You must have heard the rumors. The Spurs are interested in Chris Paul, likewise, Paul seem to like the idea of playing for San Antonio as well. So, as a fan or a pundit, do you think the Spurs should pursue Chris Paul?

The most obvious reason for this idea is, of course, that Spurs’ lead guard Tony Parker is still rehabilitating and would not be back until around Christmas according to those in the know of his condition. Not only that, since TP is coming off a major injury at his age, there are legitimate concerns that he might not be able to do the stuff he normally does.

Not to mention, Patty Mills’ free agency and Dejounte Murray still developing.

So, if you were R. C. Buford, what would you do? Let's check out the scenarios, the ‘should’ -- and not the ‘how’ to get Chris Paul.

Okay, we are almost certain that Parker would still be playing once he’s fully healed but Christmas is a long time for us to gauge how far his athleticism has dropped in relation to how far has Dejounte Murray has improved by then. PlayOff readiness is key here.

If the Spurs just let it be, like they re-sign Mills and continue on working with Murray while hoping that no injury would befall them especially for Kawhi come PlayOff time -- then they could survive. But to thrive, they need Mills and Green to hit their marks since Aldridge is questionable. No. Not his ability to play but his ability to dominate.

Point here is -- while the Spurs need an upgrade at the PG position, they need Mills' shooting, so can't just let him go. And they can't throw away a raw talent like Murray who only needs to develop his outside shot to become a real threat. Meanwhile, what do we do with Tony Parker? See, being a big part of the Spurs' success, can't just release him unless he chooses to retire. Or opt out, if possible, then just sign him up at a budget.

Question -- is Chris Paul a fit for the Spurs? Hey, can’t be too excited with his reputation, look what happened to LaMarcus Aldridge? Take note, Paul is a ball-dominant player which is not exactly the style of San Antonio. However, he is one player who is not afraid of the moment. Meaning, he'd do what he could to carry the team if necessary. And if ever the Spurs face the Warriors again come PlayOffs, Paul would even take the challenge of guarding a so much taller Kevin Durant. But then, would Paul be willing to adjust his game? Otherwise, he could also delay the further development of Kawhi Leonard for one. Now with the pros and cons, this could be another gamble for the Spurs.

Thus if ever, should the Spurs then consider having 4 point guards?

Sure. Paul to start. Parker to sub and take turns with Mills, who should also be used as an SG in some cases. Murray? Make him an SG every now and then, he's tall and athletic enough, and could penetrate well. This could prepare Murray for his eventual ascent as the Spurs' next star point guard. Key now for Paul is affordability, would he be willing to take a much lower paycheck? ‘Cause signing him up could cause the Spurs to sacrifice a lot of reliables. If so, should San Antonio just sign up another PG? Derrick Rose? Injury-prone. Kyle Lowry? Nervous wreck. Well, think they should have just kept Cory Joseph back then -- good penetrator, could hit the three, athletic and not afraid of the moment.

Say what you?

Published by Consumer Live