What to do with Manu?

[Rustyman]

With the Manu's being a free agent in 2010, what should the Spurs do?

The options as I see it are the following:

1. Sign him to a new 3 year deal for around $10m. (This retains the status quo and but does it give the Spurs the best chance of being successful after 2010? I don't believe it does as Manu's style means that his body is likely to breakdown sooner rather than later and I don't think he can change his style to a less frenetic version without reducing his value to the Spurs.)

2. Trade him now for quality youth like some of the restricted free agents like Deng, Gordon, Okafor, Iggy, Josh Smith, etc. who are thinking of signing qualifying offers and being unrestricted free agents next year. (Problem is that this likely reduces the Spurs chances of being effective this year as it will take at least half a season for any of these players to integrate with the Spurs)

3. Keep Manu for this season, see if he comes back okay from the Olympics and then make a decision on his future at the end of this season.

My view is that the best possible value the Spurs can get is Option 2. If the Spurs can get such a deal done, they can potentially look at being successful now and after Duncan retires in 3-4 years time as Parker will still hopefully be around to carry the franchise.

I know that lots of the people on this site are fervent Manu supports but looking at it purely from a Spurs perspective, I would be very surprised if the Spurs FO is not looking at exploring these options.

Thoughts?

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

4. Worry about it in 2009.

And 2 will never happen, Manu will retire a Spur.

Props though, first lame thread of the day.

[Rustyman]

Why is the topic lame? Is it impossible to talk about Manu being traded? He has been brilliant in winning 2 of the Spurs 4 championships. He is also likely one of the major reasons why the Spurs have not repeated the last two opportunities they have had.

He is a major injury risk going to the Olympics and if he comes back with an injury do we simply say that due to all things he has done for the Spurs, they should pay him for the next 4 years irrespective of his expected performance.

The Spurs are a business and outside of Duncan, no one is immune to being traded if that makes the Spurs better.

So next time, instead of comments like "lame" or "never happen", try to at least formulate a sensible response.

[hater]

Is it impossible to talk about Manu being traded?

not impossible, but a waste of everyone's time. He won't be traded.

he might opt to go back to Europe to make real $ but that's in a few years.

[Spuradicator]

He's got to be performing at his current level for me to feel comfortable with the Spurs paying him over 10 mil a year in his next contract.

But yeah, no way he gets traded.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Calling it lame is perfectly sensible, given the propensity of rookie posters over the last couple of days to propose trades and signings that make little sense.

Manu will never be traded. Yes, it's a business, which is exactly why he won't be. San Antonio has a Spanish speaking Spurs star to call its own.

Some guys are just destined to retire Spurs. David Robinson. Tim Duncan. Manu is another one of those.

And for all the reasons you mentioned (coming up on the tail end of his career, injury prone), no team in the league will give up any of those guys you mentioned for him.

If the Spurs front office traded him now, none of those guys would be an upgrade or have the potential to even match Manu's skill level or clutchness.

Not to mention the fact that the citizens of SA would burn down the at&t center and lynch everyone in the Spurs front office if it happened.

Many league observers called Manu one of the top 3 or so shooting guards in the league this past season, and you want to trade him for a dime a dozen swing man.

Hence, lame thread.

[wildbill2u]

He may be traded at some later point in his career; it's not inconceivable since we also traded George Gervin and James Silas who's #s hang in our rafters.

However, it will not happen this year or next. "Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof" the Good Book says.

(Bet you didn't realize the Bible can double as a GM's handbook.)

[TMTTRIO]

he might opt to go back to Europe to make real $ but that's in a few years.

I really wouldn't be surprised with this knowing how much money and offers some of these Euro teams are giving these players. Also Manu has pretty much accomplished all he can in the NBA so why not go somewhere where there are fewer games and get crazy pay.

[Rustyman]

Looking at trading Manu later in his career simply means the Spurs won't get value for him.

Why I mentioned the possibility of trading for one of the restricted free agents is simple, if any of those guys make it clear they will sign for the qualifying offer, their club loses significant bargaining power. It them becomes a matter of getting some value not equal value. Manu might be older, but he is equal value or maybe better talent now.

Deng in the last couple of days has set Chicago a deadline of two weeks to come to a contract agreement or he is threatening to sign the qualifying offer. If he is an option, you do it. Deng entering his prime is a better deal for the next 5 years than Manu who will be/is declining as is Okafor, and possibly Iggy.

Yes, Manu is a clutch player, has and is a Spurs hero, but if the spurs keep on winning without him, the fanbase will quickly come through.

[Rustyman]

With the Euro option, the Spurs get nothing in return. If the Spurs don't sign him to an extension during the coming season, what's to stop him going back to Europe and earning $10m tax free with less games and becoming the undisputed marque player for whichever club he plays for.

If the Spurs do sign him, what are the odds on him turning into Finley2 in a couple of years, only this time, the Spurs are paying him big bucks to stay on the roster.

What I should have said at the outset is that this is not meant to bash Manu as he has been an incredible part of the Spurs success, however, being overly sentimental about Manu's future, could put the club into serious downward spiral with very limited options for recovery.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Looking at trading Manu later in his career simply means the Spurs won't get value for him.

Why I mentioned the possibility of trading for one of the restricted free agents is simple, if any of those guys make it clear they will sign for the qualifying offer, their club loses significant bargaining power. It them becomes a matter of getting some value not equal value. Manu might be older, but he is equal value or maybe better talent now.

Deng in the last couple of days has set Chicago a deadline of two weeks to come to a contract agreement or he is threatening to sign the qualifying offer. If he is an option, you do it. Deng entering his prime is a better deal for the next 5 years than Manu who will be/is declining as is Okafor, and possibly Iggy.

Yes, Manu is a clutch player, has and is a Spurs hero, but if the spurs keep on winning without him, the fanbase will quickly come through.

It's great that some of those guys are pouting and wanting big deals.

But really, what part of Manu won't be traded for anything less than a franchise level swing man don't you understand (and none of those guys are franchise level swing men)?

Deng can't fill the role that Manu has for this team, never will. He is a good player, but he's not a top 5 swing man, he won't be in his prime, and again, you're talking about the fan base who blew a gasket over Manu getting handed AJ's jersey number when he first came here.

The Spurs will never trade their prodigal Spanish speaking son for a guy who has never played south of the Mason Dixon line, at least none of those you mentioned. And none of them are guys you can put the ball in the hands of with the game on the line and expect to win it for you.

And further, if that's all not enough, remember that the Spurs want to have cap room in 2010. If they take on one of these guys now (all of whom are angling for max deals), they kill that idea.

And again, none of the aforementioned RFAs are worth the max. Damn, Manu's not even getting the max and he is better than any of these guys, yet you want us take one of them on for the max.

Maybe you can trade Duncan for Okafor while you're at it, at some point he's not going to be playing as good either. Better get value for Tim now while we still can. :rolleyes

[Hemotivo]

I really wouldn't be surprised with this knowing how much money and offers some of these Euro teams are giving these players. Also Manu has pretty much accomplished all he can in the NBA so why not go somewhere where there are fewer games and get crazy pay.

Also Manu has pretty much accomplished all he can in Europe; and he doesn't want to go back to Arg

[Rustyman]

Duncan is the franchise. Manu is not. When you get that through you head then maybe you can understand the argument.

As for Manu not being traded for a franchise level swing man, who is out there that can be gotten, Kobe, Lebron? Manu is not in those guys league, irrespective of what you may want to believe. So go for Tmac (injury prone), Pierce (saviour for Boston and the guy who brought them their first title in 17 years)? Who is this mythical franchise level swing man who is available for Manu?

The Spurs want cap room in 2010 because the free agent class is high quality and it may offer the Spurs the opportunity to pick up a player who can extend the franchise success after that point in time. However, Lebron, Wade, Bosh, etc. is unlikely to have San Antonio at the top of their list. Why not pick up that player a year earlier if the opportunity presents itself?

[manufor3]

Duncan is the franchise. Manu is not. When you get that through you head then maybe you can understand the argument.

As for Manu not being traded for a franchise level swing man, who is out there that can be gotten, Kobe, Lebron? Manu is not in those guys league, irrespective of what you may want to believe. So go for Tmac (injury prone), Pierce (saviour for Boston and the guy who brought them their first title in 17 years)? Who is this mythical franchise level swing man who is available for Manu?

The Spurs want cap room in 2010 because the free agent class is high quality and it may offer the Spurs the opportunity to pick up a player who can extend the franchise success after that point in time. However, Lebron, Wade, Bosh, etc. is unlikely to have San Antonio at the top of their list. Why not pick up that player a year earlier if the opportunity presents itself?

For the last time man, MANU WOULD BE THE SPURS TOP PRIORITY. theyd resign him fast then look at other free agents

[Rustyman]

For the last time man, MANU WOULD BE THE SPURS TOP PRIORITY. theyd resign him fast then look at other free agents

But why would Manu be the top priority for 2010 onwards? Do you believe he will still be able to deliver at his top potential to 2013?

[wildbill2u]

Manu is not only a superior player, his exciting performance on court puts butts in the seats. And he's Hispanic. He has a commercial value to the Spurs way beyond the actual stats of his play.

Who else in this league can do that? The list is very short and none of them are likely to be tradeable, certainly not to the Spurs.

The Spurs won't trade his combination of assets until they are exhausted by time or injury.

[Rustyman]

Manu is not only a superior player, his exciting performance on court puts butts in the seats. And he's Hispanic. He has a commercial value to the Spurs way beyond the actual stats of his play.

Who else in this league can do that? The list is very short and none of them are likely to be tradeable, certainly not to the Spurs.

The Spurs won't trade his combination of assets until they are exhausted by time or injury.

While no one can dispute that Manu has an exciting style of play, does the fact that he is Hispanic have a major commercial impact on the Spurs. I just think that if that was the case, the Rockets and Mavericks would have made greater attempts at getting high profile Hispanic players on their team.

I am not saying this isnt a valid reason and it a comparable position is what Bird is doing in Indiana in terms of team composition. It may not be the most talented group he is putting together but it is an attempt to get the fan base back onside. I just don't know whether the Hispanic angle weights that heavily on the Spurs minds.

[ducks]

signing manu for 10 million is not going to happen
manu makes about 10 million alone this yaer
aggiehoopsfan
manu could be traded just not yet
3-4 years.
rember this front office would let david robinson go to the knicks

[Manufan909]

You think the Spurs could possibly land Kobe or Lebron? What the hell are you smoking? I'd never be ok with a Kobe deal, but losing TP, Bowen, Mason/Fab, Bonner/, for Lebron+ scrubs would be quite nice. I don't want to see any of the big three leave, but if I had to choose, TP would be the bait. He's just a fucking ballhog anyways. He's getting better, but I don't think 7 assists a game would be too much to ask. Hell, he gets all the shots he wants already, he needs to share the love more.

And I predict that within the hour, duck will sense my blasphemy and make a post of his own to counter.

EDIT: Within five minutes.

[Rustyman]

signing manu for 10 million is not going to happen
manu makes about 10 million alone this yaer
aggiehoopsfan
manu could be traded just not yet
3-4 years.
rember this front office would let david robinson go to the knicks

Apologies, just to clarify, I meant 10 million per year not 10 million for 3 years. I don't think anyone thinks that Manu will get less than around $10m/year.

[Spuradicator]

All I know is manu's ankle better be 100% at the start of the NBA season

[temujin]

With the Manu's being a free agent in 2010, what should the Spurs do?

The options as I see it are the following:

1. Sign him to a new 3 year deal for around $10m. (This retains the status quo and but does it give the Spurs the best chance of being successful after 2010? I don't believe it does as Manu's style means that his body is likely to breakdown sooner rather than later and I don't think he can change his style to a less frenetic version without reducing his value to the Spurs.)

2. Trade him now for quality youth like some of the restricted free agents like Deng, Gordon, Okafor, Iggy, Josh Smith, etc. who are thinking of signing qualifying offers and being unrestricted free agents next year. (Problem is that this likely reduces the Spurs chances of being effective this year as it will take at least half a season for any of these players to integrate with the Spurs)

3. Keep Manu for this season, see if he comes back okay from the Olympics and then make a decision on his future at the end of this season.

My view is that the best possible value the Spurs can get is Option 2. If the Spurs can get such a deal done, they can potentially look at being successful now and after Duncan retires in 3-4 years time as Parker will still hopefully be around to carry the franchise.

I know that lots of the people on this site are fervent Manu supports but looking at it purely from a Spurs perspective, I would be very surprised if the Spurs FO is not looking at exploring these options.

Thoughts?


1) Ginobili's future is in his own hands (and ankle).

(i) He really liked it in Europe and someone has already mentioned that he might well come back. Apparently, money is not an issue these days for -several- European teams.
(ii) He has a contract with the Spurs.
(iii) If -or WHEN- he makes it clear to everyone that he WON'T play for any NBA team BUT the Spurs, and rather come back, he is essentially untradeable and he has no market value whatsoever.

2) We are eager to learn about your predictions as to the Spurs #1 pick of 2030.
He should be born these very same days.
Think about it and let us know ASAP!

[BigBigSpur]

Go back to Europe, it's the best option for Manu and Spurs.For Manu will be useless for them then.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

As for Manu not being traded for a franchise level swing man, who is out there that can be gotten, Kobe, Lebron? Manu is not in those guys league, irrespective of what you may want to believe. So go for Tmac (injury prone), Pierce (saviour for Boston and the guy who brought them their first title in 17 years)? Who is this mythical franchise level swing man who is available for Manu?

There isn't one. That's the point. And Manu's not going anywhere.


signing manu for 10 million is not going to happen
manu makes about 10 million alone this yaer
aggiehoopsfan
manu could be traded just not yet
3-4 years.
rember this front office would let david robinson go to the knicks

I don't see us signing Manu for 10 mil a year at that point in his career...

And ducks, Manu is as tradable as Tony is.

Remember when word got out about DRob possibly leaving the citizens of SA rang the phones at Holt Cat off the hook until they relented and re-signed him.

The same would happen with Manu.

[rascal]

Duncan is the franchise. Manu is not. When you get that through you head then maybe you can understand the argument.

As for Manu not being traded for a franchise level swing man, who is out there that can be gotten, Kobe, Lebron? Manu is not in those guys league, irrespective of what you may want to believe. So go for Tmac (injury prone), Pierce (saviour for Boston and the guy who brought them their first title in 17 years)? Who is this mythical franchise level swing man who is available for Manu?

The Spurs want cap room in 2010 because the free agent class is high quality and it may offer the Spurs the opportunity to pick up a player who can extend the franchise success after that point in time. However, Lebron, Wade, Bosh, etc. is unlikely to have San Antonio at the top of their list. Why not pick up that player a year earlier if the opportunity presents itself?


Agree with you. Trading manu now would be the best option. But that will not happen. And if the Spanish speaking part is so important just fill the entire team with Spanish speaking players. That should fill the seats although the team won't win much.

Manu will end up being the weight that takes this franchise down and closes the window in Duncan's last years.

They will be paying Manu like he is an allstar but getting a player often injured and with declining skills. Manu has about a two year window then a sharp decline so move him now while he has value. He already is a player who can't play big minutes for fear of braking down unlike most of the other top nba players .

[Man of Steel]

I doubt it will happen.

[Spurtacus]

Resign him. How much? Whatever amount he's worth in two years.

[roycrikside]

signing manu for 10 million is not going to happen
manu makes about 10 million alone this yaer
aggiehoopsfan
manu could be traded just not yet
3-4 years.
rember this front office would let david robinson go to the knicks

I was going to say that if you think Manu is going to take a paycut you're an idiot, but considering it's you, well...

And Manu will not be traded. Neither will Tony. The big three are going nowhere. Unless they specifically go up to Pop and ask to be traded, they're staying here.

[ArgSpursFan.]

Manu will retire as a spur,He have said it many times, and maybe that's what Pop and The Spurs FO have told him it's gonna happen.
I wouldn't be sorprised if Manu ends up working for the Spurs organization after retiring, and the same for Timmy.
BTW, lame thread.

[Supergirl]

1. Manu is not Hispanic. He is Spanish-speaking, but his lineage is Caucasian.

2. Manu is not going to be traded this year. Nor should he be traded this year. *IF* Manu comes back severely hampered by the Olympics, and the Spurs are unable to win a title in 2009, then maybe you look at trading him next summer. But more than likely, in 2010, he either re-signs for a smaller, reduced contract, retires, or signs somewhere else -- depending on how his body is holding up by then. Manu will always have value to the Spurs as long as he can play - whether it is for 10 min or 35 min - because offensively he's a sparkplug and he's a tenacious defender.

[ElNono]

Manu will be resigned to an extension before his contracts runs out.
End of thread.

[Rustyman]

Why is extending Manu a no brainer? While he has some strong positives, he has the following negatives:

1. He has made some dumb decisions on at least 2 occasions which has cost the Spurs the opportunity to repeat. At this stage of his career he is who he is and he is not suddenly going to turn into a cerebral Horry type as he gets older. As much as people might not like it, Manu is likely to decline significantly over the next 3-5 years. Giving him a 3 year extension at anything above the MLE will be a major risk but he will never sign for that amount.

2. He MAY be breaking down and becoming injury prone.

3. Postponing resigning him to after the 2009 season is a MAJOR risk as he could get a major offer from Europe which the Spurs could not match so they essentially could lose him for nothing.

That is why I believe that trading Manu for a potential star while he still has high value would be the best decision for the Spurs. Yes, any player the Spurs get back now would be unlikely to immediately match Manu's impact when he is healthy and in form. However, at least 3 and probably more of the current restricted free agents from the draft 4 years ago are likely to be better players over the next 5 years than Manu will be.

[lotr1trekkie]

Manu is our John Havlichek. He will stay until the TIM era is done. When Tim leaves all bets are off! Back to being the Spurs before David.

[Manufan909]

Why is extending Manu a no brainer? While he has some strong positives, he has the following negatives:

1. He has made some dumb decisions on at least 2 occasions which has cost the Spurs the opportunity to repeat.

Could you name the one that didn't have to due with Dirk '06? Cuz I think you're referring to this past postseason. I hope not, because how does going for AN OPEN DUNK constitute as a bad decision? He landed odd, and the Spurs were eventually exposed. Can he help it the FO hasn't gotten ANYONE to help him out? I'm hoping Mason works well in the system, but he's the next Barry, not the next Manu.

[2centsworth]

Manu is simultaneously one of the best and dumbest basketball players alive.







He will still be one of my all-time favorites.

[Supergirl]

Manu is our energy guy, full of offensive and defensive hustle. That's why he is so vital to our system. But it's also why sometimes his steals become turnovers and his physical play turns into fouls. It's all the same movements, same energy, same decision-making, but sometimes it gets interpreted one way, sometimes another. And you have to live with that.

In terms of whether Manu is breaking down - well, it is possible. But the Spurs aren't going to give up all that he gives the team (and that is a lot) unless it's really clear that's happening, and right now it's not.

[fotan2]

I just think that if that was the case, the Rockets and Mavericks would have made greater attempts at getting high profile Hispanic players on their team.


easy question . the money Cuban has is big enough to own 5 NBA teams . basically, NBA is not a business to him ,but a only a game .

Houston ------> Scola

[Mister Sinister]

Uhh...we could keep him.

[FromWayDowntown]

I don't think it's an issue of either extending Manu or trading him -- at least it isn't at this point.

I also don't get the idea of accepting pennies on the dollar for a player of Manu's caliber, just for the sake of moving him along. The Spurs plan isn't -- nor should it be -- to try to build a roster that will contend when Tim Duncan retires. That plan would essentially do little more than ensure mediocrity, since teams don't generally win without either megastars or a slew of guys with lottery talent (spare me the '04 Pistons -- half of that roster was lottery picks). The notion that the Spurs are going to somehow sustain their status as an elite club after Tim retires is nonsensical to me.

If you're going to move Manu, you have to get a real talent back for him -- or real assets that will offset the talent loss you'll endure by sending Manu out. To me, that means a young player with skills that are similar to Manu's (as I suggested yesterday, a Kevin Martin type) or acquiring the rights to lottery picks and getting some significant expiring contract. The problem is, as others have suggested, that if the rationale for trading Manu is that he's breaking down, nobody in the league will pay that sort of price for him and the Spurs will ultimately get screwed in any trade. Of course, if Manu is an asset that is worth an equal player, there's no reason to deal him. He was, after all, good enough in 2007-08 to finish 10th in the MVP voting, be voted 3rd team All-NBA, and be (to a real extent) the deciding factor in his club's ability to reach the Conference Finals. Those guys don't just grow on trees -- particularly those sorts of guys who have the sort of character and fire that Manu Ginobili has.

And spare me this notion that Manu has shown himself to be a selfish bastard by choosing to play in the Olympics. It's clear to me that Manu agonized over that decision and that he took to heart the wishes of his primary employer. I'm sure he understands that there are risks. But I wouldn't ever want to see Manu changing the way that he plays basketball just because there are risks. I don't think you can begrudge him the once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to defend a gold medal and to be the face of his nation at the Olympic games. I hope he doesn't get hurt, but I don't think his priorities are out of whack because he decided to take that opportunity.

[Darthkiller]

He's got to be performing at his current level for me to feel comfortable with the Spurs paying him over 10 mil a year in his next contract.

But yeah, no way he gets traded.

lmao. He is the leading scorer for the spurs, and he is an all star and he is only getting paid 8m a year. Scrubs like kenyon martin gets paid 14 m.

[rascal]

lmao. He is the leading scorer for the spurs, and he is an all star and he is only getting paid 8m a year. Scrubs like kenyon martin gets paid 14 m.


He hasn't made the all star team in two years. Got one all star gift apperance (to bring in the foreign fans) when other players were more deserving with better stats.

[FromWayDowntown]

He hasn't made the all star team in two years. Got one all star gift apperance (to bring in the foreign fans) when other players were more deserving with better stats.

He has made an All-NBA team.

Frankly, I think being Third Team All-NBA >>>>>>>>> Western Conference All-Star.

[smeagol]

He hasn't made the all star team in two years. Got one all star gift apperance (to bring in the foreign fans) when other players were more deserving with better stats.

And did not get to go this year when he was far more diserving than others. He even had the stats this time, the ones you think are crucial to be an AS.

[spurs_fan_in_exile]

Euthanize him and tell the Spurs fans that he went back home to a ranch in Argentina where he chases rabbits all day. Sign some washed up swing man to vet min. Use money saved by this move to invest in oil futures. Give said proceeds to me.

[ducks]

And did not get to go this year when he was far more diserving than others. He even had the stats this time, the ones you think are crucial to be an AS.

coaches must not thought he was worthy
I guess they know nothing compared to the smeagol

oh I guess that proves you are the stupid one

[mytespurs]

Question: What to do with Manu?

Answer: Nothing!!!!!!

Next topic.......

[ducks]

Question: What to do with Manu?

Answer: Nothing!!!!!!

Next topic.......

yep he can do whatever he wants
he can tell pop I am the boss and do what he wants

[tav1]

I agree with some of the logic behind the suggestion to trade Manu now, but I don't think it will happen for a number of reasons, and that's probably for the best. But his style of play, ankle and age makes it a legitmate thought, however improbable.

There are two major things that make trading Manu a deal breaker, and neither is the shortsighted "he's Manu, so it's not even worth talking about" argument.

The first deal breaker is the 2010 plan. Any trade would have to keep the plan in play. The second deal breaker is Manu's value. He's the third best shooting guard on the planet, with tremendous heart and championship know-how. If the Spurs were to trade Manu they'd have to get back an All-Star quality player (with more years left in his career than Manu), a promising youngter, and a good draft pick. And the contracts would have to work. And the incoming players must fit the Spur character profile. And the incoming players would have to make sense in terms of the Spur roster. Bringing back an All Star point, for example, doesn't make any sense at all.

It's an almost impossible scenario.

If you can't that kind of package in return, it's better to extend Manu and cross one's fingers that his body holds up.

Ironically, trading away an elite player is sometimes more of a help for the sending than the receivng franchise. See, 76ers, Philadelphia. But usually, it's just stupid.

[Darthkiller]

And did not get to go this year when he was far more diserving than others. He even had the stats this time, the ones you think are crucial to be an AS.

But he did drop couple 40 point games after all star break.

[FromWayDowntown]

coaches must not thought he was worthy
I guess they know nothing compared to the smeagol

oh I guess that proves you are the stupid one

Again, instead of being among the Top 12 players in the West at mid-season (and really, among the 7 best players not elected to that team at that point), Manu was simply one of the 6 best guards in the league for the duration of the season.

I can see where not being an All-Star is really indicative of Manu not being an elite player.

:rolleyes

[FromWayDowntown]

yep he can do whatever he wants
he can tell pop I am the boss and do what he wants

You should be pleased -- the Olympics are now filled with overrated and selfish players like Manu and Lebron.

[Darthkiller]

lol manu is overrated?

[Darthkiller]

20 minutes 18 points against spain, while nowhere near 100% .

[tav1]

I agree with some of the logic behind the suggestion to trade Manu now, but I don't think it will happen for a number of reasons, and that's probably for the best. But his style of play, ankle and age makes it a legitmate thought, however improbable.

There are two major things that make trading Manu a deal breaker, and neither is the shortsighted "he's Manu, so it's not even worth talking about" argument.

The first deal breaker is the 2010 plan. Any trade would have to keep the plan in play. The second deal breaker is Manu's value. He's the third best shooting guard on the planet, with tremendous heart and championship know-how. If the Spurs were to trade Manu they'd have to get back an All-Star (with more years left in his career than Manu), a promising, possible future All Star youngster, and a good draft pick or two. And the contracts would have to work. And the incoming players must fit the Spur character profile. And the incoming players would have to make sense in terms of the Spur roster. Bringing back an All Star point, for example, doesn't make any sense at all.

It's an almost impossible scenario.

If you can't that kind of package in return, it's better to extend Manu and cross one's fingers that his body holds up.

Ironically, trading away an elite player is sometimes more of a help for the sending than the receivng franchise. See, 76ers, Philadelphia. But usually, it's just stupid.

I just ran through every roster in the league and couldn't find a trade for Manu that makes sense. The closest I found was something like Manu, Bonner and Oberto to the Bobcats for Richardson, Ajinca, 2009 #1, and a future 2. But even that screws with 2010.

[diego]

And spare me this notion that Manu has shown himself to be a selfish bastard by choosing to play in the Olympics. It's clear to me that Manu agonized over that decision and that he took to heart the wishes of his primary employer. I'm sure he understands that there are risks. But I wouldn't ever want to see Manu changing the way that he plays basketball just because there are risks. I don't think you can begrudge him the once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to defend a gold medal and to be the face of his nation at the Olympic games. I hope he doesn't get hurt, but I don't think his priorities are out of whack because he decided to take that opportunity.

ive been trying to say this for weeks, but automatically get tagged as an argie homer. the people that are freaking out about manu are cowards afraid of risk, when risk is an integral part of life, and by extension, competitive sport.

thank you very much for saying it more eloquently than me.

[Manufan909]

Go FMW!!! If Manu can plag back from injury, imagiy the way he did against Spain while cominne him fully charged. They wont know what hit them. The USA team will be clueless, since a team with Kobe, Lebron, and Melo won't know how to pass for shit.

[rascal]

I agree with some of the logic behind the suggestion to trade Manu now, but I don't think it will happen for a number of reasons, and that's probably for the best. But his style of play, ankle and age makes it a legitmate thought, however improbable.

There are two major things that make trading Manu a deal breaker, and neither is the shortsighted "he's Manu, so it's not even worth talking about" argument.

The first deal breaker is the 2010 plan. Any trade would have to keep the plan in play. The second deal breaker is Manu's value. He's the third best shooting guard on the planet, with tremendous heart and championship know-how. If the Spurs were to trade Manu they'd have to get back an All-Star (with more years left in his career than Manu), a promising, possible future All Star youngster, and a good draft pick or two. And the contracts would have to work. And the incoming players must fit the Spur character profile. And the incoming players would have to make sense in terms of the Spur roster. Bringing back an All Star point, for example, doesn't make any sense at all.

It's an almost impossible scenario.

If you can't that kind of package in return, it's better to extend Manu and cross one's fingers that his body holds up.

Ironically, trading away an elite player is sometimes more of a help for the sending than the receivng franchise. See, 76ers, Philadelphia. But usually, it's just stupid.

So you think that manu is worth an all star and a future promising possible all star and a draft pick or two draft picks? Wow, thats over rating Manu's value.

[tav1]

So you think that manu is worth an all star and a future promising possible all star and a draft pick or two draft picks? Wow, thats over rating Manu's value.

How could he be worth less than that?

[Kori Ellis]

If the Spurs were to trade Manu they'd have to get back an All-Star (with more years left in his career than Manu), a promising, possible future All Star youngster, and a good draft pick or two.

If the Spurs were to trade Duncan, they probably wouldn't even get back an All Star, a potential All Star, plus picks. So, they definitely wouldn't get that for Manu.

Assessing Manu's trade value is hard because most teams would want to play a player of Manu's caliber 35+ mpg. And Manu is at his best when he hovers closer to 27-30mpg. A team would also have to accept that he'll miss about 10 games a season, plus be quite banged up for many more - it's just his style of play. However, Manu has so many intangibles and is so damn efficient, that he makes up for all that.

I believe Manu will retire a Spur. I think the Spurs will look at him next summer and figure it out. My guess is that he'll get a 3-year deal for about 25M-30M.

[Kori Ellis]

How could he be worth less than that?

Because he's not even an All Star every season. So why would you think you would get a younger All Star, a potential All Star and picks for him?

[tav1]

Because he's not even an All Star every season. So why would you think you would get a younger All Star, a potential All Star and picks for him?

To quote Pop, "because he's Manu Ginobli." I responded to myself above and suggested Jason Richardson, Alexis Ajinca and 2009 #1 as something approaching the ball park of his value. Or maybe Deng and Ty Thomas.

I'll go back and edit my first post, because I did put it a bit too strongly. The point is, it's almost impossible to envision a trade that brings back fair value and might be worth it for the other team.

[tav1]

So you think that manu is worth an all star and a future promising possible all star and a draft pick or two draft picks? Wow, thats over rating Manu's value.

Alright, I tone downed my original post just a bit. Still, how do you get value for Ginobli? Opportunities are few and far between.

[timaios]

I believe Manu will retire a Spur. I think the Spurs will look at him next summer and figure it out. My guess is that he'll get a 3-year deal for about 25M-30M.

You are very optimistic.
I think he'll get something between 12-14 mil/year.
He deserve it.

[Kori Ellis]

You are very optimistic.
I think he'll get something between 12-14 mil/year.
He deserve it.

If he gets 3 years/$40M, I don't mind. I just think the Spurs will try to get him for lower.

[Brutalis]

The most we could ever get for Manureankles would probably be a role player for the bench and a future first, or a couple seconds instead of the first.

[temujin]

In the worst game of his entire career, Mr Ginobili went 0-8 and scored only 3 points.

3 miserable FTs.

In the last 60'' of play.

His team WON by 3 miserable points.

Game 3, NBA Finals 07.

Some people just have it.

Come back with the trade thread AFTER he retires.

[Spurblood]

Just ship his ass out for some young talented guys and draft picks from a lottery team

[ArgSpursFan.]

Just ship his ass out for some young talented guys and draft picks from a lottery team

Yeahhh!!!
let's trade manu for Tmac and make the Rockets title contenders while we're at it.......................right??:nope

[ArgSpursFan.]

I say Cuban Would throw anyone besides Dirk in order to get Manu.
I say: Josh Howard and draft picks for Manu is a deal that Cuban would do in a fucking heartbeat.

[smeagol]

coaches must not thought he was worthy
I guess they know nothing compared to the smeagol

oh I guess that proves you are the stupid one

He made the NBA's 3rd team.

The coaches made a mistake, you dumbfuck.

Who's the stupid one, again?

[ducks]

He made the NBA's 3rd team.

The coaches made a mistake, you dumbfuck.

Who's the stupid one, again?

yep that is why they make more money then you

[pad300]

I believe Manu will retire a Spur. I think the Spurs will look at him next summer and figure it out. My guess is that he'll get a 3-year deal for about 25M-30M.


You are very optimistic.
I think he'll get something between 12-14 mil/year.
He deserve it.



If he gets 3 years/$40M, I don't mind. I just think the Spurs will try to get him for lower.

I sincerely hope you people are NUTS. The spurs would be making an error if they went above 10M, 9M, 8M ($/year, consecutive - Total 27M). They should probably try just over the MLE (I'd try and keep it under 8M/year)...I personally would be exceedingly wary of giving an aging player of Manu's injury history the big bucks. Especially if we want to try and wring another title from the last bit of Duncan's career.

[Marcus Bryant]

I sincerely hope you people are NUTS. The spurs would be making an error if they went above 10M, 9M, 8M ($/year, consecutive - Total 27M). They should probably try just over the MLE (I'd try and keep it under 8M/year)...I personally would be exceedingly wary of giving an aging player of Manu's injury history the big bucks. Especially if we want to try and wring another title from the last bit of Duncan's career.

Who will they be saving the money for then?

[Kori Ellis]

I sincerely hope you people are NUTS. The spurs would be making an error if they went above 10M, 9M, 8M ($/year, consecutive - Total 27M). They should probably try just over the MLE (I'd try and keep it under 8M/year)...I personally would be exceedingly wary of giving an aging player of Manu's injury history the big bucks. Especially if we want to try and wring another title from the last bit of Duncan's career.

Why did you call me nuts when I said the Spurs would probably try to get him for $25-30M? Isn't that pretty much what you are saying ($24-27M)?

I just said I don't mind if he gets 3 years/$40M because I think he's been relatively underpaid on his current contract. It's not my money, so I don't care if the Spurs pay him $40M - I just don't think they will.

[DPG21920]

It is a dicey situation because of Manu's style of play and inability to play 35+ minutes a night, but he is coming off his best season and is a pure winner. His good far outweighs his bad and you do not trade winners unless it is a homerun, which is almost impossible.

[ducks]

if he gets 40 million for 3 years
he will hurt the spurs cap room

[DPG21920]

If he makes less than he does now with his looming extension I would be shocked. I think 3 years 30M sounds about right. if the go + or - by about 5M that would be ok.

[DPG21920]

if he gets 40 million for 3 years
he will hurt the spurs cap room

I thought that was why we had cap room, to sign him. No other free agent is more important that we could realistically get if you want to maximize Tim's chances to win.

[Rustyman]

Just want to clarify my original point. If the Spurs are looking to get better in the next 1-5 years and potentially remain a contender once Duncan declines, they need to look at their options.

Of the available assets the Spurs, I think exploring trading the trading of Manu is the best one as Spurs will never get fair value for Duncan and Parker is only entering his prime. The rest of the Spurs roster is unlikely to bring back anything significant in trade.

The objective in trading Manu would be to get something close to his current level of performance with the potential to exceed his performance in the future . That is why I suggested that the Spurs explore the potential for taking advantage of the status with this years restricted free agents.

Manu for Deng, Iggy, Okafor, Gordon, or someone of that caliber makes sense if the we keep this objective in mind. Manu for a average player or two or draft picks do not make sense as it is unlikely to improve the Spurs now or in the future. Now there is no guarantee that any of the teams with talented RFA's are willing to listen to an offer for Manu, however, with Childress taking up a Euro offer, the Bulls, Bobcats, 76'ers are all likely to be a lot less certain of their positions with regards to the RFA's.

To recap:
1. Manu for Deng, Gordon, Okafor, Iggy, or similar players. YES
2. Manu for role players or picks. NO
3. Manu for 3 years extra after 2010 for $10m or more. NO
4. Manu to expire in 2010 is better than 2 or 3.

[smeagol]

yep that is why they make more money then you

Because they make money, the can't make mistakes.

Keep them coming, ol' ducks . . . :rolleyes

[Sissiborgo]

Keep him hes one of the best!

[rascal]

Just want to clarify my original point. If the Spurs are looking to get better in the next 1-5 years and potentially remain a contender once Duncan declines, they need to look at their options.

Of the available assets the Spurs, I think exploring trading the trading of Manu is the best one as Spurs will never get fair value for Duncan and Parker is only entering his prime. The rest of the Spurs roster is unlikely to bring back anything significant in trade.

The objective in trading Manu would be to get something close to his current level of performance with the potential to exceed his performance in the future . That is why I suggested that the Spurs explore the potential for taking advantage of the status with this years restricted free agents.

Manu for Deng, Iggy, Okafor, Gordon, or someone of that caliber makes sense if the we keep this objective in mind. Manu for a average player or two or draft picks do not make sense as it is unlikely to improve the Spurs now or in the future. Now there is no guarantee that any of the teams with talented RFA's are willing to listen to an offer for Manu, however, with Childress taking up a Euro offer, the Bulls, Bobcats, 76'ers are all likely to be a lot less certain of their positions with regards to the RFA's.

To recap:
1. Manu for Deng, Gordon, Okafor, Iggy, or similar players. YES
2. Manu for role players or picks. NO
3. Manu for 3 years extra after 2010 for $10m or more. NO
4. Manu to expire in 2010 is better than 2 or 3.


Option 3 will be the one the spurs choose and it will sink their chances of getting a title because Manu will be on the sharp decline by then.

[pad300]

Why did you call me nuts when I said the Spurs would probably try to get him for $25-30M? Isn't that pretty much what you are saying ($24-27M)?

I just said I don't mind if he gets 3 years/$40M because I think he's been relatively underpaid on his current contract. It's not my money, so I don't care if the Spurs pay him $40M - I just don't think they will.

I said I hope your nuts, not that you are. I hold out hope that he will do a Tim, and take a less than full market value (in Tim's case, MAX) extension because he wants to win. I hope to see him transition to a close to MLE salary (the role envisioned for Brent Barry when 1st signed), because I don't think the Spurs can financially support something more than 1 Max level player (Duncan until @2012, I think), 2 semi-stars (currently Parker and Gino), and assorted role players (some of whom will undoubtedly be overpaid...every FO makes some errors). I don't think that in 2010 onwards a core of old Duncan, old Manu, and prime Parker will be enough to contend, unless we get extremely lucky with injuries and such. I don't want to move Ginobili, he's a born winner, and can be a huge difference maker when healthy, but I am uncertain of his ability to have that sort of an impact over a season (post 2010). I think we need the salary cap space to bring in another semi-star level player, or pay the one that develops from our draft picks...I think having to bring in an outside player (and pay the associated premium) is more likely.

[ducks]

Because they make money, the can't make mistakes.

Keep them coming, ol' ducks . . . :rolleyes

you can never make a mistake can you

[Anti.Hero]

Get rid of Manu?!?!


http://images.google.com/url?q=http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/826/59110721ma7.jpg&usg=AFQjCNHNdCg8cIp0kIN-RRC541CSG0w_uA

[Manufan909]

Get rid of Manu?!?!


http://images.google.com/url?q=http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/826/59110721ma7.jpg&usg=AFQjCNHNdCg8cIp0kIN-RRC541CSG0w_uA

Ha, I don't think you should've used a pic of the first dude that got kicked into the well.
:lol

[tav1]

Just want to clarify my original point. If the Spurs are looking to get better in the next 1-5 years and potentially remain a contender once Duncan declines, they need to look at their options.

Of the available assets the Spurs, I think exploring trading the trading of Manu is the best one as Spurs will never get fair value for Duncan and Parker is only entering his prime. The rest of the Spurs roster is unlikely to bring back anything significant in trade.

The objective in trading Manu would be to get something close to his current level of performance with the potential to exceed his performance in the future . That is why I suggested that the Spurs explore the potential for taking advantage of the status with this years restricted free agents.

Manu for Deng, Iggy, Okafor, Gordon, or someone of that caliber makes sense if the we keep this objective in mind. Manu for a average player or two or draft picks do not make sense as it is unlikely to improve the Spurs now or in the future. Now there is no guarantee that any of the teams with talented RFA's are willing to listen to an offer for Manu, however, with Childress taking up a Euro offer, the Bulls, Bobcats, 76'ers are all likely to be a lot less certain of their positions with regards to the RFA's.

To recap:
1. Manu for Deng, Gordon, Okafor, Iggy, or similar players. YES
2. Manu for role players or picks. NO
3. Manu for 3 years extra after 2010 for $10m or more. NO
4. Manu to expire in 2010 is better than 2 or 3.

Okay, Rustyman, I understand that you're not advocating trading for the sake of trading, or trading for pennies on the dollar. But given the parameters you've suggested in the quoted post, would you support(keeping the rest of the current roster in mind):

1) Manu and Oberto for Deng and Thomas?
2) Manu and Oberto for Gordon and Thomas?
3) Manu and Oberto for Okafor and a draft pick?
4) Manu and Oberto for Richardson and Ajinca?
5) Manu and Oberto for Iguodala and Speights?
6) Manu and Bonner for Crawford, Lee and Chandler?

I've included Bonner and Oberto assuming cap constraints. Beside, if the Spurs were to trade Ginobli, Oberto would be crushed. Might as well send him in the deal.

Most of the people on this board would reject all 6 scenarios listed above. Personally, I'd say yes, no, no, yes, maybe and maybe. On the maybes, I'm more no than yes.

The two deals I'd be inclined toward both effectively diminish the 2010 plan.

So, are these the sort of deals you'd want to see Rustyman?

[AFBlue]

Manu's value to this team over the next two years will be greater than anything the Spurs could get for him in return...especially coming off the injury-plagued series with LA.

His value after that is difficult to determine at this point, but not having him count against the cap in 2010 is VERY valuable. If the Spurs decide Manu is past his prime and have the option to sign a younger talent to play alongside Tim and Tony, they'll opt not to re-sign him.

If they can't find someone willing to come to SA for big bucks, they might just be better off signing Manu to a reasonable contract and going after another player or two for reasonable contracts.

Either way....trading Manu at this point or likely any point in the next two years wouldn't be worth it.

[tav1]

Manu's value to this team over the next two years will be greater than anything the Spurs could get for him in return...especially coming off the injury-plagued series with LA.

His value after that is difficult to determine at this point, but not having him count against the cap in 2010 is VERY valuable. If the Spurs decide Manu is past his prime and have the option to sign a younger talent to play alongside Tim and Tony, they'll opt not to re-sign him.

If they can't find someone willing to come to SA for big bucks, they might just be better off signing Manu to a reasonable contract and going after another player or two for reasonable contracts.

Either way....trading Manu at this point or likely any point in the next two years wouldn't be worth it.

I more or less agree with you. But I'm just trying to engage Rusty on his terms. I don't see a worthwhile trade out there, but I'm not opposed to it as a conversation piece.

[Rustyman]

Okay, Rustyman, I understand that you're not advocating trading for the sake of trading, or trading for pennies on the dollar. But given the parameters you've suggested in the quoted post, would you support(keeping the rest of the current roster in mind):

1) Manu and Oberto for Deng and Thomas?
2) Manu and Oberto for Gordon and Thomas?
3) Manu and Oberto for Okafor and a draft pick?
4) Manu and Oberto for Richardson and Ajinca?
5) Manu and Oberto for Iguodala and Speights?
6) Manu and Bonner for Crawford, Lee and Chandler?

I've included Bonner and Oberto assuming cap constraints. Beside, if the Spurs were to trade Ginobli, Oberto would be crushed. Might as well send him in the deal.

Most of the people on this board would reject all 6 scenarios listed above. Personally, I'd say yes, no, no, yes, maybe and maybe. On the maybes, I'm more no than yes.

The two deals I'd be inclined toward both effectively diminish the 2010 plan.

So, are these the sort of deals you'd want to see Rustyman?


I'd say the Spurs should definitely go for 1,3 and 5 as the major players in those deals are likely to at least be good 2nd tier stars. With the other options, I have doubts as to whether the Spurs would be better off with any of them. Of these, 2 may be a possibility but the others simply don't make the Spurs better in the short or medium term.

Now whether those deals are out there to be made is another question but the Spurs should at least ask. In normal circumstances 1,2,3 and 5 would not be available in a swap for Manu and extras as these are young players with potential to get significantly better. However, RFA contract negotiations mean that these players could possibly be had at a discount because of the fear that the clubs may lose them for nothing in a year's time.

Deals 4 and 6 could be made now but in this case the Spurs would not get equal value in return. The Spurs will get younger but not potential star quality players in return. Both the Bobcats and Knicks would jump on these deals as it will make them immediately better.

The reason I floated the potential trades idea for Manu was that I really cannot see him averaging more than 30 minutes a game from this point forwards and Pop might be best limiting him to 24 minutes a game to ensure he has something in the tank come playoff time. At that point, while he delivers great value when on court, a younger player can offer 35-40 minutes per game and have a greater overall effect on the game outcome. With Duncan not likely to average more than 35 minutes a game either, you start having significant periods during a game where the backups and role players have to play a larger role than what they are capable of.

The easy way to address this situation is to get a younger player or two of close to equal ability who can stay on the court longer. Now getting that younger player might not be easy, the Spurs should still be trying. That is why I think Mahinmi could play a potentially critical role for the Spurs, if he develops into reliable starter in the next season or two, it partially compensates for the reduced minutes Duncan and Manu will play. If Mahinmi develops and Manu is traded for one of the players mention, then I think the Spurs are a legitimate contender for the next 5-6 years.

As for the 2010 plan, the objective of that plan should be to sustain and increase the success of the club. A move such as I suggested would likely do that and a year earlier than planned. For 2010, we should simply accept that the Spurs are not going to get Lebron, Wade, Bosh, etc. These guys will get max money wherever they go and in much more attractive destinations than San Antonio. The Spurs plan is likely to hinge on being able to take advantage of moves which teams make to get these guys. I believe the Spurs don't have to wait to 2010 to make their move.

[Kori Ellis]

I really cannot see him averaging more than 30 minutes a game from this point forwards

07-08 was the first season he even averaged 30 mpg for the Spurs. In 06-07, he averaged 27.5, did you find him valuable then? I'm not being a smartass; I'm just curious why you think his inability to play near 35 mpg isn't worth it now. For the four years prior to last season, he always played 27-29 mpg. I think he'll probably average right around 27 mpg again this year.

[Rustyman]

07-08 was the first season he even averaged 30 mpg for the Spurs. In 06-07, he averaged 27.5, did you find him valuable then? I'm not being a smartass; I'm just curious why you think his inability to play near 35 mpg isn't worth it now. For the four years prior to last season, he always played 27-29 mpg. I think he'll probably average right around 27 mpg again this year.

Thats just the point, I think Manu has been good value at $9m/year playing 27 mpg at his previous level of play. I do however think he is very likely to play 27 mpg or less at a lower level of performance in years to come. I think he is very unlikely to be good value for money at $10m/year playing 24 mpg from 2010 onwards.

Unlike some, I am not bashing Manu or denying that he has been great for the Spurs. What I am saying, is the there may be better value for money options for the Spurs from this point forward in trading Manu and even if these options are equal value for money, going with one of the young stars mentioned is likely to extend the Spurs window of opportunity.

When I look at it, I think there is a good chance that Duncan can sustain his level of performance or not drop off substantially for the term of his existing contract. I think Parker will sustain or even improve his performance over the next 5 years. I think Manu will decline significantly in the next year or two to the point of no longer being a 2-3rd tier star but more of a role player. I think that before that happens, the Spurs should explore their options to ensure ongoing success.

[exstatic]

While no one can dispute that Manu has an exciting style of play, does the fact that he is Hispanic have a major commercial impact on the Spurs. I just think that if that was the case, the Rockets and Mavericks would have made greater attempts at getting high profile Hispanic players on their team.

I am not saying this isnt a valid reason and it a comparable position is what Bird is doing in Indiana in terms of team composition. It may not be the most talented group he is putting together but it is an attempt to get the fan base back onside. I just don't know whether the Hispanic angle weights that heavily on the Spurs minds.

How many high profile Hispanic players have there been over the years? Not too damn many until recently. I do recall both the Rox and the Mavs having spanish speakers on their squads. Dallas had Najera and the Rox had Carl Herrera, who was Venezuelan, IIRC. Houston is hardly Hispanic when compared to SA or even Dallas. I'm sure that if the Mavs could get their hands on an All Star, All NBA hispanic guard, they'd jump at the chance.

[diego]

Thats just the point, I think Manu has been good value at $9m/year playing 27 mpg at his previous level of play. I do however think he is very likely to play 27 mpg or less at a lower level of performance in years to come. I think he is very unlikely to be good value for money at $10m/year playing 24 mpg from 2010 onwards

Unlike some, I am not bashing Manu or denying that he has been great for the Spurs. What I am saying, is the there may be better value for money options for the Spurs from this point forward in trading Manu and even if these options are equal value for money, going with one of the young stars mentioned is likely to extend the Spurs window of opportunity.


i assume you, and most bball fans in general, would trade manu for pierce straight up (i know the celts wouldnt, but bear with me). it seems logical right? similar skill sets, similar stats, and pierce averages a good 5-6 minutes more.

but how would it improve the spurs if pierce had similar output in more time?

the upside of pierce isnt that he plays 5-6 mins more, its that he is presumably less injury prone.

but this is professional sports. pierce has had severe injuries, as has duncan, and kobe and dirk and iverson and so on and so on. are some guys more injury prone than others? absolutely. but that doesnt make it an exact science.

shit, a lot of the younger guys being proposed as trade targets have had injury woes of their own (okafor, richardson, crawford). what guarantees do you have they would be healthier than manu?

there are risks no matter what, from injuries to chemistry to bbal iq to work ethic and so on and so on.

IMO, a manu trade would have to improve the spurs for sure, not maybe. i have no doubt in my mind that, right now, there isnt a player out there that can give the spurs what manu does, at the price he does, and have yet to see a trade proposal to question that idea.

[temujin]

Ginobili is the rare type of player that will win you something even averaging 5 mpg.
Scoring 3 ppg.

He just has it.

Some posters -manifestly- don't.

[Manufan909]

Where was Pierce in the MVP voting, and the All-NBA team? Not trying to attck, I just really don't know. I think we'd be getting the bum end of the deal. Manu, Tony, and KG would be scarier than the current Celtic big 3, in my opinion.

[tav1]

I'd say the Spurs should definitely go for 1,3 and 5 as the major players in those deals are likely to at least be good 2nd tier stars. With the other options, I have doubts as to whether the Spurs would be better off with any of them. Of these, 2 may be a possibility but the others simply don't make the Spurs better in the short or medium term.

Now whether those deals are out there to be made is another question but the Spurs should at least ask. In normal circumstances 1,2,3 and 5 would not be available in a swap for Manu and extras as these are young players with potential to get significantly better. However, RFA contract negotiations mean that these players could possibly be had at a discount because of the fear that the clubs may lose them for nothing in a year's time.

Deals 4 and 6 could be made now but in this case the Spurs would not get equal value in return. The Spurs will get younger but not potential star quality players in return. Both the Bobcats and Knicks would jump on these deals as it will make them immediately better.

The reason I floated the potential trades idea for Manu was that I really cannot see him averaging more than 30 minutes a game from this point forwards and Pop might be best limiting him to 24 minutes a game to ensure he has something in the tank come playoff time. At that point, while he delivers great value when on court, a younger player can offer 35-40 minutes per game and have a greater overall effect on the game outcome. With Duncan not likely to average more than 35 minutes a game either, you start having significant periods during a game where the backups and role players have to play a larger role than what they are capable of.

The easy way to address this situation is to get a younger player or two of close to equal ability who can stay on the court longer. Now getting that younger player might not be easy, the Spurs should still be trying. That is why I think Mahinmi could play a potentially critical role for the Spurs, if he develops into reliable starter in the next season or two, it partially compensates for the reduced minutes Duncan and Manu will play. If Mahinmi develops and Manu is traded for one of the players mention, then I think the Spurs are a legitimate contender for the next 5-6 years.

As for the 2010 plan, the objective of that plan should be to sustain and increase the success of the club. A move such as I suggested would likely do that and a year earlier than planned. For 2010, we should simply accept that the Spurs are not going to get Lebron, Wade, Bosh, etc. These guys will get max money wherever they go and in much more attractive destinations than San Antonio. The Spurs plan is likely to hinge on being able to take advantage of moves which teams make to get these guys. I believe the Spurs don't have to wait to 2010 to make their move.

Rustyman, thanks for the response.

After reading your response, I agree that if the Spurs *could* swing any of the aforementioned deals, they should give it careful thought. Again, I don't think that any of them constitute no brainers, or even that the suggested trade partners would consider such deals, but the Spurs would not be receiving pennies on the dollar. I wouldn't be upset with Buford if he dealt Manu for something on the scale we're discussing. But all of the deals come with significant risk, and staying the course looks like a good option.

[oski1000]

Trade Manu to Rockets for Scola!!!:bang:bang

[Ed Helicopter Jones]

Manu is probably one of the top 3 closers in this league when he's healthy, and the dropoff on the Spurs was obvious against LA when Manu's not 100%.

I hope they renegotiate/extend him for another three years at $10M+. In my mind he's up there with David/Tim/Ice as one of the greatest Spurs ever. Even a Manu that might be a half-step slower in a couple of years is still better than 90% of what's available in the league.

[Manufan909]

True. How many NBA players are there, anyways? 10 out of 720 right now means he's better than 98% of the players in the league last season. I think in 2010 he'll still be better than 88% of them, which is a great deal.

[Sissiborgo]

Keep him ore spurs will be shit!