My proposal continues to be a swap of Sjax's expiring + picks for Kirilenko at the deadline. His versatility to split between PF and SF would be very useful.
I know people like to come up with trade scenarios, but everyone needs to stop throwing in Blair and Bonner as if anybody would want them. As a rule of thumb, take them out of the trade and then see if it looks good. This trade does not.
A trade like this is the equivalent of the Lakers offering Sacre/Clark/Blake for Kawhi.
1. Identify players on the Spurs you think are worthless.
2. Identify players on other teams you think make the Spurs much better.
3. Propose trading players from Group 1 for players in Group 2.
4. Complain when the FO isn't smart enough to pull off such trades.
5. Rinse and repeat.
Those are the types of trades that were rejected back in the good old days of NBA Live.
1. Identify players on the Spurs you think are worthless.
2. Identify players on other teams you think make the Spurs much better.
3. Propose trading players from Group 1 for players in Group 2.
4. Complain when the FO isn't smart enough to pull off such trades.
5. Rinse and repeat.2K ruining people's understandings of reality with its override feature.
Mozgov on the market:
League sources said the Denver Nuggets are looking to deal center Timofey Mozgov, who has been unable to get much playing time on a deep team and has an expiring contract. Mozgov is aware he could be moved by the Feb. 21 trade deadline.
http://www.foxsportsflorida.com/01/1...9&feedID=10140
Denver is 28th in 3P%. If the Nuggs are looking to unload Mozgov, and they're certainly not playing him, they might actually have an interest in Bonner. The trade would work under the CBA.
It would work, and I think the Nuggets would have interest. I can't see how the Spurs would, though. They don't need four centers.
One of them is being used as a PF and one has never played in the NBA.
Bonner's days are clearly numbered. He barely plays and he'll be traded or waived by June 29th. Mozgov would just be added to the mix of possibilities. While that's not much, it's more than Bonner is worth if waived. You lose the trade chip, but there's hardly any guarantee of getting a better asset than Mozgov for Bonner's contract.
Anyway, there are very few teams that may be interested in Bonner as a player. Denver could be one of them.
Trade him for Randolph, then. The salaries don't have to match, as Denver has a huge trade exception. That would be best, I think, because it would create a $1.9 Million TE for San Antonio, if they play their cards right. Plus, it'd create more room under the tax to do other moves (this season or in June).
Honestly, Denver needs to stop fooling around and play Gallo at the four, Iggy at the three, and find a two they like. A guard like Neal may really appeal to them, but I don't see a deal that makes sense there.
That would make more sense for the Spurs. No reports, however, that Denver wants to offload Randolph. Even though they haven't used him this season, he's still very young and is locked up for two more seasons for a total of 3.5M.
In my opinion, Denver is a year away from being in Memphis' situation. They just keep re-signing every body. If they keep Brewer like they want to, they'll be right up against the tax next year. Even though Randolph is cheap, the Nuggets might have interest in moving his long-term deal for an expiring one. If they don't plan on using him, it's kind of a disservice to keep him. In a couple of years, he'll be the new Mozgov. (That's not really a justification of this trade, but rather just an observation on their management.)
Bonner will have his highest value in June. I don't think they Spurs should sell that chip for a player who at best is going to take away developmental minutes from Baynes. Saving the extra million bucks is hardly a sweetener to me, either.
Green + Tiago + Bonner as filler for McGee tbh... They get a starting caliber SG and Center, although lower level ones but on great contracts. We get all the monkeyballing we need...
Not the worst idea I've ever heard. But I'd be nervous about losing Green until/unless Joseph or Neal showed some real consistency. I like the idea of getting McGee if Pop thinks he can really use him. But his lack of BBIQ makes hard to know. Also, Denver would have to add a player or two to make the numbers work, and that would push the Spurs right up against the tax.
I can't wait until tomorrow. It'll be so much easier when these BYC players can get put in the trade machine.
Seriously the combined D of Tim KY and McGee would be incredible, if we're gonna sacrifice the spacing at least let's get the athletic freak with the biggest wingspan around... KY+McGee would put us on the same level of lengh as the Thunder basically.
True enough, unless Iggy opts out and they let him walk. I see the Mozgov/Randolph calculus differently when considering Denver's situation. It makes for sense to me for them to choose to keep Randolph over Mozgov.
As to the Spurs and Bonner, they may very well see it the way you suggest. The Spurs are typically patient. Holding Bonner's contract until June makes sense. You retain the possible of a significant move while the worst case scenario is paying him the 1M to go away.
Denver's not trading McGee, at least not for what the Spurs could offer.
I agree that they shouldn't. But damn if they aren't constantly trading their players right now. It reminds me of Houston. If they don't think McGee can be a long-term starter, then moneyballing him for a highly efficient back up center and a starting two-guard is not the worst thing they could do. I imagine Splitter actually as a ton of value to knowledgeable front offices around the league. Everyone's looking for the next Gortat/Asik.
In a binary sense, it does make sense to keep Randolph over Mozgov. But I think they should just trade Randolph and let Mozgov walk. Randolph is the type of signing that looks great from a value standpoint but really adds up in your cap math and seems pointless down the road. They should never have signed him. Mozgov's a free agent after this year, so there's no reason why they need to consider him a necessary piece if they move Randolph. They better not try to re-sign him if he lasts until the off-season. They really messed up with Chandler. With Brewer out playing him (Chandler has been hurt, though) they find themselves in a position where they may have to give up an asset just to send him away.
I'd only trade Bonner for either someone who is pretty sure to help this season or someone with potential to help later who may get snatched up if I wait. I don't consider Mozgov either of those types of players.
I'd agree, but I don't see trading for Splitter as a moneyball move, if that's what you meant. They have McGee for 3yrs/34M and don't have to negotiate or risk losing him in free agency.
I'm still of the opinion that the Spurs don't have the right assets to pry McGee from Denver.
You make good points, but I don't agree about Randolph. Salary dumping a 1.7M player with his potential doesn't make sense to me. Someone has to occupy the roster spot and the potential savings are small.
Re-signing Splitter is made easier thanks to him being an RFA. The way I see it, McGee's contract is the the absolute max they can expect to have to pay to keep Splitter. Most likely, he'll be getting Asik money. So Splitter at $8 Million a year and Green at $3.65 Million would be almost equal to McGee's contract alone. Getting Green means they don't have to worry about re-signing Brewer, who really could get a big pay raise. So you take away about $5 Million for not having to keep Brewer and you have a savings of almost $4 Million. Even if you have to pay Splitter a ton of money, that still makes you break even. With the wing position secured, they can trade Chandler with no worries about having no one behind Gallo. That could save them even more.
So I do think it can be a smart financial move to send away McGee for players like Splitter and Green. I don't see a better deal out there if the Nuggets don't plan on rebuilding. You add the fact that the team should be better after than deal and there is definitely the possibility that the they end up doing something like this down the road. I don't think they'll consider moving him until next year, though. They still have to figure out their front-court, and they'll probably give everyone another off-season to adjust.
I was under the impression that trading for Bonner would be a move that could help them this year. It's not like I'm proposing trading Blair for Randolph. If they need three-point shooting that badly, then it might be worth giving up a player they have no plans to use. I'm sure they'd prefer to trade Mozgov, but I don't think that's good enough for the Spurs, unless they have a of an free-agency plan set up.
Perhaps the Spurs do have the pieces to pry McGee away, after all. That, however, begs the next question. If all the highlighted statements are assumed to be true, why do the Spurs make the deal?
Well I don't know you Karl and their FO view McGee but I've yet to see any Denver fan even think about trading McGee, they mostly love him, so I'm not sure we really have the pieces but it's an idea.
I already agreed that Randolph makes more sense for the Spurs. I still see value for the Spurs in a Bonner for Mozgov deal. You do, however, make a case for Denver to do the deal for Randolph.
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
