After signing Othyus Jeffers, the San Antonio Spurs waived Malcolm Thomas. However, it seems the Spurs loss is Utah's gain.
The Jazz have signed Thomas and he spoke on why he didn't stick with San Antonio.
"It was hard to crack the rotation in San Antonio with a team that had been together for so long. But I feel like this is a great opportunity for me seeing as how we’re all around the same age and we can build chemistry."
Thomas now has a chance to demonstrate what he can do in the NBA.
However, will Jeffers get a shot at playing time with San Antonio or will he succumb to the same thing as Thomas did while he was in San Antonio?
So what do you have to say Spurs fans? Was releasing Thomas a good or bad move on the Spurs part?
(via The Salt Lake Tribune)
I am with most. We have 2 guys and MB who have very little use and limited future value as replacements, so why sign a guy and drop him and bring a new guy and not play him also. None of this makes any sense. Rather than bring in a future player with more upside, we bring in a guy who is 28 and under sized. I like Jeffers but sitting on the pine as insurance while putting a patchwork lineup of 3 guards, Nando, etc instead of playing the guy you brought in for defense, is weird.
Their really seems to be an aversion to keeping athletic 6'" guys by Pop. I really don't get it. They could all be stupid. Lawal, Greene, Haslip, etc. No one we have other than Boris can cover mid range shooters, so LA, Favors, Parsons, Ibaka, etc eat us alive and we have no way to score at an 80% clip to offset all this "layup" from 15ft. Thomas could have helped. Consider a 2nd unit of MG, DG, Thomas, Tiago and Mills. They could score and defend with the best.
Hope there is a larger plan.
If Pop isn't going to play these guys, then the use of paying them is for developmental purposes. Then when you cut somebody like Malcolm, not only are the Spurs on the "hook" for the guaranteed contract, but the new team gets the benefit of the player development investment that was made. Honestly, Baynes and De Colo can't get enough burn, so why even fill these roster slots if Pop won't play them?
Not much to say, but I like what little I've seen of Jeffers better than what little I saw of Thomas.
@jojo707 I think with our plethora of "bigs" that Baynes might have been the better option to waive. I think Baynes has hit his ceiling with us, and I doubt we resign him next year. We probably won't resign De Colo either, but he gives us depth at the wing that we need at the moment.
A lot of people have a love affair with Baynes, but I think in the future Thomas has more upside.
@MOlsenUtah, by claiming him off waivers are now responsible for his contract, the Spurs are off the hook.I think he was more of a "project" for the future. The team is filled with bigs, so it didn't surprise me in the least that a move was made.