective shot blocker) at a cut rate, I’d snatch him up in a second.
Note that none of the guys listed above are older than 32 and Duhon, Petrius, Delfino, Ross, Ariza, Swift and Diop are all under 30.
If the team follows the course above, using their mid-level exception to secure two or three solid but unspectacular veterans (the most probable scenario by far, I believe), that would leave us either 1 or 2 slots to fill via draft and/or trade.
Chad Ford at espn.com currently has Kansas’ point guard Mario Chalmers as the Spurs 1st round pick in his latest mock draft. He’s a solid player with grit, a defensive mentality and the ability to hit big long range shots (as we all saw in the championship game).
But as I said, considering Vaughn’s limitations, I’d much prefer our backup point guard be someone who’s proven he can lead a team at the professional level, should Parker suffer an injury. Putting a rookie (unless it’s Derrick Rose) in charge of a contender seems foolhardy. There’s no reason we can’t get a quality backup for a decent price.
We could alternatively use the pick to find an athletic big man. It’s hard to find a good NBA big who can play both post offense and defense. And they never come cheap. So hoping to find that combination in the draft is understandable.
But those guys are almost always gone by the end of the lottery and guys who get selected lower are usually projects. The Spurs need someone who can contribute now. An impact swingman is far more likely to be available at # 26 than an impact big.
That’s partly why I’d prefer we use the pick to lock up a wing player who can provide scoring and athleticism from day one. Finding that at pick # 26 won’t be easy, which is why I’m not averse to trading all three picks to try to move up into the teens.
I also wouldn’t oppose packaging the pick with a player or two to get even higher. Would all three picks and Matt Bonner get us in the mid-teens? Would all of that and Brent Barry get us into the bottom half of the lottery. It’s worth investigating.
If we stay at #26, I’d consider French swingman Nicolas Batum. If we could move up to the late teens or low 20’s, I’d pursue super-athlete, head case and great shooter Chase Budinger of Arizona. If we could somehow get to the mid-teens, I’d go for Joe Alexander or Brandon Rush, both of whom are athletic, can shoot and can play right away.
A couple of other considerations:
If we use or free agent money to sign a wing, I could easily see us trying to move up a half dozen picks to snag Robin Lopez, a 7-footer with mediocre offensive skills but who could prove a great energy guy who will rebound, defend and play hard every minute.
Also, Ford says Portland is itching to trade the 13th pick because they already have a wealth of youngsters. Maybe current Blazer GM and former Spurs staffer Kevin Pritchard would be open to securing the veteran savvy of Barry and/or the size and shooting of Bonner in combination with a lower pick or one next year. That scenario might get us in the range of Danilo Gallinari, the highly touted Italian point forward.
If we ended the summer with deals that include: Gallinari, Rush, Alexander (my personal fave) or Budinger, along with Chris Duhon and either Kurt Thomas or some combination of him and Najera, Elson, Diop or Nesterovic, I’d consider that a success and very do-able.
Now let’s step away from the probable into the possible but unlikely.
I had hoped we’d make a play for this guy last year but we didn’t. I remain convinced that if there were some way to get it done, we should trade for Shane Battier. He’s a younger, taller, thicker Bruce Bowen, who can defend and make 3’s. And while he isn’t going to win any dunking contests, he’s better than many of the free agents we’ll be considering. Perhaps the Barry/Bonner/draft pick chips could be busted out one more time to make it happen. As I said, possible but unlikely.
Next we move into the land of theoretically conceivable but seriously dubious.
There are two free agents I didn’t mention above, mostly because the chances of getting either are remote, if not impossible. Ether would resolve our low post offense issue immediately, but not leave room for anything else.
First is Elton Brand. He’s a free agent, and based on some inside info from one EC, he’s looked great in private workouts. Obviously getting him would be a coup of enormous proportions. Unfortunately, to do so, we’d have to find ways to dump tons of salary/players or convince the Clips to go for a sign and trade. Neither is likely. And even then, the Clips can offer significantly more than any other suitor. Plus, he loves LA, and who can blame him? This deal is pretty much dead before it even gets off the ground.
Slightly (but only slightly) more realistic is Antawn Jamison. Why? He’s a little older than Brand (32 vs. 29), not quite as good, and may be slightly more willing to give up some money for the chance to join a winner at this point in his career. Would he be willing to go down to the $5.8 million exception, even extended over four or five years? Hard to see that happening. But it’s not inconceivable. I actually think that of the two crazy free agent scenarios, this one is preferable, as Jamison can play a little three as well, creating more roster matchup flexibility. If it could be made to work, I could see SA going for it. But it’s a loooong shot at best.
An important note: many observers have pointed out that the Spurs have structured their contracts so that only Duncan and Parker will be locked up in the summer of 2010. Some say that’s so they can make a big splash in the supposedly impressive free agent market that summer.
My issue with that? There’s no guarantee that any of those free agents will actually be available in two years. And even if they are, they’ll all be able to command more money from their current team than we could offer, even with a maximum deal.
Finally, in two years, Tim will be 34 years old. By then, the appeal of playing next to him may be diminished, depending on how effective he is that point.
Many experts claim that 34 is the age when most top big men (Olajuwon, Malone, Ewing, Shaq, the Admiral) start to see serious drops in the their effectiveness. I would contend that the drop is earlier, around 32, Tim’s current age. I think we can still count on two more years of 18 points and 10 rebounds per game. But that’s obviously not 22 and 12. And at 34, I think we’re likely to see a bigger dip. Since his game isn’t based on athleticism, Tim should still be able to get stuff done, but that will mean 14 and 8 more often than 18 and 10.
Parker should be in his prime in 2010. He’ll be 28 and I’ve always felt that ages 27-30 are the peek years for an NBA player. But he’s been in the league since he was a teenager so there may be wear and tear. Besides, Parker and 2/3 of Duncan are no guarantee that free agents will be clamoring to join the squad.
My point? 2010 is a crapshoot. So let’s take advantage of the next two years, while we still have Timmy, Tony and Manu, to try to win 1 or 2 more titles.
Let’s move on to the most troubling/intriguing/anguish-inducing option I’ve heard so far. It came from one JL and it goes like this. He ponders the idea of a Manu Ginobili trade for the #2 pick currently held by Miami.
It’s not as crazy as it might seem. Chad Ford suggests that Pat Riley isn’t a big fan of likely #2 pick Michael Beasley, who has had some personal problems and has what might be called a fun-loving disposition. He suggests Riley might prefer to trade down to get O.J. Mayo, whose skill set he prefers and who thinks would fit well with Dwayne Wade.
If Riley is considering Mayo, the notoriously hard-driving GM would surely love a competitor and winner like Ginobili. In combination with Wade, Udonis Haslem and Shawn Marion, the Heat would immediately become competitive again. Plus Manu would be certain to attract fans and season ticket buyers in the heavily Latino community of South Florida.
The Spurs, if they could get comfortable with the idea of Beasley would get a 19-year-old stud who is ready to contribute right now and can play both the 3 and 4. He’s like a young Rasheed Wallace in terms of talent. Of course, he’s shown signs that he might also be a young Rasheed Wallace in terms of personality quirks. The team would have to be convinced that the kid is up to the challenge.
Then there’s the Manu factor. He brings a lot more to the Spurs than just the stats he provides.
He’s a consummate professional and team player who does whatever needs to be done to help the team win. He plays with a reckless abandon that is inspiring to both teammates and fans. And he is a winner of the first order- the only man ever to win an NBA championship, an Olympic gold medal and the European Championship.
He was instrumental in three Spurs finals and played his best in the 4th quarters of the final games vs. New Jersey and Detroit. Tim Duncan is still the rock of ages for the Spurs. But Manu Ginobili is the team’s beating heart. As he goes, so go the Spurs.
It’s hard to imagine they’d have the same drive and passion without him. And since he’s my favorite player in the league, I’m personally conflicted about even the suggestion of parting with him.
But as with most of the other scenarios listed above, it’s very unlikely, so I won’t expend too much emotional energy on it right now.
One last factor to consider: A development that could preclude the need for dramatic roster changes is the growth of Ian Mahinmi.
After marinating for two years in Europe, he spent most of last year in the developmental league with the Spurs’ farm team, the Austin Toros. His numbers were impressive and the team was impressed with his steady progress. If he’s given the chance to become a regular part of the rotation next season, and takes advantage of the opportunity, he could be a real difference-maker.
At 6-10, and with freakish leaping ability, he can play three positions, although he’s best suited for the 4. He need not be a star or even a starter just yet, although it would be nice if he could achieve the latter by 2009-2010. But if he could consistently play 15-18 minutes a games next season and provide 7-8 points and 4-5 rebounds, that would reduce much of the pressure on the Spurs aging frontcourt. If Mahinmi is the first big man off the bench for the team by February, look for Buford and Popovich to shop another piece for a scorer or high draft pick by the trade deadline.
So, let’s review shall we? I’m going to now provide what I believe is a realistic but hopeful depth chart, based on what I think are possible transactional scenarios over the course of the summer. Here we go:
DEPTH CHART
POINT GRD SHOOTING GRD SML FORWD PWR FWD CENTER
T. PARKER I. UDOKA B. BOWEN T. DUNCAN F. OBERTO
c. duhon M. GINOBILI c. budinger I. MAHINMI k. thomas
J. VAUGHN drft pick/free agent B. BARRY diop or elson
A few notes:
First, you’ll see that I have 14 players listed, not 15. Obviously, it’s very hard to determine every player on a roster. I could as easily see Najera or Rasho on the team in place of Diop or Rasho. And I assume that cap limitation will require the 15th player, and maybe even the 14th, to be minimum salary free agents or rookies. They will hopefully be young and able to run for days.
Additionally, by having the team draft Budinger, I’m assuming they will have moved up in the draft, which would require giving up the 26th pick and another piece, in this case Matt Bonner.
Note also that this roster replaces AARP members like Horry, Finley and Stoudamire with twentysomethings like Duhon, Budinger, Diop. It also assumes an increased role for Mahinmi.
Finally, you’ll see that I have Ime Udoka starting. That’s because I firmly believe that the Spurs need Manu in top form to win a championship (refer to the Lakers series if you have any doubts). For him to be in top form, he needs to be healthy and rested. And that means keeping him below 30 minutes a game.
This roster addresses most of the concerns I have about the Spurs. It gives them a credible backup point guard. It gives them greater depth and (some) offensive punch in the post. It gives them a rookie wing player with breakout scoring ability. It gives them an increased role for the two most promising upstarts from last season (Udoka and Mahinmi). It still leaves them with multiple 3-point shooters. It allows for quality contributors from players 1-12. It adds youth without sacrificing too much veteran savvy. It doesn’t mortgage the future. It allows for success in the present.
This is a team that can win a championship. It won’t be easy, of course. But it’s conceivable, even possible.
Thus it is written. Thus shall it be.
Rather, let’s focus on what’s important- how to get the Spurs back in the winner’s circle in 08-09. The pieces remain for a very competitive team. But for the first time in three or four years, SA is unlikely to be considered one of the top threats to win a championship next season.
The Lakers will only be stronger with the return of Andrew Bynum from injury. The Jazz and Hornets are both likely to be as good, if not even better, than they were this year. The Suns and Mavs may be a step below those others. But both are still 50-win teams and may be better than that with a full season to incorporate their big-name mid-season acquisitions. Houston will have Yao Ming back at full strength. Denver and Golden State will remain competitive. And next season, with a healthy Greg Oden, Portland is likely to make the leap into the middle of the Western Conference playoff pack. That’s nine quality teams for the Spurs to compete against. And that’s not even including the Pistons or Celtics, nor the ever-improving Magic.
So what must the Spurs do to return to the mountaintop? After careful analysis, and with the research assistance of the good folks at the Express-News and espn.com, I’ve come up with our areas of deficiency and some possible solutions.
Let’s first acknowledge where the Spurs faltered this year.
-They were too dependent on their three top players, often requiring all three of them to play their best in order to win against elite teams. If one of them was injured or had a bad game, the chances of victory dropped precipitously. The Spurs need an additional, consistent scorer, someone who can provide 12-14 points a night, preferably a wing player who can break down defenses by creating offense on his own, but who can still hit the open three that’s so crucial to the Spurs’ offensive philosophy.
-They only had one legitimate post-up threat. Other than Tim Duncan, there was no one the Spurs could consistently rely on to get a bucket down low in a back-to-the-basket situation. That limitation forced the team to change its offensive scheme any time Timmy wasn’t on the floor. The team needs to acquire another post player who can provide some sort of offensive punch. It would be great if he could also fit into the Spurs “force the driver baseline to the post defender” defensive scheme. But at this point that’s almost secondary to finding a player who can relieve some of the low post offensive workload when Tim’s resting.
-The backup point guards this season were abysmal. Jacque Vaughn could have applied for membership in the bricklayers union and Damon Stoudamire was a waste of space. The team needs a reliable backup point guard who can provide some semblance of an offensive threat. Vaughn, who will likely be back next year, is serviceable defensively and can make a decent third string PG, but the team needs a player who can at the very least, hit an open jumper when left unguarded.
-The team is old. This was the year the Spurs crossed the line from veteran to aged. No one can blame the front office for trying to squeeze one more year out of a group that won a championship last year. But ultimately, the wear and tear, as well as the lack of youthful energy, was too much to overcome. The Spurs need to better incorporate the few younger players they do have into the regular rotation and add some others. It would be nice if at least two of the three needs I mentioned above were addressed with players closer to 25 than 35. I’d actually prefer a veteran backup at the point, but greater youth at the wing and in the post would be wise additions.
Now that we know what the team needs, let’s look at what they currently have and how to add to that.
According to the Express News (EN), the following are players who are under contract next season. The players with a (p) next to their names have player options according to espn.com:
Tim Duncan
Manu Ginobili
Tony Parker
Bruce Bowen
Ime Udoka
Fabricio Oberto
Matt Bonner
Ian Mahinmi
Brent Barry (p)
Jacque Vaughn (p)
The following are unrestricted free agents:
Kurt Thomas
Michael Finley
Damon Stoudamire
Robert Horry
DeMarr Johnson
They have the mid-level exception, which provides about $5.8 million to spend on free agents.
They also have three draft picks- the 26th in the 1st round and the 45th and 57th in the 2nd.
And finally there’s Tiago Splitter, last year’s first round draft choice, who was supposed to be the heir apparent next to Tim Duncan (the reason we didn’t sign Scola), but who appears ready to re-sign with Tau Ceramica for the next two years for much more than he can make here (damn you, value of the American dollar!)
So let’s look at the Spurs depth chart, first based on who the team actually has signed:
POINT GRD SHOOTING GRD SML FORWD PWR FWD CENTER
T. PARKER M. GINOBILI B. BOWEN T. DUNCAN F. OBERTO
J. VAUGHN I. UDOKA B. BARRY M. BONNER
I. MAHINMI
There are obvious strengths to the team as it stands now. Every starter (if you include Manu) returns, including the team’s top three players, all of whom are locked in through at least 2010. There is depth and flexibility at the wings with four players who can play multiple positions. And there is a wealth of battle-tested veterans who know how to win.
But this chart shows some equally obvious flaws with the Spurs’ squad as currently constituted. There is little depth at point guard. Every wing player is 30 or older and none is taller than 6-7. There is no quality depth at either post position and what depth there is includes players with little experience, no bulk and minimal low-post offensive skill.
Some of these problems can be addressed with free agents who played for the Spurs this last season. The fallout from Splitter’s apparent decision to remain in Europe means the team is likely to do everything it reasonably can to re-sign Kurt Thomas, who provides toughness, rebounding, credible defense and a decent mid-range jumper.
He does little to make the team younger, but considering the Spurs’ dire situation down low, there’s not much choice. There are other free agents available on the market and I will address our options there momentarily. But for the time being, let’s assume Thomas gets re-signed.
A note on the Splitter situation: Reports suggest that the Spurs didn’t sign Luis Scola last summer in large part because they believed Splitter was a better fit next to Duncan. But that maneuvering was too cute by half. Scola, an Argentinian who has played for years with longtime teammates Ginobili and Oberto, ended up finishing third in rookie of the year voting for a DIVISION RIVAL. And now Splitter is probably not an option until 2010, if at all.
Based on all this, it can be reasonably said that the Spurs’ (generally justifiably) vaunted front office team truly screwed the pooch on this one. Letting a player of Scola’s ability go for nothing and then losing the player who justified the decision to let him go may go down as the single worst player personnel decision them team made in the last decade. Scola sure would have come in handy during the recent playoff run and one can’t help but wonder if having him in the lineup might have complicated things for Gasol, Odom et al. The Spurs sheen of management invincibility has clearly started to fade. They need to find a way to buff it up.
Let’s move on to the other free agents. Damon Stoudamire is clearly gone. DeMarr Johnson would likely have been gone even before his recent DUI arrest. Now we can remove the “likely.” There’s been lots of speculation about Robert Horry retiring. Regardless of what he decides, the team should and will end their fruitful association with him. That leaves us with one big question mark- Michael Finley.
There’s a decent argument for retaining him. He knows the Spur system. He’s still a gunner who can heat up quick. He can play two positions. He’s improved defensively in his time with the team.
But none of that mitigates the more compelling reasons to dump him. If ever there was a Spur that epitomized the transitional position the Spurs are in, it’s Finley. He can still play some and he’s the kind of player the Spurs have repeatedly plugged in with great success in recent years- veteran, skilled, professional. But he’s also old, at risk of injury, prone to long droughts of ineffectiveness and likely to going to cost more than the team wants to spend.
This is exactly the opportunity for the team to get younger and more athletic, whether through free agency, a trade or the draft. SA still has enough quality 3-pt shooters that they can sacrifice Finley for a player who may not hit from beyond the arc but can play above the rim. So let’s thank him for his service and dump him.
Assuming we re-sign Thomas, that leaves us with 11 players under contract. We need four more.
So we’ve solved part of our post problem but not our wing or PG issues. If we sign Thomas, that will likely allow us to sign only one other free agent, two at most, and probably not for much. We’ll have to fill the other hole through the draft.
We could fill the point guard hole with a veteran free agent (my preference) or we could go for a wing player. If we go the point guard route, our options will include Chris Duhon, Lindsey Hunter or Tyronn Lue. My favorite would be Duhon, who fits the Spurs mold, has experience but is still in his twenties. I’d pick Lue next. And 38 year old Hunter only as a last resort.
If we decide to spend free agent money on a wing player, there are a number of options. The EN mentions both Mickael Petrius of GS and Carlos Delfino of Toronto as possibilities, although espn.com says Delfino has a player option w/ Toronto, which may affect things.
Unfortunately, neither has played big minutes in the league and both are listed at 6-6, a little short to go up against the likes of Tayshaun Prince, Lamar Odom and other lanky threes. It’s hard to see either being that 4th scorer I said we need. Of the two, I’d prefer Delfino, who’s offensive numbers are better and who is from Argentina and has played a lot w/ Manu and Fab.
Other possible wing players to consider:
Quinton Ross- more of a 2 than a 3 at 6-6, but would come cheap. He can defend and hit treys. Kind of a skinny Udoka, which may make him superfluous.
Eduardo Najera- plays more 4 than 3, but is a tough, hustling rebounder with a mean streak. Could also be an option if Thomas falls through.
Trevor Ariza- He has a player option so one would think he’d like to stick with the Lakers. But if nabbed he would be a good Bowen-in-training. He’s 6-8, athletic and a superior defender. Not much for offense though.
Stromile Swift- I mention him because he’s available, although his inconsistency and the money he would demand make him doubtful.
There are also a few power forwards and centers that might be available if Thomas passes on us or even if he sticks around at a reasonable price. They include two guys who wouldn’t require much time to get up to Spur speed. But first:
DeSegana Diop- Wouldn’t add a thing offensively but could really work for the defensive system, esp. if we got Thomas too.
Francisco Elson- He was marginally effective the first time around and would probably come even cheaper than before. Not a solution but a stopgap option.
Rasho Nesterovic- I actually like this idea a lot. Nesterovic played his role perfectly when he was a Spur. It’s just that didn’t seem to do enough for the money he made. But if he provided the same thing (good mid-range jumper, solid defense, surprisingly effective shot blocker) at a cut rate, I’d snatch him up in a second.
Note that none of the guys listed above are older than 32 and Duhon, Petrius, Delfino, Ross, Ariza, Swift and Diop are all under 30.
If the team follows the course above, using their mid-level exception to secure two or three solid but unspectacular veterans (the most probable scenario by far, I believe), that would leave us either 1 or 2 slots to fill via draft and/or trade.
Chad Ford at espn.com currently has Kansas’ point guard Mario Chalmers as the Spurs 1st round pick in his latest mock draft. He’s a solid player with grit, a defensive mentality and the ability to hit big long range shots (as we all saw in the championship game).
But as I said, considering Vaughn’s limitations, I’d much prefer our backup point guard be someone who’s proven he can lead a team at the professional level, should Parker suffer an injury. Putting a rookie (unless it’s Derrick Rose) in charge of a contender seems foolhardy. There’s no reason we can’t get a quality backup for a decent price.
We could alternatively use the pick to find an athletic big man. It’s hard to find a good NBA big who can play both post offense and defense. And they never come cheap. So hoping to find that combination in the draft is understandable.
But those guys are almost always gone by the end of the lottery and guys who get selected lower are usually projects. The Spurs need someone who can contribute now. An impact swingman is far more likely to be available at # 26 than an impact big.
That’s partly why I’d prefer we use the pick to lock up a wing player who can provide scoring and athleticism from day one. Finding that at pick # 26 won’t be easy, which is why I’m not averse to trading all three picks to try to move up into the teens.
I also wouldn’t oppose packaging the pick with a player or two to get even higher. Would all three picks and Matt Bonner get us in the mid-teens? Would all of that and Brent Barry get us into the bottom half of the lottery. It’s worth investigating.
If we stay at #26, I’d consider French swingman Nicolas Batum. If we could move up to the late teens or low 20’s, I’d pursue super-athlete, head case and great shooter Chase Budinger of Arizona. If we could somehow get to the mid-teens, I’d go for Joe Alexander or Brandon Rush, both of whom are athletic, can shoot and can play right away.
A couple of other considerations:
If we use or free agent money to sign a wing, I could easily see us trying to move up a half dozen picks to snag Robin Lopez, a 7-footer with mediocre offensive skills but who could prove a great energy guy who will rebound, defend and play hard every minute.
Also, Ford says Portland is itching to trade the 13th pick because they already have a wealth of youngsters. Maybe current Blazer GM and former Spurs staffer Kevin Pritchard would be open to securing the veteran savvy of Barry and/or the size and shooting of Bonner in combination with a lower pick or one next year. That scenario might get us in the range of Danilo Gallinari, the highly touted Italian point forward.
If we ended the summer with deals that include: Gallinari, Rush, Alexander (my personal fave) or Budinger, along with Chris Duhon and either Kurt Thomas or some combination of him and Najera, Elson, Diop or Nesterovic, I’d consider that a success and very do-able.
Now let’s step away from the probable into the possible but unlikely.
I had hoped we’d make a play for this guy last year but we didn’t. I remain convinced that if there were some way to get it done, we should trade for Shane Battier. He’s a younger, taller, thicker Bruce Bowen, who can defend and make 3’s. And while he isn’t going to win any dunking contests, he’s better than many of the free agents we’ll be considering. Perhaps the Barry/Bonner/draft pick chips could be busted out one more time to make it happen. As I said, possible but unlikely.
Next we move into the land of theoretically conceivable but seriously dubious.
There are two free agents I didn’t mention above, mostly because the chances of getting either are remote, if not impossible. Ether would resolve our low post offense issue immediately, but not leave room for anything else.
First is Elton Brand. He’s a free agent, and based on some inside info from one EC, he’s looked great in private workouts. Obviously getting him would be a coup of enormous proportions. Unfortunately, to do so, we’d have to find ways to dump tons of salary/players or convince the Clips to go for a sign and trade. Neither is likely. And even then, the Clips can offer significantly more than any other suitor. Plus, he loves LA, and who can blame him? This deal is pretty much dead before it even gets off the ground.
Slightly (but only slightly) more realistic is Antawn Jamison. Why? He’s a little older than Brand (32 vs. 29), not quite as good, and may be slightly more willing to give up some money for the chance to join a winner at this point in his career. Would he be willing to go down to the $5.8 million exception, even extended over four or five years? Hard to see that happening. But it’s not inconceivable. I actually think that of the two crazy free agent scenarios, this one is preferable, as Jamison can play a little three as well, creating more roster matchup flexibility. If it could be made to work, I could see SA going for it. But it’s a loooong shot at best.
An important note: many observers have pointed out that the Spurs have structured their contracts so that only Duncan and Parker will be locked up in the summer of 2010. Some say that’s so they can make a big splash in the supposedly impressive free agent market that summer.
My issue with that? There’s no guarantee that any of those free agents will actually be available in two years. And even if they are, they’ll all be able to command more money from their current team than we could offer, even with a maximum deal.
Finally, in two years, Tim will be 34 years old. By then, the appeal of playing next to him may be diminished, depending on how effective he is that point.
Many experts claim that 34 is the age when most top big men (Olajuwon, Malone, Ewing, Shaq, the Admiral) start to see serious drops in the their effectiveness. I would contend that the drop is earlier, around 32, Tim’s current age. I think we can still count on two more years of 18 points and 10 rebounds per game. But that’s obviously not 22 and 12. And at 34, I think we’re likely to see a bigger dip. Since his game isn’t based on athleticism, Tim should still be able to get stuff done, but that will mean 14 and 8 more often than 18 and 10.
Parker should be in his prime in 2010. He’ll be 28 and I’ve always felt that ages 27-30 are the peek years for an NBA player. But he’s been in the league since he was a teenager so there may be wear and tear. Besides, Parker and 2/3 of Duncan are no guarantee that free agents will be clamoring to join the squad.
My point? 2010 is a crapshoot. So let’s take advantage of the next two years, while we still have Timmy, Tony and Manu, to try to win 1 or 2 more titles.
Let’s move on to the most troubling/intriguing/anguish-inducing option I’ve heard so far. It came from one JL and it goes like this. He ponders the idea of a Manu Ginobili trade for the #2 pick currently held by Miami.
It’s not as crazy as it might seem. Chad Ford suggests that Pat Riley isn’t a big fan of likely #2 pick Michael Beasley, who has had some personal problems and has what might be called a fun-loving disposition. He suggests Riley might prefer to trade down to get O.J. Mayo, whose skill set he prefers and who thinks would fit well with Dwayne Wade.
If Riley is considering Mayo, the notoriously hard-driving GM would surely love a competitor and winner like Ginobili. In combination with Wade, Udonis Haslem and Shawn Marion, the Heat would immediately become competitive again. Plus Manu would be certain to attract fans and season ticket buyers in the heavily Latino community of South Florida.
The Spurs, if they could get comfortable with the idea of Beasley would get a 19-year-old stud who is ready to contribute right now and can play both the 3 and 4. He’s like a young Rasheed Wallace in terms of talent. Of course, he’s shown signs that he might also be a young Rasheed Wallace in terms of personality quirks. The team would have to be convinced that the kid is up to the challenge.
Then there’s the Manu factor. He brings a lot more to the Spurs than just the stats he provides.
He’s a consummate professional and team player who does whatever needs to be done to help the team win. He plays with a reckless abandon that is inspiring to both teammates and fans. And he is a winner of the first order- the only man ever to win an NBA championship, an Olympic gold medal and the European Championship.
He was instrumental in three Spurs finals and played his best in the 4th quarters of the final games vs. New Jersey and Detroit. Tim Duncan is still the rock of ages for the Spurs. But Manu Ginobili is the team’s beating heart. As he goes, so go the Spurs.
It’s hard to imagine they’d have the same drive and passion without him. And since he’s my favorite player in the league, I’m personally conflicted about even the suggestion of parting with him.
But as with most of the other scenarios listed above, it’s very unlikely, so I won’t expend too much emotional energy on it right now.
One last factor to consider: A development that could preclude the need for dramatic roster changes is the growth of Ian Mahinmi.
After marinating for two years in Europe, he spent most of last year in the developmental league with the Spurs’ farm team, the Austin Toros. His numbers were impressive and the team was impressed with his steady progress. If he’s given the chance to become a regular part of the rotation next season, and takes advantage of the opportunity, he could be a real difference-maker.
At 6-10, and with freakish leaping ability, he can play three positions, although he’s best suited for the 4. He need not be a star or even a starter just yet, although it would be nice if he could achieve the latter by 2009-2010. But if he could consistently play 15-18 minutes a games next season and provide 7-8 points and 4-5 rebounds, that would reduce much of the pressure on the Spurs aging frontcourt. If Mahinmi is the first big man off the bench for the team by February, look for Buford and Popovich to shop another piece for a scorer or high draft pick by the trade deadline.
So, let’s review shall we? I’m going to now provide what I believe is a realistic but hopeful depth chart, based on what I think are possible transactional scenarios over the course of the summer. Here we go:
DEPTH CHART
POINT GRD SHOOTING GRD SML FORWD PWR FWD CENTER
T. PARKER I. UDOKA B. BOWEN T. DUNCAN F. OBERTO
c. duhon M. GINOBILI c. budinger I. MAHINMI k. thomas
J. VAUGHN drft pick/free agent B. BARRY diop or elson
A few notes:
First, you’ll see that I have 14 players listed, not 15. Obviously, it’s very hard to determine every player on a roster. I could as easily see Najera or Rasho on the team in place of Diop or Rasho. And I assume that cap limitation will require the 15th player, and maybe even the 14th, to be minimum salary free agents or rookies. They will hopefully be young and able to run for days.
Additionally, by having the team draft Budinger, I’m assuming they will have moved up in the draft, which would require giving up the 26th pick and another piece, in this case Matt Bonner.
Note also that this roster replaces AARP members like Horry, Finley and Stoudamire with twentysomethings like Duhon, Budinger, Diop. It also assumes an increased role for Mahinmi.
Finally, you’ll see that I have Ime Udoka starting. That’s because I firmly believe that the Spurs need Manu in top form to win a championship (refer to the Lakers series if you have any doubts). For him to be in top form, he needs to be healthy and rested. And that means keeping him below 30 minutes a game.
This roster addresses most of the concerns I have about the Spurs. It gives them a credible backup point guard. It gives them greater depth and (some) offensive punch in the post. It gives them a rookie wing player with breakout scoring ability. It gives them an increased role for the two most promising upstarts from last season (Udoka and Mahinmi). It still leaves them with multiple 3-point shooters. It allows for quality contributors from players 1-12. It adds youth without sacrificing too much veteran savvy. It doesn’t mortgage the future. It allows for success in the present.
This is a team that can win a championship. It won’t be easy, of course. But it’s conceivable, even possible.
Thus it is written. Thus shall it be.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)