General Trades Discussion

[Bruno]

Minny saying to Williams to wait for Rubio is a little weird. Williams is out of their rotation with Kirilenko/Howard playing SF and Love/Cunningham playing PF. Will they change their rotation once Rubio came back? It seem doubtful even more they will need to have Williams playing with the first unit to be paired with Rubio.

To me, it sounds more than they are just playing the clock. A trade seems inevitable.

[Chinook]

Minny saying to Williams to wait for Rubio is a little weird. Williams is out of their rotation with Kirilenko/Howard playing SF and Love/Cunningham playing PF. Will they change their rotation once Rubio came back? It seem doubtful even more they will need to have Williams playing with the first unit to be paired with Rubio.

To me, it sounds more than they are just playing the clock. A trade seems inevitable.

Not that our opinions matter to what's actually going to happen. But out of all the semi-realistic PF options discussed (Williams, Millsap, Mbah a Moute, Aminu in some minds, etc.) for whom would you most prefer the Spurs trade? I love Willams' potential, but I can't see how he'd crack the rotation this year.

[Bruno]

Not that our opinions matter to what's actually going to happen. But out of all the semi-realistic PF options discussed (Williams, Millsap, Mbah a Moute, Aminu in some minds, etc.) for whom would you most prefer the Spurs trade? I love Willams' potential, but I can't see how he'd crack the rotation this year.

To me: Millsap > Williams > Mbah a Moute > Aminu.

I'm really convinced Spurs don't have the assets to get Millsap (without trading Kawhi, of course). Regarding Williams, I would put him as backup PF with Diaw being the starting PF.

[ABC]

Minny saying to Williams to wait for Rubio is a little weird. Williams is out of their rotation with Kirilenko/Howard playing SF and Love/Cunningham playing PF. Will they change their rotation once Rubio came back? It seem doubtful even more they will need to have Williams playing with the first unit to be paired with Rubio.

To me, it sounds more than they are just playing the clock. A trade seems inevitable.

That's what it sounds like to me too. They're trying to keep his value up by saying he just needs to play with the right point guard to be effective and they're also trying to keep Williams and his agent happy by saying he might get more playing time soon.

[Chinook]

If the Spurs were to go the Williams route, I would prefer they find a way to trade Blair and keep Bonner. I think the fifth-big role really works for him, and I don't think Blair would be happy going back to being inactive. If the Spurs traded him (to Philly, for example) then they'd be short (lol, pun) a big. Having Bonner would mean the Spurs wouldn't have to depend on Williams being good yet this year.

I don't think the Spurs could get Millsap without messing up their team -- at least not in a direct trade. If the Jazz are seriously looking to move him for a player like good point guard, the Spurs may be able to move in and get him if they have something the other team wants more than Millsap.

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=a7m2ok8

This isn't what Utah is looking for, but it's a way to explain the idea. I wouldn't make that trade right now, even if Utah agreed, because I want to see more from De Colo. Moving Diaw or Jackson would make taking Millsap's salary back much easier.

[TD 21]

To me: Millsap > Williams > Mbah a Moute > Aminu.

I'm really convinced Spurs don't have the assets to get Millsap (without trading Kawhi, of course). Regarding Williams, I would put him as backup PF with Diaw being the starting PF.

As I said last week, I think they do have the assets to get him without giving up a major piece. I'm not saying it's likely or that they will, but I think they have a chance, even if it is an outside one.

If my proposal of Diaw, Blair, Joseph (or, if they prefer Mills or De Colo), Anderson and a 1st, doesn't get it done, then I'd offer 2 1sts. One of them is all but guaranteed to be a bottom 5 pick and the other will probably end up being a non lottery pick, too, because even when Duncan and Ginobili retire, a core of Parker, Green, Leonard, Millsap, Splitter and Neal, is a likely playoff team. Even if they missed, it's difficult to envision them being bad enough for the pick to come back and bite the Spurs. In the unlikely event it does, nobody's going to care if they win the championship this season or next and having an increased chance of doing so is easily worth that risk.

[objective]

I've not been following the Milsap discussion, but I don't see how they'd be interested in anything the Spurs have that's not big 3 or Leonard, and even Kawhi I don't know.

Even two draft picks from the Spurs wouldn't be very enticing. They already have 3 lottery picks they can't give enough minutes to and one of them barely plays at all. More youth isn't what they would want, nor two back up points who aren't any better than the back ups they already have.

[ace3g]

I think Derrick Williams would be a great addition, like Diaw last season, Williams would be motivated with a change of scenery. He still puts up decent rebounding numbers, has 3 point range, and young. Plus Sean Elliott would love another Arizona Wildcat on the roster.

*If the Wolves statement is correct that Williams put up his best numbers along side Rubio, maybe he can do the same with Nando (similar skill set to Rubio).

[Chinook]

*If the Wolves statement is correct that Williams put up his best numbers along side Rubio, maybe he can do the same with Nando (similar skill set to Rubio).
Not to mention with Manu and Diaw at times. The Spurs' passing system really makes it easy for scorers to get the shots they like. So I think he'd do well here offensively so long as he gets the system.

If his three-point shot is consistent, then Williams probably could replace Bonner as the second stretch four. I still don't know if he'd play better with Splitter than he would if he were in the starting line up. Diaw seems comfortable in his bench role now, and I'd be inclined to keep him there and just replace Blair with Williams.

But is he a player that the Spurs would realistically target? It seems like they prefer to get established veterans if they make trades.

[Bruno]

If the Spurs were to go the Williams route, I would prefer they find a way to trade Blair and keep Bonner. I think the fifth-big role really works for him, and I don't think Blair would be happy going back to being inactive. If the Spurs traded him (to Philly, for example) then they'd be short (lol, pun) a big. Having Bonner would mean the Spurs wouldn't have to depend on Williams being good yet this year.

If Spurs trade for Williams, they had to be high on him because there is an important financial commitment coming with him. His salary this year is $4.8M, $5M for next season and $6.3M for 2014/2015 with the deadline to pick the option on that year being at the end of next season training camp.

Personally, I would have no issue at all with Spurs trading both Blair and Bonner if they can get a good PF. As you said, Blair could/would be a pain in the ass to have at the end of the bench. I consider Bonner being worthless, even as a 5th big, because, at the end, it's all about the playoffs and he is atrocious at that time of the year.

[CGD]

Sounds like if a team really wanted Williams they'd wait until this summer to see if Minni fails to pick up his option, and then trade for him next year. If the spurs did pursue him, what could they realistically offer the wolves outside of cap relief? Don't know why but I get a gut feeling Gasol is going to get traded to Minni, and one of the parts sent to Lakers is going to be this dude.

Im more pedestrian in my trade hopes. Mbah a moute is interesting. I still like Patterson despite his declining numbers this year. I get that Blair is on a cheap salary and all, but he needs to move on.

[CGD]

If Spurs move bonner they do need a of that can knock down an outside shot to space the floor. No bullshit. The recent Memphis showed the value of that.

[Chinook]

If Spurs trade for Williams, they had to be high on him because there is an important financial commitment coming with him. His salary this year is $4.8M, $5M for next season and $6.3M for 2014/2015 with the deadline to pick the option on that year being at the end of next season training camp.

Personally, I would have no issue at all with Spurs trading both Blair and Bonner if they can get a good PF. As you said, Blair could/would be a pain in the ass to have at the end of the bench. I consider Bonner being worthless, even as a 5th big, because, at the end, it's all about the playoffs and he is atrocious at that time of the year.

Yeah, if the Spurs can get a guy like Baynes to come aboard as the fifth big, I'd feel pretty comfortable trading for Williams. Hell, even if they don't get Williams, I couldn't get Blair out the door fast enough if Baynes is willing to come over. I hope the Spurs consider getting Williams as opposed to signing an older player. I would love to see them land a good young prospect sometime.

It doesn't look like Pop is planning on playing Bonner in the playoffs much, if at all, this season. He seems adequate about only playing him as a change of pace, fifth big off the bench. Those players are usually out of the post season rotation, anyway.

[elemento]

I would love to get Williams. If San Antonio can transform Matt Bonner into a decent role player, I am positive that they can do the same with Derrick Williams. Maybe he can be the stretch 4 that SA has been looking for since Horry. Still, I don't think Minny is willing to sell him low (Bonner + Blair for Williams is terrible value for Minny). Remember that Minny asked the 2nd overall pick this draft for Derrick Williams (Cho obviously refused). Still, I think Minny would ask one of our SGs (Green or Neal) to pull the trigger. They only have Shved with Roy's injury (and possibly retirement) and they're playing a lot of small-ball with Ridnour + Barea.

[Chinook]

I think most in this thread are willing to give up Neal for Williams. Bruno's suggestion was Neal and Bonner. I've also heard Green and Blair. No one's paying attention to that second package yet because Green can't be traded until next month. With that in mind, I'd like this to go down:

Trade Blair to Philly for the Pelican's second-rounder

Trade Neal, Bonner and one of the Spurs' first or the NO second (potentially both) for Williams

Sign an established PF (Martin, or McDyess if he checks out physically) or call up Wilkerson/Sullivan to be the fifth big

It wouldn't hurt to bring in Baynes, either, because it would be nice if the fifth big could play the center spot.

[Paranoid Pop]

I don't like Williams and he's owned a lot of money, wouldn't do it tbh, makes the TWolves a lot better too when we could see them as 8th seed but yeah I'd say it's fair to say I'm in the minority on that.

[elemento]

@ chino . I've made a trade proposal on realgm just 4fun with Green + Mills + Bonner going to Minny for Derrick Williams + Luke Ridnour (after december 15th). All Minny fans liked it. I like it for us because : We lack a reliable backup PG and Ridnour is a good one. With this move, Neal gets back to his best position by far (SG) as Manu's backup and with a reliable backup PG, Manu could simply start again. (just like when Ford was here)Our depth chart would be : Tony Parker / Luke Ridnour / Cory JosephManu Ginobili / Gary Neal / Nando De Colo Kawhi Leonard / Stephen Jackson Boris Diaw / Derrick Williams / Dejuan Blair Tim Duncan / Tiago Splitter. For Minny it makes sense because with Rubio back they would have 2 backup PGs making too much money (4m/each). Mills is a cheap 3rd string PG and Green makes sense with Roy down and considering that they only have Shved, a rookie, as a reliable SG option. PS: Don't know why my post keeps going without space, That's not how I am typing it. Sorry about that.

[Chinook]

@ chino . I've made a trade proposal on realgm just 4fun with Green + Mills + Bonner going to Minny for Derrick Williams + Luke Ridnour (after december 15th). All Minny fans liked it. I like it for us because : We lack a reliable backup PG and Ridnour is a good one. With this move, Neal gets back to his best position by far (SG) as Manu's backup and with a reliable backup PG, Manu could simply start again. (just like when Ford was here)Our depth chart would be : Tony Parker / Luke Ridnour / Cory JosephManu Ginobili / Gary Neal / Nando De Colo Kawhi Leonard / Stephen Jackson Boris Diaw / Derrick Williams / Dejuan Blair Tim Duncan / Tiago Splitter. For Minny it makes sense because with Rubio back they would have 2 backup PGs making too much money (4m/each). Mills is a cheap 3rd string PG and Green makes sense with Roy down and considering that they only have Shved, a rookie, as a reliable SG option. PS: Don't know why my post keeps going without space, That's not how I am typing it. Sorry about that.

:toast No worries about the formatting. I'm new here, and I have to edit my posts almost every time.

Two issues with your trade scenario:

1) Danny Green cannot be traded until January 15. He is a BYC player (which nowadays pretty much a restricted free agent who resigned with his own team), so he has different restrictions than a normal free agent. Incidentally, Mills can veto this deal as well (in order to keep his early-Bird rights), but I don't think that's an issue, because he'd probably think he could get more playing time with the Wolves than the Spurs in that scenario.

2) I don't think the Spurs like Ridnour enough to consider that trade. If his contract were expiring at the end of this season, then that'd be one thing. But he's due $4.3 Million next year (fully guaranteed, according to Sham). San Antonio has options at the back up point they seem to like in De Colo and Joseph. My guess is that this would only work as part of a series of trades in which the Spurs moved some more guards to make room for him.

Those aren't the biggest hurdles to overcome, and if the Spurs really like Williams, then taking back Ridnour is not too big of a price if they feel comfortable with De Colo playing the 2. I think Nando is too good to keep on the bench for the next two years, though. To be honest, if the Williams market heats up, then the biggest obstacle to your trade scenario will be Green's BYC restriction. The way it sounds, the Wolves may move him sooner than later. The Spurs may not be able to wait until January.

[elemento]

Fair points Chino

I'm not sold on Nando's ability to be a full-time PG, but that's me. I still think he is a SG with great passing skills, just like Manu.

For SA's FO pull the trigger on Williams, It would have to be Bruno's scenario with only Bonner + Neal for Williams. I think Neal is quite underrated in ST and SA would miss his scoring punch off the bench, but that move would be a no-brainer, at least for me.

I don't Minny will wait too much to move him. Williams may end up like Wes Johson, who in the end was moved for nothing because he had no trade value as a big time bust.

[szkorhetz]

Guys, I had a dream tonight, where Varejao was traded to us for Mills, Neal, Bonner and a first round pick.
I wish!

[ABC]

More on Vesely:

http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/224901/Vesely_Dropping_Out_Of_Wizards_Rotation

Jan Vesely has received DNP-Coach's Decision in each of the last two Washington Wizards games and has been falling out of the team's playing rotation.

Throughout the season, Vesely has been a supportive teammate. He also has the support of owner Ted Leonsis and coach Randy Wittman.

“I don’t want him to step away from game playing, I want him to be ready every night,” Wittman said. “As our guys know, it can change at any minute. We’ve said that all year, with who I started and who’s played and who hasn’t played. He’s got to keep practicing hard and it’s going to come. It’s going to happen.”

The Wizards don't plan to send Vesely to the D-League, according to a league source. It is clear, however, that he has seen a decline in playing time since being moved to the starting lineup on Nov. 26.

[Russo21]

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=aagtxcg

something like that would go down ok

[Bruno]

I don't know if Spurs would be interested in Vesely because he is very atypical player with big holes in his game but what I'm sure is that he would be so much better with Spurs than with the Wizards. A winning, well structured, Euro-friendly team would do wonders for him.

[ABC]

I don't know if Spurs would be interested in Vesely because he is very atypical player with big holes in his game but what I'm sure is that he would be so much better with Spurs than with the Wizards. A winning, well structured, Euro-friendly team would do wonders for him.

Yeah, I like Williams better right now, but I think Williams might cost more too.

[Chinook]

Can Vesely shoot away from the basket? I couldn't find evidence in that in the videos I saw. If he can only score in the paint, I don't really see how he can help the Spurs at all.

[Paranoid Pop]

I like the idea of getting Vesely, not sure what it would take tho.

[Chinook]

He's playing like garbage right now. If the Wizards want to move, they'd likely ask for an expiring and maybe a player like Neal. His trade value has plummeted He needs to either get a jump shot so he can be a small-forward/stretch four, or he needs to learn some post moves and become a legitimate big. He's really in between right now.

If the Wizards like Blair for some odd reason, than he and Bonner for Vesely makes sense. If they want someone like Neal instead, then I'd still try to give them Blair and take back someone like Booker.

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=cdmxsnr

[Chinook]

Or maybe this would be better if the Spurs got back on of Philly's seconds:

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=aa4dybc

[elemento]

He can't and wouldn't help the Spurs now.

Vesely is a raw project. Just for comparison, Cory Joseph is more ready to contribute than Vesely. That's how raw he is.

He can't shoot and is completely lost offensively and defensively. He has great size and crazy athleticism, but that's about it.

[Paranoid Pop]

He can't and wouldn't help the Spurs now.

Vesely is a raw project. Just for comparison, Cory Joseph is more ready to contribute than Vesely. That's how raw he is.

He can't shoot and is completely lost offensively and defensively. He has great size and crazy athleticism, but that's about it.

Like Bruno said it's intriguing because he would go from a terrible situation to a perfect fit : a euro friendly team with a winning culture. I think we have enough quality guards this year to take a bet on someone like him, especially when Blair is our fifth big...

[objective]

Hard to make a trade for Vesely during the season I would think. Blair and Neal wouldn't be enough for salary. Don't know if Anderson would be eligible for a trade right at the deadline. And Blair plus Neal and Joseph/Mills might leave the backcourt too thin. Bonner quite frankly would be too valuable during the season to trade for a player who would go straight to the d-league.

In the summer though, Bonner's partial guarantee plus their pick on draft night could be it. His contract becomes fully guaranteed on June 29th, the draft is the 27th. If Grunfeld still has a job he might be reluctant to part with him, but if a new GM is in to clean house Vesely would be a good candidate to just get a pick with.

[Bruno]

He can't and wouldn't help the Spurs now.

Vesely is a raw project. Just for comparison, Cory Joseph is more ready to contribute than Vesely. That's how raw he is.

Disagree.

You might see in Vesely a player that struggles badly while playing for the worst NBA team but I also see a player that played a lot of good games at the Euroleague level.
If Spurs are interested in him, and I'm not saying they are or they should be, it will be because of his Euro resume and not his year with Washington.

[Chinook]

Disagree.

You might see in Vesely a player that struggles badly while playing for the worst NBA team but I also see a player that played a lot of good games at the Euroleague level.
If Spurs are interested in him, and I'm not saying they are or they should be, it will be because of his Euro resume and not his year with Washington.

How do you think he'd fit with the Spurs? I can't find a role for him.

[Bruno]

How do you think he'd fit with the Spurs? I can't find a role for him.

I would play him at the 4 spot, likely as backup with Diaw starting. It certainly will take a little time to have him back at a good level but I think he could end up as a significant upgrade over Blair/Bonner.

[Chinook]

I'd hope the Spurs can get a decent power-forward to play just in case Vesely craps out. Maybe Booker could be included when he gets healthy.

[Russo21]

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=auj5c4d

Wouldn't mind something like that going down. The Bucks are shithouse and would get 2 expiring contracts giving them cap space for the near future.

Spurs get big, real big and defensive instantly, with Dalembert, career 8pt 8reb 2blocks guy and Larry Sanders, another 8pt 8reb 3blocks bigman, and Luc Richard, a long defensive wing. We wouldn't get abused every time Duncan goes to the bench anymore and the big fella would get some much needed help. A big rotation of

Duncan
Dalambert
Sanders
Splitter
And yes, a floor Stretching Bonner

Would be freakin awesome.

The Bucks take back 2 good players they can take off the books or use as trade bait around the deadline. Milwauke are average, but not quite bad enough to get good draft picks, they're kind of a stuck in the middle team so might like shorter contracts to help rebuild.

[Chinook]

That trade would never work. Not only do the Bucks not want to get rid or Sanders (he's the reason why Dalembert is complaining about playing time), but I highly doubt they want anything to do with Jackson after what they went through last year.

The best chance for the Spurs to sneak Dalembert or much more improbably Sanders away is by facilitating a trade that sends Milwaukee a star-level player (Varejao, Gasol).

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=a4ju59g

The Spurs wouldn't do this for Dalembert, because he'd push them over the tax line. But in my opinion, that is how a reasonable trade will the Bucks looks.

For Sanders, it's harder to get a trade that makes the Spurs the best destination for him. This is the best I could come up with:

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=d7k6rvl

The Pacers may not be willing to trade Granger (and maybe not for that price, although a first or two could be tossed in). The Bucks may not want him (although they need a good wing like him), the Pacers or Milwaukee may want Sanders even though they are loaded with bigs already. There are tweaks to this scenario that can be made after the 15th of January, but that's my best attempt at it now.

[Mel_13]

Suns source: Michael Beasley is "toxic," team in tailspin, could lead to major shakeup.

At game in Memphis, Luis Scola and Goran Dragic seen arguing briefly on court. Losing breeding frustration.

https://twitter.com/Powell2daPeople

Makes one wonder if they're anxious enough to part with Beasley that they would package him with Gortat. From the other side, is Gortat good enough to take Beasley as part of the deal?

[elemento]

Best deal for PHX would be dealing Gortat to OKC to get a package around that TOR pick + Lamb/Perry Jones.

I wonder if the Spurs could get Scola for cheap. (have to wait a year though right?) I am sure he would absolutely love to play with Manu.

[Chinook]

A properly handled Beasley would be one of the scariest forwards in the league. He has the size to play the four and the range and athleticism to dominate there on the offensive end. But Beasley is plumb crazy. As far as I know, he's not like Jackson where he is a good guy that just doesn't control himself if he's in a losing situation. He seems to do his fair share of disrupting a team's chemistry by acting selfish.

If Pop could rehabilitate him, Beasley himself would be worth trading for, because the Spurs have never really had someone who can do the things he can. But I don't think Pop's interested in taking care of an 18 Million-dollar baby.

Then there's the matter of what the team would look like if the trade were to happen. I assume it would be a Jack and Splitter for Gortat and Beasley deal. If the Spurs decide not to start Gortat, then the best lineup will be Beasley and Duncan/Diaw and Gortat. If you flip Beasley and Diaw, I don't know if the spacing/passing would be the same. But if you don't start Gortat, then trading Splitter is pointless, and a bench of Beasley and Diaw would get toasted on defense.

I could see San Antonio trying this if they got off to a horrible start and needed a shake-up. Right now, things are working too well to trade away two rotational player mid-season for players with unknown fits. For another team a team that thinks they can handle Beasley, though, this may be a good opportunity.

[Mel_13]

Best deal for PHX would be dealing Gortat to OKC to get a package around that TOR pick + Lamb/Perry Jones.

I wonder if the Spurs could get Scola for cheap. (have to wait a year though right?) I am sure he would absolutely love to play with Manu.

Yeah, Scola can't be traded until July 1st.

[Chinook]

Best deal for PHX would be dealing Gortat to OKC to get a package around that TOR pick + Lamb/Perry Jones.

I wonder if the Spurs could get Scola for cheap. (have to wait a year though right?) I am sure he would absolutely love to play with Manu.

Yes, they do have to wait a year. If OKC offers that deal to the Suns, they'd be crazy not to take it. Absorbing Perkins' salary really isn't too be of a deal for them, and getting young prospects may help them tank more easily. I don't think the Thunder would want that trade, though. They may regret Perkins' contract, but Gortat would add an element that they really don't use as much without Harden there. Also, I don't think the Thunder want any part of Beasley, and Mel_13 is probably right when he said that the Suns may try to move him in any Gortat deal.

[elemento]

I wonder if that rumor (Patterson for Neal + Blair) had some merit. Morey tried to show-case him, he had a few good games but now he got back to earth. Pretty sure they would not mind moving him. (D-Mo and Jones have a higher ceiling and they still have to deal with White's mental issues). They could use Neal, but Blair would probably go to a 3rd team.

For San Antonio the pros would be : His mid-range is absolutely money. If the Spurs want to replicate the Mcdyess role he would be perfect. The good thing is that he could be paired with Duncan or Splitter and the spacing would not be affected. His defense is also pretty good. Man to man and in terms of help defense.

The cons - he is not a great rebounder and his post moves are very basic. The post moves would not be needed much in SA, but his poor rebounding skills would be a problem. Obviously Asik a great rebounder and crash the boards in elite level, but that can't be an excuse to average only 5 boards in 30 minutes.

Anyway, considering his pros and cons I think he would be a good fit. He is ready to contribute right now and SA would have him for cheap (rookie contract) this season and the next.

How do you guys feel about him ? Agree or disagree with the description ?

[Paranoid Pop]

Jackson for Bargnani, I know shoot me if you will. But the Raptors have to be desperate with no draft pick and no cap space, we could even throw Blair and a pick.

We'd have two good centers, and three stretch bigs. Of course getting stuck with his shitty contract might not be worth it plus he's a known softy/defensive liability but I like having a scorer at that position to give us a real alternative to Boris.

Doesn't really make sense to take a bet on someone who is paid that much but that would be intriguing to me.

[Mel_13]

Jackson for Bargnani, I know shoot me if you will. But the Raptors have to be desperate with no draft pick and no cap space, we could even throw Blair and a pick.

We'd have two good centers, and three stretch bigs. Of course getting stuck with his shitty contract might not be worth it plus he's a known softy/defensive liability but I like having a scorer at that position to give us a real alternative to Boris.

Doesn't really make sense to take a bet on someone who is paid that much but that would be intriguing to me.

I'd make the case against Andrea one more time, but you've hit the main points against him.

[Chinook]

I wonder if that rumor (Patterson for Neal + Blair) had some merit. Morey tried to show-case him, he had a few good games but now he got back to earth. Pretty sure they would not mind moving him. (D-Mo and Jones have a higher ceiling and they still have to deal with White's mental issues). They could use Neal, but Blair would probably go to a 3rd team.

For San Antonio the pros would be : His mid-range is absolutely money. If the Spurs want to replicate the Mcdyess role he would be perfect. The good thing is that he could be paired with Duncan or Splitter and the spacing would not be affected. His defense is also pretty good. Man to man and in terms of help defense.

The cons - he is not a great rebounder and his post moves are very basic. The post moves would not be needed much in SA, but his poor rebounding skills would be a problem. Obviously Asik a great rebounder and crash the boards in elite level, but that can't be an excuse to average only 5 boards in 30 minutes.

Anyway, considering his pros and cons I think he would be a good fit. He is ready to contribute right now and SA would have him for cheap (rookie contract) this season and the next.

How do you guys feel about him ? Agree or disagree with the description ?

He'd be an improvement over Blair. But without any other sweeteners, I feel that could be selling low on Neal. I'm skeptical of his defense. To me, a big part of defense is rebounding, and as you said, that's not a strong suit for him. I don't know if he has the range to compensate for his other short comings. It's nice that he can shoot from 15-17 feet, but it would be better if he could go out to the three-point line reliably. I saw him shoot a couple of corner threes last night, but he really wasn't close on either one. ESPN has him at 31 percent, though, so maybe that's just me seeing him on an off night.

I'd like the idea more if it didn't mean trading players to a division rival. I could warm up to it more if it becomes clear the Spurs need a big man and no better option becomes available. But I'd wait until the deadline before I even consider dealing with Houston.

[Mel_13]

It's Hoopsworld, so take it fwiw:

While Varejao has many fans within the Cavaliers organization, multiple league sources believe Cleveland will trade him as the February 21 trade deadline approaches. One league source thinks the Cavs would part ways with Varejao if they were able to add one or two more pieces to their young core that includes Kyrie Irving, Dion Waiters, Tristan Thompson and Tyler Zeller.

http://www.hoopsworld.com/nba-pm-will-cavaliers-trade-anderson-varejao/

If true, then any package from the Spurs would have to include Leonard. I wouldn't be interested in Andy at that price.

[Chinook]

If true, then any package from the Spurs would have to include Leonard. I wouldn't be interested in Andy at that price.

Agreed. Leonard stays.

I think Cleveland may still covet Derrick Williams, who has slimmed down this year in an effort to play the SF spot. The Wolves probably don't want Varejao, but I could see Minny and Cleveland being two players in three- or four-team deal.

The question I have for everyone is this: Which team needs Varejao badly enough to trade for him?

If that team is the Spurs, I think they may be able to get him, if certain criteria are met. It would involve trading Splitter (something of which I am not a fan, mind you), and Minny would have to sell low on Williams, but I think a deal for Varejao could look like this:

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=bdzvjmb

Not the most unrealistic trade in the world, and it could be even more tempting if the Spurs include Green (and either swap Blair for Bonner or take back a point guard from the Wolves) after January 15 and send Neal (or Mills or Joseph) to Cleveland. That's giving up a lot, and I don't think it makes the Spurs better, but I do think Splitter/Williams/Neal (with the possibility of draft picks being tossed in) is a legitimate offer to make for Varejao.

[Mel_13]

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=bdzvjmb

Not the most unrealistic trade in the world, and it could be even more tempting if the Spurs include Green (and either swap Blair for Bonner or take back a point guard from the Wolves) after January 15 and send Neal (or Mills or Joseph) to Cleveland. That's giving up a lot, and I don't think it makes the Spurs better, but I do think Splitter/Williams/Neal (with the possibility of draft picks being tossed in) is a legitimate offer to make for Varejao.

Actually, if Minny would trade Williams for Bonner and Neal, I'd just do that trade and keep Splitter.

[Chinook]

Yep, me too. I was just saying that that's how trading for Varejao would be possible. It's possible Pop would prefer the veteran Varejao over Williams anyway, and he may not like Splitter enough to give him another chance in the playoffs. But my money says if the Spurs like Williams at all, and Minnesota offers him to San Antonio for any combination of the Spurs' backup guards and Bonner or Blair, the Spurs would take that deal and run.

[Mel_13]

Yep, me too. I was just saying that that's how trading for Varejao would be possible. It's possible Pop would prefer the veteran Varejao over Williams anyway, and he may not like Splitter enough to give him another chance in the playoffs. But my money says if the Spurs like Williams at all, and Minnesota offers him to San Antonio for any combination of the Spurs' backup guards and Bonner or Blair, the Spurs would take that deal and run.

I'd hope so. Also, if you're going to trade for Williams, you want to get him as soon as possible so that an informed decision on his 4th year option can be made when October rolls around.

[Chinook]

I'd hope so. Also, if you're going to trade for Williams, you want to get him as soon as possible so that an informed decision on his 4th year option can be made when October rolls around.

Sure, but the Wolves will probably wait as long as they can to try to get the best value they can. Neal and Bonner may be a fair trade, but Minnesota would probably view it as settling. It's a deal they may make at the deadline if they feel Neal (or Green) could make them into a playoff team. Until then, they'll entertain notions of Williams being the headliner to land a superstar.

Also, I think they'll be plenty of time to evaluate Williams. If the Spurs were to trade for him, they'd at least try to play him as part of the regular rotation. Actually, I would assume he'd be starting next to Duncan within a couple of weeks.

[Mel_13]

You're probably right. Williams represents the right mix of risk/reward for the Spurs. I'd love to see them pick him up.

[Chinook]

I just want to see Pop get some elite young talent. He hasn't had that since Parker (maybe Leonard, too, but I'm not sure). It would be great to see Williams, Vesely or Sanders getting tutored by the Big Three. Hell, even Beasley could turn it around if he got some actual leadership in his life, not that I'm suggesting adding that head case or anything.

[Mel_13]

:lol

I'd draw the line at Beasley. I don't believe that what's going on in his head is fixable.

[Chinook]

Haha, yeah, probably.

I just got caught up watching Youtube videos of him from 2010 after you brought him up in the Gortat discussion yesterday. He looked incredible for those first couple of months with Minnesota. I found myself wondering how the Wolves could fail to get it done with all that talent they had. It ended up being a bad situation for everyone there except Love. I don't see how Phoenix is any better for him. You add in Wade being his first mentor and Beasley's instability, and I don't see how it was ever going to work out for him.

[Bruno]

^Agree, I don't think Beasley can be saved.

Williams' biggest issue is that he wanted to play SF and Minny also wanted him to do that transition. For the little I've watched from him, it's clear that Williams should play PF. That's the spot where he could eb a special player with his athleticism and skills.

The deciding factor of a trade with Williams could be the situation around Roy. If he is able to come back, Minny won't really need a SG. If he retires, they will need one and they will also free a roster spot to do a 1 for 2 trade without needing to waive a player.

[TD 21]

I wonder if that rumor (Patterson for Neal + Blair) had some merit. Morey tried to show-case him, he had a few good games but now he got back to earth. Pretty sure they would not mind moving him. (D-Mo and Jones have a higher ceiling and they still have to deal with White's mental issues). They could use Neal, but Blair would probably go to a 3rd team.

For San Antonio the pros would be : His mid-range is absolutely money. If the Spurs want to replicate the Mcdyess role he would be perfect. The good thing is that he could be paired with Duncan or Splitter and the spacing would not be affected. His defense is also pretty good. Man to man and in terms of help defense.

The cons - he is not a great rebounder and his post moves are very basic. The post moves would not be needed much in SA, but his poor rebounding skills would be a problem. Obviously Asik a great rebounder and crash the boards in elite level, but that can't be an excuse to average only 5 boards in 30 minutes.

Anyway, considering his pros and cons I think he would be a good fit. He is ready to contribute right now and SA would have him for cheap (rookie contract) this season and the next.

How do you guys feel about him ? Agree or disagree with the description ?

I don't see the Spurs giving up Blair and Neal for Patterson (I do think the Rockets would probably do this though). I agree that he'd be a better fit than Blair, but if they're going to part with Neal, it's got to be for a surefire starting PF or at least someone with the potential to be in the near future. Patterson has got third big written all over him.

If the Spurs want to replicate the McDyess role, they can just sign the real McDyess. Yes, he's old and hasn't played in over a year and a half, but it doesn't make sense to give up Neal for a guy to play the McDyess role when they can sign the real thing.


http://ca.sports.yahoo.com/news/nba--kevin-love-remains-unsure-about-timberwolves--future-200009299.html;_ylt=A2KLJcVG_sdQaWcAKgLqbwM6;_ylu= X3oDMTN1M3VoOWdlBG1pdANGRUFUVVJFRCBNZWdhdHJvbiBOQk EEcGtnA2RkNTk5NjM2LThiZDctMzgzZi04Y2Y2LTA0NGFlZTBm MDVkYQRwb3MDMQRzZWMDbWVnYXRyb24EdmVyAzIwZTZiNDgzLT QzZGQtMTFlMi1iYWZiLWY3YjFmNDFmOGVlZg--;_ylg=X3oDMTFoZGZwdmhsBGludGwDY2EEbGFuZwNlbi1jYQRw c3RhaWQDBHBzdGNhdANuYmEEcHQDc2VjdGlvbnM-;_ylv=3

And Derrick Williams – the No. 2 overall pick – will be getting one DNP after another on the Wolves' bench until Kahn finally trades him for next to nothing in the near future.


Sounds more like prediction than rumor, but who knows? I'm not particularly high on Williams and think he probably ends up as a Harrington type off the bench, but if they'd accept Neal/Bonner, it'd be difficult to say no.

[Bruno]

There is today in the E-N an article about whether or not Spurs will keep James Anderson:
http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/spurs/article/Spurs-notebook-Anderson-s-status-depends-on-4109943.php

This Pop quote is noteworthy because of its consequences:

But, it's also a business, so you've got to look at the money end of it, taxes and how close we are, because we're not going to pay (luxury) tax. We're not going to do that


First, whenever looking at trade scenarios, look also if the trade keep Spurs below the tax because it seems to be a strict constraint.

Second, even if Spurs keep Anderson, Spurs will still be $406K below the tax. That's a comfortable margin even when you factor that Spurs payroll might rise a little because of unlikely bonuses. What is really behind that quote is that Spurs want to keep a financial margin for a potential future trade. Spurs haven't set their mind on standing pat which is a very good news to me. Despite their great record, Spurs remain weak at the PF slot.

[elemento]

I don't see the Spurs giving up Blair and Neal for Patterson (I do think the Rockets would probably do this though). I agree that he'd be a better fit than Blair, but if they're going to part with Neal, it's got to be for a surefire starting PF or at least someone with the potential to be in the near future. Patterson has got third big written all over him.

If the Spurs want to replicate the McDyess role, they can just sign the real McDyess. Yes, he's old and hasn't played in over a year and a half, but it doesn't make sense to give up Neal for a guy to play the McDyess role when they can sign the real thing.


http://ca.sports.yahoo.com/news/nba--kevin-love-remains-unsure-about-timberwolves--future-200009299.html;_ylt=A2KLJcVG_sdQaWcAKgLqbwM6;_ylu= X3oDMTN1M3VoOWdlBG1pdANGRUFUVVJFRCBNZWdhdHJvbiBOQk EEcGtnA2RkNTk5NjM2LThiZDctMzgzZi04Y2Y2LTA0NGFlZTBm MDVkYQRwb3MDMQRzZWMDbWVnYXRyb24EdmVyAzIwZTZiNDgzLT QzZGQtMTFlMi1iYWZiLWY3YjFmNDFmOGVlZg--;_ylg=X3oDMTFoZGZwdmhsBGludGwDY2EEbGFuZwNlbi1jYQRw c3RhaWQDBHBzdGNhdANuYmEEcHQDc2VjdGlvbnM-;_ylv=3

And Derrick Williams – the No. 2 overall pick – will be getting one DNP after another on the Wolves' bench until Kahn finally trades him for next to nothing in the near future.


Sounds more like prediction than rumor, but who knows? I'm not particularly high on Williams and think he probably ends up as a Harrington type off the bench, but if they'd accept Neal/Bonner, it'd be difficult to say no.

I disagree. I think the Spurs FO would do it (Blair + Neal for Patterson). Blair is gone and I don't think they give a damn about him anymore and even though Neal is a good backup guard, SA can live without him with Manu and Green.
I am not against bringing Dice again, but the difference between Dice and Patterson are 15 years of age. Dice would be good to give SA 10-15 minutes a night off the bench. Patterson could play way more and he could start with Duncan if Pop feels that the Diaw/Splitter is the best way to improve the front-court bench. They're simple awesome as a combo.

I am not against Williams either and I would pull the trigger in both cases, but so far Derrick Williams has showed way less than Patterson. And he can't complain that he didn't have the chance, because Love was hurt and he was still playing bad. I think Williams would end up as a stretch BIG in SA and i would be fine with it.

[TD 21]

I disagree. I think the Spurs FO would do it (Blair + Neal for Patterson). Blair is gone and I don't think they give a damn about him anymore and even though Neal is a good backup guard, SA can live without him with Manu and Green.
I am not against bringing Dice again, but the difference between Dice and Patterson are 15 years of age. Dice would be good to give SA 10-15 minutes a night off the bench. Patterson could play way more and he could start with Duncan if Pop feels that the Diaw/Splitter is the best way to improve the front-court bench. They're simple awesome as a combo.

I am not against Williams either and I would pull the trigger in both cases, but so far Derrick Williams has showed way less than Patterson. And he can't complain that he didn't have the chance, because Love was hurt and he was still playing bad. I think Williams would end up as a stretch BIG in SA and i would be fine with it.

Maybe they would; who knows? All summer, I thought they could "live without him (Neal)" too, but I'm not so sure anymore. For as much scoring depth as this team has, if they trade him, who's the fourth option? Who's the guy who helps shoulder the load when one of the big three is injured or when two of them are having an off night? If half of those wins turn into losses, that's the difference between being a 1 seed and a 4 seed and still having a chance to win a playoff game beyond the 1st round or having virtually no chance. Trading Neal puts the onus squarely on Ginobili to stay healthy and score consistently or on Leonard to show that he can create/score consistently.

Ideally, you'd like more, but all they need is 10-15 mpg off the bench. Between Duncan, Diaw, Splitter and small ball, they don't need McDyess to reprise his previous role. In a vacuum, I'd prefer Patterson over Blair/McDyess; I'm just not sure he upgrades them enough at PF to risk weakening them in another area.

I disagree. The gap between Patterson and Williams isn't vast and Williams obviously has the higher upside.

[Paranoid Pop]

Tim Tiago
Vesely Diaw
SJax Manu
KY De Colo
TP Neal

We have to start our best defenders SJax and KY imo, Green is holding us back in a way imo.

[ace3g]

^Agree, I don't think Beasley can be saved.

Williams' biggest issue is that he wanted to play SF and Minny also wanted him to do that transition. For the little I've watched from him, it's clear that Williams should play PF. That's the spot where he could eb a special player with his athleticism and skills.

The deciding factor of a trade with Williams could be the situation around Roy. If he is able to come back, Minny won't really need a SG. If he retires, they will need one and they will also free a roster spot to do a 1 for 2 trade without needing to waive a player.

Zach Lowe ‏@ZachLowe_NBA (https://twitter.com/ZachLowe_NBA) Hmm. RT @Twolves_PR (https://twitter.com/Twolves_PR): Brandon Roy will address the media today after practice. Availability scheduled for 12:45 p.m. on the main court.

Timberwolves PR ‏@Twolves_PR (https://twitter.com/Twolves_PR)
Just a general availability session. Hasn't talked since his surgery. @talkhoops (https://twitter.com/talkhoops) Ruh roh. Wonder what that means for Roy.

--

Doesn't look like a retirement speech according the Wolves PR, but should get some answers how the surgery went and how he feels.

[ace3g]

NBA's top trade candidates

Most NBA players who signed contracts during the past offseason become eligible on Saturday to be traded. What that means: With a much larger pool of players available for deals, NBA general managers will start spending a lot more time on the phone in the coming weeks. "It's about to heat up on Dec. 15," one Eastern Conference general manager said. "Conversations are definitely happening because once Dec. 15 comes, the pool increases.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/nba--nba-s-top-trade-candidates-000418190.html

[Bruno]

It would be so much better for Spurs to do a trade now rather than one at the trade deadline because it will give them enough time to work with the new player(s) before the playoffs.

I do hope Spurs are among active teams on the phones.

[ace3g]

It would be so much better for Spurs to do a trade now rather than one at the trade deadline because it will give them enough time to work with the new player(s) before the playoffs.

I do hope Spurs are among active teams on the phones.

Especially since the chances of acquiring a player with knowledge of the Spurs system is less likely (Diaw and SJAX).

Derrick Williams is more attractive now because not only can he be a mobile 4, knock on wood, but if Kawhi or SJAX got injured again, he would help in our SF depth as well.

[elemento]

Zach Lowe ‏@ZachLowe_NBA (https://twitter.com/ZachLowe_NBA) Hmm. RT @Twolves_PR (https://twitter.com/Twolves_PR): Brandon Roy will address the media today after practice. Availability scheduled for 12:45 p.m. on the main court.

Timberwolves PR ‏@Twolves_PR (https://twitter.com/Twolves_PR)
Just a general availability session. Hasn't talked since his surgery. @talkhoops (https://twitter.com/talkhoops) Ruh roh. Wonder what that means for Roy.

--

Doesn't look like a retirement speech according the Wolves PR, but should get some answers how the surgery went and how he feels.

The other SG they have, Malcom Lee, has huge knee problems as well :

Joan Niesen ‏@JoanNiesen
Malcolm Lee with chrondal injury to right knee. Left Wednesday night's game with knee pain. Out indefinitely.

2m Jerry Zgoda ‏@JerryZgoda
Lee has had knee issues, of course. Chrondal condition is degenerative, involving cartilage damage

Still think they could make a move for a SG. Going small with Ridnour is not helping Minny at all. Austin Rivers just had a career high with 27 points against Minny's small back-court.

[Paranoid Pop]

Trade machine says that Green can't be moved before January 15th. A package of Green + Blair seems easy to trade salary wise, not sure it's would get enough interest to get what we need. If we do trade Neal, who serves as a filler? Blair+someone? or Bonbon? I think Bonbon is ok as a fifth big...

Vesely is my first choice, value can't get any lower he's playing like an absolute scrub, he's shooting something like 0.100 at the FT line but I see the potential somehow, it's might bit of a longshot and too much of a project for the FO but it's the most exciting target to me.

Williams was put in a way better situation to succeed than Vesely and failed but he's showing way more at this point, so that's a lower risk lower reward option and that means there's probably way more chances it actually happens.

Neal could work straight up for someone like Brandan Wright but the thought of Gary dropping bombs on us in a Dallas uniform is nightmarish, I wouldn't trade him in the west bar none tbh... One of our other back up PG + pick for Wright could be good but I doubt Dallas would care for any of our scrubs, well I can't come up with a trade that makes sense but I'd like to have him if the price was reasonable...

[raybies]

Stephen Jackson and Gary Neal for Luke ridnour and Derrick Williams.
Saves spurs two million, gets that back up point we sorely need. , gives us a 3-4 player that we can teach defense and give time with his offense. Doesn't tie our money up past 2015.
Minny gets vets and salary cap relief.

Maybe Derrick and kawhi building blocks with Cory.

What do u think?

[TD 21]

I don't think whether Roy returns or not will be an impediment to a deal, nor the Wolves lacking a roster spot to make a two for one trade. In the case of the former, Budinger is out long term and Howard is a fringe player at this point, so they could play Shved/Neal at SG and Kirilenko/Roy at SF. Given Roy's declining athleticism and mobility, that might be his best position defensively now anyway. In the case of the latter, even before his latest injury setback, Lee was an easy and obvious cut.

Really, I think it just comes down to whether they see Neal/Bonner as sufficient value. I was skeptical at first, but now I'm thinking they might, for two reasons . . .

http://ca.sports.yahoo.com/news/nba--nba-s-top-trade-candidates-000418190.html

"They will move him in a heartbeat if they could," one rival team executive said. "I don't think the coaches are that high on him. You have to get something for him now because the longer he sits, the more people think he can't play."


1. This is the second time in less than a week that it's been inferred that he could be had for relatively little.

2. They're last in 3-point shooting (at a putrid 30%).

[szkorhetz]

I don't think whether Roy returns or not will be an impediment to a deal, nor the Wolves lacking a roster spot to make a two for one trade. In the case of the former, Budinger is out long term and Howard is a fringe player at this point, so they could play Shved/Neal at SG and Kirilenko/Roy at SF. Given Roy's declining athleticism and mobility, that might be his best position defensively now anyway. In the case of the latter, even before his latest injury setback, Lee was an easy and obvious cut.

Really, I think it just comes down to whether they see Neal/Bonner as sufficient value. I was skeptical at first, but now I'm thinking they might, for two reasons . . .

http://ca.sports.yahoo.com/news/nba--nba-s-top-trade-candidates-000418190.html

"They will move him in a heartbeat if they could," one rival team executive said. "I don't think the coaches are that high on him. You have to get something for him now because the longer he sits, the more people think he can't play."


1. This is the second time in less than a week that it's been inferred that he could be had for relatively little.

2. They're last in 3-point shooting (at a putrid 30%).
I would hate to give up Neal, but getting rid of Bonner and the acquisition of somebody really, really athletic could really make this a good deal for both teams.
He won't defend Gasol or Ibaka well, but come on, he could do a decent job on LeBron in the Finals. :flag:
Do it, Pop.

With Rubio back, Derrick is +22, 12 point, five boards in 12 minutes...

[ace3g]

Well I guess it is no coincidence that immediately with the return of Rubio, Derrick Williams has one of his best games of the season. It would bode well that he does well with creative passers, something the Spurs have a plethora of.

[MaNu4Tres]

Well I guess it is no coincidence that immediately with the return of Rubio, Derrick Williams has one of his best games of the season. It would bode well that he does well with creative passers, something the Spurs have a plethora of.

It probably is coincidence, tbh. One game, small sample ... relax. Derrick Williams, a talented player athletically, won't all of a sudden become the Larry Bird of fundamentals with the addition of Rubio. He is who he is-- an athletic freak-- who is not only fundamentally challenged, but he can't shoot either. Rubio won't change that. The only thing that will change is maybe more cherry picking/transition opportunities if Rubio is the recipient of long/crisp outlet passes after fast/long rebounds (that is if Williams leaks out; that is if Williams gets significant minutes with Rubio; which won't happen with Kirlenko playing great ball). Once you consider all the stars that need to be lined-up, it's obvious Rubio won't make a significant impact on Williams production.

In the half-court, Rubio's creativity may make a small beneficial bump in DW's offensive production, but it won't be significant or anything substancial. To explain, in high pick and roll scenarios w/Rubio--there could be more back door/back-cut opportunities from the corner in particular. But those opportunities won't be significant enough to turn the tables in regards of his production to the T'Wolves or hypothetically the Spurs.

Williams is who he is. Justifying the Spurs should be interested in him by saying Spurs have the play-makers to make the most of his athletic ability is pretty naive. There's a reason why strictly athletic players like Jefferson, Pops Mensa, and James White didn't stick with the Spurs (even if they did have the play-makers).

[Mel_13]

Well I guess it is no coincidence that immediately with the return of Rubio, Derrick Williams has one of his best games of the season. It would bode well that he does well with creative passers, something the Spurs have a plethora of.


It probably is coincidence, tbh. One game, small sample ... relax. Derrick Williams, a talented player athletically, won't all of a sudden become the Larry Bird of fundamentals with the addition of Rubio. He is who he is-- an athletic freak-- who is not only fundamentally challenged, but he can't shoot either. Rubio won't change that. The only thing that will change is maybe more cherry picking/transition opportunities if Rubio is the recipient of long/crisp outlet passes after fast/long rebounds (that is if Williams leaks out; that is if Williams gets significant minutes with Rubio; which won't happen with Kirlenko playing great ball). Once you consider all the stars that need to be lined-up, it's obvious Rubio won't make a significant impact on Williams production.

Love didn't play last night and Williams only got 19 minutes in an overtime game. Still no minutes for Williams when Love and AK47 are both healthy.

[Paranoid Pop]

Ed Davis is playing so well for the Raptors... Too bad we don't have the assets to trade for Bargnani because they have to be thinking about trading him at this point.

[Paranoid Pop]

I would like a scoring pf with some range tbh, Boris is so passive that I feel we need a chuker like Bustnani or Teletovic, the latter being probably much easier to get.

[Russo21]

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=bznpspy

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=aga4a2f

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=bu5f9aj

Wouldn't mind for something like them to go down before the deadline

[Bruno]

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=bznpspy

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=aga4a2f

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=bu5f9aj

Wouldn't mind for something like them to go down before the deadline

When posting links to espn trade machine, add at least what the trade is, instead of forcing people to click on links.

[Chinook]

Can we please get a "Hopefully This is a Joke Trade" thread made so that we don't have to be inundated with all these terrible scenarios? Why do people keep thinking teams want to trade their young talented players for whatever crap Spurs have lying around on their bench?

[Chinook]

When posting links to espn trade machine, add at least what the trade is, instead of forcing people to click on links.

The trade machine is seriously the worst thing ESPN has put out. It causes so many people to suggest crap just because that app says it's possible.

[Paranoid Pop]

Tiago starting may mean they will need a back up center more than a PF.

[LittleCriminal]

D. Blair, C. Joseph, Draft Pick(s) for L. Sanders???

Maybe even throw in M. Daniels??

Good or Bad Idea??
http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=caey6l3

[szkorhetz]

D. Blair, C. Joseph, Draft Pick(s) & Trade Exception for L. Sanders???

Maybe even throw in M. Daniels??

Good or Bad Idea??
http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=caey6l3
I'd do it, but I doubt Bucks would do. He is a very good defensive prosperct and he actually plays.
What about Randolph? He doesn't play much in Denver, he is very mobile, good shoot blocker/rebounder.

[Chinook]

D. Blair, C. Joseph, Draft Pick(s) & Trade Exception for L. Sanders???

Maybe even throw in M. Daniels??

Good or Bad Idea??
http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=caey6l3


No.

1) That trade's impossible. You can't combine trade exceptions with anything.

2) You don't even need to add the TE for the salaries to work

3) There are ways to "trade" their exception to the Bucks. It requires the Spurs to absorb a player like Daniels into their TE, which would give the Bucks a TE. But that wouldn't happen, because the Bucks probably don't want to just get rid of a player, and there's little incentive to get a minimum-level TE, because you can just trade for a minimum contract any time you want to, anyway.

Please, people, don't just suggest any trade that pops into your mind. Check to see that it's actually possible, first off. But more importantly, think if the other team would really want to do it. If it involves only players you want taken out of the rotation in exchange for someone you really want to put into the rotation, it's probably going to be a bad trade idea.

EDIT: 4) The Bucks aren't going to trade Sanders for anyone outside of Leonard or maybe Spiltter. If they really like Neal, he may be able to go with Blair and a 1st, but that isn't likely with Ellis and Jennings both being FAs along with Neal in the summer. Honestly, Dalembert is probably easier for the Spurs to get than Sanders, and that's accounting for the salary difference.

[Chinook]

Bruno it may be worthwhile to put a link to the CBA FAQ in the OP. Maybe that would encourage people to look some of this stuff up instead of consistently proposing impossible trades ideas.

[Paranoid Pop]

Any player beasting on a small contract has no chance to be moved. We have to look at players who don't perform up to their contract.

I think it basically comes down to a lottery bust for one of our SG or a veteran on bad contract for Sjax's expiring contract. I'd do Green for Vesely in a heartbeat but I'm not even sure th wiz would do it, they have worse contracts and don't really need a SG. But you can't tell me it wouldn't be intriguing to play in our second unit with Boris and De Colo who play euro ball basically.

[TheCerebral1]

Now would be a great time to grab a guard like Josh Selby, who's being sent down to Reno. A bigger up tempo youngster still on his rookie deal. Definitely Selby > Joseph.

[Bruno]

Bruno it may be worthwhile to put a link to the CBA FAQ in the OP. Maybe that would encourage people to look some of this stuff up instead of consistently proposing impossible trades ideas.

Good idea. Done

[MR-Clutch]

Pretty good article on the trade market here: http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-triangle/post/_/id/45346/trade-season-more-potential-names-on-the-nba-market

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=bthe7z3

If Tiago is going to be starting, this trade would give us a serviceable 3rd string center in case one of them runs into foul trouble. The problem here is that were placing a lot of hope in Diaw getting better then he has played so far. I haven't seen a lot of Mozgov so I'm unsure of what his percieved value/ceiling are, but from what Ive see he seems pretty athletic and could be solid defensive presence for us.

The article also talks about the grizzlies possibly needing to trade Arthur to get under the salary cap. I always like him and think he would bring a lot to the table, but who knows what the asking price would be. He isn't eligible to be traded until January 15th, but maybe a package Neal, Blair, and Mills could get the job done. This would significantly weaken our depth, and might actually make the grizzlies better then they are now, but I think Arthur would fit very well into the spurs system. I think our team would still look very good on paper.

Parker/De Colo/ Joseph
Green/Ginobili/Anderson
Leonard/Sjax
Diaw/Arthur/Bonner
Duncan/Splitter

[Mel_13]

The article also talks about the grizzlies possibly needing to trade Arthur to get under the salary cap. I always like him and think he would bring a lot to the table, but who knows what the asking price would be. He isn't eligible to be traded until January 15th, but maybe a package Neal, Blair, and Mills could get the job done. This would significantly weaken our depth, and might actually make the grizzlies better then they are now, but I think Arthur would fit very well into the spurs system. I think our team would still look very good on paper.

If the Grizzlies are motivated to trade Arthur to get under the tax threshold, then they would have no interest in a trade that bring back similar salary in return. They would need a trade partner with enough cap space or a large enough trade exception to absorb Arthur's contract. The Spurs have neither.

[MR-Clutch]

Damn you're right. My bad.

[LittleCriminal]

I'd do it, but I doubt Bucks would do. He is a very good defensive prosperct and he actually plays.
What about Randolph? He doesn't play much in Denver, he is very mobile, good shoot blocker/rebounder.

Good Call!!! I'd take Randolph as well.. at this point I'd hope the Spurs are looking into doing something to obtain a starting/backup 6"10 or taller Center or Power Foward... I think Blair needs to go.
Cheers Mate!

[ace3g]

Basketball (http://sulia.com/channel/basketball)
Sam Amico (http://sulia.com/samamicofso/)


Magic are said to be exploring idea of trading JJ Redick. Some other names NBA GMs have mentioned as trade chips
(potentially, anyway) as the wheeling-and-dealing season gets underway with the passing of Dec. 15 -- which is when players who signed contracts over the summer are eligible to traded.

Let's take a look, with contract expiration year in parentheses:

* J.J. Redick, SG, Magic (2013)

* Josh Smith, PF, Hawks (2013)

* Devin Harris, PG, Hawks (2013)

* MarShon Brooks, SG, Nets (2014)

* Gerald Henderson, SG/SF, Bobcats (2014)

* Anderson Varejao, PF/C, Cavaliers (2014)

* Anderson Varejao, PF/C, Cavaliers (2014)

* Daniel Gibson, G, Cavaliers (2013)

* Shawn Marion, F, Mavericks (2014)

* Corey Brewer, SG/SF, Nuggets (2013)

* Anthony Randolph, PF, Nuggets (2015)

* Charlie Villanueva, PF, Pistons (2014)

* Al Jefferson, C/PF, Jazz (2013)

* Paul Millsap, F, Jazz (2013)

* Alec Burks, SG, Jazz (2014)

* Derrick Williams, F, Timberwolves (2014)

* Eric Bledsoe, PG, Clippers (2014)

* Ersan Ilyasova, PF, Bucks (2016)

* Patrick Patterson, PF, Rockets (2014)

* Jose Calderon, PG, Raptors (2013)

http://sulia.com/channel/basketball/f/ecc7e73a-af6c-471c-9248-1ea669f0fe24/?source=twitter

[objective]

David Aldridge:
(http://www.nba.com/2012/news/features/david_aldridge/12/17/morning-tip-lakers-and-kobe-bryant-still-trying-to-find-rhythm/index.html)

The Wizards are in desperate need of a point guard until John Wall comes back and are willing to move one of their bigs for a veteran point, league sources say. But will there be much interest in the likes of Trevor Booker (who hasn't played in three weeks since suffering a knee injury)? With the worst record in the league at the quarter pole, Washington is not at all interested in dealing its 2013, first-round and likely top-three pick.

Mills for Booker could be useful. Mills doesn't have a place on this team if he can't claim the back-up point duties, and Joseph has improved. He could start and put numbers on that trash team until/if Wall gets back this season.

Booker's undersized, hurt, and nothing special. But he's a body.

[ColinB]

I'll take two Anderson Varejaos please.

[ABC]

I'll take two Anderson Varejaos please.
:lol

[LittleCriminal]

No.

1) That trade's impossible. You can't combine trade exceptions with anything.

2) You don't even need to add the TE for the salaries to work

3) There are ways to "trade" their exception to the Bucks. It requires the Spurs to absorb a player like Daniels into their TE, which would give the Bucks a TE. But that wouldn't happen, because the Bucks probably don't want to just get rid of a player, and there's little incentive to get a minimum-level TE, because you can just trade for a minimum contract any time you want to, anyway.

Please, people, don't just suggest any trade that pops into your mind. Check to see that it's actually possible, first off. But more importantly, think if the other team would really want to do it. If it involves only players you want taken out of the rotation in exchange for someone you really want to put into the rotation, it's probably going to be a bad trade idea.

EDIT: 4) The Bucks aren't going to trade Sanders for anyone outside of Leonard or maybe Spiltter. If they really like Neal, he may be able to go with Blair and a 1st, but that isn't likely with Ellis and Jennings both being FAs along with Neal in the summer. Honestly, Dalembert is probably easier for the Spurs to get than Sanders, and that's accounting for the salary difference.

1. No trade is Impossible (Jefferson for Jackson)
2. I did not have to add the TE but I did, so what? With or without it the trade still works.
3. I did add M. Daniels. So What? With or WithOut him the trade still works.

Wanna see Your Impossible Trade Idea Again:
D. Granger, T. Hansbrough for B. Udric+Bench Players

Edit: 4) The Pacers aren't going to Trade away Granger and Hansbrough for B. Udric+Bench Players. Practice what you Preach!! (Reread Shit Quote In Original Post Above)

Btw Granger is out Probably till March... Can you trade an Injured player after or before the trade deadline?? lol
NBA Trade Deadline 2013 is at 2:00 PM (CT) on Thursday February 21.
Looks like you need to catch up on some reading!!!

"Bruno (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=2449) it may be worthwhile to put a link to the CBA FAQ in the OP. Maybe that would encourage people to look some of this stuff up instead of consistently proposing impossible trades ideas."--- I'll admit it's a good Idea to do what you asked of Bruno..If a Poster wants to get into the details of the CBA, good for them, but I am not going to read the CBA Link just to post a trade Idea....waste of time/life.

Myself as well as many others ( I Hope) find the NBA purely as a form of entertainment in our lives. All I care about is the Class of the Spurs Organization, 95% of the current roster, watching the games and Winning.

I don't need to understand the entire CBA due to the fact you,myself and many other Spurstalk Posters do not have the Authority to use said Knowledge In the actual NBA. People like you use this Info to bitch about Trade Ideas in an Online Trade Idea Forum.

Understand that you have no clue as to what any NBA organization is going to do just like the rest of us.
Quit acting like you know what team would do what.... you don't!

[Bruno]

If Spurs still believe in his upside, Blair for Anthony Randolph would be a nice little trade.

[objective]

The guy I would target is Emeka Okafor. It would be a gamble similar to what Dallas did back in 10 with Tyson Chandler. He has a high bbiq, he is a good rebounder and shot-blocker. Not the best situation for him in Washington and i think a guy like him would flourish in SA's system.

It's pretty clear that the Ariza/Okafor experiment was a major failure for Washington. At this point, Washignton would gladly move them for expirings. Perfect target to move BonBon. SA would have to use Jackson's expiring though.

I was just thinking about Okafor after considering Booker considering Aldridge's Wizards speculation about them considering moving a big man.

Okafor is not having a good year. Only 21.6 minutes a game, he hasn't even started every game he's played. Shooting 45% from the field. Just really being a garbage player for the Wizards.

But it's hard to tell what the Wizards might do when their GM is such a moron with bulletproof job security. He traded for Okafor and Ariza's terrible deals, when he could have had tons of cap space instead after buying out Lewis and later amnestying Blatche. So maybe Grunfeld thinks Okafor is better than Duncan, it's hard to say with a buffoon like him.

But, thinking it over I don't even think myself it's worth junking Jackson to get Okafor. He's 6-10, he does block some shots, but he's also so . . . unremarkably average at basketball. If he's not good enough at this point in his career to even play 25 minutes a night when there's not a lot of other healthy, good big men, that's pretty shameful. If he was playing for the Grizzlies, I'd understand. But the Wizards?

The other consideration is that his contract runs into next year and might mean no re-signing of Splitter due to Okafor getting 14.5 million. And after getting bought out Jackson would just go to some team like the Lakers and screw the Spurs.

[Spursfanfromafar]

If Spurs still believe in his upside, Blair for Anthony Randolph would be a nice little trade.

I would prefer someone like Gustavo Ayon who seems more attuned to be a role player than Randolph, who I suppose has been a flop everywhere he has gone, his so called potential notwithstanding.

[LittleCriminal]

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1414188-5-rudy-gay-trade-offers-the-memphis-grizzlies-would-listen-to/page/5

Would you trade Leonard,Jackson and Splitter for Rudy Gay??
I would not.

[Paranoid Pop]

Moving Splitter seems like a not so bad idea again now that he proved completely inefficient vs Ibaka :

Tiago to Boston
Bradley and Bargnani to SA
Melo Sullinger and Sjax's expiring to Toronto (+pick eventually)

We get the best perimeter defense duo in the league with KY/Bradley and true spacing vs OKC who can just protect the paint too easily right now.
Boston get the perfect fit to play with KG and Rondo
Toronto get two young prospect, a pick and a lot of cap space

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=cp3llmr

Boston probably says no since it takes away all their youth for a one year rental of Tiago but they may get desperate enough...

Then I'd do Green for a backup big, Vesely or Williams or anyone.

[Bruno]

I would prefer someone like Gustavo Ayon who seems more attuned to be a role player than Randolph, who I suppose has been a flop everywhere he has gone, his so called potential notwithstanding.

Yep, Spurs could very well put Randolph in the bust category.


More globally, it's noteworthy that Splitter starting with Tim and playing an expanded role has changed what Spurs need. Earlier this season, it was clear Spurs needed a quality PF. With Splitter being now more than Tim's backup, Spurs seems to have fine 3 men PF/C rotation of Duncan/Splitter/Diaw. It could change in the future especially if Diaw continue to play at that poor level.

The need for Spurs to do a significant trade is way lower with the new rotation decided by Pop. A 3rd string center would be welcomed but Spurs could get one through free agency or a minor trade. I would too keep an eye on how Blair will react at being buried at the end of the bench.

[Paranoid Pop]

Yep, Spurs could very well put Randolph in the bust category.


More globally, it's noteworthy that Splitter starting with Tim and playing an expanded role has changed what Spurs need. Earlier this season, it was clear Spurs needed a quality PF. With Splitter being now more than Tim's backup, Spurs seems to have fine 3 men PF/C rotation of Duncan/Splitter/Diaw. It could change in the future especially if Diaw continue to play at that poor level.

The need for Spurs to do a significant trade is way lower with the new rotation decided by Pop. A 3rd string center would be welcomed but Spurs could get one through free agency or a minor trade. I would too keep an eye on how Blair will react at being buried at the end of the bench.

Yeah they may instead put a secondary playmaker next to TP to make the twin twoer experiment work better before deciding anything...

[Bruno]

Yeah they may instead put a secondary playmaker next to TP to make the twin twoer experiment work better before deciding anything...

Well, the Splitter/Duncan pair +/- is +34 in 127mins which is very good. Even considering that it didn't work that well against OKC, early hints have shown that pairing Duncan with Splitter was a good move.

[Spursfanfromafar]

Yep, Spurs could very well put Randolph in the bust category.

The need for Spurs to do a significant trade is way lower with the new rotation decided by Pop. A 3rd string center would be welcomed but Spurs could get one through free agency or a minor trade. I would too keep an eye on how Blair will react at being buried at the end of the bench.

Yes, a defensive PF is not so much an imperative now since Splitter's emergence as Duncan's co-starter. But I think that Blair seems to have exhausted his effectiveness and Diaw, with his abilities, does seem limited. And maybe all the questions asked of the Spurs in last few years' post-season will be repeated again. Just so that the Spurs' main players remain fresher for the post-season and are without too much wear and tear, I think they should consider getting a replacement for Blair/Bonner. Diaw adds a rarer dimension as a stretch-big/passing big/ competent post defender and is therefore more surer than Blair/ Bonner now.

[Chinook]

1. No trade is Impossible (Jefferson for Jackson)
2. I did not have to add the TE but I did, so what? With or without it the trade still works.
3. I did add M. Daniels. So What? With or WithOut him the trade still works.

Wanna see Your Impossible Trade Idea Again:
D. Granger, T. Hansbrough for B. Udric+Bench Players

Edit: 4) The Pacers aren't going to Trade away Granger and Hansbrough for B. Udric+Bench Players. Practice what you Preach!! (Reread Shit Quote In Original Post Above)

Btw Granger is out Probably till March... Can you trade an Injured player after or before the trade deadline?? lol
NBA Trade Deadline 2013 is at 2:00 PM (CT) on Thursday February 21.
Looks like you need to catch up on some reading!!!

"Bruno (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=2449) it may be worthwhile to put a link to the CBA FAQ in the OP. Maybe that would encourage people to look some of this stuff up instead of consistently proposing impossible trades ideas."--- I'll admit it's a good Idea to do what you asked of Bruno..If a Poster wants to get into the details of the CBA, good for them, but I am not going to read the CBA Link just to post a trade Idea....waste of time/life.

Myself as well as many others ( I Hope) find the NBA purely as a form of entertainment in our lives. All I care about is the Class of the Spurs Organization, 95% of the current roster, watching the games and Winning.

I don't need to understand the entire CBA due to the fact you,myself and many other Spurstalk Posters do not have the Authority to use said Knowledge In the actual NBA. People like you use this Info to bitch about Trade Ideas in an Online Trade Idea Forum.

Understand that you have no clue as to what any NBA organization is going to do just like the rest of us.
Quit acting like you know what team would do what.... you don't!



1 Yes, that trade is impossible. You CAN'T trade a TE with anything else. It's against the rules you don't care to understand. That's why you should look them up instead of acting like Jefferson for Jackson (completely legal) is a legitimate retort.

2 See the first point. It does NOT work.

3 No, you did not add Daniels until after I said that you could if you wanted to give the Bucks a TE. A trade of Joseph and Blair for Sanders is possible without adding Daniels (as in, it's legal). But as I said in that point, it's a waste of time (like doesn't give them anymore flexibility) to add Daniels unless the Bucks just want to get rid of him.

I couldn't care less about how you view the forum. You ask what people think about an idea, and I respond telling you it's impossible (as in illegal according to the CBA). That's not a minor little thing we should all just overlook because you're too lazy to remember the three or four rules you need to know in order to propose trades that could actually happen. I wasn't trying to dig at your idea when talking Bruno. The CBA FAQ is a good resource for people who want to understand when a trade is legal and when it's not (in addition to many other things).

4 You asked our opinions, and I said what I thought: The Spurs aren't going to be able to trade crap unless it's for crap, horribly damaged goods or terrible contracts. If there's no reason why it would happen, then it's a bad idea. It's not me saying I wouldn't do it if I was Buford and the other team came to me and asked.

Lay off the whining, man. People aren't trying to act high and mighty by telling you why your idea is bad. Some of us try to actually know what we're talking about so that we don't give foolish opinions. Your opinions are just as welcome here as anyone else, but that doesn't give you the right to ignore facts and rules about the NBA's legal system and then to get upset when your idea is criticized after you ask for people's opinions.

[Chinook]

If Spurs still believe in his upside, Blair for Anthony Randolph would be a nice little trade.

That would be interesting, but that would involve cutting Anderson, as the Spurs would be over the tax after that trade. Secondly, the rules seem to suggest that Randolph's salary is too big for that trade to work.

I keep hearing about how high Randolph's upside it, but it just doesn't seem to be working with him. It'd be nice to see him on a winning team for once, but with him having a long-term deal, I don't see the Spurs absorbing that much risk.

Along the lines of trading Blair for a big with supposed upside, what about Jeremy Tyler? I heard that he was good in high school but got bad advice which has really hurt is career. His contract is a lot smaller than Blair's, but that's not an issue, because Blair can fit into GS's exception. If the Spurs were to put Tyler in the Ford exception, then they'd get a brand new TE equal to all of Blair's salary, which could come in handy. I've heard nothing about Tyler being a good player now, but I'd rather have a big with upside on the bench than one who has declining knee health.

[Paranoid Pop]

Another long shot :

Danny Green Neal? pick? to Minny - they get the SG they desperately want

SJax Bonner Budinger to Toronto - they get the SF of the future they are looking for and a lot of cap space

Derrick Williams Bargnani Landry Fields to SA - we get all the bigs we need, taking a bad contract back is not that bad for what we get

It's a strech for Minny to send Derrick Williams and Budinger for Danny Green and I'm not sure adding a pick and even Gary Neal would change that, but you could argue we send them a SG and a SF back. Three ways trade proposals take a lot of wishful thinking most of the time, that one is no exception I guess...

[Paranoid Pop]

All things considered it's pretty safe to assume Pop will bet on Splitter this year.

Green for Derrick Williams seems like the safest bet, too bad Green can't be traded before January 15th...

Besides Williams has the mobnility to challenge Abaka's shots. Could start in limited minutes next to Tim with Splitter playing big minutes off the bench...

Is Pop too in love with Green to even think about it?

Would the Wolves bite? and for what package exactly?

The thing is Minny is involved in a lot of trade rumors involving much bigger targets than Green, their name come up in the Gasol, Verajao trade rumors so if they pull the trigger on something like that it kills any chance of the trade happening...

[szkorhetz]

Another long shot :

Danny Green Neal? pick? to Minny - they get the SG they desperately want

SJax Bonner Budinger to Toronto - they get the SF of the future they are looking for and a lot of cap space

Derrick Williams Bargnani Landry Fields to SA - we get all the bigs we need, taking a bad contract back is not that bad for what we get

It's a strech for Minny to send Derrick Williams and Budinger for Danny Green and I'm not sure adding a pick and even Gary Neal would change that, but you could argue we send them a SG and a SF back. Three ways trade proposals take a lot of wishful thinking most of the time, that one is no exception I guess...
So, basically our two best options are Bargnani and Williams?
Nice....

[Paranoid Pop]

So, basically our two best options are Bargnani and Williams?
Nice....

To be fair I'm the only one who thinks Bargnani could be a positive and not sure why you would complain about Williams, what did you expect? Gasol or Ilyasova?

[szkorhetz]

To be fair I'm the only one who thinks Bargnani could be a positive and not sure why you would complain about Williams, what did you expect? Gasol or Ilyasova?
I actually like Williams, he is very athletic.But Bargs... He is not much better than Bon-Bon. Okay, more athletic, younger, better penetration, but nothing else.

[Chinook]

He can't shoot threes like Bonner, and he's not as experienced as Bonner. But I like Williams' potential. Anything outside Parker, Kawhi and Splitter is a reasonable price to pay for a player with that kind of upside. There are others like Duncan and Manu that the Spurs wouldn't trade, anyway, but he's worth the risk of giving up a couple of people like Green and Neal.

[Bruno]

That would be interesting, but that would involve cutting Anderson, as the Spurs would be over the tax after that trade. Secondly, the rules seem to suggest that Randolph's salary is too big for that trade to work.

This trade should work if Anderson is cut before it. Spurs would then be able to benefit to the non-taxpayers trade rules that allows them to take back up to 150%+100K of the salary send.

Regardless of that trade scenario, with everybody on his way back, it's time for Spurs organization to wonder whether or not they should keep Anderson. He has been relatively fine but he doesn't really fill a need.

[Chinook]

I think he's good to keep if they plan to move a wing. He seems to know the system, and he's not pushing for time the same way that Neal, De Colo and Mills are. He seems perfect as a depth player.

[Paranoid Pop]

Espn insider had an article on potential Derrick Williams trades, not sure if posted already and I'm not sure what's the policity with insider articles since the plagiarism scandal so I'll just link what I found when googling for it : http://www.therxforum.com/showthread.php?t=937889

[Chinook]

Espn insider had an article on potential Derrick Williams trades, not sure if posted already and I'm not sure what's the policity with insider articles since the plagiarism scandal so I'll just link what I found when googling for it : http://www.therxforum.com/showthread.php?t=937889

Thanks for the link. :toast If that's Williams' value, the Spurs really could beat it which their spare parts. It does suppose that Williams is a small-forward, though, which I don't think is true in today's NBA. As a power-forward, Williams may have a different market. Neal, Green or De Colo along with Blair or Bonner and a couple of firsts should be able to get it done.

[Paranoid Pop]

A scenario worth exploring imo :

Sign Aron Baynes as back up center and mostly play him with a polished passers like Boris/Nando.

Allows us to trade our best trading chip Tiago who's too good to be back up C and doesn't fit that well at PF.

Move him and Green in a three way trade with Minny and Boston for Derrick Williams and AB.

We get a young core of De Colo AB KY D.Williams while still getting better or at least more balanced.

[ace3g]

A scenario worth exploring imo :

Sign Aron Baynes as back up center and mostly play him with a polished passers like Boris/Nando.

Allows us to trade our best trading chip Tiago who's too good to be back up C and doesn't fit that well at PF.

Move him and Green in a three way trade with Minny and Boston for Derrick Williams and AB.

We get a young core of De Colo AB KY D.Williams while still getting better or at least more balanced.

While I'm impressed with Baynes rebounding # in Euroleague, he doesn't allow the Spurs to move Tiago, because Baynes is still an unproven commodity in the NBA

[Paranoid Pop]

While I'm impressed with Baynes rebounding # in Euroleague, he doesn't allow the Spurs to move Tiago, because Baynes is still an unproven commodity in the NBA

Well we could use a rebounder anyway so we should get him and go from there. Pop doesn't want to keep Anderson anyway imo so we have a free roster spot who is wasted basically right now.

[Chinook]

A scenario worth exploring imo :

Sign Aron Baynes as back up center and mostly play him with a polished passers like Boris/Nando.

Allows us to trade our best trading chip Tiago who's too good to be back up C and doesn't fit that well at PF.

Move him and Green in a three way trade with Minny and Boston for Derrick Williams and AB.

We get a young core of De Colo AB KY D.Williams while still getting better or at least more balanced.

I don't like that deal.

One, Boston can't absorb Splitter for Bradley.

Two, if Green is enough to get Williams, I think the Spurs should just do that and be happy with it.

Three, I actually like Splitter and Duncan starting together. Baynes working out would mean the Spurs have a legitimate third post player to come in, which reduces the pressure of foul trouble and losing size on the bench.

Four, I like what Bradley did defensively last year, but he's sort of small to play the 2 guard, and the back court is pretty packed as it is. I'd rather keep Green and move Neal if the Spurs don't feel comfortable with their guards' defensive abilities.

[ace3g]

I'm all for signing Baynes as you can see in the Baynes thread, just not at the expense of trading Splitter. Kind of hoping if the Spurs are interested in him, to try and bring him in as quickly as possible to see what kind of role he can carve. I agree though with the 15th spot should go to a PF/C rather than a SF in JA.

[Chinook]

Paranoid Pop (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=29467)

A deal like you described would look something like this:

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=cbmjgul

but it would have Green instead of Neal and Bonner going to Minny once the restriction gets lifted. I think that deal is semi-doable, since the Wolves would get two legitimate swing men who are young and signed to long-term deals. Boston gets some size, rather than a player who interferes with Green in Williams. I think the Spurs lose a lot, though. I don't see how anything from the other teams can make up for the loss of Splitter, and Bradley still has some work to do to get to Green's level.

If the Spurs were looking for a major shake-up, this would qualify. But I don't think they're anywhere near worried enough to make this type of move.

[Paranoid Pop]

Yeah I actually agree with both of you. I don't see a huge move happening.

I don't believe in Splitter as much as most people but the Tim/Tiago starting frontline could be a very hard match up for a team like Miami... On paper it should do good vs OKC as well but I really doubt that one. We did well in the past with Blair's inside scoring vs OKC so there's no reason it shouldn't work with Splitter but I still think Tiago is a bad defender at PF, not mobile enough to challenge outside shots.

If we keep Splitter, a rebounder is probably the priority, we gave up to many offensive rebounds vs OKC to have a chance, Collinson got 5 or 6 on Blair alone but Ibaka got a lot as well... So bringing in a rebounding back up center may be enough.

If we part with Splitter obviously getting a PF would be in order but I don't Pop doing that.

[Chinook]

Buuuuuut... If the Spurs were to go that route, then maybe something like this would be better value:

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=cowmgcd

Adding a player like Baynes and doing this trade would save the Spurs a good deal of money this year and give them even more cap room next year (as they wouldn't have to pay Splitter). I still don't see how it doesn't cripple them this year; they'd have to hope one of Baynes, Melo or someone else can step in as the backup center. I could see that approaching realistic value for Williams, and that's a great deal for Splitter, all things considered. If San Antonio doesn't plan on paying him next season, I think this is one of the best packages they could expect to receive. Plus, they'd get a decent second-rounder from Philly.

The Celtics get a good center who may be even better starting with Rondo than he is playing limited minutes in San Antonio. Cory could play with his cousin, and he and/or Ivey may be able to play the guard-stopper role Bradley used to play with Boston. Philly gets Blair for basically nothing. Minnesota gets the guard they need, more shooting and a much-cheaper power-forward prospect that is doing decent work in Boston right now. Some picks may have to change hands, but I could see this framework working for all teams involved. So long as the Spurs want to move Splitter (which I don't believe they do) and the Wolves give up on getting Gasol, I could see them all agreeing to this.

[szkorhetz]

Why the fuck would the Celtics trade the best perimeter defender in the NBA for a Center that doesn't really fit and an unproven PG?
makes no sense. less than nothing.

[Chinook]

The term "best perimeter defender" is thrown around way too much. A few months of good defensive play does not put Bradley in that category. (He didn't do anything as a rookie). He's also coming off an injury, so it's up in the air if he's going to come back and be the same. Right now, Boston is playing "small" with Garnett as the center. But they've been trying for the last few years to get good big men. The lack of them is killing the Celtics this year. They also need a back-up point guard badly, too, as right now they have to trot out Barbosa. Bradley was never much of a point, either, so he's not going to help. Joseph has shown flashes of being a true PG. He seems like a decent project for a team that's so Rondo-dominated, anyway.

Ivey has done as much defensively as Bradley. I honestly don't really care about the Spurs getting him, but an earlier poster suggested him as a piece in a Splitter trade, so I left him in. I don't see him as an irreplaceable piece for Boston, and I don't see him as a necessary piece for San Antonio. He'd be risky to start with Parker, and he probably wouldn't be displacing Manu on the bench. So giving him playing time would probably require moving Green. That may end up being worth it, but I don't think Bradley's good enough to change the back-court rotation when everyone is healthy.

[DPG21920]

Home Run, Solid Double, Base Hit?

I hate baseball. It's something only Caribbean Greece cares about anymore. However, with regards to bosltering the Spurs chances to win a title do you feel the Spurs need a homerun, just a base hit or the solid double? I preface this all with a thought process of not giving up any of the big 3, Tiago or Kawhi if possible.

How I define those:

Homerun: Significant risk/Significant reward. Injured players, bad contracts, malcontents that might be able to be had with salary relief and/or a first round pick.

Solid Double: Might have to move a guy like Tiago, preferrably not though, to get a player who's very solid on a fair contract that just might be a bad fit with current team, or on a team with younger players ready to take over. Not a superstar player, but one that is definitely boarderline All Star player if it goes well.

Base Hit: A rotational guy that fills a need where the Spurs don't have to rely on Blair, Bonner, Boris or one of the weaker back up guards.

Do most feel the Spurs need any trade and if so, which level?

For example - a homerun type of trade in this context:

Hornets Give: Eric Gordon
Spurs Give: Stephen Jackson, Matt Bonner and Gary Neal + first rounder

Hornets get to off load a big contract for a guy who's damn talented, but seemingly always unhealthy (whether he wants to be in NO is another valid question). Stephen Jackson is a salary guy who can be bought out opening up cap space. They get a big man who might have something they like and is only partially guaranteed next season, a rotational shooter like Gary Neal (to replace a guy like Belinelli they lost) and a first rounder. They might be able to get more for him, but if someone offers them a decent role player + cap space + first rounder do they move him? Especially if the trade market for Gordon is pretty dried up if he does not play many games near the deadline?

Spurs get a guy with some star potential where if he works out can give the Spurs another legit 20PPG talented scorer/ball handler. He might also pave the way for Manu insurance in case 1) Manu gets injured or 2) Manu retires. It's a huge risk because of the contract, but that type of trade (getting a guy with that upside) without having to give up a major piece might be something to consider.

So along those lines, what do yall think about what the Spurs really need?

[Chinook]

I'm torn between what I want the Spurs to get and what I think they need to help them this year. I think any homerun trade is too risky if thinking about this year, as there are too many things that could go wrong to sink a ship that is sailing pretty smoothly right now. If they move Splitter, they'd have to have a really solid plan on how to replace him. The Spurs waited too long for another legitimate big man to move him for an unknown.

I want the Spurs to take a change on player who are treading the bust line. I think the Spurs' biggest asset is their culture and their coaching. They should use it to their advantage. I want to see some young players who are under performing their high draft statuses, like Williams and Vesely. I don't think it helps the Spurs now if they have to give up Tiago or even Green or Jack for one of these players, but I'd love to see what those players could become in San Antonio.

A bigger risk than Gordon would be Beasley, who is really looking like a bust with his third team. He's a huge headcase, and is almost certainly beyond saving, but if he could get back on track, he'd be the missing piece. He can just do things other bigs can't. His contract is pretty reasonable compared to Gordon, and Green and Bonner could probably get it done. He'd be the homerun trade out there.

Outside of him, a trade like Splitter for Cousins is another high risk/reward deal. I don't really think trading for injured players makes sense; that's more for free agency in my mind.

EDIT: Actually, Bonner, Blair and Neal for Beasley works, too.

[szkorhetz]

Beasley is not much of an inside player. I love him, I have him starting next to TIM in 2K13, but in reality, that just would not work and really would not solve any of our problems, IMHO.
If we wouldn't have KL, than it is another story. But we have.

[DPG21920]

So you're thinking just a base hit it seems. In all my scenarios, the goal in mind would do a trade without giving up Tim/TP/Manu/Kawhi/Tiago. I only give up Tiago if it's a no brainer, but that would be tough. From an injury perspective I mean a guy who's still expected to return at least by the trade deadline.

I agree though about our culture. Taking on a lower risk guy with some situational problems might be a good idea and much less risky/costly. However, in that situation the contract becomes critical. If it's low risk/low reward I want the cap space to not be phased too much.

[Chinook]

I personally don't think the Spurs will have cap space if they intend to keep Splitter. He'll eat almost all of what Manu and Jack don't, and exceptions will take the rest. The Beasley trade doesn't give up Tiago, and I imagine Diaw would play with him off the bench or Beasley will play with him. The only way I give up Splitter is for someone like Gortat. But I don't think that's necessary with the way Tiago has been playing.

Besides Gordon, who else would qualify as a homerun? I know others have been injured, but I can't think of anyone really good who's been out besides Bynum and Granger.

szkorhetz (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=31498) I don't think the Spurs need another inside player to start next to Tim. I think the days of saving him from banging down low are over. He seems like he's putting a lot of effort into being able to play in the post effectively again. A stretch four who can drive and finish may make a good deal of sense this year.

[DPG21920]

Someone like Amare perhaps? Big risk, but type of guy if things go right that might really help? Same deal with the contract as Gordon..

[DPG21920]

Agree about the cap space though. I mentioned that Tiago is in line for a big pay day probably in the salaries thread. Let's say the Spurs have between 18-22M in cap space next year. Does Manu retire? If he does, would they even consider bringing Jack back? Even if Manu does not retire, is Jack likely to stay? The real quesitons are Manu's health, will he retire and if not, how much will he take? Will he take a Duncan like pay cut to stay on?

Then there is Tiago. That could wind up being a very tough, ASIK like decision.

[Chinook]

I forgot about Amare. But I worry that he'd only be a center at this point. He was never overly effective as a four, and he's been getting slower. I don't consider him an upgrade over Splitter. If the Spurs are going to swing for the fences, I think it needs to be for a power-forward. I don't think any other position is bad enough to take an injury risk. I don't see any out there that would qualify, though. Maybe Bargnani, but he's never been good enough to worry about.

[DPG21920]

Definitely not Bargnani. But the idea was to just guage what type of trade/risk, if any, the Spurs need to take. If you can get a guy like Gordon/Amare/Other similar type guy without giving up anyone but Jackson+fillers+draft pick, is that necessary? Or should the Spurs focus on smaller deals and keep cap space in mind most importantly?

Tough to answer right now and I really hope over the next month the Spurs stay healthy, get a rotation set and we see what this team's ceiling truly is.

[Chinook]

Tiago is worth Asik money, in my opinion. If you look at who else is making that type of money, Splitter is worth it.

[DPG21920]

Don't disagree really. It will be very interesting and things can change quickly. Any kind of major injury changes the variable, same with a strong or weak playoff run. Just too hard to tell. Good news is Spurs have options. They can have cap space if they want it. They can likely keep their core together if they want to. They have tradeable assets (Jackson/Bonner expiring contracts, talent like Tiago/Neal or even big 3). They are in a good spot.

[Chinook]

They are. The Spurs don't need a superstar; they have that by committee with the Big Three. They need youth and athleticism in the front court. They need star potential. I think they can do that without giving up Jack, but as long as they have a plan to replace his minutes at the three, I'm willing to see what that looks like.

Williams is the one to watch, as he has everything the Spurs need from a role player this year, as well as having the ability to compensate for the Big Three getting older. Vesely is intriguing, but I haven't seen the skills needed to play the three or the four. Beasley would never happen, as he's about as far away from a Spurs player as you can get. But getting him for spare parts would allow the Spurs to offset dependence on him or any of these player right away.

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=c3lhrqp

What's true is that there are some young player with potential getting inconsistent minutes on teams across the league. Teams like Philly and Milwaukee seem to have know idea who to play on any given night. Veterans like those that San Antonio has can be really helpful to teams trying to gain some stability. The Spurs just have to be willing to give up some of that stability for potential.

[szkorhetz]

Why do you always trading DB to Philly. They stated that they have no interest in him...

[Chinook]

I don't believe Philly has said that. No team ever states that they have no interest in a player from another team, nor that they do. It's terrible practice to show your hand when you don't have to, and in some cases it's tampering.

I don't think Philly would mind taking Blair for nothing. But if they do, there are other teams that would take him for nothing or for non-guaranteed contracts, which would mean pretty much the same thing. I usually just put them there because the trade machine lets me do it without asking me to jump through hoops. It's possible that the Suns would take him in this deal, which would render having to find a third team moot.

[TD 21]

DPG, not a snowball's chance the Hornets even give that proposal a second of consideration. Gordon's days are clearly numbered their and his injury prone nature won't help his value, but he's still worth a lot more than that.

Stoudemire makes too much for him to be a consideration. They'd have to literally gut their roster to acquire him, they'd be left with zero depth on the perimeter and staying under the tax would be virtually impossible going forward.

To answer your question, probably a double. Given their dire situation, I'd take a base hit too, though. Obviously, a home run would be great, but it's highly unlikely.

Regarding Williams: Howard has a torn ACL, is done for the season and has been released. Not only opens up a roster spot, but further weakens their wing depth. There's speculation they could pursue Redd, but you've got to think Neal (and Bonner, to make it work) is looking pretty good right now.

[Chinook]

Too bad Green can't be traded, as he can play both wing position and could be more valuable than Neal for that reason. Unfortunately, Howard's injury may open up minutes for Williams at the three. If that's the case, they may not want to move him as much.

[RodNIc91]

How about bonner for Jordan Hill straight up?? It seems like a win-win for both teams

[DPG21920]

TD21 - don't disagree about NO with regards to Gordon - it was just an example. I think they would listen, but it would depend on the market for him. It might very well be dry if he has any setbacks or hasn't played by the deadline.

[Paranoid Pop]

They are. The Spurs don't need a superstar; they have that by committee with the Big Three. They need youth and athleticism in the front court. They need star potential. I think they can do that without giving up Jack, but as long as they have a plan to replace his minutes at the three, I'm willing to see what that looks like.

Williams is the one to watch, as he has everything the Spurs need from a role player this year, as well as having the ability to compensate for the Big Three getting older. Vesely is intriguing, but I haven't seen the skills needed to play the three or the four. Beasley would never happen, as he's about as far away from a Spurs player as you can get. But getting him for spare parts would allow the Spurs to offset dependence on him or any of these player right away.

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=c3lhrqp

What's true is that there are some young player with potential getting inconsistent minutes on teams across the league. Teams like Philly and Milwaukee seem to have know idea who to play on any given night. Veterans like those that San Antonio has can be really helpful to teams trying to gain some stability. The Spurs just have to be willing to give up some of that stability for potential.

Beasley playing for Pop would be hilarious.

If they are not trying to get Baynes, they have to be working on a trade... I don't believe a lot of names have been suggested as a back up center via trade.

Rebounding seems like it could end up being very important in the PO, teams like Miami, Boston could be fucked in the POs because of their lack of rebounding. We probably belong to that list if we don't find a good back up C or at least we'd have to go back to last year's rotation.

The Lakers have been playing Metta at the 4 and are supposedly looking for a SF, they probably couldn't be sold on the idea but I would do Green for Jordan Hill in a heartbeat. Hard to find a better rebounder tbh.

[Chinook]

http://espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?gameId=400278102

Sanders beasted with 17/20/3, so I think he's out of trade discussions for even the most optimistic of posters. Besides him, however, I think the other Bucks bigs are fair game. The rotation is nuts. They gave four bigs DNPs last night. I can't see how they can keep them all.

It looks like they've given up on Mbah a Moute being a wing. He started at the four and put up pretty good numbers (20/6/2 in 40 minutes). You add him to the rest, and I can't see how they go much longer without making some deals.

Out of all of Milwaukee's bigs besides Sanders, who do people on here most want? Who would be most realistic for the Spurs to target?

[AussieFanKurt]

None of them tbh. They are all below average for the most part. Sanders I would love on spurs, obviously won't happen.

Udoh, Dalembert, Gooden, Joel P are all shit. I'd go with Mbah maybe but meh.

[Paranoid Pop]

Dalembert is clearly the most realistic target.

Everyone would want Ilyasova tho.

Mbah a Moute is in the middle.

Not sure what the Bucks needs.

Dalembert's contract is in its last year so as a fourth big we could do way worse. Problem is would he be ok being only the fourth big, didn't to be fine with his situation with the Bucks.

[Paranoid Pop]

I wish I could fast forward to the trade deadline tbh, I don't believe in the current rotation but at the same time I feel we are pretty close.

The whole thing is pretty reminiscing of 2004/2005, the backdoor sweep and the need to trade for a big...

[Paranoid Pop]

That said John Henson could be nice, wouldn't have any ego problem with playing 4th big and I'm not sure he has a place in this Bucks team even long term. Problem is why would they give up such a young player when his value isn't set yet.

[Chinook]

Also about Milwaukee: It's going to be interesting to see what the Bucks do with Jennings. Word is that he doesn't want to come back and that Milwaukee is looking to move him as a result. I was looking at possible suitors for him (none of whom are the Spurs, if anyone was getting worried about me suggesting them) and it wouldn't shock me if Utah made a play. People on this board talk about the Jazz trying to get a young point guard, and Jennings may be the best of those on the market.

So what would a Jazz/Bucks deal look like? I think like this:

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=bnl2nlu

If the Jazz want Jennings, taking Gooden isn't a horrible price. They'd trade some of their cap room (they'd still have a bunch in the offseason) and let the Bucks get out of Gooden's contract instead of giving Milwaukee picks. The Bucks get out of two bad situations without losing much. As a tallish combo guard, Burks is a player that could mesh well with the shorter shooting guards the Bucks have.

What's more interesting is that the Bucks would get Millsap back, and they'd have no reason to keep him. They probably would slide him into the starting four spot next to Sanders. But they have so many young players and long-term deals for front-court players that it may make sense to just buy Millsap out, especially because Milwaukee would probably have to be a fading team for them to make this trade in the first place. If they bought out Millsap and made him a free agent... well it's clear why such a possible deal interests me.

[Paranoid Pop]

I was thinking a bit along these lines, Gooden would have to be part of the package if the Bucks make a trade and the Jazz is indeed one of the teams that wants a young PG badly.

How about something like :

Gooden Burks Henson to SA
Jennings to the Jazz
Green BonBon and De Colo to the Bucks

We get two young potential studs, taking Gooden's salary for just one player is not worth it, it would have to be at least two to start making sense.

Jazz would say yes, the Bucks may give too much to essentially get rid of Gooden...

[Chinook]

Burks isn't better than Green. He could be a good player to put with Tony and Manu, though. At best, that's a wash, and then you have Gooden taking up too much money for too long to not even play. Henson may have potential, but he can barely get off the bench in Milwaukee. So I don't think that's even close to worth it. And forget the Jazz trying to take back no money in that deal. They can have Gooden's salary on their books. Also, I think that trade pushes the Spurs above the tax, so that's a deal-stopper.

If Utah took Gooden and the Spurs took Milsap, I could see that being much better. Add in Diaw for Henson and you may be able to keep the Spurs under the tax. Something like this:

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=cc3cr9o

But with Green instead of Neal, and maybe Mills instead of Joseph or De Colo. That should keep the Spurs out of the tax, and get the players you want. I think Utah should have to pay the most, since they're the team that'd really be getting what they want. I worry about replacing Green in the lineup and about the lack of a true power-forward. Milsap is nice and all, but Henson will have to be really good really early in order for the Spurs' big rotation to not be worse than it is right now.

On the plus side, that opens up even more cap room for the Spurs next offseason.

[Paranoid Pop]

Yeah including Burks was wishful thinking more than filling a real need. I don't think the Bucks would want Boris tho.

But I def like Bonner to the Bucks, is there a better sub for Ilyasova out there?

[Chinook]

Diaw only has one year left on his deal (which is an option, to boot), so his contract is much better than Gooden's. I could see them accepting him to make the salaries work. Switching him and Bonner doesn't really harm the trade, though, so if Utah is good with him (and if Diaw doesn't veto anything) then the trade could happen anyway. I really wouldn't want to give up both Bonner and Diaw in a deal, though the prospect of bringing over a player like Gelabale and using Jack as a full-time stretch four may make it an easier proposition to swallow.

[Chinook]

It also wouldn't shock me if Ilyasova is traded this year. He doesn't even start all of their games anymore. While I don't think he's been a huge bust or anything, I'm not sure if what he brings is worth it to the Bucks for what they're paying him. It's very possible that they'd simply look for the best deal out there for their bigs on long-term deals and just deal with whomever is left.

[Strategic]

While Gooden does have a bit of familiarity with the Spurs system he just didn't seem to fit so well with the team.

[Paranoid Pop]

Since it seems they won't go after Baynes, the most realistic outcome may be a tosb like Ben Wallace who could play with Boris since Boris Tiago is too soft. Wouldn't really mind tbh.

Still we have too many players, have to get rid of some of them...

[Chinook]

TD21 - don't disagree about NO with regards to Gordon - it was just an example. I think they would listen, but it would depend on the market for him. It might very well be dry if he has any setbacks or hasn't played by the deadline.

Not necessarily Spurs-related, but I wouldn't be shocked to see New Orleans move Gordon for a really good player. Indiana has a situation on their hands with Granger's return coming up and Paul George being a good fit at the small-forward. I could see the Pacers wanting a player like Gordon to play the two while leaving George at the three. So a Granger for Gordon swap is possible.

But...

I think there is room for a more-complicated scenario to come into play. Word around the street is that the Grizzlies are looking to get under the tax by moving Arthur for nothing and/or moving Gay for a cheaper player. While cost-cutting is the priority, I imagine Memphis would like to get a good enough player in return to not run their chances this year. Granger makes about $3.5 Million less than Gay this year, and he is a better shooter, which would fit Memphis' inside-attack system better than the slashing Gay. I could see the Grizzlies being interested in a deal with Indiana as a result.

So bam: http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=cwf84n5

The Pelicans get a "star" player to pair with Davis. With Davis and Lopez signed to cheap, long-term deals, New Orleans can afford to pay Gay a little more than he's worth. This hurts their chances of tanking this year, but they probably aren't going to draft anyone better than Gay anyhow. All they'd need after this trade would be some better guards.

Indiana gets a player who is a better fit for their team. They also get a hometown hero for a discounted price. Gordon's injury makes him risky, but it's not like Granger has been healthy either so far.

Memphis gets a player on a shorter deal who could excel in their scheme. He's been injured this year, but he doesn't have a big history of that, and he's on a shorter deal than Gay and is movable if something goes wrong. In the very least, he's about as good as the Grizzlies can expect to get from a salary dump.

Houston is just there to make the number work. If Memphis makes the Gay for Granger swap, they'd still need to shed about a million more dollars to get under the tax. Trading Bayless for Douglas gets them there.

[Paranoid Pop]

Good scenario, makes sense for everyone.

[TD 21]

What's more interesting is that the Bucks would get Millsap back, and they'd have no reason to keep him. They probably would slide him into the starting four spot next to Sanders. But they have so many young players and long-term deals for front-court players that it may make sense to just buy Millsap out, especially because Milwaukee would probably have to be a fading team for them to make this trade in the first place. If they bought out Millsap and made him a free agent... well it's clear why such a possible deal interests me.

How could buying out an asset of that caliber ever make sense? Even if you think he's not a fit, he could easily be re-routed for a quality piece or two. No team would even consider for a second buying him out. It wouldn't matter if they had a clear cut starter and five PF's.

[Chinook]

How could buying out an asset of that caliber ever make sense? Even if you think he's not a fit, he could easily be re-routed for a quality piece or two. No team would even consider for a second buying him out. It wouldn't matter if they had a clear cut starter and five PF's.

If moving Milsap were that easy, the Jazz would've done it by now. Most contenders don't have 9 Million bucks worth of useless (like expendable) players lying around. Non-contenders would have no reason to give up assets for him. I'm not saying you're wrong about the Bucks not waiving him if they got him, mind you. I just don't think it's impossible that they don't find a taker and decide to save some money.

Who could you see trading for Milsap in that scenario?

[DPG21920]

If moving Milsap were that easy, the Jazz would've done it by now. Most contenders don't have 9 Million bucks worth of useless (like expendable) players lying around. Non-contenders would have no reason to give up assets for him. I'm not saying you're wrong about the Bucks not waiving him if they got him, mind you. I just don't think it's impossible that they don't find a taker and decide to save some money.

Who could you see trading for Milsap in that scenario?

I don't agree with buying him out, but the Spurs are a team that seems like a good trade partner. Spurs have Jackson that is an expiring contract plus some decent role players plus a first rounder they could offer. That is why I mentioned it as at least something to keep an eye on. Millsap is good though, so I could see someone offering more of a basketball talent in return.

[Chinook]

I don't agree with buying him out, but the Spurs are a team that seems like a good trade partner. Spurs have Jackson that is an expiring contract plus some decent role players plus a first rounder they could offer. That is why I mentioned it as at least something to keep an eye on. Millsap is good though, so I could see someone offering more of a basketball talent in return.

Milwaukee will never touch Jackson again. So in the scenario I laid out, the Spurs would have to take Gooden, which I think we can all agree they shouldn't do. I can totally understand the idea that Millsap have legitimate suitors. But I have a hard time finding teams that can really give up what the Bucks or Jazz would want. Maybe most likely if that the Bucks would just keep Millsap and possibly look to re-sign him and move other players like Mbah a Moute.

[DPG21920]

Spurs should just deal direct. Send UTA Jack/Neal/First Rounder for Millsap

[Chinook]

I see that as being a deal that Utah would have to settle for. If Millsap can bring back a player like Jennings, I think that's more tempting to the Jazz than Neal. It would be more compelling the Spurs also took back Bell's contract, which is doable. I don't know. It's an option. With Mo Williams getting hurt, I can see the Jazz making a trade pretty quickly. I think they'd rather move Jefferson, but obviously it's harder to find a deal for him.

[Paranoid Pop]

The Jazz still like Millsap better than big Al thon I agree with Chinook they would need a nice PG back to give him up.

[TD 21]

If moving Milsap were that easy, the Jazz would've done it by now. Most contenders don't have 9 Million bucks worth of useless (like expendable) players lying around. Non-contenders would have no reason to give up assets for him. I'm not saying you're wrong about the Bucks not waiving him if they got him, mind you. I just don't think it's impossible that they don't find a taker and decide to save some money.

Who could you see trading for Milsap in that scenario?

You think moving Millsap is difficult? As I said in this thread a few weeks back, I think they'll find it difficult to get what they'd want, but they could move him in a second if they wanted to, even if the return is nothing more than a middling package, like the one I proposed from the Spurs.

It's not impossible, because technically they could do it. I'm just saying, no one would do that, nor does it make sense for anyone to.

[Chinook]

You think moving Millsap is difficult? As I said in this thread a few weeks back, I think they'll find it difficult to get what they'd want, but they could move him in a second if they wanted to, even if the return is nothing more than a middling package, like the one I proposed from the Spurs.

It's not impossible, because technically they could do it. I'm just saying, no one would do that, nor does it make sense for anyone to.

I don't think that package would appeal to the Bucks at all. I mean, if we just forget the scenario and go back to simple Jazz-trading-Millsap idea, then we can talk about it for sure. But even then, I can't see who's willing to offer a good package. He's worth it (I think he's even better than he plays right now), but I don't see any teams that look like potential partners. That's why I keep asking. I'm not challenging; I'm legitimately curious.

[DPG21920]

Millsap makes the most sense for a contender IMO. While their might be some cusp teams that could bolster their chances to make the playoffs, to me the most likely Millsap destination is a contender. Now assuming that is true, how many contenders have the expiring deals they would likely want in addition to other assets (draft picks, solid role players...)? When you examine it like that, Spurs are definitley near the top of the list.

I agree UTA will be looking for more, but will they find it? Millsap is a really solid player so I wouldn't be shocked, but they are also in a tough spot because everyone knows he pretty much needs to be traded and can walk for free next year. So options may be a bit more limited than you would normally think.

[Paranoid Pop]

Millsap makes the most sense for a contender IMO. While their might be some cusp teams that could bolster their chances to make the playoffs, to me the most likely Millsap destination is a contender. Now assuming that is true, how many contenders have the expiring deals they would likely want in addition to other assets (draft picks, solid role players...)? When you examine it like that, Spurs are definitley near the top of the list.

I agree UTA will be looking for more, but will they find it? Millsap is a really solid player so I wouldn't be shocked, but they are also in a tough spot because everyone knows he pretty much needs to be traded and can walk for free next year. So options may be a bit more limited than you would normally think.

They don't have to trade him since they really like him. Will Atlanta trade Smith for a bag of potatoes because he could walk? No.

[DPG21920]

They don't have to trade him since they really like him. Will Atlanta trade Smith for a bag of chips because he could walk? No.

Nothing UTA has done says the "really like him". If they really liked him, they would not allow for Favors to continually eat into his minutes and bench him for crunch time. He can walk for nothing because he is an unrestricted free agent in the off season. That changes the variables quite drastically.

They may like him, but they don't really like him as evidenced to the situation going on there. ATL will absolutely trade Josh for a bag of chips if they think they are not going to re-sign him and that he will walk for nothing. Getting expiring contracts + a first round pick + possibly a solid role player is a hell of a lot better than losing an asset for nothing because he does not fit into your plans.

[Paranoid Pop]

Well every single analyst out there think they should let big Al walk and try to re-sign Millsap but if they know he won't stay no matter what (hard to know) then yeah they may deal him for what they can get.

[CGD]

The jazz obviously want assets in return from either, or both, of those players, but they also know that their negotiating position is weak. Worst case for them is that Al and Milsap both walk, and they keep the expiring contracts for themselves (23m in cap space this summer). Not the worst thing that can happen. They are a team rebuilding away...

I dont see how the spurs can get either of these guys. Offering a package essential built around the 26-30th pick isn't enticing. Moving SJax is also useless since both those guys are on expiring deals themselves. If they are looking to use those players in the program, then sign them this summer. (Jefferson is a VERY poorman's Timmy, but at least he has a good post game). Dont think the spurs should move any of their young assets (Blair is not an asset) for either of these players when there is no guarantee they'd sign here this summer anyway.

[Chinook]

The jazz obviously want assets in return from either, or both, of those players, but they also know that their negotiating position is weak. Worst case for them is that Al and Milsap both walk, and they keep the expiring contracts for themselves (23m in cap space this summer). Not the worst thing that can happen. They are a team rebuilding away...

I dont see how the spurs can get either of these guys. Offering a package essential built around the 26-30th pick isn't enticing. Moving SJax is also useless since both those guys are on expiring deals themselves. If they are looking to use those players in the program, then sign them this summer. (Jefferson is a VERY poorman's Timmy, but at least he has a good post game). Dont think the spurs should move any of their young assets (Blair is not an asset) for either of these players when there is no guarantee they'd sign here this summer anyway.

Pretty much what I was thinking. The Jazz would trade either for a good point guard, which is why I suggested Milwaukee as a partner. I don't see another team that both has the assets Utah wants and is motivated to move those assets. I don't see the Spurs trading for Millsap unless it's a deal like the the Jack/RJ swap, where it is an aftershock of a larger deal.

That's also why I think Millsap is a legitimate buyout candidate if he gets moved to somewhere else as salary filler.

[Chinook]

I guess Toronto may go after Millsap to replace Bargnani's production. They have a point in Calderon whom they've considered moving and who has asked for a trade, apparently. The Raptors don't have a big use for Millsap with their young bigs like Davis and Valanciunas, but they do have need for a wing who's better than Landry Fields. So they may accept Jack and a little sweetener as payment for Millsap. Utah would get their point, and maybe a little something else from San Antonio or Toronto. Blair may be good here, as he can be a deep-bench big in case of injuries.

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=cgz7y58

Individually, that might not be enough to get Millsap, but it helps the other teams get what they need. In my opinion, this is how the Spurs should operate in the trade market: facilitating trades and getting players at a cheaper price than they could directly.

[CGD]

It's not a bad framework ^

im not so sure what the spurs' plan is with Joseph with Nando making a case for backup pg, and Cory relegated to Austin this year. But barring an injury or if the team stalls this year, I really don't see us moving Jax. Guy is too key for our playoff hopes this year. In the worst case he leaves after this year and we keep the cap space to ourselves.

Id fear going after either Milsap or Jefferson right now, and having the prospect of negotiating their contract plus that of Splitter at the same time. I'd like to see the spurs make a play for one of them in the summer however once we decide what to do with Splitter.

[Chinook]

The Spurs will probably not have the cap room to sign any big free agent after resigning their own guys. It may be necessary, therefore, to trade for these players this year. I like Jack and think he can come up big in the post season, but if he's going to be a full-time power-forward, then he is probably not as good of an option as Millsap. If it all it costs is Jack and two end-of-bench players to get a legitimate (but short) power-forward, then I think they have to make that deal.

[Paranoid Pop]

I fully believe we won't make a huge trade that would change the starting PF, I don't see it even tho some have hope we can get Millsap.

So to have any hope vs OKC, I think the playmaking of Manu and De Colo is essential. Splitter can't be a positive unless he outscores Ibaka because he's too slow to really slow him down on defense. So we have to impose our will and pound it inside, thus playing a playmaker next to TP is imo the scenario that gives us the best odds. The only difference KY could make is he would help even up the rebounding, of course he will defend Durant better but he was very passive in the last game.

The tie breaker to decide who we should send is Manu, either Manu starts and you got a weaker bench but we can keep Green (who is Pop's favorite) or you start De Colo and then Green becomes useless since he can't play PG. I think the first scenario is the most realistic one and I like Neal more than Green.

TP Manu
De Colo Green

That doesn't suck, especially since Green can defend PG pretty well and De Colo has looked like a decent SG defender so we can switch the D eventually.

So now the only blatant weakness would be the suspect rebounding (mostly relying on eyetest) with Tiago/Boris.

So Neal for a good rebounder, while still keeping in mind that Boris can play both SF and PF, so Neal for a center or Neal-Sjax for something more mobile with some range to play backup PF or SF with Tiago/Boris.

Sample size is limited but Derrick Williams seems like the best fit.

Roy (if shot) + Williams for Sjax + Neal + picks

Roy would have to be really shot tho... We could eventually throw a Matt Bonner and take back a Stiemsma...

Derrick Williams gets my final vote tbh.

[AFBlue]

What about JJ Hickson? Like Millsap and Jefferson he's on an expiring contract, and like both he fills a need in the Spurs frontcourt. The Trailblazers can get some value for him in his walk year if the Spurs offer CoJo and maybe a first round pick in this weak draft year.

Thoughts?

[Chinook]

Hickson is making $4 Million this year. So any trade would have to have Bonner and/or Green in it. I don't think the Spurs would move Green, and I don't think Portland wants to move him. Unless Miles Leonard becomes a force, they will probably try to re-sign Hickson. I do like his rebounding and post game, though.

[AFBlue]

Hickson is making $4 Million this year. So any trade would have to have Bonner and/or Green in it. I don't think the Spurs would move Green, and I don't think Portland wants to move him. Unless Miles Leonard becomes a force, they will probably try to re-sign Hickson. I do like his rebounding and post game, though.

I would include Bonner for salary-matching purposes. For Portland the question is whether they view Hickson as a key piece of their future. He's having a great season and will be looking for a long-term deal this summer. It's possible they have inside track and interest in retaining him, but its also possibly a George Hill situation (blocked by all-star, need depth a another position). If the Spurs offered Joseph and a draft pick, that may be more appealing than Hickson on a 4yr deal for $8-10M/yr.

Probably a longshot like the others, but I thought I'd throw it out there.

[Libri]

I don't know if CoJo and a draft pick will be enough. If the Blazers make the playoffs, then they may want someone who can help them now. In this case the trade could be for an upcoming player, who is already contributing, and a draft pick. If the Blazers miss the playoffs, then they may want a couple of first round draft picks. I think it will all depend on how they do the next few weeks and their chances of making the playoffs.

[Chinook]

I would include Bonner for salary-matching purposes. For Portland the question is whether they view Hickson as a key piece of their future. He's having a great season and will be looking for a long-term deal this summer. It's possible they have inside track and interest in retaining him, but its also possibly a George Hill situation (blocked by all-star, need depth a another position). If the Spurs offered Joseph and a draft pick, that may be more appealing than Hickson on a 4yr deal for $8-10M/yr.

Probably a longshot like the others, but I thought I'd throw it out there.

Portland has a lot of cap room coming up, so I don't think they'll have a problem paying him whatever he's worth. Unlike the Hill situation, Hickson has locked up the starting center spot. He's also been averaging a double-double recently, so it seems he has found his role. The only way the Spurs get him, I think, is by signing him as a free agent. Hopefully, Hickson pulls a Gooden and tries for a buyout later this season. That's pretty doubtful as well, though.

[ace3g]

^Agree, I don't think Beasley can be saved.

Williams' biggest issue is that he wanted to play SF and Minny also wanted him to do that transition. For the little I've watched from him, it's clear that Williams should play PF. That's the spot where he could eb a special player with his athleticism and skills.

The deciding factor of a trade with Williams could be the situation around Roy. If he is able to come back, Minny won't really need a SG. If he retires, they will need one and they will also free a roster spot to do a 1 for 2 trade without needing to waive a player.

Adrian Wojnarowski ‏@WojYahooNBA (https://twitter.com/WojYahooNBA) Y! Sources: With more knee trouble, Minnesota's Brandon Roy considers retirement again. http://tinyurl.com/cojhekp (http://t.co/Qf2gziJ4)

--
Another set back for Roy.


Also Antawn Jamison could be available now that he is "mad" about his latest 5 DNPs

[Bruno]

So, Roy is one the verge of retirement and Matt Bonner got yesterday his first DNP-CD since November 21st. :stirpot:

I don't know what Minny will do but, trading Derrick Williams for Neal + Bonner and signing Gelabale for the min, would be a good plan for them.

[Chinook]

He is their best piece to trade, so it'll be the Spurs or someone else. Maybe the Kings will be interested.

[Paranoid Pop]

Even tho I want him on the team badly, I'm pretty skeptical we could make the best offer.

We have Sjax's expiring contract if they want to get rid of Roy's contract while dealing Williams we could make it happen but plenty of teams have cap space/big expiring contracts.

I don't think a lot of team would send them a SG as good as Green even tho it wouldn't the Spurs first choice to send him obviously. JJ Redick is said to be on the trading block tho so there may be some competition no matter what.

If the SG is Neal, maybe Sjax and Bonner could be included in the deal while taking back Roy's contract... Wolves could have some good help and some great flexibility this summer but I don't think this is nearly enough, even with some picks.

I don't think we can make anything good happen without dealing one of our two best trade baits : Splitter and Green.

[ace3g]

So, Roy is one the verge of retirement and Matt Bonner got yesterday his first DNP-CD since November 21st. :stirpot:

I don't know what Minny will do but, trading Derrick Williams for Neal + Bonner and signing Gelabale for the min, would be a good plan for them.

San Antonio Spurs ‏@spurs (https://twitter.com/spurs) Gary Neal did not travel to Dallas with the team and will not play tomorrow vs. the Mavericks.

:stirpot:

[Paranoid Pop]

Random crackpot trade scenario :

Tiago + Neal for Derrick Williams : they need a SG and a better backup big, not sure anyone could beat that package, salaries match perfectly, value seems fair to me because the Spurs players are expiring that will command more money in the offseason

Then we have to trade for a backup C or sign a TOSB

Edit : well scratch that, giving up Tiago would be too much.

[szkorhetz]

San Antonio Spurs ‏@spurs (https://twitter.com/spurs) Gary Neal did not travel to Dallas with the team and will not play tomorrow vs. the Mavericks.

:stirpot:
Pop is in love with thoose two guys. Won't happen. :depressed

[TD 21]

Even tho I want him on the team badly, I'm pretty skeptical we could make the best offer.

It does seem ridiculous to think that Neal could be the headliner of a package for a guy who was the 2nd pick in the draft a year and a half ago, but the bottom line is, at this writing, you could argue that Neal is the better player and he'd certainly be more useful on that team (he'd probably be their third option; tops on the perimeter), given their lack of depth at SG and league worst 3-point shooting. You've also got to factor in that Kahn is dumb and that the pressure is mounting, not only on his job, but to keep Love happy.

If Neal and Bonner won't get it done, they could always throw in a 1st. I've got no delusions about Williams becoming a star, but at the same time, you don't let a late 20's pick get in the way of this. This is potentially too good to be true.

[Chinook]

If Neal and Bonner won't get it done, they could always throw in a 1st. I've got no delusions about Williams becoming a star, but at the same time, you don't let a late 20's pick get in the way of this. This is potentially too good to be true.

Damned straight. I wouldn't mind moving Jack, though. Pop seems to be trying to make him a four. If the Spurs trade for Williams, they're gonna play him. Any minutes Jack would play would thereby evaporate. If they make that trade and add a wing like Gelabale, it could really help balance this team.

[venitian navigator]

One trade that could be interesting.

Jackson + Neal + Bonner + Joseph to Toronto for Bargnani + Lawry

Toronto could mpove this way 'cause of the big cap space next year (Jackson and Neal expiring, Bonner owed just one million, Joseph limited amount of salary), after both Bargnani and Lawry have been realized as bad investments.

For us, Bargnani is obviously an improvement over Bonner/Blair like a fourth big, and Lawry become instantly our back up point guard (a role where he could be simply the best on the entire league).
This move opens also two spots where we could land some players waived (a la Childress).

The bad of this move is, obvioulsly, that we lose the corporate knowledge of Jackson and Neal (also of Bonner, if we just talk about regular season)...but the quality beneficial for the team (also in the long term run...I see no other "big" player we could join on the next year market with the possible cap space we should have) colud be too good to pass...

[TheCerebral1]

One trade that could be interesting.

Jackson + Neal + Bonner + Joseph to Toronto for Bargnani + Lawry

Toronto could mpove this way 'cause of the big cap space next year (Jackson and Neal expiring, Bonner owed just one million, Joseph limited amount of salary), after both Bargnani and Lawry have been realized as bad investments.

For us, Bargnani is obviously an improvement over Bonner/Blair like a fourth big, and Lawry become instantly our back up point guard (a role where he could be simply the best on the entire league).
This move opens also two spots where we could land some players waived (a la Childress).

The bad of this move is, obvioulsly, that we lose the corporate knowledge of Jackson and Neal (also of Bonner, if we just talk about regular season)...but the quality beneficial for the team (also in the long term run...I see no other "big" player we could join on the next year market with the possible cap space we should have) colud be too good to pass...

Bargnani is not worth the paper his contract is written on. He's a 7'0" footer but that doesn't mean he's what the Spurs need. Bargnani can not guard a lamp post. He's pathetic in post and block defense. I know the Spurs are an offense first driven team but that seems retarded to me.

[TD 21]

Damned straight. I wouldn't mind moving Jack, though. Pop seems to be trying to make him a four. If the Spurs trade for Williams, they're gonna play him. Any minutes Jack would play would thereby evaporate. If they make that trade and add a wing like Gelabale, it could really help balance this team.

I don't think he's "trying to make him a four", so much as he realizes that their rotation, as currently constituted, should consist of nine. But within' that nine, there's only three bigs and none of them play major minutes, so someone has to eat up some minutes at PF and given his size and rapidly declining athleticism/speed/quickness, in addition to erratic shooting, it makes sense that he be that someone the majority of the time.

This reminds me of '08. I think they know they absolutely must acquire a fourth big, even if it means paying a higher price than they'd prefer (the only one from the top nine who might get traded is Neal; I'm speaking more to picks). It's not like it hasn't been a need in recent years, but they were still holding out hope that Bonner would come through in the playoffs or that they could get away with Blair for a few minutes. It's clear they've now accepted that neither of those two can be an option. They don't even want to have to play them in the regular season anymore, even with all of the maneuvering that the current big rotation requires.

[DPG21920]

Well, Millsap was benched for another entire fourth quarter in favor of Favors. Millsap only played 20 minutes to Favors' 29. Millsap can't be happy in a contract year for him with a reduced role possible at anytime (especially crunch time) and I would imagine even if he isn't publicly voicing his displeasure, I am sure he can't be too happy about this.

[Chinook]

I don't think he's "trying to make him a four", so much as he realizes that their rotation, as currently constituted, should consist of nine. But within' that nine, there's only three bigs and none of them play major minutes, so someone has to eat up some minutes at PF and given his size and rapidly declining athleticism/speed/quickness, in addition to erratic shooting, it makes sense that he be that someone the majority of the time.

This reminds me of '08. I think they know they absolutely must acquire a fourth big, even if it means paying a higher price than they'd prefer (the only one from the top nine who might get traded is Neal; I'm speaking more to picks). It's not like it hasn't been a need in recent years, but they were still holding out hope that Bonner would come through in the playoffs or that they could get away with Blair for a few minutes. It's clear they've now accepted that neither of those two can be an option. They don't even want to have to play them in the regular season anymore, even with all of the maneuvering that the current big rotation requires.

I don't know if there's a place for Jackson in a nine-man rotation after the assumed Williams trade (Neal and Bonner plus sweeteners) unless Manu plays the point. The way I see it, Williams is guaranteed minutes if the Spurs trade for him, so he'd probably be the fourth big/combo-forward. This pushes Jack out of the rotation if Manu plays the wing off the bench role. If Manu plays as a combo-guard, then Jack can be the wing, but he'll have to show that he has the athleticism still to not be a liability there. Honestly, I think this would be the best rotation if all goes well:

Parker
> Ginobili
Green
> Jackson
Leonard
> Williams
Duncan
> Diaw
Splitter

In the playoffs, we'll obviously see a skew with the Big Three getting heavy minutes along with whoever else is playing well. But the success of that rotation really depends on Jack being able to defend wings the way he defended Harden a couple of days ago.

[ace3g]

Not sure what this means on the D. Williams trade front, but:

Emiliano Carchia ‏@SportandoBasket (https://twitter.com/SportandoBasket) Official: : #Twolves (https://twitter.com/search?q=%23Twolves&src=hash) sign free-agent F Lazar Hayward.

[Chinook]

Not sure what this means on the D. Williams trade front, but:

Emiliano Carchia ‏@SportandoBasket (https://twitter.com/SportandoBasket) Official: : #Twolves (https://twitter.com/search?q=%23Twolves&src=hash) sign free-agent F Lazar Hayward.

Is he more of a three or a four? If he can play as a wing, it probably means they're trying to fix their issues without trading Williams. If he's a power-forward, that would imply Williams' playing time is going to shrink even more. And if he's a combo-forward, that may completely take away Williams' time.

[TD 21]

I don't know if there's a place for Jackson in a nine-man rotation after the assumed Williams trade (Neal and Bonner plus sweeteners) unless Manu plays the point. The way I see it, Williams is guaranteed minutes if the Spurs trade for him, so he'd probably be the fourth big/combo-forward. This pushes Jack out of the rotation if Manu plays the wing off the bench role. If Manu plays as a combo-guard, then Jack can be the wing, but he'll have to show that he has the athleticism still to not be a liability there. Honestly, I think this would be the best rotation if all goes well:

Parker
> Ginobili
Green
> Jackson
Leonard
> Williams
Duncan
> Diaw
Splitter

In the playoffs, we'll obviously see a skew with the Big Three getting heavy minutes along with whoever else is playing well. But the success of that rotation really depends on Jack being able to defend wings the way he defended Harden a couple of days ago.

They wouldn't play a nine man rotation if this trade were to come to fruition; they'd go back to playing a ten man one. They're only playing nine now because Pop no longer trusts Blair/Bonner, plus it opens up more minutes for players (namely, Splitter) deserving of more minutes.

Williams would be the fourth big, but I don't think he'd get a guaranteed 15-20 mpg. I think he'd get maybe 10-12 mpg to start and then it would depend on his performance. Clearly, they'd want him to be a contributor now, but I think they'd view him as more so a long term project, as opposed to a quick fix.

As for Hayward, he's an undersized SF and a fringe player, who's incapable of fixing their issues at the position. The best way for them to accomplish that (other than just waiting for Budinger to get healthy), is to trade Ridnour. A number of teams could use a solid, veteran backup PG (Cavs, Trail Blazers, Wizards) and have wing depth to spare. By doing this, they'd open up a spot in their back court rotation . . . you've got to think that would only increase their interest in Neal.

[Russo21]

No time for Dalembert and Henson

9:15AM ET
Milwaukee Bucks


http://a.espncdn.com/combiner/i?img=/i/teamlogos/nba/500/mil.png?w=80&h=80&transparent=true (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/clubhouse?team=mil)Backup minutes going to Udoh and Ilyasova.

Be nice if we could swing a trade for Samuel Dalembert. If he's getting no PT in Milwauke i wander what we could offer them for him. He'd be no saviour but a great 3rd defensive big to team with tim and tiago, could be a lot of help.

[Bruno]

Is he more of a three or a four? If he can play as a wing, it probably means they're trying to fix their issues without trading Williams. If he's a power-forward, that would imply Williams' playing time is going to shrink even more. And if he's a combo-forward, that may completely take away Williams' time.

Hayward is a SF. Words is that he will be only kept a week while his contract is still non-guaranteed and that after it, Minny will try Gelabale with 2 10 days contracts. If Hayward/Gelabale get minutes, it will heavily impact Derrick Williams because he got his minutes at the SF spot since Howard knee injury.

[Russo21]

Orlando are shithouse in wake of D12 leaving. I wander if they want to go into total tank mode to secure lottery picks for the next few years consecutive. They have a couple of talented bigs who could really help us. And we have a couple of expirings that could really help them tank/reload.

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=bd5r452

Vucevic has been in beast mode all year, 11ppg, 10rpg, 1bpg and stays out of foul trouble.
Big Baby has been on a tear this year to, injured at the moment but will recover no worries, 16ppg, 8rpg, 1bpg, 1spg and is like an immovable 300lb wide load.

Pair Davis and Vucevic with Duncan and Tiago and we'd have a 4 headed beast in the middle. Backed up by the all around play of Diaw and floor spacing Bonner we'd have a massively diverse and talented 6 deep big rotation.

So would the magic dump 2 productive players with 3 years left on their contracts for the expiring contracts of Jackson and Blair? Worth a phone call?

[Chinook]

Thanks Bruno and TD 21 for clarification on Hayward. He doesn't seem to be the answer. But I don't think Neal is really going to be as desirable to Minnesota, either. If they get a wing they like in Gelabale, then they might be willing to stand pat. They have Shved and Barea to play the shooting-guard, and even though they're undersized, they both deserve to be in the rotation, which cuts down on minutes a player like Neal would get. If Gelabale can play the three, then their rotation seems set. I only see them needing a guard if they move Ridnour or Barea.

[Seventyniner]

Orlando are shithouse in wake of D12 leaving. I wander if they want to go into total tank mode to secure lottery picks for the next few years consecutive. They have a couple of talented bigs who could really help us. And we have a couple of expirings that could really help them tank/reload.

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=bd5r452

Vucevic has been in beast mode all year, 11ppg, 10rpg, 1bpg and stays out of foul trouble.
Big Baby has been on a tear this year to, injured at the moment but will recover no worries, 16ppg, 8rpg, 1bpg, 1spg and is like an immovable 300lb wide load.

Pair Davis and Vucevic with Duncan and Tiago and we'd have a 4 headed beast in the middle. Backed up by the all around play of Diaw and floor spacing Bonner we'd have a massively diverse and talented 6 deep big rotation.

So would the magic dump 2 productive players with 3 years left on their contracts for the expiring contracts of Jackson and Blair? Worth a phone call?

If the Magic are going to take expiring contracts, they'll want to dump Harrington, Turkoglu, and perhaps Davis. It would probably take Splitter, Bonner, one or both of Neal/Blair, Jackson, and a 1st rounder to pry Vucevic away along with Harrington and Turkoglu.

[Chinook]

If the Magic are going to take expiring contracts, they'll want to dump Harrington, Turkoglu, and perhaps Davis. It would probably take Splitter, Bonner, one or both of Neal/Blair, Jackson, and a 1st rounder to pry Vucevic away along with Harrington and Turkoglu.

I actually don't think that package would work. The Magic had their chance to take back expirings (or even just a trade exception) in the Howard trade, but they instead chose to take back some long-term deals like Afflalo and Harrington. I don't think the owner cares about cap space, and especially not to the extent of giving up what may turn out to be the best piece they got from trading Howard.

On the other hand, I agree with you about their other pieces. Harrington can probably be had a matching salary, and the Magic may even be willing to add in a mid-level prospect (Harkless, for example) if the Spurs trade them Jack and maybe a first.

[Paranoid Pop]

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=9wacb4l

Three way trade with the Raptors and Bucks that gets us Udoh (+ Kleiza as filler) for Neal and Sjax.

[Strategic]

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=9wacb4l

Three way trade with the Raptors and Bucks that gets us Udoh (+ Kleiza as filler) for Neal and Sjax.



I think Jax would quit before he went back to Milwaukee because he's not interested in a rebuilding team, so I guess that would rule out Toronto for him also.

[Paranoid Pop]

I think Jax would quit before he went back to Milwaukee because he's not interested in a rebuilding team, so I guess that would rule out Toronto for him also.

Well no team really wants him either, contender or rebuilding team, it's all about his contract. But I don't think he's getting traded, just throwing it out there.

[Chinook]

I think Jax would quit before he went back to Milwaukee because he's not interested in a rebuilding team, so I guess that would rule out Toronto for him also.

I think a lot of teams would be fine with Jack wanting to quit if that meant they could buy him out. With the way he's been playing now, his contract is really the key to his trade value. Trading him to the Bucks wouldn't work because they wouldn't want him back. He was toxic there by the end of his stay. They'd try to move him like Golden State did. Toronto doesn't have that history, so they'd be more willing to put up with him for a few months, I'd assume.

[Chinook]

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=9wacb4l

Three way trade with the Raptors and Bucks that gets us Udoh (+ Kleiza as filler) for Neal and Sjax.

I can't see Milwaukee trading for another big on a long-term deal. Any trade involving Bargnani is going to be pretty hard to pull off.

[Chinook]

The more I thing about it, the more I think that the only way the Spurs can get Williams is by moving Green. He seems to be more what the Wolves need than Neal is. I'd be worried about the wing position if he were to get traded, though.

[Bruno]

The more I thing about it, the more I think that the only way the Spurs can get Williams is by moving Green.

I think you underrate how low Adelman is on Williams. He decided to play Dante Cunningham over Williams at PF and Josh Howard over him at SF. Add to that a $5M salary and it's hard to think Minny will be interested in keeping Williams. Unless Adelman change his mind about him, they will trade him for the best offer at the trade deadline.

[TD 21]

The more I thing about it, the more I think that the only way the Spurs can get Williams is by moving Green. He seems to be more what the Wolves need than Neal is. I'd be worried about the wing position if he were to get traded, though.

You could be right and if that's the case, then it's not going to happen. I think the Spurs view Green as virtually non trade able. Not because he's some all time great in the making, but because they have no one to replace him. Neal somewhat can positionally, but you (probably) know what I mean. I think they'd only move Green for the caliber of player he (along with the usual trade candidates on this team) can't be acquired for.

In general, I don't see them creating another hole to acquire a fourth big. That's why I think Neal is the only one of the top nine they might trade for a fourth big and that's why their options are likely going to be limited.

[Paranoid Pop]

They have that guy Manu something to replace him in the starting lineup, like they will have to do in the playoffs anyway but I agree that he's most likely off limits because Pop loves him so much...

[CGD]

Dude is owed 5m next year. Would the Spurs realistically have the cap space to add him and resign Manu, Tiago, AND Jax without going over the tax threshold?

[Chinook]

I think you underrate how low Adelman is on Williams. He decided to play Dante Cunningham over Williams at PF and Josh Howard over him at SF. Add to that a $5M salary and it's hard to think Minny will be interested in keeping Williams. Unless Adelman change his mind about him, they will trade him for the best offer at the trade deadline.

I don't think the Wolves would really want Neal back, though. With Rubio, Shved, Ridnour and Barea needing minutes, Neal's impact is reduced. It's hard to say he could displace any of those guys from the rotation. They're really lacking a big shooting-guard or small-forward to play good defense and hit open shots. That's not really Neal's game.

As far as Williams goes, I don't think the Wolves are as low on him as his playing time suggests. Cunningham has played well in the games I've seen him in this year. I don't blame Adelman for playing him, especially because Minnesota wants Williams to focus on playing the three. The fact that Williams has been struggling to do that is really not surprising. I don't think Minnesota would trade him for nothing over that.

[Chinook]

Dude is owed 5m next year. Would the Spurs realistically have the cap space to add him and resign Manu, Tiago, AND Jax without going over the tax threshold?

Yes. Unless Manu, Jack and Tiago ask for the max, the Spurs will be nowhere near the tax next season.

[Chinook]

You could be right and if that's the case, then it's not going to happen. I think the Spurs view Green as virtually non trade able. Not because he's some all time great in the making, but because they have no one to replace him. Neal somewhat can positionally, but you (probably) know what I mean. I think they'd only move Green for the caliber of player he (along with the usual trade candidates on this team) can't be acquired for.

In general, I don't see them creating another hole to acquire a fourth big. That's why I think Neal is the only one of the top nine they might trade for a fourth big and that's why their options are likely going to be limited.

Pretty much. I wouldn't trade Green for Williams, either. He's just too much of an unknown to risk losing arguably the best perimeter defender and three-point shooter on the team.

[raybies]

Only players we might part ways with is Neal Bonner and Blair.

Maybe a trade for an additional first round, most desirable, or even a high second, most likely a mid for a desperate team looking for a shooter or rebounder.

Then we sign some 10 days for a couple vets, pg but most likely size. Spurs most glaring issue is fourth big. Maybe mcdyess. That would be solid.

[Paranoid Pop]

Aside from Udoh, a good target could be Spencer Hawes, he's not a world beater and certainly not the ideal athletic big to complete our frontline rotation but I like the BBIQ, I think he could be a great fit.

Now the thing is the Sixers are looking for size (and a backup PG) so no way they trade him for anything but a big, makes it kinda complicated...

Obviously the Bucks and the Jazz are the partners of choice to make a trade happen, good thing we're mostly on good term with both...

Also I'm pretty sick of hearing about Green being untradeable, you'd think he was more than a streaky spot up shooter with shaky defense, well he isn't. But by all means keep your Danny Green and don't complain during the playoff when he goes cold and suddenly becomes useless but Pop loves his specialists... We'd have the core to have one of the best passing team since the Kings but Pop likes to play specialists like Green and Bonner who can't pass to save their lives. I just don't/won't get it, especially since we have two Manu Ginobili.

We have to trade Green imo, he's the one trade bait we can easily part with.

SG Manu / De Colo
PG TP / Neal or Mills

is good enough, actually it's incredibly awesome and more reliable than a Danny Green.

According to timvp's players pairings analysis for December 16th, De Colo Neal had one of the very best point differential of any pairing...

I'd trade him for one of Udoh, Derrick Williams or Spencer Hawes and I wouldn't look back.

[Chinook]

Also I'm pretty sick of hearing about Green being untradeable, you'd think he was more than a streaky spot up shooter with shaky defense, well he isn't. But by all means keep your Danny Green and don't complain during the playoff when he goes cold and suddenly becomes useless but Pop loves his specialists... We'd have the core to have one of the best passing team since the Kings but Pop likes to play specialists like Green and Bonner who can't pass to save their lives. I just don't/won't get it, especially since we have two Manu Ginobili.

We have to trade Green imo, he's the one trade bait we can easily part with.

SG Manu / De Colo
PG TP / Neal or Mills

is good enough, actually it's incredibly awesome and more reliable than a Danny Green.

According to timvp's players pairings analysis for December 16th, De Colo Neal had one of the very best point differential of any pairing...

I'd trade him for one of Udoh, Derrick Williams or Spencer Hawes and I wouldn't look back.

Oh, no you don't, PP :lol. You don't get to use advance statistics to try to prove your point after you dismissed the ones showing Green to be the most effective defensive player on the team last season and in the playoffs (even against OKC). Not only do they show Green to be perhaps the most influential player outside the Big Three this year, but the eye test is showing that, too. There's a reason why Pop is resting him now in blowouts even when he makes the other wings play garbage time.

To say De Colo is another Manu shows a lack of depth in analyzing Ginobili's game. Manu isn't awesome just because he makes great passes. He plays an all-around game where he can make game-changing plays on both ends of the court. Do you know who is the next-closest wing to making that kind of impact? Green. De Colo is too raw to be considered "more reliable" than Green (or even Neal or Mils).

We'll just have to agree to disagree on Green's overall talent level. But I don't see how you can try to say fringe players like De Colo are more important than him. Green has a lot to learn before he can be a consistent, all-around player, but he's still better than most players on the roster right now. Trading him sets the team back unless they get a starting power-forward in return.

[Paranoid Pop]

Oh, no you don't, PP :lol. You don't get to use advance statistics to try to prove your point after you dismissed the ones showing Green to be the most effective defensive player on the team last season and in the playoffs (even against OKC). Not only do they show Green to be perhaps the most influential player outside the Big Three this year, but the eye test is showing that, too. There's a reason why Pop is resting him now in blowouts even when he makes the other wings play garbage time.

So the eye test is showing that Green is more influencial than Tiago and KY... The team wasn't doing so good without KY and Tiago starting is the single biggest game changer but the mighty Green has more impact... That said he's taking quite a few shots away from these two, he does have a big influence that way, not in a good way tho...


To say De Colo is another Manu shows a lack of depth in analyzing Ginobili's game. Manu isn't awesome just because he makes great passes. He plays an all-around game where he can make game-changing plays on both ends of the court. Do you know who is the next-closest wing to making that kind of impact? Green. De Colo is too raw to be considered "more reliable" than Green (or even Neal or Mils).

Green can't make a play to save his life, he can't pass, he can't put the ball on the floor... Both Neal and De Colo are at least able to play the PnR with a big, it's like day and night, Green has the most limited game on the team with Bonner. De Colo guarded Wade while Green got raped by Kobe and most SGs he faces...


We'll just have to agree to disagree on Green's overall talent level. But I don't see how you can try to say fringe players like De Colo are more important than him. Green has a lot to learn before he can be a consistent, all-around player, but he's still better than most players on the roster right now. Trading him sets the team back unless they get a starting power-forward in return.

De Colo has proven himself in Europe and with his national team, so did Mills, meanwhile Green was scrubing in Poland like a no name scrub. Few players got the opportunity Green got, they called his coach to have a "talk", gave him a starting spot, some of it had to do with Manu's injury but a lot of it was man love from Pop.

But you know what, I hope I get proven wrong because I wish for the team to succeed more than anything but Pop better be confident in his choice, because it's all on him, one way or the other. For me there's too many Bonner's similarities to ignore.

The remaining big was always gonna be a free agent tosb I guess.

[Strategic]

The remaining big was always gonna be a free agent tosb I guess.


I agree with this. This season is almost half over making it a little late for a young big to be able to learn enough of the system to help. I know last year they were able to get Diaw, but he is a seasoned vet and is also familiar with Parker. This leaves either someone with substantial league experience(I would hate to see the team sign a FA in the 30 plus club), or someone already playing with the Toros, ie Wilkerson or Jackson. I guess McDyess is a possibility, but being the professional he is, I think he would already be with the team if he was really going to happen.

[Chinook]

You'll have to forgive me first off. I'm not very good at this quote-by-quote thing.

So the eye test is showing that Green is more influencial than Tiago and KY... The team wasn't doing so good without KY and Tiago starting is the single biggest game changer but the mighty Green has more impact... That said he's taking quite a few shots away from these two, he does have a big influence that way, not in a good way tho...

The Spurs won as many games as they did when KL (I assume you're talking about Leonard here) was out because Green was able to hold down the fort at the three for so long. It really took it's toll on him physically and on the team, but they still had a good record during that stretch. So yeah, Green's proven his worth. I love Kawhi as much as anyone, but he's not playing better than Green right now. He makes flashy plays, but he has not been the defensive anchor people pretend he's been. He obviously has a higher ceiling, but he's not playing as well as consistently as Green is.

Tiago starting can't be considered the biggest factor in the Spurs' turn-around, because he was starting during the losing period. He's obviously really important, and his success is essential to the Spurs' having any chance of winning it all. But that doesn't mean Green isn't just as important. He continues to be the best player to try to check Wade and Paul in crunch time.

Green only really takes shots when he's open. That's not really taking opportunities from Splitter and Leonard, as it wouldn't make sense only have four players score on the court. Green is also great shooter, so there's no reason why the Spurs should give up a better chance at points just to have Kawhi shoot more.


Green can't make a play to save his life, he can't pass, he can't put the ball on the floor... Both Neal and De Colo are at least able to play the PnR with a big, it's like day and night, Green has the most limited game on the team with Bonner. De Colo guarded Wade while Green got raped by Kobe and most SGs he faces...

Green has made plays, but obviously he's not a De Colo's level in that regard. He's not a driver, which is obviously something that he needs to work on and that he's been working on. He's not a big creator, but he makes the smart pass and he obviously knows the offense as well as anyone. He's calling plays out as much as anyone outside the Big Three when he's on the court. He's also hit big shots, which is more important on this team than having a flashy passer.

I don't know what you're seeing in De Colo to think he's a great defender. He guarded Wade well when he was injured and not trying, but as the game went on, he really lost effectiveness. Besides that performance, he's really been nothing better than adequate on that end, and that's usually only against backup point guards (and slow ones at that). Green has always drawn harder assignments and has done well for the most part. Kobe got him, as did Harden the first Rockets game. But he's been good against many others (Paul, Derozan, Mayo, Lin, Harden the third game, Williams, etc.). Leonard, for all his hype, is only good against Durant, Gay and Kobe at the end of the game this season. That's obviously a great set of players against which to have success, and it's sorely needed on this team, but he's also struggled against players like Kobe and Harden. He's been as great as he's been in steals this year primarily because he hasn't been asked to defend the other team's best wing. That's been Green's job.


De Colo has proven himself in Europe and with his national team, so did Mills, meanwhile Green was scrubing in Poland like a no name scrub. Few players got the opportunity Green got, they called his coach to have a "talk", gave him a starting spot, some of it had to do with Manu's injury but a lot of it was man love from Pop.

I don't want to belittle De Colo's international accomplishments, but they don't show that he's an NBA player much. The international game is too different to compare them. The fact that Green was bad in Poland is not a reflection of his worth. He was only there for a short time, so I imagine he really wasn't adjusted to being in another country. He's proven himself in the NBA, though, which matters more to this discussion than any time in Europe.

You seem to forget how Green got the starting job. It wasn't because he was playing badly but got favoritism from Pop. It was because he was an tremendous play-maker in limited minutes. He was expected to be cut before last season, but he played so well in pre-season and in spot duty, that Pop eventually gave up on a second-year first-round pick to give the better player more minutes. Performances like the Cleveland and Dallas games cemented his role as the glue guy. He played well enough to allow Pop to play Manu off the bench. Nothing was given to Green; he earned it through his play over the first half of the season.


For me there's too many Bonner's similarities to ignore.

I'm starting to think you don't know what people mean when they criticize Bonner. Bonner's whole benefit is that the offense plays insanely well due to the spacing his three-point shooting supplies. That's why he was called the +/- King. As soon as the March (it's been getting earlier each year) rolls around, his shooting goes south, and the Spurs' can't adjust to the lack of spacing.

Green's production isn't based on three-point shooting. He's a really good help and individual defender, and he rebounds very well for his position. He boxes out well, and he provides timely plays. That did not dry up during the stretch run. He was a big part in the Spurs' 20-game winning streak. In the first two rounds of the playoffs, he (and Leonard) was absolutely destroying their competitors. Green was a major part of the comeback in Game Three against the Clippers, and he played critical defense on Paul to close out Game Four. In the OKC series, he hit a shooting slump, which he obviously let get to him in other aspects of the game. But he was still the defensive-rating king. Bonner never had that impact when his shots don't fall in a series.

Green and Bonner are nothing alike. Jefferson and Bonner were, maybe. But Green has made too many clutch plays to say he shrinks under pressure.

As far as bigs go, we'll see what happens. Neal and Bonner may help get someone who can back Splitter up at the five. I really just don't want to see Blair on the court again. If they can't trade him, they just need to buy him out.

[Paranoid Pop]

You'll have to forgive me first off. I'm not very good at this quote-by-quote thing.


The Spurs won as many games as they did when KL (I assume you're talking about Leonard here) was out because Green was able to hold down the fort at the three for so long. It really took it's toll on him physically and on the team, but they still had a good record during that stretch. So yeah, Green's proven his worth. I love Kawhi as much as anyone, but he's not playing better than Green right now. He makes flashy plays, but he has not been the defensive anchor people pretend he's been. He obviously has a higher ceiling, but he's not playing as well as consistently as Green is.

Tiago starting can't be considered the biggest factor in the Spurs' turn-around, because he was starting during the losing period. He's obviously really important, and his success is essential to the Spurs' having any chance of winning it all. But that doesn't mean Green isn't just as important. He continues to be the best player to try to check Wade and Paul in crunch time.

Vs the likes of the Thunder...


Green only really takes shots when he's open. That's not really taking opportunities from Splitter and Leonard, as it wouldn't make sense only have four players score on the court. Green is also great shooter, so there's no reason why the Spurs should give up a better chance at points just to have Kawhi shoot more.

Well you know what I mean, MAnu and De Colo may use the fact that they are open to drive and pass to Tiago or get a better % shot, playing them get us easier shots.


Green has made plays, but obviously he's not a De Colo's level in that regard. He's not a driver, which is obviously something that he needs to work on and that he's been working on. He's not a big creator, but he makes the smart pass and he obviously knows the offense as well as anyone. He's calling plays out as much as anyone outside the Big Three when he's on the court. He's also hit big shots, which is more important on this team than having a flashy passer.

Like? He has one game winner in his life and he got a looot called for him even back to last year, not a great % of clutch makes if we're being honest.


I don't know what you're seeing in De Colo to think he's a great defender. He guarded Wade well when he was injured and not trying, but as the game went on, he really lost effectiveness. Besides that performance, he's really been nothing better than adequate on that end, and that's usually only against backup point guards (and slow ones at that). Green has always drawn harder assignments and has done well for the most part. Kobe got him, as did Harden the first Rockets game. But he's been good against many others (Paul, Derozan, Mayo, Lin, Harden the third game, Williams, etc.). Leonard, for all his hype, is only good against Durant, Gay and Kobe at the end of the game this season. That's obviously a great set of players against which to have success, and it's sorely needed on this team, but he's also struggled against players like Kobe and Harden. He's been as great as he's been in steals this year primarily because he hasn't been asked to defend the other team's best wing. That's been Green's job.

Got the same question with Green tbh, no sure where the myth of Green being a great defender originated, he's mostly decent at help defense, can't really lock anyone down, best bet is to throw his hustling at a PG bringing the ball up the court but really there's no much skill involved.


I don't want to belittle De Colo's international accomplishments, but they don't show that he's an NBA player much. The international game is too different to compare them. The fact that Green was bad in Poland is not a reflection of his worth. He was only there for a short time, so I imagine he really wasn't adjusted to being in another country. He's proven himself in the NBA, though, which matters more to this discussion than any time in Europe.

You seem to forget how Green got the starting job. It wasn't because he was playing badly but got favoritism from Pop. It was because he was an tremendous play-maker in limited minutes.

The term playmaker is definitely misused right there... James Anderson has more playmaking abilities in his pinkie at any point in time than Green ever will. He a spot up shooter and an hustling guy on D. While it's nice to have the motor to hustle, it's one the most suspect "skill" imo, typically used in contract years by the scrubs of the league, besides everyone hustle in the playoffs.


He was expected to be cut before last season, but he played so well in pre-season and in spot duty, that Pop eventually gave up on a second-year first-round pick to give the better player more minutes. Performances like the Cleveland and Dallas games cemented his role as the glue guy. He played well enough to allow Pop to play Manu off the bench. Nothing was given to Green; he earned it through his play over the first half of the season.

It was given to him in the sense that no one really got that kind of opportunity that quickly, he was babied more than anyone but maybe Blair, another player who got to start thanks to Pop being irrational...


I'm starting to think you don't know what people mean when they criticize Bonner. Bonner's whole benefit is that the offense plays insanely well due to the spacing his three-point shooting supplies. That's why he was called the +/- King. As soon as the March (it's been getting earlier each year) rolls around, his shooting goes south, and the Spurs' can't adjust to the lack of spacing.

Green's production isn't based on three-point shooting. He's a really good help and individual defender, and he rebounds very well for his position. He boxes out well, and he provides timely plays. That did not dry up during the stretch run. He was a big part in the Spurs' 20-game winning streak. In the first two rounds of the playoffs, he (and Leonard) was absolutely destroying their competitors. Green was a major part of the comeback in Game Three against the Clippers, and he played critical defense on Paul to close out Game Four. In the OKC series, he hit a shooting slump, which he obviously let get to him in other aspects of the game. But he was still the defensive-rating king. Bonner never had that impact when his shots don't fall in a series.

Green and Bonner are nothing alike. Jefferson and Bonner were, maybe. But Green has made too many clutch plays to say he shrinks under pressure.

Yes they are, Pop's favorites, stat kinda back up their efficiency but they don't pass the eyetest and don't cut it in the playoffs. Also Green's efficiency has everything to do with his shot, you're kidding yourself if you believe he's a great enough defender not to hurt the team more than anyone when he's bricking shots. It'd be like arguing that this year's Bonner is a great enough rebounder to make a difference no matter what...


As far as bigs go, we'll see what happens. Neal and Bonner may help get someone who can back Splitter up at the five. I really just don't want to see Blair on the court again. If they can't trade him, they just need to buy him out.

They won't they paid 1 M so that other teams couldn't get him, teams like Miami that were smart enough to call their bluff and no send a pick back for him... They may salary dump him but I don't believe they will buy him out.

[Chinook]

I guess we're just gonna have to pretend like two different realities happened last year. It's clear you have your own view of Green that nothing can change. That's okay. There are plenty of things to discuss that don't involve him.

I just don't see why the Spurs kept Blair this offseason if Pop was thinking about giving up on him. He's not even good depth anymore.

[Paranoid Pop]

I guess we're just gonna have to pretend like two different realities happened last year. It's clear you have your own view of Green that nothing can change. That's okay. There are plenty of things to discuss that don't involve him.

I just don't see why the Spurs kept Blair this offseason if Pop was thinking about giving up on him. He's not even good depth anymore.

Anyway we have way bigger problems than Green. Green is a fine SG (who is played SF when he shouldn't tho).

Like someone said in the game thread, might be the right time to give Gelabale a call and look to trade SJax.

Not everybody can be untradable on this team...

[Paranoid Pop]

We basically have no choice but to at least take back one shitty contract imo if we only have SJax, Neal and Bonner and not very attractive picks to send.

[TD 21]

Random trade idea that popped into my head when considering why Blair didn't play in garbage time tonight: Blair/Joseph for Ayon/Smith, with Smith being waived immediately.

Considering how well he played as a rookie, he's had a disappointing season and given that the Magic have exactly one NBA PG on their roster (Moore is more SG than PG and Smith is a fringe player) and he's an aging, fringe starter, it's not difficult to see why this might interest them.

For the Spurs, they were interested before he signed with the Hornets and given that he's a foreigner and a high IQ type, there's probably a pretty good chance he'd at least more closely resemble the player he was last season with them. If not, at least they'd be getting a backup C (which would allow them to play Duncan and Splitter together even more if they so choose) and a solid defensive rebounder, while ridding themselves of Blair and staying under the tax.

[Paranoid Pop]

I like it tbh.

Like it's Fredette's destiny to be traded to the Jazz, Ayon is made for SA...

That said, you rarely trade big for small unless you get something really good, and we're sending a D leaguer... Granted he could be good enough to be our own backup PG... But Ayon's contract seems too cheap for them to part with him.

[TD 21]

Upon further review, Smith is surprisingly guaranteed through next season (low salary, but still), so it makes sense to just go Ayon for Joseph straight up (because they're at 15, though Jones is non-guaranteed), with Blair being traded to whoever is willing to take him (Bobcats? Cavs?) for a top 50 or 55 protected 2nd round pick 3-5 years from now.

Also, apparently he thrived playing the pick-and-roll with Vasquez, so you've got to think he'd thrive playing primarily with Ginobili and occasionally with Parker. This is what Ginobili and the 2nd unit in general needs. It's not just a backup C, it's someone who thrives in the pick-and-roll. Then Splitter can become a legit starter, as opposed to a halfway one.

[Chinook]

I still like the idea of trading Blair for Jeremy Tyler. Tyler's pretty much shown nothing for the Warriors, but he's a big with potential who can sit on the bench as well as Blair can in a worst-case scenario. His contract has only 100k guaranteed for next year. He may be able to show some progress in a strong locker room. I don't think the Warriors would think him too big of a price to pay if they still want Blair at all.

What's better is that the Spurs can get a $1.1 Million trade exception by using Ford's TE from last year to take Tyler while sending Blair to Golden State for part of Udoh's TE. That gives San Antonio the ability to claim non-minimum players off waivers, which can be a good thing if a Corey Brewer situation happens again within the next year.

[Richie]

Nobody who has seen Blair play this year will want him in a trade

[Chinook]

Blair's best value may be allowing a team to dump a player they picked in the 20s of the first round. A team in a situation like Houston was in training camp may be interested in trading for an expiring Blair rather than having to shell out guaranteed money for a player whose option they realized they shouldn't have picked up.

[Chinook]

Anyway we have way bigger problems than Green. Green is a fine SG (who is played SF when he shouldn't tho).

Like someone said in the game thread, might be the right time to give Gelabale a call and look to trade SJax.

Not everybody can be untradable on this team...

If Jack can't get it together, the Spurs need to move him. The idea of keeping him just so they can get cap room next summer is foolish, in my opinion. If they can get a good $8 Million player for him now, that may be better than signing an MLE player in the offseason. They really don't have room for a much bigger deal than that unless they re-sign almost no one.

[Bruno]

287189212430741507
287192032680763392

First, Minny seems to want Reddick and, even if Neal isn't as good as him, they are the same kind of players.
Second, there is a little basis for us to talk about Williams since Spurs were high on him a year ago.
Third, Given their roster additions, I doubt Suns And Rockets are still interested in Williams. Lakers have nothing to offer unless they do a big trade with Gasol.

[CGD]

287189212430741507
287192032680763392

First, Minny seems to want Reddick and, even if Neal isn't as good as him, they are the same kind of players.
Second, there is a little basis for us to talk about Williams since Spurs were high on him a year ago.
Third, Given their roster additions, I doubt Suns And Rockets are still interested in Williams. Lakers have nothing to offer unless they do a big trade with Gasol.


I did see that the Wolves like JJ. I found it interesting from the Wolfson tweet that it would "probably take Derrick Williams AND a future first-rounder to get Orlando's attention." JJ is decent, but I underestimated how low the Wolves seem to be on Derrick Williams if they are also considering giving up a 1st to get him.

[ace3g]

would be nice to have someone that could do this:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TyeZH7gGw_Y

[Chinook]

Maybe the Spurs have to use Jack as the expiring with Neal and take back a contract that Minnesota doesn't want? Having Williams' $5 Million on the books pretty much kills the chance at cap space in the off season anyway.

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=aet5oyx

Ridnour can help as a backup point, so it's not like his contract is too bad. I'd like the Spurs to move Bonner for a wing in this case. I guess Wilson Chandler is available, but his contract is awful.

I just don't see how Neal is more appealing than JJ Barea. Barea hits threes, but he also plays with hustle and more drive. I can't see him being kicked out of the rotation. If that above trade goes through, though, there should be enough room for everyone there.

[Seventyniner]

Maybe the Spurs have to use Jack as the expiring with Neal and take back a contract that Minnesota doesn't want? Having Williams' $5 Million on the books pretty much kills the chance at cap space in the off season anyway.

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=aet5oyx

Ridnour can help as a backup point, so it's not like his contract is too bad. I'd like the Spurs to move Bonner for a wing in this case. I guess Wilson Chandler is available, but his contract is awful.

I just don't see how Neal is more appealing than JJ Barea. Barea hits threes, but he also plays with hustle and more drive. I can't see him being kicked out of the rotation. If that above trade goes through, though, there should be enough room for everyone there.

I've just been reading Zach Lowe's piece on Rudy Gay trades:
http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-triangle/post/_/id/46581/the-rudy-gay-dilemma-if-hes-dealt-where-will-he-land
and he implies that Minnesota might be trying to get cap room for this summer, meaning they wouldn't want to trade for Gay. In that case, doesn't Jax/Blair/Neal for Williams/Kirilenko make sense for both sides? Minnesota gets cap space (Kirilenko has a $10.2M player option for next season), and the Spurs get a defensive upgrade and a potentially great defensive smallball lineup in Tony/Manu/Kawhi (or Green)/Kirilenko/Duncan.

[Chinook]

I've just been reading Zach Lowe's piece on Rudy Gay trades:
http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-triangle/post/_/id/46581/the-rudy-gay-dilemma-if-hes-dealt-where-will-he-land
and he implies that Minnesota might be trying to get cap room for this summer, meaning they wouldn't want to trade for Gay. In that case, doesn't Jax/Blair/Neal for Williams/Kirilenko make sense for both sides? Minnesota gets cap space (Kirilenko has a $10.2M player option for next season), and the Spurs get a defensive upgrade and a potentially great defensive smallball lineup in Tony/Manu/Kawhi (or Green)/Kirilenko/Duncan.

If the Wolves have moved on from Kirilenko (which it really doesn't seem like they have), then trading him for Jack would make sense. But the Wolves are in the playoff race right now. so I doubt they're in hard core rebuild mode. They need wing help, so taking Jack back without having to trade away Kirilenko may be appealing to them, especially if they can get about $10-15 Million off the books by moving Barea or Ridnour with Williams.

Getting back Kirilenko would definitely be a good move for the Spurs, as they have to look for another small-forward if they deal Jack. As far as I understand, he and Parker are friends, so that helps. He's also another Durant/James/Dirk defender, which really couldn't hurt.

I just don't see the Wolvles giving him up; they'd be right back to where they were with no wing depth if they do.

[TD 21]

If Williams AND a 1st is in fact the asking price for Redick, then I can't see that trade happening. The goods news is, if they're interested in Redick, then it stands to reason they'd be interested in Neal too and given that the Spurs supposedly "loved him" entering the draft, you'd think there would be a decent chance of this happening.

Chinook, Neal has much better size for an SG than Barea and is a clear cut better 3-point shooter. As I said a few days ago, I think their plan is to get an SG and to move Ridnour for help at SF.

Paranoid Pop, you may be right about them not wanting to trade big for small, but they could still make this happen by adding Bertans rights or a 1st for their 2nd (which will equate to probably a 6-8 spot difference).

That may sound like an overpayment, but if Ayon gets back to where he was last season (and as I alluded to, there's good reason to think he would as a Spur), then this would be a steal to get him for a couple of assets who most likely have no chance at contributing in what's left of this team's window and who's long term upside isn't all that high.

[Seventyniner]

If the Wolves have moved on from Kirilenko (which it really doesn't seem like they have), then trading him for Jack would make sense. But the Wolves are in the playoff race right now. so I doubt they're in hard core rebuild mode. They need wing help, so taking Jack back without having to trade away Kirilenko may be appealing to them, especially if they can get about $10-15 Million off the books by moving Barea or Ridnour with Williams.

Getting back Kirilenko would definitely be a good move for the Spurs, as they have to look for another small-forward if they deal Jack. As far as I understand, he and Parker are friends, so that helps. He's also another Durant/James/Dirk defender, which really couldn't hurt.

I just don't see the Wolvles giving him up; they'd be right back to where they were with no wing depth if they do.

It's true that a Kirilenko/Jax swap would hurt the Wolves this year. They'd be far more inclined to do that trade near the deadline if they start losing a bunch of games.

I'm not sure I can think of a scenario where the Spurs would be willing to take Barea or Ridnour along with Williams and Kirilenko. We'd go back to potentially including Green in the trade, and I don't think that's worth it. Ridnour is a solid backup PG, but Barea is borderline useless to the Spurs unless they trade both Neal and Mills; even then, Barea would be a 5th guard at best.

I'm trying to come up with a Kirilenko/Williams/Ridnour for Jax/filler scenario, but the Spurs wouldn't include Green, and the Wolves probably wouldn't want Bonner. Trading Bonner would leave the Spurs with only 4 bigs anyway, one of which is a near-useless Blair.

The Spurs only have to get within 150% because they are under the tax, right? Kirilenko + Williams + Ridnour = $18.6M, so if the 150% rule applies, the Spurs would only have to send out $12.4M minimum. Jax + Joseph + Neal doesn't quite get you there. Would they take Blair as more filler? That pushes the Spurs well into the tax too, and eats up all of next year's potential cap space. I'd have to rate this deal as unlikely due to reservations from both sides, though it would be good for the Spurs this season.

[Chinook]

Well then, TD 21 would you say that Jack and Neal for Ridnour and Williams is a good-looking deal for Minnesota? If the Spurs feel confident that someone like Gelabale can step in as the back up three or that Williams can indeed play some minutes there, that trade should give the Wolves what they want. I also think the Adelman is the type of coach that Jack can respect.

I'd still hope they move Bonner, though.

[ace3g]

saw a random trade idea on twitter: Blair for Jason Collins

[Chinook]

It's true that a Kirilenko/Jax swap would hurt the Wolves this year. They'd be far more inclined to do that trade near the deadline if they start losing a bunch of games.

I'm not sure I can think of a scenario where the Spurs would be willing to take Barea or Ridnour along with Williams and Kirilenko. We'd go back to potentially including Green in the trade, and I don't think that's worth it. Ridnour is a solid backup PG, but Barea is borderline useless to the Spurs unless they trade both Neal and Mills; even then, Barea would be a 5th guard at best.

I'm trying to come up with a Kirilenko/Williams/Ridnour for Jax/filler scenario, but the Spurs wouldn't include Green, and the Wolves probably wouldn't want Bonner. Trading Bonner would leave the Spurs with only 4 bigs anyway, one of which is a near-useless Blair.

The Spurs only have to get within 150% because they are under the tax, right? Kirilenko + Williams + Ridnour = $18.6M, so if the 150% rule applies, the Spurs would only have to send out $12.4M minimum. Jax + Joseph + Neal doesn't quite get you there. Would they take Blair as more filler? That pushes the Spurs well into the tax too, and eats up all of next year's potential cap space. I'd have to rate this deal as unlikely due to reservations from both sides, though it would be good for the Spurs this season.

The 50-percent rule only applies if the receiving team is under the tax after the trade. Since that would put the Spurs over the tax, they can only take back a 25-percent increase in salaries. But Pop has said the Spurs will not go over the tax this year, so it might be best to consider that a hard cap.

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=abpxfwm

I think that's a good deal, because it gets both teams what they need to compete better this year. The Spurs get a fourth big and a legitimate back up point, while the Wolves get shooting and a back up wing. I'd even send a first if I were RC. The Wolves may swap out Ridnour for Barea, though, which makes the deal less desirable.

For the Wolves, it even saves them some money down the line. If Jack plays well for Adelman, it could really improve them.

The real question if what to do if Jack is moved.