Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 132
  1. #26
    Veteran loveforthegame's Avatar
    My Team
    Golden State Warriors
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Post Count
    18,321
    Bruno, thanks for the informative post. It's extremely helpful for those of us who don't understand all the ins and outs. Best job I've seen.

    If I remember correctly, Finley let the FO know his decision a few days before the draft the last time he had a PO. I suspect he does so again especially if he's picking it up.

  2. #27
    Germany's #1 Spurs Fan Streakyshooter08's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Post Count
    989
    Great job Bruno.

    Thanks for the breakdown.

  3. #28
    PARKER HAS RE-SIGNED!
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Post Count
    776
    Bruno, taking the early lead for the summer MVP! I still come here regularly but do not take the time to post. But some good hard work was put in this post and this is the type of post that helps the overall quality of the board and make spurstalk what it is.
    Tanks Bruno.
    Same goes for timvp.
    MERCI spurstalk

  4. #29
    Bruce Almighty Bruno's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Post Count
    18,636
    Here are the numbers (Lux Tax Limit - Big 3 Salary = budget for supporting cast)

    2005-2006 (61.7 - 31.7 = 30M or 48.6% of the Tax limit)
    2006-2007 (65.4 - 35.1 = 30.3M or 46.3% of the Tax limit)
    2007-2008 (67.9 - 38.6 = 29.3M or 43.2% of the Tax limit)
    2008-2009 (71.1 - 42.1 = 29M or 40.8% of the Tax limit)
    and using Bruno's guesstimate in the OP
    2009-2010 (71 - 45.5 = 25.5M or 35.9% of the Tax limit)

    So while the Spurs had almost half of their budget to devote to a supporting cast in 2005-2006, they will have little more than a third of the budget this summer for the same purpose.
    Nice point.

    Spurs had to do a better job at spending their money on role players. The most basic rule is that you don't give money to players that don't play.

    The core of a team is 8 players (2 PGs, 3 SG/SF and 3 PF/C). A 4th SG/SF and a 4 PF/C also get some playing time. The rest of the roster doesn't play.
    If you spend more than $3M on your 9th or 10th player, you're wasting money.
    If you spend more than $1.5M on your 11th to 15th player, you're wasting money.

    Spurs have often overpaid these end of the bench players :
    05-06: Nazr(4th PF/C): $5.5M, Barry(4thSG/SF): $4.7M, Oberto (5th PF/C) : $2.3M.
    06-07: Barry(4th SG/SF): $5.1M, Ely(6th PF/C): $3.3M, Bonner(5th PF/C): $2M, Butler (7th PF/C): $2.2M.
    07-08: Horry(4th PF/C): $3.6M, Bonner(5th PF/C): $2.7M.
    08-09: Bowen (4th SG/SF): $4M, Oberto (5th PF/C): $3.6M.

    My point isn't to trash Spurs front office, every FO makes mistakes. However, there is money to save compared to the previous years. Even with $5M less to spend in the supporting cast, Spurs had enough money to build a very good team if they have a nearly perfect summer.

  5. #30
    Ridding the world of Alien Scum...Relentlessly. Man In Black's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Post Count
    4,390
    +1000

  6. #31
    Out with the old... Obstructed_View's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Post Count
    40,383
    did ever a championship team come out of the free agency? I can't remember.
    Shaq left Orlando.

  7. #32
    real fans go bald mountainballer's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Post Count
    3,238
    So while the Spurs had almost half of their budget to devote to a supporting cast in 2005-2006, they will have little more than a third of the budget this summer for the same purpose.
    good point.
    this leads to the question: can in todays NBA a team win a le without paying lux tax?
    I doubt it. yes, we used to laugh about the Knicks and Mavs, who couldn't get it done while spending 30% more money than the Spurs. all true.
    but if we look at the currently best teams, they spend 10-20 million more than the Spurs and that's what makes the difference.
    if you spend this kind of money in a smart way, this means:
    +10 million = one all star player, or 2 starter quality role player, or 3 decent bench player.
    +20 million= one superstar, or 2 all stars, or one all star and 2 quality role player. etc. etc.

    what I try to say:
    when you stay under the threshold, while you pay one superstar and 2 all stars, it means you MUST NOT have any player on your roster, who isn't actually better than the money he gets. that's almost impossible, even for the best management in the world.
    and that's also the difference to the Lakers, Cavs and Celtics.
    let's just guess. we would have added to this roster (a healthy Manu assumed) 2 quality MLE players. (just a guess, Salmons and Przybilla. I mention them, because Spurs wanted both at some point and were willing to pay them the MLE money they make).
    I claim that our big 3 plus this 2 plus the average bench crop we have now, is about at the level of the current Lakers and Cavs.
    the roster would cost about what the Lakers and Celtics spend and still be far under what the Cavs.
    this situation doesn't change next season. by some smart moves the Spurs will be able to assemble a decent team and still stay under the threshold. but a contender? almost impossible. you would need 2 or 3 miraculous FA or trade steals to make this happen. but that's nothing you can count on, especially since the Spurs haven't been very lucky in this department in the last years.

  8. #33
    Veteran Mel_13's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Post Count
    14,367
    this leads to the question: can in todays NBA a team win a le without paying lux tax?
    I doubt it.

    this situation doesn't change next season. by some smart moves the Spurs will be able to assemble a decent team and still stay under the threshold. but a contender? almost impossible. you would need 2 or 3 miraculous FA or trade steals to make this happen. but that's nothing you can count on, especially since the Spurs haven't been very lucky in this department in the last years.
    I agree. I believe the Spurs will take steps to improve the team and definitely will get younger. But I think they will have a limit somewhere around 8M for a trade target. Now if a Gasol-type opportunity presents itself (Bosh), they will be willing to put all their eggs in one basket for a move that makes them a serious contender. But players like Carter and Jefferson make way too much money for the improvement they offer the team.

    One more thing about the difficulties facing the FO this summer. There will other customers for every good player that some team wants to move in a salary dump. For every desirable player there will be a minimum of five teams that can offer more cap relief than the Spurs. The three teams with cap space (MEM, DET, and OKC) as well as Portland and Dallas. And there are probably others. The Spurs will have to wait until those teams have satisfied themselves before they move to the top of the list.

    Many around here will complain loudly as some talented player moves to another team, but the simple fact is that the Spurs do not have much to offer. Just remember, their trade bait are the same players that have been so harshly criticized.

  9. #34
    Habeeb it! completely deck's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Post Count
    1,481
    Now this is what I'm talking about. Great thread

  10. #35
    Never say die!!
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    153
    This is very informative. hats off...

  11. #36
    Chunky Brazil's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    30,042
    I didn't see this article posted and I'm not sure if it belongs to this section or not but I found it interesting : 2010 plan, gooden, sheed, Ian, spliter etc...

    Bruno please feel free to move it or delete if already posted.

    Wednesday, April 29th, 2009...6:53 am
    Offseason Breakdown: Drew Gooden and the Frontcourt

    Jump to Comments I plan a long series of posts considering the Spurs roster, with consideration toward individual players and larger roster issues. At points, these posts might overlap with thoughts on the upcoming draft (forthcoming shortly). But they will be tagged differently. I wasn’t sure where to start with my offseason analysis, but Pop’s DNP of Drew Gooden in last night’s loss seems like a good place.

    Should the Spurs resign Drew Gooden? I think not. Let me explain.

    The 2010 Cap Strategy
    The Spurs are currently in good cap position for 2010. I think they could abandon their 2010 free agent strategy, but only for a few specific cir stances. One such cir stance would be the ability to take on a star player in a trade. I call this the Vince Carter Exception. But it could also apply to odd cir stance players such as Josh Childress. If the Spurs can land an impact player, they should. Damn the 2010 torpedoes. Otherwise, it makes sense for the Spurs to stay the 2010 course.
    Resigning Drew Gooden for the full MLE (his asking price, methinks) messes with all this. He played well as a Spur, but I’m not sure he makes a lot of sense for the team going forward, especially if it compromises the Spurs ability to land an impact player via trade or through 2010 free agency. As good as Gooden is, he’s a role player. With the health concerns that surround the team’s age, they need to swing for the fences. The team needs to add a game changer. And they’ll need cap space to make that happen. Gooden only makes sense on a one year deal or if he’ll take a less than market value multi-year contract, but I doubt he’ll have much interest in those options.
    The 2010 talks tends to center around bigs such Amare Stoudemire, Chris Bosh, Yao Ming and Dirk Nowitzki. But those players only have opt out clauses next summer. They may not be on the market. It will be interesting to see whether or not the cold economy discourages those guys from leaving money on the table. In that case, the Spurs might want to modify to a 2011 plan, or some such. You can find a helpful list of the player pool here. The current assumption, however, is that many of those players should be available. The Spurs should fall into a wait and see holding pattern.

    Ian Mahinmi and Tiago Splitter
    The three important things to know about Drew Gooden’s game is that he’s an excellent low post scorer, mediocre rebounder and below average defender. The Spurs are best served to find a post option that reverses Gooden’s characteristics. In other words, they need a player who is an above average post defender, solid rebounder and merely decent at scoring the ball.
    The Spurs have two players in their immediate pipeline whom might answer those calls. The first is Ian Mahinmi, who is signed to an inexpensive rookie contract. Mahinmi has shown lots of promise, but no one really knows what the kid has to offer. He set out the season due to injury, but was scheduled to be a part of the rotation last season. I’m not suggesting he is at Gooden’s level, but, on a cost-benefit analysis, if he can give the Spurs 6 and 6 at only 1 million a season, he’s probably a better option than Gooden. He’s also an able shot blocker and post defender, something the Spurs need.
    We recently learned that Tiago Splitter could be available to the Spurs in the near future. He’s precisely the sort of big that San Antonio needs to add up front. But he’ll cost the Spurs more money than a typical rookie. The Spurs can’t afford to tie up their frontcourt cap with Gooden if they plan to bring Splitter over.

    Other Options
    I haven’t said as much yet, but I’m operating under the assumption the Spurs could move much of their frontcourt in a trade(s). I don’t think there is any guarantee that Fabricio Oberto, Kurt Thomas and Matt Bonner will be on next year’s team. They could be, but their contracts may be needed to accommodate a trade. One of the reasons the Spurs should be fine moving one or all of those players is that they have a couple end of the bench frontcourt options available–players that would occupy the same pine that Fabricio Oberto did this season.
    I’ve already mentioned Ian Mahinmi and Tiago Splitter, but let me throw out a couple more names. Robertas Javtokas‘ Russian contract has expired. He’s at least as good as Oberto and the Spurs own his rights. If he’ll sign at an affordable price, he’s a great option as a low minute rotation player. Another option is Toros standout Dwayne Jones. Jones has played professionally with the Cavs and now has a season with Austin on his resume. He’s a good rebounder who understands the system. The Spurs could sign him for 1/3 of what Oberto makes and get the same scoring and board production. Finally, the Spurs own the rights of James Gist, who is something of a combo forward. He’s a long shot, but would benefit from a Spurs roster spot and the opportunity at a season-long Toros assignment. With Gist, a lot depends on his summer league productivity.
    (Finally, there is Pops Mensah-Bonsu, who is not available. That’s because the Spurs screwed the pooch by not buying out Jacque Vaughn and retaining Pops. We live. We learn. We try to move on. Hindsight is 20/20 this side of Manu Ginobili’s ankle injury, but I wish the Spurs had shown better judgement. This is not a Gooden/Mensah-Bonsu either/or. The Spurs should have signed both, but this was only possible by showing JV the door. Yet another regretful side effect of second-guessing George Hill.)

    What Type of Player Could the Spurs Use?

    Beyond the things listed above, we all know the Spurs could use a shot blocker. Tim Duncan has been the only true shot-blocker on the team since Rasho Nesterovic left, and Rasho’s defense obviously paled in comparison to David Robinson’s. Kurt Thomas is an excellent interior defender, but not as much of a shot blocking threat. Neither is Drew Gooden.
    The Spurs could also use a big who can spread the floor. Matt Bonner is their current option, but he is not a Robert Horry replacement. Bonner’s virutal non-existence in the postseason, after a remarkable season in which he played to his ceiling, should have the Spurs thinking about pulling the plug on the New Hampshire Experiment. They’ve seen all that he has to offer. Perhaps they try something else.
    The Spurs would also benefit from a big who is able to guard face-up 4s such as David West and Dirk Nowitzki. This is a long standing roster need. The combination of Matt Bonner and Ime Udoka is not the right answer.

    Rasheed Wallace
    Rumors of Rasheed Wallace’s desire to join the Spurs began back in February, and they continue down to the present. Wallace meets all of the Spurs frontcourt needs, save one. He’s old. But that’s actually not a bad thing this time around. Signing Wallace on a one year deal for part or all of the MLE fits within the Spurs 2010 strategy and answers current roster needs–he can block shots, defend and knock down threes. Signing Wallace to a short term contract also gives the Spurs roster flexibility in light of other possibilities, such as adding Tiago Splitter in 2010.

    Verdict
    In all likelihood the Spurs are better served to let Drew Gooden walk, especially if they’re able to sign Rasheed Wallace in free agency. Under that scenario, the Spurs would look to include the contracts of one or two bigs in a trade deal for an impact wing. Maybe that’s possible, maybe not. In any case, if the Spurs aim high they could remake their frontcourt rotation this offseason. After the dust settles, I’m hoping they return a roster of 5 bigs that looks something like:
    Duncan/Wallace/Thomas/Mahinmi/Javtokas or Jones
    This scenario is hopeful that Thomas steps away in 2o1o and is replaced by Tiago Splitter.
    It’s a risky gamble to take on a few pairs of old legs. But it preserves their 2010 aspirations and provides some correctives to current roster issues.

  12. #37
    "The ball don't lie." dbestpro's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Post Count
    10,259
    I agree. I believe the Spurs will take steps to improve the team and definitely will get younger. But I think they will have a limit somewhere around 8M for a trade target. Now if a Gasol-type opportunity presents itself (Bosh), they will be willing to put all their eggs in one basket for a move that makes them a serious contender. But players like Carter and Jefferson make way too much money for the improvement they offer the team.

    One more thing about the difficulties facing the FO this summer. There will other customers for every good player that some team wants to move in a salary dump. For every desirable player there will be a minimum of five teams that can offer more cap relief than the Spurs. The three teams with cap space (MEM, DET, and OKC) as well as Portland and Dallas. And there are probably others. The Spurs will have to wait until those teams have satisfied themselves before they move to the top of the list.

    Many around here will complain loudly as some talented player moves to another team, but the simple fact is that the Spurs do not have much to offer. Just remember, their trade bait are the same players that have been so harshly criticized.
    Cap space is good for signing free agents but it usually takes expiring contracts to make the trades. From that perspective one could argue that the Spurs are in the best shape of any team to facilitate a trade with a team that is looking to 2010 or beyond.

    I think the elephant in the room may happen is through an extension and contract restructure for Manu. Maybe he signs for 4 years at 5 mil each and frees up another 5 mil for this year.
    Last edited by dbestpro; 05-05-2009 at 01:40 PM.

  13. #38
    Veteran Mel_13's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Post Count
    14,367
    Cap space is good for signing free agents but it usually takes expiring contracts to make the trades. From that perspective one could argue that the Spurs are in the best shape of any team to facilitate a trade with a team that is looking to 2010 or beyond.
    Sorry, but you are just plain wrong. For example, if a team has an 8M player and wants maximum cap relief, they can trade him to a team with at least 8M in cap space and receive a trade exception in return. No players have to be exchanged.

    Recent example, Kurt Thomas and two first round draft picks from Phoenix to Seattle in exchange for a 9M trade exception and a conditional second rounder.

    http://www.prosportstransactions.com...&submit=Search

    What I stated in my post is accurate. At a minimum, 5 teams (DET, MEM, OKC, Portland, and Dallas) will be in better position than the Spurs to offer cap relief to a team seeking to dump a contract . San Antonio may make a trade, but they have no better than the sixth best assets to facilitate a salary dump.

  14. #39
    Veteran Mel_13's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Post Count
    14,367

    I think the elephant in the room may happen is through an extension and contract restructure for Manu. Maybe he signs for 4 years at 5 mil each and frees up another 5 mil for this year.
    NFL type contract restructuring does not happen in the NBA. Manu will get his 10.7M in 2009-2010. Nothing will change that.

  15. #40
    The Dude minds DPG21920's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Post Count
    76,197
    Do you think this is what the Spurs FO actually does? I mean, we are going pretty in depth and over multiple scenarios. I cannot imagine how it would be to do this with your job on the line.

    Sounds like fun

  16. #41
    real fans go bald mountainballer's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Post Count
    3,238
    What I stated in my post is accurate. At a minimum, 5 teams (DET, MEM, OKC, Portland, and Dallas) will be in better position than the Spurs to offer cap relief to a team seeking to dump a contract . San Antonio may make a trade, but they have no better than the sixth best assets to facilitate a salary dump.
    all true, but this also doesn't mean, that this teams don't want to play the FA market and instead are willing to swallow another team's contract.
    (btw. how should Dallas be able to offer cap relieve? they are far over the cap and don't have a significant trade exception.)
    however, none claims that Spurs are in better position than any NBA team. just that they can offer a nice package, be it for cap relieve 2009 (Fab+Bruce) or 2010 (KT, Matt, RM).

  17. #42
    Veteran Mel_13's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Post Count
    14,367
    all true, but this also doesn't mean, that this teams don't want to play the FA market and instead are willing to swallow another team's contract.
    (btw. how should Dallas be able to offer cap relieve? they are far over the cap and don't have a significant trade exception.)
    however, none claims that Spurs are in better position than any NBA team. just that they can offer a nice package, be it for cap relieve 2009 (Fab+Bruce) or 2010 (KT, Matt, RM).
    I was responding to this post.

    From that perspective one could argue that the Spurs are in the best shape of any team to facilitate a trade with a team that is looking to 2010 or beyond.
    Of course, all of those teams will have their own agendas. My point was that we should not overestimate the value of the Bowen/Oberto deals, especially relative to the ability of other clubs to offer more.

    As to Dallas, they have three major pieces and one big hammer.

    1. Stackhouse has one year left at 7.25M, but only 2M is guaranteed.

    2. Howard has next year at 10.9M and then a team option for 2010-11, so that contract is effectively an expiring contract.

    3. Dampier has next year at 12.1M. His 13.1M for 2010-11 only becomes guaranteed if he reaches standards next year that he has never reached since becoming a Mav. That contract may also be regarded as an expiring deal.

    4. Mark Cuban. While any deal the Spurs make to take back a long-term deal will be constrained by staying under the lux tax next year, Dallas will have no such limitations. So they can make deals that increase long-term obligations AND significantly increase next year's payroll.

  18. #43
    real fans go bald mountainballer's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Post Count
    3,238
    1. Stackhouse has one year left at 7.25M, but only 2M is guaranteed.

    2. Howard has next year at 10.9M and then a team option for 2010-11, so that contract is effectively an expiring contract.

    3. Dampier has next year at 12.1M. His 13.1M for 2010-11 only becomes guaranteed if he reaches standards next year that he has never reached since becoming a Mav. That contract may also be regarded as an expiring deal.

    4. Mark Cuban. While any deal the Spurs make to take back a long-term deal will be constrained by staying under the lux tax next year, Dallas will have no such limitations. So they can make deals that increase long-term obligations AND significantly increase next year's payroll.
    ok, I see. the Stack contract in fact looks better than the Fab+Bruce package, in terms of pure cap relieve.

  19. #44
    "The ball don't lie." dbestpro's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Post Count
    10,259
    NFL type contract restructuring does not happen in the NBA. Manu will get his 10.7M in 2009-2010. Nothing will change that.

    FYI

    A contract for four or more seasons can be renegotiated after the third anniversary of its signing, extension, or renegotiation that increased any season's salary by more than 8%. Contracts for fewer than four seasons cannot be renegotiated. A contract cannot be renegotiated between March 1 and June 30 of any year. Only teams under the cap can renegotiate a contract, and the salary in the then-current season can be increased only to the extent that the team has room under the cap. Raises in subsequent years are limited to 10.5% of the salary in the first renegotiated season. The renegotiation may not contain a signing bonus. Contracts cannot be renegotiated downward (players can't take a "pay cut" in order to create salary cap room for the team) or to contain fewer seasons. The question then is what consitutes downward. In general terms downward refers to the amount of money owed on the contract.

  20. #45
    Veteran Mel_13's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Post Count
    14,367
    FYI

    A contract for four or more seasons can be renegotiated after the third anniversary of its signing, extension, or renegotiation that increased any season's salary by more than 8%. Contracts for fewer than four seasons cannot be renegotiated. A contract cannot be renegotiated between March 1 and June 30 of any year. Only teams under the cap can renegotiate a contract, and the salary in the then-current season can be increased only to the extent that the team has room under the cap. Raises in subsequent years are limited to 10.5% of the salary in the first renegotiated season. The renegotiation may not contain a signing bonus. Contracts cannot be renegotiated downward (players can't take a "pay cut" in order to create salary cap room for the team) or to contain fewer seasons. The question then is what consitutes downward. In general terms downward refers to the amount of money owed on the contract.
    Thank you, I did not know about this provision in the CBA.

    It does, however, preclude any downward renegotiation of Manu's contract due to the highlighted clause.

    I am not aware of any NBA contract that has been renegotiated according to this provision, I wonder if it has ever been used. Certainly, the type of cap space-creating renegotiations we see all the time in the NFL seem to be prohibited.

    Link for your reference:

    http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#Q52

    which includes this clause:

    "Again, a team over the salary cap cannot renegotiate a contract"

  21. #46
    The OL' Perfessor wildbill2u's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Post Count
    8,608
    We are screwed with too many role players with guaranteed contracts that can't do the job any more and aren't tradeable because of it. Ref: Bowen, Oberto,Thomas, Finley.

    Bonner and Mason proved why they were bench players at best in their previous teams--INCONSISTENCY, low defensive & rebounding skills. Playoffs showed their true values.

    Hill, Mahimi, and all the rest of the 'potential stars' that just need Pop to give them 30 minutes a game (Gist, Hairston, Pops, etc.) are just pipe dreams in terms of guaranteed help that can be counted on for big years next year.

    We will probably be forced to play out these contracts next year and therefore will not be compe ive. We might even make the lottery with a little luck

    On the upside, by the following year we should have a good cap space position and a better draft position because we aint goin' nowhere with these role players.

  22. #47
    Pimp Marcus Bryant's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Post Count
    1,021,967


    All of the role players with guaranteed contracts only have one season left and some of those are partially guaranteed.

    All of them are tradeable as they can offer cap relief in the summer of 2010 to a team with contracts which extend beyond. In the case of Oberto and Bowen, they are even more attractive since their contracts are partially guaranteed.

  23. #48
    The OL' Perfessor wildbill2u's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Post Count
    8,608


    All of the role players with guaranteed contracts only have one season left and some of those are partially guaranteed.

    All of them are tradeable as they can offer cap relief in the summer of 2010 to a team with contracts which extend beyond. In the case of Oberto and Bowen, they are even more attractive since their contracts are partially guaranteed.
    Great. They are tradeable--but for what? Why would anyone give away a great young player they like for the future just for some capspace?

    What we'd get offered is our old guys for their old stars with long term contracts on the downside of their careers? (Think Vince Carter or Shaq or Sheed) Or players who weren't great but serviceable who are also on the way down and aren't likely to give us the energy and youth we need. (Check out Thomas' stats for the last five years) Guys like that will just put us in a hole later on so why go there?

    We need to remake this team--but it will be difficult. Let these players ride it out this year and we will be the ones with all the capspace next year.

    Of course it means another losing year during the limited time left for the Big 3.

  24. #49
    Believe. Duncan2177's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Post Count
    1,803
    We are screwed with too many role players with guaranteed contracts that can't do the job any more and aren't tradeable because of it. Ref: Bowen, Oberto,Thomas, Finley.

    Bonner and Mason proved why they were bench players at best in their previous teams--INCONSISTENCY, low defensive & rebounding skills. Playoffs showed their true values.

    Hill, Mahimi, and all the rest of the 'potential stars' that just need Pop to give them 30 minutes a game (Gist, Hairston, Pops, etc.) are just pipe dreams in terms of guaranteed help that can be counted on for big years next year.

    We will probably be forced to play out these contracts next year and therefore will not be compe ive. We might even make the lottery with a little luck

    On the upside, by the following year we should have a good cap space position and a better draft position because we aint goin' nowhere with these role players.
    The spurs FO would be idiots to have the same team next year. that .

  25. #50
    Free Throw Coach Aggie Hoopsfan's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Post Count
    30,978
    Great. They are tradeable--but for what? Why would anyone give away a great young player they like for the future just for some capspace?
    Well, we have seen it happen increasingly in the league over the last two years, and with the lux cap coming down, you can bet you will see it more often as well.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •