Simmons on what the Spurs should do

[2Cleva]

Tuck (San Antonio, TX): Bill, if you're the GM of the Spurs what do you do to capitalize on the last few years of the Duncan-Ginobili era?

Bill Simmons: (12:24 PM ET ) I would trade Parker right now for multiple pieces. I think they need to start the rebuilding process a little while keeping the Duncan/Manu foundation. For instance, a deal that makes sense to me is Parker to the Wolves for Randy Foye, the No. 6 pick and expiring contracts. Something like that. And if you're the Wolves, you'd do a deal like that because that gives you a foundation of Jefferson, Love and Parker... you need 3 building blocks to contend and those are 3 good ones. Reminds me of the Ray Allen/Boston trade a little.

Rock (Camden, NJ): Um, you do know Tony Parker just turned 27 on May 17, right? And that Duncan and Manu are hurt more often than LaDainian Tomlinson? Why would the Spurs build around the two older/less durable players?

Bill Simmons: (12:32 PM ET ) Good question. The answer: They can't deal Duncan for obvious reasons (you don't trade your all-time franchise guy), and Manu wouldn't have as much value as he should because of his ankles. The Spurs were victimized by the NBA's stupid draft system - it penalizes teams that do things the right way and eventually fade back to the middle of the pack because you can't ultimately keep winning 55-60 games picking in the bottom-four of the draft with a luxury tax.

[urunobili]

oh oh...

[Dr. Gonzo]

Sounds like a good plan.

[FromWayDowntown]

Simmons is angling for the Minnesota GM job -- however tongue in cheek it might be; suggesting that the Spurs trade Parker to Minnesota (while in itself absurd) is a self-aggrandizing suggestion in the sense that he can say "See, I'm thinking about ways to get you Tony Parker."

Why the Spurs would be interested in pieces from a team that hasn't won in years and the 6th pick in a weak draft is beyond me. That they would be willing to part with their most consistent player -- and, at times, their best player -- in return for pieces and a mediocre draft pick is asinine.

[EricB]

That actually sounds halfway legit.

Problem is, Foye is hurt often as well...

[benefactor]

Parker to Memphis for Mayo, Gay and Gasol.

[Blackjack]

Over/Under the amount of pages in this thread?:smokin

[benefactor]

ducks not viewing yet.....

[samikeyp]

Over/Under the amount of pages in this thread?:smokin

No shit, this place is about to go bat shit nuts.

[Blackjack]

Parker to Memphis for Mayo, Gay and Gasol.

If Rubio is as good as advertised, Memphis would be a damn nice fit for him. (At least they'd be a lot of fun to watch.)

[objective]

The Spurs were victimized by the NBA's stupid draft system - it penalizes teams that do things the right way and eventually fade back to the middle of the pack because you can't ultimately keep winning 55-60 games picking in the bottom-four of the draft with a luxury tax

Surprising excuse-making from the guy who gives so much credit (rightly) to Darryl Morey.

The Spurs have had plenty of opportunities to draft solid contributing role players and even legit starters since 2003 but blew it all for a variety of stupid reasons.

The luxury tax didn't make them sign Elson/Butler over Scola and then trade Scola for garbage, or skip out on guys like Josh Howard, David Lee, Paul Milsapp, Trevor Ariza, etc etc.

[spurs_fan_in_exile]

I'll give Bill the benefit of the doubt and just assume that such ridiculous thoughts are the result of him drinking non-stop ever since the Celtics got eliminated.

[JWest596]

That without a doubt is one of the stupidest ideas I have ever read. The Spurs will soon be Tony's team. His skills and leadership are and will be in their prime for the next 6-8 seasons. SA needs Tony against the CP3, Williams , etc of the future. All Star PGs are a rare commidity and a necessity And Randy Foye is not the answer either. Pop and RC will figure it out, Simmons has no clue.

[Blackjack]

As far as the actual idea of trading Parker?

It's really not all that outlandish if your talking about winning titles, and not just sustaining long term respectability.

Tony's the only one of the Big 3 that could bring back a package that could provide the right prospects and depth to help fill the roster adequately enough to keep the window open for Tim and Manu.

As great as Tony played this year, and as good as he's going to be moving forward, Tony isn't going to be the centerpiece to a championship-level team.

It's not a slight against him or his talent, just a fact.

Barring any unforeseen free-agent acquisitions or Gasol-like trades, the window closes with Tim and Manu.

[mathbzh]

By is logic I don't understand why he wants to keep Gino...
Trade Parker and Ginobili...so why not trading Duncan... After ten years of top 3 pick maybe we could start winning again.
Does these guys get paid for writing these BS?

[urunobili]

Maybe Bayless, Outlaw and Pryzbilla would be better than Foye and a #6... i may get in the Minnesota thing with a 2010 first round pick too...

[George Gervin's Afro]

Parker has the highest trade value.

[SanAntonioSpurs23]

Wow.... Yeah let's trade Parker for Randy Foye and the 6th pick because that is going to help Tim and Manu win another championship.... :pctoss :lol

The only thing that is certain if we trade Parker is that we will be getting a top 14 draft pick in 2010.....

Ridiculous..... WOW

[DPG21920]

That is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. So Foye + random guy out of college = better than Finals MVP, 3 time champion, 27 year old TP.

This is one of the worst thought out scenarios and it seriously under values TP and is a slap in the face to him.

Should Atlanta trade Joe Johnson for this same package?

[BacktoBasics]

A healthy Parker and a decent role player in a below average trade for Manu > an injured Manu and a decent role player in a below average trade for Parker.

This guy's a moron.

[porscha]

http://i39.tinypic.com/2qtznsx.jpg:wow:vomit:

[Mel_13]

I love Bill's work and read it regularly, but this idea makes little sense. Not because the idea of trading Parker for several young pieces is completely ridiculous, but getting nothing better than Foye back as the major piece in return just doesn't work. I'm not sure he was being totally serious since he compares it to the Ray Allen trade which left Ray's old team deep in the lottery for at least two years.

[FromWayDowntown]

I'm not sure he was being totally serious since he compares it to the Ray Allen trade which left Ray's old team deep in the lottery for at least two years.

From Minnesota's perspective, it's a bit like the Ray Allen trade.

From San Antonio's perspective, it's waving a white flag, particularly if you buy the notion that you need 3 stars to win (basically).

[Mel_13]

From Minnesota's perspective, it's a bit like the Ray Allen trade.

From San Antonio's perspective, it's waving a white flag, particularly if you buy the notion that you need 3 stars to win (basically).

Exactly, I could see a package from Portland that would at least be worth discussing, but this deal kills any championship dreams and doesn't even bring back enough to think that the Spurs would be better down the line.

[baseline bum]

So the Spurs best move to win now is to trade a point guard in his prime for a lesser talent not in his and a 19 year-old? :lol

[FromWayDowntown]

Exactly, I could see a package from Portland that would at least be worth discussing, but this deal kills any championship dreams and doesn't even bring back enough to think that the Spurs would be better down the line.

Perhaps, but I don't think you ever improve your team by trading a star for pieces. That's particularly true if you intend to send that star to a team in your own conference and solve that team's most significant problem with an elite answer.

You might be able to get a few nice pieces from Portland for Parker, but I don't think it's feasible to get true talent-for-talent value in such a deal (since any such deal wouldn't include Roy or Aldridge) and meanwhile, you leave Portland with a 3-star core that looks a lot like the core that won the Spurs 3 titles from 2003 to 2007. Even in that scenario, whatever trade you've made likely leaves you to play catchup with Portland -- among others.

[timvp]

Trading Parker to help bring in multiple talented players isn't a horrible idea ... but :lmao @ Foye and the number six pick. That's about half as much as it would take for Pop to even answer the phone.

[Mel_13]

Perhaps, but I don't think you ever improve your team by trading a star for pieces. That's particularly true if you intend to send that star to a team in your own conference and solve that team's most significant problem with an elite answer.

You might be able to get a few nice pieces from Portland for Parker, but I don't think it's feasible to get true talent-for-talent value in such a deal (since any such deal wouldn't include Roy or Aldridge) and meanwhile, you leave Portland with a 3-star core that looks a lot like the core that won the Spurs 3 titles from 2003 to 2007. Even in that scenario, whatever trade you've made likely leaves you to play catchup with Portland -- among others.

We've had this discussion elsewhere and I agree with you. If the Spurs believe that they can make a run at another championship, they must keep Parker. Only if they are ready for life after the Big 3 should any trade be contemplated. If they reached that point, they could get much more for Parker than the Minnesota package that Simmons proposes.

[DPG21920]

The fact he says "start the rebuilding process early" clearly shows he does not fully comprehend the Spurs situation.

Spurs are in win now mode and everyone knows it. If they were going to trade either TP or Manu, they would only even consider it if you got immediate = talent that they felt would improve the chances of winning a ring for Tim.

Just a terrible, poorly constructed opinion.

[DPG21920]

That is the other thing: any team that would want Parker to propel them into contention or into the playoffs, would have to give up too many pieces and it would make the trade stupid for them.

These types of trades only work when you are rebuilding and you get young franchise type players and depth in return. Which clearly, the Spurs are not trying to rebuild just yet. They are re-tooling, there is a difference.

[TFloss32]

Trading Tony Parker is Celtics homer Bill Simmon's dream of tearing apart small market teams that threaten the success of the bigger markets. Letting Tony leave would be a HUGE mistake. The Spurs need to be on the phone with the Clippers to see if they can finish off the deal to bring Camby to SA (especially if Rasheed Wallace is demanding $8 million a year this offseason). With Blake Griffin now in the mix, I'm sure somebody is the odd man out between Camby, Kaman and Randolph. Just depends on who the Clips really want to keep. Hell, watch them pick Rubio and trade Baron...

[AFBlue]

Foye and a #6 in this draft :lmao

Because of the immense talent likely hitting the market next summer, there will be teams lining up to GIVE AWAY good players with a couple more years left on their contracts. Guys like Richard Jefferson, Gerald Wallace, Boris Diaw, Vince Carter will practically be dealt for nothing.

So the Spurs can likely pick up one of those talents without giving up any of their big three and they can stay a relevant, championship-contending team for the next few years.

That'd be my plan anyways....

[StoneBuddha]

Personally, I think it's just a 60 second response, given without much thought since he's fielding 1000's of questions in his chat. I wouldn't read too much into the suggestion.

[DPG21920]

It would be like saying trade Rondo for Foye and the 6th pick and start rebuilding the Celtics early. Would he have said that?

[roycrikside]

I bag on Tony as much as anyone and even I think Simmons' trade idea is retarded. This is a terrible draft. Who at #6 is supposed to turn us into a contender? And Randy Foye? Are you serious?

What an atrocious offer.

If Simmons thinks if Pop/Buford or real NBA GMs would ever entertain such a lopsided deal, then I really do want him to be the T-Wolves GM, just to witness his rude awakening.

"But.. but.. why won't you do it? The trade works on ESPN's trade machine..."

[roycrikside]

Simmons has always undervalued Parker and has ripped him for years by the way. He doesn't think much of Tony at all and dislikes foreign players in general. I think Manu is the only foreign guy I've ever read him say nice things about and even with Manu he's ripped him for flopping and made tasteless kidnapping "jokes" about his family.

[TFloss32]

Foye and a #6 in this draft :lmao

Because of the immense talent likely hitting the market next summer, there will be teams lining up to GIVE AWAY good players with a couple more years left on their contracts. Guys like Richard Jefferson, Gerald Wallace, Boris Diaw, Vince Carter will practically be dealt for nothing.

So the Spurs can likely pick up one of those talents without giving up any of their big three and they can stay a relevant, championship-contending team for the next few years.

That'd be my plan anyways....

In addition to calling the Clips about Camby, I think the potential Vince Carter trade from February should be re-visited. If the Nets would take Hill OR Mason + expiring contracts, but not both, I would pull the trigger. Vince has a crappy attitude occasionally but the dude can score and he would give us some nasty, which we so desperately need (especially from the wing position). He's definitely not in the Nets' future and it appears they want to drop him ASAP.

[superjames1992]

What is with people wanting to trade away the three players that gave us the rings? I don't get it!

Well, I guess you could arguably say that we could have won in 2003 without Parker as Speedy Claxton finished a lot of playoff games instead of Parker (including the game-clincher in the NBA Finals), but without Manu and definitely Timmy we could not have done it.

[AFBlue]

In addition to calling the Clips about Camby, I think the potential Vince Carter trade from February should be re-visited. If the Nets would take Hill OR Mason + expiring contracts, but not both, I would pull the trigger. Vince has a crappy attitude occasionally but the dude can score and he would give us some nasty, which we so desperately need (especially from the wing position). He's definitely not in the Nets' future and it appears they want to drop him ASAP.

Camby is another one.

Point is...there are plenty of options the Spurs have to add an impact player without subtracting arguably their biggest one.

[ChumpDumper]

Foye kinda sucks.

[DPG21920]

There is no reason to knock Foye in order to prop up TP. Foye is a solid player that has had some really good stretches. TP for Foye is still absurd and I would not even do it for Foye + #1 draft pick this year if the Wolves had it.

[ChumpDumper]

I just said he kinda sucks. Fair production on a shitty team isn't terribly impressive.

[DPG21920]

:lmao kinda sucks

[DPG21920]

Hey, at least he did not suggest Barbosa + 14th pick.


I can see it now: "The Suns could pair TP with Nash and have the best of the PG world. The Spurs would get Barbosa who is a scoring machine and just as fast as TP so they don't lose much. Then they would get a player with the 14th they could build around. It is a win-win."

[ChumpDumper]

:lmao kinda sucksI am praising him with a faint damn.

[DPG21920]

I am praising him with a faint damn.

Stop it.

[stxspurs]

Parker to Memphis for Mayo, Gay and Gasol.

x2

[Pucho!!!]

Since we're makin asinine suggestions Mr. Simmons, how about we trade Bonner to the Warriors for the #7 pick? Don Nelson gets another 3 pt shooter that's also a vetern big man (which they lack, they got tons of young players already) and the Spurs get a great pick this draft. Just a suggestion...haha

[Brazil]

Trading Parker to help bring in multiple talented players isn't a horrible idea ...

What kind of deal would you consider good for the spurs in a trading parker idea ?

[Solid D]

Trading Parker to help bring in multiple talented players isn't a horrible idea ... but :lmao @ Foye and the number six pick. That's about half as much as it would take for Pop to even answer the phone.

Why not Parker for Foye and expirings? That's waay better than Scola for "air" from 2 summers ago!!! It's all relative.

[jag]

If you think the spurs have scoring problems now...

[timvp]

What kind of deal would you consider good for the spurs in a trading parker idea ?

It'd would have to be a lot of value in return. And the only scenario that makes sense to me is that if Ginobili isn't going to recover, then you might have to trade Parker to put enough talent around Duncan. If Ginobili is going to recover, then I wouldn't trade Parker.

But in a "replenish" type of trade a team would have to give something like Bosh, Calderon and sweetener or Oden, Fernandez, Batum and sweetener or Biedrins, Randolph, Wright and sweetener ... something like that. But again, I'd only start considering these trades if Manu's career is basically over and the alternative is Parker and Duncan struggling to win 50 games just to go out in the first round.

And really, if that scenario comes to fruition, a more logical rebuilding plan would be to keep Parker and see what you could get for Ginobili and Duncan. Ginobili for David Lee and filler and Duncan for Aldridge, Batum, Fernandez, Outlaw and filler :depressed

[Solid D]

I say trade Parker. He's prone to injuries like broken fingers and spraining ankles against Miami and some such.

[dbestpro]

Would you do Parker to the Clippers for the rights to Griffin and Davis? Griffin and Randolf play the same spot and the Clips are going to have a hard time unloading Randolf. With Parker they become an instant playoff team and the Spurs are still playoff caliber while adjusting their future to include another big for x years.

[timvp]

It'd would have to be a lot of value in return. And the only scenario that makes sense to me is that if Ginobili isn't going to recover, then you might have to trade Parker to put enough talent around Duncan. If Ginobili is going to recover, then I wouldn't trade Parker.

But in a "replenish" type of trade a team would have to give something like Bosh, Calderon and sweetener or Oden, Fernandez, Batum and sweetener or Biedrins, Randolph, Wright and sweetener ... something like that. But again, I'd only start considering these trades if Manu's career is basically over and the alternative is Parker and Duncan struggling to win 50 games just to go out in the first round.

And really, if that scenario comes to fruition, a more logical rebuilding plan would be to keep Parker and see what you could get for Ginobili and Duncan. Ginobili for David Lee and filler and Duncan for Aldridge, Batum, Fernandez, Outlaw and filler :depressed

I need to stop posting from this fishing boat :drunk

[Duncan2177]

I would trade Parker for Wade,LeBron or Kobe but not for Foye, :lol This Simmons dude is a crack monkey, Parker will not be traded.

[timvp]

Would you do Parker to the Clippers for the rights to Griffin and Davis? Griffin and Randolf play the same spot and the Clips are going to have a hard time unloading Randolf. With Parker they become an instant playoff team and the Spurs are still playoff caliber while adjusting their future to include another big for x years.

No way. Davis is broken down and will need a walker by the time the end of his contract rolls around. I wouldn't take Davis in a salary dump.

[Ocotillo]

Simmons needs to get a screen name and start posting trade ideas here. He makes as much sense as some of the trade proposals from some posters.

[Zocalo]

Simmons is completely obtuse.

[SenorSpur]

He (Simmons) made sense right up to the point where he uttered the words "I would".

[Solid D]

I need to stop posting from this fishing boat :drunk

:rollin

[ducks]

trading tp might make sense after duncan and manu retire
and spurs can not get two other stars to play with him
then you trade tp for 2 stars and a lottery pick

[tav1]

Maybe Bayless, Outlaw and Pryzbilla would be better than Foye and a #6... i may get in the Minnesota thing with a 2010 first round pick too...

Simmons is underselling Parker.

The Blazers would rather give up Oden than Pryz. That I know.

[Obstructed_View]

I wouldn't trade Parker for anything less than a first round pick AND an established player with all-star caliber talent AND at least one solid role player. As good as he's been the past couple of years, there's no reason to think he's not going to get better.

[Bruno]

If Manu is done, the best thing to do is to make a push in the 2010 FA instead of trading Parker.

[DPG21920]

Today, you need a big 4 to be dominate (Celtics: Pierce, Garnett, Allen, Rondo, Lakers: Kobe, Odom, Pau, Bynum). Trading away TP would be a disaster because guard play imo is the most important aspect of the NBA and the Spurs have a top 5 talent.

Spurs need to add another piece, a big, to the Big 3. Trading TP only makes sense if you get 2 legit stars in return, but then, what would the team trading for Parker gain by doing so.

The only scenarios trading someone like Parker or Tim makes sense, is if the Spurs were rebuilding and a team in win now mode needed the piece to push them over the top.

[DPG21920]

If Manu is done, the best thing to do is to make a push in the 2010 FA instead of trading Parker.

This is the entire plan as of now, no? If Gino is not healthy, the Spurs will have the money to replace him in FA in 2010. I agree this is the course of action that should be taken IF Manu is not healthy.

Unless you get a no brainer for Manu, why trade him for pennies on the dollar when you could use the money to sign someone in FA that is better than the player you can trade him for.

[FromWayDowntown]

If this thread ever makes its way into Simmons' radar, I'm sure the citizens of San Antonio will again be blasted with something like "do they only write in crayon in San Antonio" or whatever Simmons unleashed a few years ago in response to criticism from Spurs' fans.

[Bukefal]

Trade parker? That is digging your own grave at this moment. REbuilding is good, focusing on young players is good, thats what spurs should focus on, to secure the future. They should build around Parker. Trade parker? No way! Simmons is crazy.

[DPG21920]

I hope it does find its way. So often people who are paid to do these jobs are wrong, and have no one to answer to. Nor do they fess up and say I was wrong; they flip-flop.

This is a message board and fans are not peers at ESPN, we do not have to be P.C. and we call out a stupid take when we see it.

[Bruno]

This is the entire plan as of now, no? If Gino is not healthy, the Spurs will have the money to replace him in FA in 2010.


Well, if Spurs want to be a contender in 09-10, they have to improve their supporting cast and they won't be able to do it without screwing their 2010 cap space.

Spurs have to decide this summer whether or not to stick with the 2010 plan and it isn't a easy choice.
If you improve the supporting cast and Ginobili isn't back at a good level, Spurs will be stuck with a non-contending team (Duncan + Parker + a solid supporting cast) without capspace in 2010 to improve the team.
If you stick with the 2010 plan, Spurs won't be a contender in 09-10 and if Manu is healthy, most of the 2010 capspace will be spend on Manu. In that case, Spurs will be stuck after 2010 with a non-contending team (big 3 + a poor supporting cast).

Whatever Spurs do this summer, they will take risks. Their choice will quite depend on how optimistic they are about Manu's recovery.

[DAF86]

I'll give Bill the benefit of the doubt and just assume that such ridiculous thoughts are the result of him drinking non-stop ever since the Celtics got eliminated.

I heard he has Argentine relatives.

[DAF86]

It'd would have to be a lot of value in return. And the only scenario that makes sense to me is that if Ginobili isn't going to recover, then you might have to trade Parker to put enough talent around Duncan. If Ginobili is going to recover, then I wouldn't trade Parker.

But in a "replenish" type of trade a team would have to give something like Bosh, Calderon and sweetener or Oden, Fernandez, Batum and sweetener or Biedrins, Randolph, Wright and sweetener ... something like that. But again, I'd only start considering these trades if Manu's career is basically over and the alternative is Parker and Duncan struggling to win 50 games just to go out in the first round.

And really, if that scenario comes to fruition, a more logical rebuilding plan would be to keep Parker and see what you could get for Ginobili and Duncan. Ginobili for David Lee and filler and Duncan for Aldridge, Batum, Fernandez, Outlaw and filler :depressed

Wow I never thought of that, would you guys do Bosh for Tony straight up?

[timvp]

If Manu is done, the best thing to do is to make a push in the 2010 FA instead of trading Parker.After touching that stove so many times and getting burnt, I have no confidence that the Spurs could sign someone in the summer of 2010 that can replace Manu.


If Manu has gone Marciulionis and its downhill from here, I think it'd take something more drastic to get #5. I doubt "drastic" includes trading Parker ... but that door can't be sealed shut.

Just like if Manu has a rehab setback before the trade deadline, he'll have to be put on the block due to his enticing contract. Sucks but the loyalty has to be in the ring.

[timvp]

Wow I never thought of that, would you guys do Bosh for Tony straight up?

Not for a free-agent-to-be Bosh. And unlikely even for a re-signed Bosh. That wouldn't be a talent improvement, it'd just move the talent around.

[DAF86]

Not for a free-agent-to-be Bosh. And unlikely even for a re-signed Bosh. That wouldn't be a talent improvement, it'd just move the talent around.

Yeah, but moving it to where is most needed: the front court.

[DPG21920]

Spurs would have a gaping hole in the back court worse than they do now up front.

[timvp]

Yeah, but moving it to where is most needed: the front court.

A power forward next to TD is much easier to find than championship level point guard. And if Manu goes down again, the hole in the backcourt would be 50 times larger than the hole has ever been in the frontcourt.

[DPG21920]

Well, if Spurs want to be a contender in 09-10, they have to improve their supporting cast and they won't be able to do it without screwing their 2010 cap space.

Spurs have to decide this summer whether or not to stick with the 2010 plan and it isn't a easy choice.
If you improve the supporting cast and Ginobili isn't back at a good level, Spurs will be stuck with a non-contending team (Duncan + Parker + a solid supporting cast) without capspace in 2010 to improve the team.
If you stick with the 2010 plan, Spurs won't be a contender in 09-10 and if Manu is healthy, most of the 2010 capspace will be spend on Manu. In that case, Spurs will be stuck after 2010 with a non-contending team (big 3 + a poor supporting cast).

Whatever Spurs do this summer, they will take risks. Their choice will quite depend on how optimistic they are about Manu's recovery.

That is what I was eluding to. That is why I have been saying that if it is possible to poach talent now (meaning do not trade the big 3, just offer salary cap relief), then forget 2010. Not only does it give you a one year early head start at a title run with the big 3, you get time to evaluate with Manu. If he is healthy, then the gamble pays off big time. If he is not, at least you do not have to worry about trying to lure talent here in 2010.

There is risk, but if you can get any kind of high level talent at positions of need using the MLE and trade this summer, I think the Spurs have to do it.

[Bruno]

If Manu has gone Marciulionis and its downhill from here, I think it'd take something more drastic to get #5. I doubt "drastic" includes trading Parker ... but that door can't be sealed shut.


If Manu is done, Spurs won't get #5.

[DPG21920]

Well, if Spurs want to be a contender in 09-10, they have to improve their supporting cast and they won't be able to do it without screwing their 2010 cap space.

.

This part is not necessarily true. If they would have traded for Camby, or do it this summer, he upgrades the Center position and expires in 2010. Not to mention you can offer 1 year full MLE to someone as well.

It would put the Spurs over the luxury tax for the year, but it would keep the 2010 plan intact, while increasing the odds for next year.

[timvp]

If Manu is done, the best thing to do is to make a push in the 2010 FA instead of trading Parker.


If Manu is done, Spurs won't get #5.

Then for what reason would you "make a push in the 2010 FA"?

[Bruno]

That is what I was eluding to. That is why I have been saying that if it is possible to poach talent now (meaning do not trade the big 3, just offer salary cap relief), then forget 2010. Not only does it give you a one year early head start at a title run with the big 3, you get time to evaluate with Manu. If he is healthy, then the gamble pays off big time. If he is not, at least you do not have to worry about trying to lure talent here in 2010.


The level of talent you can get this summer via trade is quite lower than the talent you can potentially get in 2010 with more than $20M in cap space.
I don't think Parker + Duncan + what you can get this summer is a championship level team.

[Bruno]

Then for what reason would you "make a push in the 2010 FA"?

You can hope for a miracle like Bosh signing with Spurs.

[timvp]

You can hope for a miracle like Bosh signing with Spurs.

But if there's no championship shot even with a miracle, what's the point?

[DPG21920]

There are 4 scenarios now that I have seen it:

1) Spurs do not make any trades (or just very small ones) and Manu is healthy.
- This would mean that the Spurs would extend him more than likely and the bulk of the 2010 money goes to him, leaving little room to upgrade. Which in Bruno's mind means they would not be able to compete for a title.

2) Spurs do not make trades and Manu is unhealthy.
- This would mean the Spurs would have to lure a FA, which is hard to do and he would have to be as good as Manu just to keep the team where they are at. Which is probably slightly below championship contender.

3) Spurs make a significant trade and Manu is healthy.
- This would mean the gamble pays off and the Spurs have their best shot at #5.

4) Spurs make a significant trade and get some upgrades and Manu is unhealthy.
- This would mean the Spurs do not extend Manu and do not have money to upgrade the team so they are stuck with TD, TP and good support and thus not contenders.


If you look at that, only 1 scenario leads to the Spurs having a chance at number 5.

[DAF86]

A power forward next to TD is much easier to find than championship level point guard. And if Manu goes down again, the hole in the backcourt would be 50 times larger than the hole has ever been in the frontcourt.

If Manu goes down again you trade him, he's an expiring contract so it wouldn't be so hard to do.

My question of Bosh for Tony was 'cause if I would have to start a team right now I'd pick Bosh over Tony (I'd pick Bosh over Manu and maybe even Tim too, but with them I don't think a trade would be possible).

[Bruno]

But if there's no championship shot even with a miracle, what's the point?

timvp playing the smartass.. :lol

If Manu is done, it would take a miracle for Duncan to get #5 with Spurs.

Happy now ?

[DPG21920]

The level of talent you can get this summer via trade is quite lower than the talent you can potentially get in 2010 with more than $20M in cap space.
I don't think Parker + Duncan + what you can get this summer is a championship level team.

There is not going to be 20M. That would only be 5 players under contract and you would have to fill out the roster still.

Do you think that Duncan+TP+Bosh with essentially the same supporting cast as this year has any more of a legit shot to win a title than Duncan+TP+Manu all healthy?

[timvp]

timvp playing the smartass.. :lol

If Manu is done, it would take a miracle for Duncan to get #5 with Spurs.

Happy now ?

Yes. You call it a miracle. I call it drastic.

Thanks.

[DAF86]

There is not going to be 20M. That would only be 5 players under contract and you would have to fill out the roster still.

Do you think that Duncan+TP+Bosh with essentially the same supporting cast as this year has any more of a legit shot to win a title than Duncan+TP+Manu all healthy?

I don't know if they'd be a legit contender but they would definitely be a better team at this point of Manu's career.

[Bruno]

Yes. You call it a miracle. I call it drastic.

Thanks.

Well, it's quite different.

[timvp]

Well, it's quite different.

Fair enough.

It sounds basically the same to me. Neither one of us think that there is an easy fix if Manu is done. You think the only avenue to the drastic fix is via free agency, and while I agree with free agency being an option, I also think that the right trade could possibly keep the door open.

[raspsa]

The only sacred cow is Timmy, everyone else is expendable but only if the trade makes sense. Tony's value is the highest its been in his career. FO would be remiss in its duties if it turned a deaf ear to other teams who express an interest in Parker or who don't consider exchanging him for a player(s) who might make the team better. Its just good business practice. Nothing personal.

[Russ]

Trading Parker makes sense, but only when Duncan and Ginobili go, not before.

As good as Parker is, he's not the kind of player you can build a team around. When P&G leave, the Spurs should rebuild from the bottom up and not try to "sustain" some level of mediocrity with Parker. That would be better for both the Spurs and for TP.

[Ocotillo]

Maybe Toronto lets Bosh walk since they have Pops......... :p:

[Bruno]

Fair enough.

It sounds basically the same to me. Neither one of us think that there is an easy fix if Manu is done. You think the only avenue to the drastic fix is via free agency, and while I agree with free agency being an option, I also think that the right trade could possibly keep the door open.

The difference isn't on whether or not a trade is the way to fix things.

A miracle is something unexpected. It could be a player like Bosh deciding to sign with Spurs, Magic trading Howard for Bonner, Mahinmi turning into an All Star...
Even if Spurs do great moves, I don't think it will be enough to make them contender without Manu. They will need to be extremely lucky at a moment.
A major player signing with Spurs in 2010 is the less unlikely miracle that's why I say Spurs should take the 2010 FA route if Manu is done.

I just don't think there is a realistic fix if Manu is done.

[ivanfromwestwood]

As great as Tony played this year, and as good as he's going to be moving forward, Tony isn't going to be the centerpiece to a championship-level team.

It's not a slight against him or his talent, just a fact.





your kidding right. so i guess it was another tony parker taking it to kidd, nash, billups and a number of other big name pg's on the way to 3 championships. parker is one of the top 3 pg's in the league right now. and he has got better every year. i bet next year he will be in the running for mvp at his pace.

[timvp]

The difference isn't on whether or not a trade is the way to fix things.

A miracle is something unexpected. It could be a player like Bosh deciding to sign with Spurs, Magic trading Howard for Bonner, Mahinmi turning into an All Star...
Even if Spurs do great moves, I don't think it will be enough to make them contender without Manu. They will need to be extremely lucky at a moment.
A major player signing with Spurs in 2010 is the less unlikely miracle that's why I say Spurs should take the 2010 FA route if Manu is done.To me, a miracle is drastic. And something drastic enough to make the Spurs a contender without Manu would be a miracle. I don't see a non-drastic move that would result in the Spurs winning a championship without Manu.


I just don't think there is a realistic fix if Manu is done.True. And depending on how you look at it, a fifth ring with or without Manu could be deemed unrealistic. Even if Manu stays healthy, that's just the first domino that would have to fall for the Spurs to ultimately celebrate on the river.

[ivanfromwestwood]

Duncan must move to C this year....he is slow and we need to get more athletic. Having him at the 5, he has avg athletic ability for that spot while he is below par at PF.

.
who is better at power forward?

[Bruno]

Even if Manu stays healthy, that's just the first domino that would have to fall for the Spurs to ultimately celebrate on the river.

Yes, even if Manu is back at his best level, Spurs FO will need to be nearly perfect to get #5.
Duncan's health is also a big domino...

[tav1]

Fair enough.

It sounds basically the same to me. Neither one of us think that there is an easy fix if Manu is done. You think the only avenue to the drastic fix is via free agency, and while I agree with free agency being an option, I also think that the right trade could possibly keep the door open.

If Manu is done you absolutely trade him, and here's why. His expiring contract is still enough to land one inexpensive young prospect. An inexpensive young prospect + scaled back free agent money + Splitter keeps the team competitive.

On top of this, the Spurs could still get creative with their other expiring contracts.

I think this is a better option than trying one's luck on the free agent market because, at best, the Spurs will land a player on par with 2007 Manu. 2007 Manu + current Parker + current Duncan might not be enough to get past the Lakers. If that's the case, they'll still need a couple more pieces to fill things out.

btw: even a diminished Manu and his expiring contract should still carry a good asking price on the market. Ben Gordon and Tyrus Thomas? Rip Hamilton or Tay Prince and Amir Johnson? Keep in mind, in the first scenario it's actually just Thomas for Manu because Gordon is not going to resign with Chicago. The second is a Detroit salary dump for Manu--which is easier to sell to fans than a straight dump.

[ivanfromwestwood]

What kind of deal would you consider good for the spurs in a trading parker idea ? how bout parker to the clippers for camby and first round daft pick plus another scrub. then we get ricky rubio and parker gets to move to las angeles. everyone would be happy.

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

I generally love Bill Simmons' writing, and a lot of the time he nails things more conventional writers completely miss, but that is the dumbest fucking trade I've ever heard.

Parker is one of the top 3 PGs in the league and at his peak over the next 3-4 years, so you trade him for a scrub like Foye and the number 6 pick in a weak draft? GTFOH!

[Marcus Bryant]

Proof that what matters most is the ability to make people laugh.

[Brazil]

The chance to get a #5 w/o Manu is just close to 0 whatever the deal we can think of. So the spurs scenario must be done considering a manu healthy, forget the 2010 plan. Our best shot is still with the big 3 but even healthy I agree with Bruno we need a kind of miracle Hill becoming a very solid nba player on O and D, Mason playing great in PO, cleaning the house with the departure of fin, JV, udoka, bonner, KT for a decent C or PF (it could be drew) + SF and hoping that Ian or Gist become a very gifted young player.

[Russ]

Number 5 for the Spurs will be like drawing an inside straight.

They need both Manu being healthy and more athleticism.

That will be the minumum of requirements to get back to the promised land.

[DPG21920]

To me, a miracle is drastic. And something drastic enough to make the Spurs a contender without Manu would be a miracle. I don't see a non-drastic move that would result in the Spurs winning a championship without Manu.

True. And depending on how you look at it, a fifth ring with or without Manu could be deemed unrealistic. Even if Manu stays healthy, that's just the first domino that would have to fall for the Spurs to ultimately celebrate on the river.


There are 4 scenarios now that I have seen it:

1) Spurs do not make any trades (or just very small ones) and Manu is healthy.
- This would mean that the Spurs would extend him more than likely and the bulk of the 2010 money goes to him, leaving little room to upgrade. Which in Bruno's mind means they would not be able to compete for a title.

2) Spurs do not make trades and Manu is unhealthy.
- This would mean the Spurs would have to lure a FA, which is hard to do and he would have to be as good as Manu just to keep the team where they are at. Which is probably slightly below championship contender.

3) Spurs make a significant trade and Manu is healthy.
- This would mean the gamble pays off and the Spurs have their best shot at #5.

4) Spurs make a significant trade and get some upgrades and Manu is unhealthy.
- This would mean the Spurs do not extend Manu and do not have money to upgrade the team so they are stuck with TD, TP and good support and thus not contenders.


If you look at that, only 1 scenario leads to the Spurs having a chance at number 5.

This is where we come back to scenario 3. If they are going to be essentially screwed with Manu healthy or hurt, they must take their chances and trade for some talent now without having to give up any of the big 3.

It is a risk, but with all the other options presented, if Manu can stay healthy and perform, it has the least amount of downside coupled with the most upside.

[Obstructed_View]

timvp playing the smartass.. :lol

If Manu is done, it would take a miracle for Duncan to get #5 with Spurs.

Happy now ?

If Manu is done, the Spurs can still win with Parker + Duncan + good role players. If Parker is gone, the Spurs might not win with Manu + Duncan, even if both are at 100 percent because there's nobody who can reliably run the team. The Spurs' success or lack of success in the playoffs has centered around guard penetration, and there's nobody better than Parker. The almost D'Antoni-like failure to develop anything that resembles a backup point guard means the loss of Parker would destroy this team, at least in the short term, which means the Spurs would be pissing away another year that the window is open.

[tmtcsc]

WTF does Bill Simmons know ? He's a dude with a mic, that's it. His opinion is no more informed than anyone else. Manu Ginobili is going to be back with a vengence.

[Holt's Cat]

So let me get this right. The Spurs trade their top scorer and youngest star because the other two stars are aging and dealing with physical ailments. Yeah, that makes sense.

[cdcast]

Spurs need a starting big and SF. That means using their expiring contracts in a trade and using the MLE and LLE---that puts them way over the luxury tax.

If there was ever a summer for them to pay the luxury tax---THIS IS IT. But I can't see Holt doing it. His cheapness is gonna hold the team back from any meaningful moves.

[Blackjack]

Over/Under the amount of pages in this thread?:smokin

5, huh?

That's all you guy's got?:lol


your kidding right. so i guess it was another tony parker taking it to kidd, nash, billups and a number of other big name pg's on the way to 3 championships. parker is one of the top 3 pg's in the league right now. and he has got better every year. i bet next year he will be in the running for mvp at his pace.

You did read the whole post, right?

Some of you guy's are hilarious. If the rhetoric isn't glowing, it's some how a slight or bash. Amazing, really.

Why don't you tell me how many 6'-ish scoring point-guard's have ever been the centerpiece to a championship team?

Off the top of my head, I can think of only Zeek. Probably the greatest little man to ever play the game.

Are your Spurs-blinders suggesting that Tony is on his way to being the best/most dominant little man the league's ever seen?

If so, we'll just have to agree to disagree.

See, I hate having to respond to irrational/emotional (homer) posts, because it puts me in a position to where I almost have to denigrate someone, when that was never the intention.

I'm open to the possibility of a Parker trade, but I'm not pushing for one.

Simmons suggested trade is a flat-out joke, but the logic in trading Parker isn't all that crazy.

If the Spurs could get Memphis to give up something like the rights to Rubio, Mayo, and Darko- a decent big who's contract would probably make the trade work- I'd definitely consider it. But that's just something off the top of my head.

[Solid D]

Spurs need a starting big and SF.
and a backup PG who can manage the floor and clock. Pop seems to be more interested in playing George Hill at the 2, with an ability to guard opposing 2s/3s with his long wingspan and on-ball D. Mason isn't a PG either.

[50 cent]

All you have do is watch these Playoffs to realize how far away the Spurs are now from an athleticism standpoint from contention.

It's sad to admit, but we've fallen off the contender radar real quickly.

I don't even think a healthy Big 3 is going to get us past the first round at this point in their careers.

It's going to take a miracle to get #5. Incredible health, the fountain of youth, Ian Manhinmi actually not being a china doll and becoming a force in the NBA, and some schrewd FA moves.

It's been one hell of a run, but I'm afraid it's over barring a Christ-like intervention.

[JustinJDW]

So the Spurs best move to win now is to trade a point guard in his prime for a lesser talent not in his and a 19 year-old? :lolI know right, what a joke of a plan. Who the hell is writing this crap.

Trade Tony? Right when he is just breaking out? Right when he developed his jump shot to perfect and can drive and do whatever he wants, basically making him unstoppable? Trade Parker? Right in his prime? Is this a fucking joke?

[poop]

All you have do is watch these Playoffs to realize how far away the Spurs are now from an athleticism standpoint from contention.
.

its been painfully obvious for a long time now.

this is why i was so excited about us signing POPSMB and giving Hairston minutes, at least we were moving in the direction of youth and athleticism.

but most here laughed at that, and popovich agreed, waiving(or benching) all our young athletic talent in favor of keeping Bonner, Vaughn, and Oberto on our playoff roster. maybe now some of the douchebags will admit how stupid it was to do that. we could have been developing POPS, hairston and hell even Williams but now all we have is a group of mediocre fossils.

[GSH]

Here's how the Spurs can win #5 and #6 before Duncan's time is up:

Trade Parker for Jose Calderon and Anthony Parker, and the Raptors' #9 pick. Draft Earl Clark with the #9 pick, and Terrence Williams with the #37 pick (for their defense at first), and get Chip Engelland to help them improve their shooting.

Tank the 09-10 season, giving Tim and Manu enough time to legitimately heal, and secure a lottery pick for 2010. (Then defy the ping-pong ball odds once again. :p:)

Summer of 2010: sign Tiago Splitter and the #1 pick in the draft.

Fall of 2010: Duncan and Manu are fresh and ready to kick ass. Tiago Splitter shows everyone he is more than NBA-ready, and Ian Mahinmi is finally able to put in solid NBA minutes. Calderon is dishing out 10 assists per night, and Hill is solid as his backup. Roger Mason and Anthony Parker are consistent, rock-solid journeymen. Earl Clark is drawing comparisons to Danny Granger, and Terrence Williams is drawing comparisons to Bruce Bowen. James Gist is back from Europe, and is an animal on both ends of the floor. Malik Hairston has found his confidence (and his jump shot) in the D-League and the only problem is finding him enough minutes. And the new #1 draft pick is just a bonus... and the foundation of the new dynasty.

The only thing that is a big stretch is the lottery pick, but since we all know that God loves the Spurs...

[Edit: Okay, so the #1 pick is tongue-in-cheek, but the rest is all within the realm of possibility. I think the Parker for Calderon/Parker/#9 trade works for salary matching. (Plus Calderon is a hell of a PG, and Parker speaks French.) Anthony Carter is a solid night-in night-out player. And both of those young draft picks are good defenders with plenty of offensive upside. Splitter isn't out of the question (unless there is some new development I've missed.) With Duncan, Manu, and Splitter together, I think the rest could be more than enough to win a championship.]

[ivanfromwestwood]

Are your Spurs-blinders suggesting that Tony is on his way to being the best/most dominant little man the league's ever seen?

If so, we'll just have to agree to disagree.


wtf are you talking about best all time? all im saying is parker owns every current pg in the nba. he has beat kidd, nash, billups, paul, d will and many others in the playoffs. imagine if we lost his offense. spurs might be lucky to average 70pts a game.


See, I hate having to respond to irrational/emotional (homer) posts, because it puts me in a position to where I almost have to denigrate someone, when that was never the intention.maybe you should take a bong hit before you post. it helps rid the asshole within you.:drunk

[raspsa]

As good as Parker is, he's not the kind of player you can build a team around.

I'd agree with you. Parker is a very good at creating offense.. when he's hot, he's unstoppable.. The problem is, specially in the playoffs teams have time to adjust their defenses and many times TP has started off a series great but has struggled as the series goes on. Its not personal, I just don't think small PGs are franchise players in general.. note I said "small".. Magic Johnson I could build a franchise around..

[spursbird]

Trade Manu for Barbosa and Robin Lopez. They're younger and had less injuries.

[wildbill2u]

If one of the Big 3 goes down, virtually everyone agrees that we're toast.

But there is a worse scenario---the Big 3 stay healthy and we're still toast because the role players we have can't carry the load in the West. We simply don't have ANY proven quality role players behind these guys like most of the other quality teams. We can make the playoffs and bow out in the first round.

Bowen is not the old Bowen or Pop would be playing him. Gooden is the next best bet but he's offensive minded only and may seek greener pastures. Mason proved to be a one trick pony. Thomas creaks when he walks. Bonner proved he's lacking consistency on O and D. Oberto may be the best of the bunch because he knows the game and that's a little scary. There's no atleticism and no youth in these guys.

The young guys, Mahimi and Hill haven't proved they can play significant roles.

[spursbird]

If one of the Big 3 goes down, virtually everyone agrees that we're toast.

But there is a worse scenario---the Big 3 stay healthy and we're still toast because the role players we have can't carry the load in the West. We simply don't have ANY proven quality role players behind these guys like most of the other quality teams. We can make the playoffs and bow out in the first round.

Bowen is not the old Bowen or Pop would be playing him. Gooden is the next best bet but he's offensive minded only and may seek greener pastures. Mason proved to be a one trick pony. Thomas creaks when he walks. Bonner proved he's lacking consistency on O and D. Oberto may be the best of the bunch because he knows the game and that's a little scary. There's no atleticism and no youth in these guys.

The young guys, Mahimi and Hill haven't proved they can play significant roles.
Yep, and we have to wait until 2010 to see who we can get.

[Jace]

Question-Is Parker somewhat overrated? I'm a huge Spurs fan and a big Parker fan but these playoffs have made me wondered about just how great he is. Obviously he can score in bunches but it appears that every speedy little PGs can do that now, every PG from Aaron Brooks to Derrick Rose lit up the scoreboard Is Parker really that unique?

[anakha]

Aaron Brooks

Think for a moment who was playing PG for the Lakers, and you'll realize Brooks's performance was good but not as great as some people may make it out to be.


Derrick Rose

Rose has the potential to be a perennial All-Star, at least. I don't mind the comparison.

[Yuushi12]

parker to memphis for mayo, gay and gasol.

deal

[silverblackfan]

Parker to Memphis for Mayo, Gay and Gasol.

This is the only trade scenario that I would jump on. It would take a hell of a lot of talent to match Tony.
As for the quote, Simmons is talking out his ass.

[DPG21920]

Why would Memphis do that?

[Blackjack]

Why don't you tell me how many 6'-ish scoring point-guard's have ever been the centerpiece to a championship team?

Off the top of my head, I can think of only Zeek. Probably the greatest little man to ever play the game.

Are your Spurs-blinders suggesting that Tony is on his way to being the best/most dominant little man the league's ever seen?

If so, we'll just have to agree to disagree.


wtf are you talking about best all time? all im saying is parker owns every current pg in the nba. he has beat kidd, nash, billups, paul, d will and many others in the playoffs. imagine if we lost his offense. spurs might be lucky to average 70pts a game.

Convenient how you completely missed the whole point of my post.(Hopefully my bolding it, proves useful;))

My viewing Tony as not being a championship-level centerpiece, is not saying he's not a great player.

Tony was the second best point in the league this year and is, at a minimum, a top 3 point-guard in the league. And of the trio he's a part of (Paul, Parker, and Williams) he had the best individual year of them, by their own standards.


maybe you should take a bong hit before you post. it helps rid the asshole within you.:drunk

Well, if what I've posted deems me an asshole in your eyes, and a bong hit is the only cure, I'll choose to remain an asshole. (I gave that shit up about 8yrs. ago)

So, If I'm an asshole...

I guess the response/dodge (and or complete lack of reading comprehension) you came back with, would be what I just dispensed of a few minutes ago.:toast

[robert1886]

parker will not go anywhere...ever! that simple

[Marcus Bryant]

The Spurs need to focus on improving the supporting cast. They have the Big 3. Now if the Big 3 can't stay healthy, well, so long for the #5 hopes.

Dealing one of your top 3 players to improve your 4th best player doesn't seem that wise.

The Spurs need to bite the bullet next season and pay some lux tax. They should be able to pick up a quality player or two in a trade using their expiring contracts and they should be able to land a starter using their MLE (ie McDyess).

[DPG21920]

The problem is that will push them well over the luxury tax, ~5-7M to be exact if they trade and use the MLE. Not to mention the potential 3M pay out that is lost, that is asking the management to lose an extra 10M.

I personally do not care, but I can see how they might.

The only hope is for the big 3 to be healthy and for the Spurs FO to bring in upgrades and in-turn pay luxury tax.

The Spurs do not need just a minor upgrade, they need someone that could make the Spurs have a "big 4" along with some other role players.

Trading TP only works in 2 scenarios:

1) If the Spurs are in rebuilding mode
2) If they can get a superstar in return along with other solid role players

Problem is, that the Spurs are in win now mode so that cancels out #1. The second problem is that in #2 a team most interested in trading for TP would likely be on the brink of being a contender and if they have to gut their team to get TP, what good does that do them? That would be the only the Spurs would trade TP, so it seems so unrealistic.

[robert1886]

yea i agree with the big 4....but its gonna take some getting lucky to do that...hopefully we can get a trade for some of our expiring contracts

[dbestpro]

A power forward next to TD is much easier to find than championship level point guard. And if Manu goes down again, the hole in the backcourt would be 50 times larger than the hole has ever been in the frontcourt.

No team has ever won an NBA champioship in the modern era where the point guard is the leading scorer for the team and does not average at least 9 apg.

[DPG21920]

No team has ever won an NBA champioship in the modern era where the point guard is the leading scorer for the team.

What does it matter if it is a pg, plenty of teams have won with a guard being their leading scorer.

It is clearly evident that Tim+Bonner+TP would be much better than Tim+Quality Big+Hill or Mason or the Bonner version of TP.

[wildbill2u]

Some of our stat gurus should post our record last season against playoff teams. I'd bet it wasn't sterling. The pieces aroound our Big 3 simply aren't good enough to go further into the playoffs.

Like a mountain climber, we've hit a patch where we can't go forward and we can't go back. Gonna be stuck here for a while.

[robert1886]

No team has ever won an NBA champioship in the modern era where the point guard is the leading scorer for the team.
well there is always a first time....but if ginolbi is healthy TP wont have to score so much like he did this year

[TFloss32]

No team has ever won an NBA champioship in the modern era where the point guard is the leading scorer for the team.

I don't know what constitutes "modern era" in your mind, but Isiah Thomas averaged 28 for the Pistons in the 1990 NBA Finals and won the Finals MVP. Chauncey Billups scoring average was about a point behind Rip Hamilton's in 2004 when they won it all and he got MVP. Tony averaged 19 and Tim averaged 20 in 2007. Bottom line...it helps tremendously to have a point guard that can score. Tony will be the leading scorer if the Spurs ever grab #5. After watching this up and down season and the series against the Mavs, it's clear that the reigns have been handed to Tony. He's our motor and we were practically held scoreless without him in the game. Letting go of him would be a HUGE mistake.

[Obstructed_View]

What's really sad about this is that the Spurs have three solid players, and are now looking for bargains to fill out the rest of the roster. The best bargains are typically found in young players who haven't hit free agency yet, so developing your own players is the wise thing to do. The Spurs seem to be putting a lot of eggs into the free agent basket while leaning too heavily on vets at the expense of their young players. That just compounds a problem that's already near crippling.

[DPG21920]

There is no way around it; if the Spurs are to improve, they must be willing to delve deeper into the luxury tax than they have ever shown the propensity to do.

[Obstructed_View]

There is no way around it; if the Spurs are to improve, they must be willing to delve deeper into the luxury tax than they have ever shown the propensity to do.

Or start developing some young talent and get use out of them before the bidding war.

[DPG21920]

How would they get that talent?

[TFloss32]

How would they get that talent?

I'm sure Obstructed_View is talking about the talent we already have, but don't use. This is because Pop feels they aren't ready, they're playing in Europe or the older vets are taking up the majority of the minutes. I'd definitely like to see Ian, Malik and George in the regular rotation this year. It all depends on the future of Vaughn, Fin and Fab. Not sure what James Gist's situation will be...I wonder if he'll remain in Italy, play for Macabbi or come to SA. Who knows with Marcus Williams???

[spursncowboys]

That is about as intelligent of an idea as MSNBC commentators explaining what the GOP should do.

[duncan228]

Today.

Bill Simmons Mailbag (http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/090522/part2&sportCat=nba)

Q: Can you please explain your asinine trade suggestion from your 5/20 chat that the Spurs should throw away Duncan's last chance at a title by trading Tony Parker to Minnesota? I just want to make sure you're the dumbest writer on ESPN.com.
-- Anthony, El Paso, Texas

SG: Sure. I'll even go with Hubie Brown's second-person hypothetical tense for you.

OK, you're San Antonio. Your Duncan window is closing and so is your chance to contend. You're in NBA no-man's-land, a little like Utah from 1999-2002: 45-50 wins guaranteed, no real chance of contending, no way of getting better because they spent too many years picking at the bottom of the first round. So what do you do? You can't trade Duncan; he's an icon and has to finish his career in San Antonio. You can't get fair value for Ginobili because of his injuries and because he's an expiring contract. Your best trade chip is Parker, a good character guy coming off a career year. He's also your most replaceable guy: a gifted scorer who can't shoot 3s, isn't a traditional point guard and struggles to defend certain points. You only need to replace him with someone who can provide 80 percent of his numbers and you'll be OK. You also need to turn him into multiple pieces.

Now, you're Minnesota. You have three keepers: Al Jefferson, Kevin Love and Randy Foye. (Note: I still like Corey Brewer but let's see how he recovers from his ACL injury.) You are a joke of a franchise with an owner who has one of the poorest reputations in the league and a fan base that doesn't care, namely because you hire failed GMs and coaches, recycle them, then expect the fans to care. Jefferson could be the best guy on a contender, Love could be the third-best guy and Foye could be a starter or a sixth man. But you're not winning anything if that's your top three. Too young, not quite talented enough. You need to acquire an experienced blue-chipper who can show everyone else the way (shades of Ray Allen and KG in Boston). And you have no chance of landing a marquee free agent because NBA players want no part of Sota when they can play for a well-run franchise in a warm city. Thanks anyway.

So what do you do? You have to bowl someone over with a big-time offer. That's why you call San Antonio and say, "We'll give you Foye, our No. 6 pick and Brian Cardinal's 2010 expiring contract for Parker." Note: The deal can't work until July 1.

OK, you're San Antonio again. Foye is a scoring point guard like Parker (his January/February splits: 27 games, 19.3 PPG, 40 percent 3FG), he's four years younger, he's a quality 3-point shooter, he's on the books for cheap ($8.3 million combined in '10 and '11), and between Foye and George Hill, you have a shot of replacing nearly all of Parker's numbers. Plus, you're adding the sixth pick and some much-needed young blood (maybe swingman James Harden, power forward Jordan Hill or shooter Stephen Curry); you'd have $27 million of expiring deals (Cardinal, Bruce Bowen, Fabby Oberto, Kurt Thomas, Matt Bonner and Roger Mason) for a possible mega-trade during the season; and you're selling high on Parker, who will never have more value than he does right now. You're telling me that trade doesn't make sense?

(Well, it makes sense to everyone but Parker and Eva Longoria, who just read the last few paragraphs screaming, "Nooooooooo! Noooooooooooo!!!!!")

Look, the biggest mistake fading contenders make is not audibling near the end of the run, when they can turn an expensive chess piece into multiple guys and an infusion of young blood. The Celtics had a chance to deal Kevin McHale (just a tad past his prime) for Sam Perkins and Detlef Schrempf in the late '80s and wouldn't do it; they could have headed into the '90s with a nucleus of Reggie Lewis, Perkins, Schrempf, Danny Ainge, Robert Parish and Larry Bird. Instead, they played the loyalty card with McHale and made the fatal mistake of dealing Ainge for Joe Kleine and Easy Ed Pinckney. You should only be loyal to franchise guys in a 30-team league. Everyone else is expendable. That's how the Spurs should be thinking. If they want to breathe new life into the Duncan era, Parker is the play. Sincerely, the dumbest writer on ESPN.com.

[Stump]

*yawn*

I still think the Spurs could easily get more for Parker, even if I'm a homer.

[Spursfan092120]

No matter what the Spurs do, I will be wearing my silver and black next year and cheering..just like every year since 1980...GO SPURS GO!!

[DAF86]

Today.

Bill Simmons Mailbag (http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/090522/part2&sportCat=nba)

Q: Can you please explain your asinine trade suggestion from your 5/20 chat that the Spurs should throw away Duncan's last chance at a title by trading Tony Parker to Minnesota? I just want to make sure you're the dumbest writer on ESPN.com.
-- Anthony, El Paso, Texas.

So who in here is Anthony from El Paso, Texas?

[024]

Today.

Bill Simmons Mailbag (http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/090522/part2&sportCat=nba)

Q: Can you please explain your asinine trade suggestion from your 5/20 chat that the Spurs should throw away Duncan's last chance at a title by trading Tony Parker to Minnesota? I just want to make sure you're the dumbest writer on ESPN.com.
-- Anthony, El Paso, Texas

SG: Sure. I'll even go with Hubie Brown's second-person hypothetical tense for you.

OK, you're San Antonio. Your Duncan window is closing and so is your chance to contend. You're in NBA no-man's-land, a little like Utah from 1999-2002: 45-50 wins guaranteed, no real chance of contending, no way of getting better because they spent too many years picking at the bottom of the first round. So what do you do? You can't trade Duncan; he's an icon and has to finish his career in San Antonio. You can't get fair value for Ginobili because of his injuries and because he's an expiring contract. Your best trade chip is Parker, a good character guy coming off a career year. He's also your most replaceable guy: a gifted scorer who can't shoot 3s, isn't a traditional point guard and struggles to defend certain points. You only need to replace him with someone who can provide 80 percent of his numbers and you'll be OK. You also need to turn him into multiple pieces.

Now, you're Minnesota. You have three keepers: Al Jefferson, Kevin Love and Randy Foye. (Note: I still like Corey Brewer but let's see how he recovers from his ACL injury.) You are a joke of a franchise with an owner who has one of the poorest reputations in the league and a fan base that doesn't care, namely because you hire failed GMs and coaches, recycle them, then expect the fans to care. Jefferson could be the best guy on a contender, Love could be the third-best guy and Foye could be a starter or a sixth man. But you're not winning anything if that's your top three. Too young, not quite talented enough. You need to acquire an experienced blue-chipper who can show everyone else the way (shades of Ray Allen and KG in Boston). And you have no chance of landing a marquee free agent because NBA players want no part of Sota when they can play for a well-run franchise in a warm city. Thanks anyway.

So what do you do? You have to bowl someone over with a big-time offer. That's why you call San Antonio and say, "We'll give you Foye, our No. 6 pick and Brian Cardinal's 2010 expiring contract for Parker." Note: The deal can't work until July 1.

OK, you're San Antonio again. Foye is a scoring point guard like Parker (his January/February splits: 27 games, 19.3 PPG, 40 percent 3FG), he's four years younger, he's a quality 3-point shooter, he's on the books for cheap ($8.3 million combined in '10 and '11), and between Foye and George Hill, you have a shot of replacing nearly all of Parker's numbers. Plus, you're adding the sixth pick and some much-needed young blood (maybe swingman James Harden, power forward Jordan Hill or shooter Stephen Curry); you'd have $27 million of expiring deals (Cardinal, Bruce Bowen, Fabby Oberto, Kurt Thomas, Matt Bonner and Roger Mason) for a possible mega-trade during the season; and you're selling high on Parker, who will never have more value than he does right now. You're telling me that trade doesn't make sense?

(Well, it makes sense to everyone but Parker and Eva Longoria, who just read the last few paragraphs screaming, "Nooooooooo! Noooooooooooo!!!!!")

Look, the biggest mistake fading contenders make is not audibling near the end of the run, when they can turn an expensive chess piece into multiple guys and an infusion of young blood. The Celtics had a chance to deal Kevin McHale (just a tad past his prime) for Sam Perkins and Detlef Schrempf in the late '80s and wouldn't do it; they could have headed into the '90s with a nucleus of Reggie Lewis, Perkins, Schrempf, Danny Ainge, Robert Parish and Larry Bird. Instead, they played the loyalty card with McHale and made the fatal mistake of dealing Ainge for Joe Kleine and Easy Ed Pinckney. You should only be loyal to franchise guys in a 30-team league. Everyone else is expendable. That's how the Spurs should be thinking. If they want to breathe new life into the Duncan era, Parker is the play. Sincerely, the dumbest writer on ESPN.com.
i just saw this while reading his mailbag. it's kind of intriguing if you think about it. i'm open for trading parker if the right deal comes along, anything it takes for the spurs to get duncan his fifth championship. this kind of makes sense ONLY if james harden is available at the sixth pick. he has the maturity, poise, talent, and commitment to defense to make an immediate contribution and possibly a franchise player in the future. i'm thinking a better version of courtney lee in the playoffs with the possibility of developing into a main option.

simmons is correct when he called out parker's weakness in 3pt shooting. i think he's a pull up jumper and a consistent 3pt shot away from cracking the top 2 PG spots. but i don't know if he will ever develop the two, it may be he already reached his ceiling. i can see him gaining a 3pt shot much later in his career when he can't get into the lanes anymore. of course all this talk is useless because popovich will never even entertain the idea. maybe after a third consecutive disappointing end in the playoffs will popovich believe a shakeup is needed.

[clubalien]

That without a doubt is one of the stupidest ideas I have ever read. The Spurs will soon be Tony's team. His skills and leadership are and will be in their prime for the next 6-8 seasons. SA needs Tony against the CP3, Williams , etc of the future. All Star PGs are a rare commidity and a necessity And Randy Foye is not the answer either. Pop and RC will figure it out, Simmons has no clue.

pg don't win nba championships if they are your star. About the only one is magic..

I think it really depends on who the draft pick is.. if the draft pick is a dwight howard,stoudmire, type of player it makes since if it is darko then it sucks

getting rid of tony clear cap so you can get a big FA and if you dd a young top draft pick then you are better off.. but that draft pick better not be a bust

[cheney212]

stupidest idea ive heard

[Steve-O-Matic]

If the Wolves included Corey Brewer (who should be near 100% by the start of the season) I'd probably make that deal. Foye and the #6 pick (plus contract filler) isn't enough because neither player would be a star (or at least Foye wouldn't). But with Foye (SG), Brewer (SF) and, say, Brandon Jennings (PG, with the sixth pick) the Spurs could parlay Parker into three young and athletic players who could lock down the three backcourt/wing positions for years to come. Foye would be the ideal partner for Ginobili at the SG position as the starter who would defer his minutes to Manu as the 6th man while also being able to play the point on occassion. This would also free up the Spurs to trade Roger Mason for another asset(s) by taking advantage of the name he made for himself during his semi-breakout year for the Spurs this past season. I agree with Simmons that its a good idea to try to sell high with a player like Parker (and perhaps, subsequently, Mason) when a franchise is clearly in decline with its current cast and has no other true up-and-comers to keep the machine going into the next decade. I like Parker as much as the next fan, but he's simply not the indespensible be-all-end-all of the Spurs franchise that many believe him to be.

[DPG21920]

Still assuming the Spurs could not trade TP for the same expiring and more talent. Why then would they trade him to Minny if I know, you know and everyone but Simmons knows that TP would command a much better package than Foye+16th+expiring if he were made available?

He is also saying the Spurs cannot trade Tim, but he is just supposed to be ok with having 0 chance at another ring as long as he retires a Spur? He would asked to be traded at that point.

[alchemist]

dumbest fucking idea by Simmons EVER! Parker is a top 15-20 talent in the league, if you're not getting someone in that range back your family deserves a painful death. :toast

[ss1986v2]

Still assuming the Spurs could not trade TP for the same expiring and more talent. Why then would they trade him to Minny if I know, you know and everyone but Simmons knows that TP would command a much better package than Foye+16th+expiring if he were made available?

just to take this in another direction, what about a deal like parker for love/miller/#6? maybe the spurs even throw another asset into the equation (maybe a future protected 1st, maybe add in a bowen/oberto for cardinal swap to save the twolves a couple bucks). what about leaving miller out?

is this closer to fair value, or is it too much for a young team like the twolves to part with?

[DPG21920]

just to take this in another direction, what about a deal like parker for love/miller/#6? maybe the spurs even throw another asset into the equation (maybe a future protected 1st, maybe add in a bowen/oberto for cardinal swap to save the twolves a couple bucks). what about leaving miller out?

is this closer to fair value, or is it too much for a young team like the twolves to part with?

That is even worse. Foye is Minny's second best player, so now the Spurs are not even getting that along with having to give up a future 1st rounder? Nothing outside of Al Jefferson would be sufficient for Parker from Minny and even then I would not want it. Love is at best a role player and cannot carry a team, same with Miller. TP is a top 3 pg, Love+Miller+16th pick will more than likely never be as good as TP is.

Minny would not part with Al, so it is just not feasible from them. Maybe another team, but it is highly unlikely because the Spurs would require a ton to give TP up and then the team that got TP would not have the pieces to compete, so it would be useless.

If Duncan or Ginobili was completely done, then maybe, but it would still require more than Minny could offer.

[ss1986v2]

That is even worse. Foye is Minny's second best player, so now the Spurs are not even getting that along with having to give up a future 1st rounder? Nothing outside of Al Jefferson would be sufficient for Parker from Minny and even then I would not want it. Love is at best a role player and cannot carry a team, same with Miller. TP is a top 3 pg, Love+Miller+16th pick will more than likely never be as good as TP is.

i would have to disagree. if the core of the package is love+#6 (you said #16, i assume its a typo) its pretty good value for parker IMO, especially if we are getting miller too. with jefferson out, love was putting up something like 16 & 10, so i think id probably rate him out as maybe a little more than a role player. and at #6, spurs would have access to most of the point guard prospects in this draft (rubio would be gone, and possibly jennings, depending on what happens with sactown). that plus miller aint too shabby a hall for us. if we assume bowen is cut and brought back:

#6/hill
manu/mason
miller/bowen
love/bonner
duncan/KT/ian

with both manu and miller able to handle the ball a bit if neccesary. thats a team with a good bit more quality in the frontcourt, with a bit of youth in the backcourt. if we are going to do something drastic, i wouldnt mind this all that much.

[DPG21920]

If you think Love is more than a role player, than that is your opinion. Zach Randolph puts up 20/10 and has been doing it for years and he is a role player. He cannot carry a team or be part of a big 3 that will win anything.

Zach Randolph>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Love and no one would do that trade. Love has a good attitude and is a nice little player, but if you are trying to say that he will ever be on the level of TP you are crazy. He will never be an all-star, all-nba team, or a finals MVP. The number 6 pick in a weak draft is a crap shoot and Miller could be had without trading TP, so why do it?

[ss1986v2]

but if you are trying to say that he will ever be on the level of TP you are crazy. He will never be an all-star, all-nba team, or a finals MVP.

again, i think the love/randolph comparison is insulting to love (and pretty much the game of basketball). but whatever, not going to make this about love. i guess we differ on whether or not you can move parker.

[exstatic]

I don't have a problem with the idea of trading Parker. I just think you HAVE to get back an All Star/All NBA talent in return. Trading one stud for two good players is a zero sum game. That stud can have four other players on the floor with them. The two good players can only have 3 other players playing on the floor at the same time.

[trajik dark]

I don't have a problem with the idea of trading Parker. I just think you HAVE to get back an All Star/All NBA talent in return. Trading one stud for two good players is a zero sum game. That stud can have four other players on the floor with them. The two good players can only have 3 other players playing on the floor at the same time.


Inconsistant too. Injuries are not as much of a problem.
agree if we trade parker we need an all around star or maybe two semi stars such as john salmon and ben gordon start hill at point now we got a team

[Phenomanul]

Trading with Minnesota makes absolute zero sense for the Spurs.... and for Parker for that matter... Why would the Spurs low-ball their star point guard with that type of disservice? By sending him to the freezer that is otherwise known as Minneapolis...

As others have mentioned... the idea of trading Parker is not completely crazy as long as the right pieces were involved...

Los Angeles Clippers: Parker and the rights to Splitter for the No. 1 pick/Eric Gordon and Al Thorton... Parker would finally play in LA where his wife makes her living... but not for the blasphemous P&G. The Spurs would get another backcourt playmaker, and a shot at infusing the frontcourt with young talent. The Clippers could throw the right amount of money to land Splitter as soon as next season (they don't seem to care about the lux tax) and would get a top 15 NBA talent in Parker.

Portland Trailblazers: Parker for (Bayless or Blake), Batum, and Pryzbilla. Spurs will fill key defensive holes and get back to being an elite defensive team. Parker will take the Blazers to the next level (hopefully after the Spurs have won No. 5). As FWD noted however, this would put the Blazers in elite territory. Would the multipiece upgrade to the Spurs be enough to offset that shift in power?

OKC Thunder: Parker and the rights to Splitter for the No. 4 pick, Westbrook and Green (or Wilcox). Parker and Durant are both young and would wreak havoc on the league for years to come; Splitter is a wild card. As good as Westbrook is the Spurs would still see a downgrade at the 1 but would considerably upgrade their SF position. The No. 4 pick would force Spurs' brass to work overtime in the scouting dept. Would Ricky Rubio fall that low?

Chicago Bulls: Parker and the rights to Splitter for Derrick Rose, the No. 16 pick and Tyrus Thomas. This trade essentially becomes a move to upgrade the Spurs' front court. Rose may eventually become as good a player as Parker but certainly would not be a downgrade. The Bulls probably don't bite on this trade, but they may be willing to shed Thomas' salary in order to avoid landing in lux tax territory and therefore have a shot at re-signing Ben Gordon.

These scenarios are far more considerate to Parker's future than trading him to Minny and leaving him out to dry.

That said, I don't know if the salaries match....

[samikeyp]

When trades happen, salaries have to match. How does it work with the salary cap when picks are involved? Is there a certain dollar value attached to the pick?

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

Trading with Minnesota makes absolute zero sense for the Spurs.... and for Parker for that matter... Why would the Spurs low-ball their star point guard with that type of disservice? By sending him to the freezer that is otherwise known as Minneapolis...

As others have mentioned... the idea of trading Parker is not completely crazy as long as the right pieces were involved...

Los Angeles Clippers: Parker and the rights to Splitter for the No. 1 pick/Eric Gordon and Al Thorton... Parker would finally play in LA where his wife makes her living... but not for the blasphemous P&G. The Spurs would get another backcourt playmaker, and a shot at infusing the frontcourt with young talent. The Clippers could throw the right amount of money to land Splitter as soon as next season (they don't seem to care about the lux tax) and would get a top 15 NBA talent in Parker.

Portland Trailblazers: Parker for (Bayless or Blake), Batum, and Pryzbilla. Spurs will fill key defensive holes and get back to being an elite defensive team. Parker will take the Blazers to the next level (hopefully after the Spurs have won No. 5). As FWD noted however, this would put the Blazers in elite territory. Would the multipiece upgrade to the Spurs be enough to offset that shift in power?

OKC Thunder: Parker and the rights to Splitter for the No. 4 pick, Westbrook and Green (or Wilcox). Parker and Durant are both young and would wreak havoc on the league for years to come; Splitter is a wild card. As good as Westbrook is the Spurs would still see a downgrade at the 1 but would considerably upgrade their SF position. The No. 4 pick would force Spurs' brass to work overtime in the scouting dept. Would Ricky Rubio fall that low?

Chicago Bulls: Parker and the rights to Splitter for Derrick Rose, the No. 16 pick and Tyrus Thomas. This trade essentially becomes a move to upgrade the Spurs' front court. Rose may eventually become as good a player as Parker but certainly would not be a downgrade. The Bulls probably don't bite on this trade, but they may be willing to shed Thomas' salary in order to avoid landing in lux tax territory and therefore have a shot at re-signing Ben Gordon.

These scenarios are far more considerate to Parker's future than trading him to Minny and leaving him out to dry.

That said, I don't know if the salaries match....


Completely disagree with all of your scenarios. No team willing to contend should even consider trading a superstar for potential.

1. Why would the Clippers do this deal having an enormous, irremovable contract at the same position? They won't give us the No.1 pick. Gordon + Thornton would not make us a better team.

2. Portland? You want to give a good team a legid 3rd star to kick our own asses for years to come? And you get back a poor man's Rasho, a poor man's Pietrus and their 3rd string PG. That's an awful trade for the Spurs.

3. You critisize the choice of Minneapolis but you're OK with the wonderful city of Oklahoma? No way Parker goes there.

4. The Chicago trade makes more sense, but I think it'd probably be bad for both teams, as it doesn't solve any of the Bulls' problems and in the same time Spurs get a player who might someday improve enough to be on Parker's level. Again, it doesn't make the Spurs better during our 3-year window to contend.

[Phenomanul]

Completely disagree with all of your scenarios. No team willing to contend should even consider trading a superstar for potential.

1. Why would the Clippers do this deal having an enormous, irremovable contract at the same position? They won't give us the No.1 pick. Gordon + Thornton would not make us a better team.

2. Portland? You want to give a good team a legid 3rd star to kick our own asses for years to come? And you get back a poor man's Rasho, a poor man's Pietrus and their 3rd string PG. That's an awful trade for the Spurs.

3. You critisize the choice of Minneapolis but you're OK with the wonderful city of Oklahoma? No way Parker goes there.

4. The Chicago trade makes more sense, but I think it'd probably be bad for both teams, as it doesn't solve any of the Bulls' problems and in the same time Spurs get a player who might someday improve enough to be on Parker's level. Again, it doesn't make the Spurs better during our 3-year window to contend.


Personally I wouldn't trade Parker... I was simply pointing out that there were much better options out there than what Simmons' suggested...

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

Personally I wouldn't trade Parker... I was simply pointing out that there were much better options out there than what Simmons' suggested...

Yea I agree we shouldn't trade either of the big 3.

[Yogurt210]

Trading with Minnesota makes absolute zero sense for the Spurs.... and for Parker for that matter... Why would the Spurs low-ball their star point guard with that type of disservice? By sending him to the freezer that is otherwise known as Minneapolis...

As others have mentioned... the idea of trading Parker is not completely crazy as long as the right pieces were involved...

Los Angeles Clippers: Parker and the rights to Splitter for the No. 1 pick/Eric Gordon and Al Thorton... Parker would finally play in LA where his wife makes her living... but not for the blasphemous P&G. The Spurs would get another backcourt playmaker, and a shot at infusing the frontcourt with young talent. The Clippers could throw the right amount of money to land Splitter as soon as next season (they don't seem to care about the lux tax) and would get a top 15 NBA talent in Parker.

Portland Trailblazers: Parker for (Bayless or Blake), Batum, and Pryzbilla. Spurs will fill key defensive holes and get back to being an elite defensive team. Parker will take the Blazers to the next level (hopefully after the Spurs have won No. 5). As FWD noted however, this would put the Blazers in elite territory. Would the multipiece upgrade to the Spurs be enough to offset that shift in power?

OKC Thunder: Parker and the rights to Splitter for the No. 4 pick, Westbrook and Green (or Wilcox). Parker and Durant are both young and would wreak havoc on the league for years to come; Splitter is a wild card. As good as Westbrook is the Spurs would still see a downgrade at the 1 but would considerably upgrade their SF position. The No. 4 pick would force Spurs' brass to work overtime in the scouting dept. Would Ricky Rubio fall that low?

Chicago Bulls: Parker and the rights to Splitter for Derrick Rose, the No. 16 pick and Tyrus Thomas. This trade essentially becomes a move to upgrade the Spurs' front court. Rose may eventually become as good a player as Parker but certainly would not be a downgrade. The Bulls probably don't bite on this trade, but they may be willing to shed Thomas' salary in order to avoid landing in lux tax territory and therefore have a shot at re-signing Ben Gordon.

These scenarios are far more considerate to Parker's future than trading him to Minny and leaving him out to dry.

That said, I don't know if the salaries match....

I like your mind set.
It's kinda hard to trade away a player you have loved for soo long on your team, but hey it'stime to better the team and our city of San Antone. Gotta do what you gotta do. Time to fall in love with new players.

[Blackjack]

Simmons revisited . . .


5-22-09

Bill Simmons Mailbag (http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/090522/part2&sportCat=nba)

Q: Can you please explain your asinine trade suggestion from your 5/20 chat that the Spurs should throw away Duncan's last chance at a title by trading Tony Parker to Minnesota? I just want to make sure you're the dumbest writer on ESPN.com.
-- Anthony, El Paso, Texas

SG: Sure. I'll even go with Hubie Brown's second-person hypothetical tense for you.

OK, you're San Antonio. Your Duncan window is closing and so is your chance to contend. You're in NBA no-man's-land, a little like Utah from 1999-2002: 45-50 wins guaranteed, no real chance of contending, no way of getting better because they spent too many years picking at the bottom of the first round. So what do you do? You can't trade Duncan; he's an icon and has to finish his career in San Antonio. You can't get fair value for Ginobili because of his injuries and because he's an expiring contract. Your best trade chip is Parker, a good character guy coming off a career year. He's also your most replaceable guy: a gifted scorer who can't shoot 3s, isn't a traditional point guard and struggles to defend certain points. You only need to replace him with someone who can provide 80 percent of his numbers and you'll be OK. You also need to turn him into multiple pieces.

Now, you're Minnesota. You have three keepers: Al Jefferson, Kevin Love and Randy Foye. (Note: I still like Corey Brewer but let's see how he recovers from his ACL injury.) You are a joke of a franchise with an owner who has one of the poorest reputations in the league and a fan base that doesn't care, namely because you hire failed GMs and coaches, recycle them, then expect the fans to care. Jefferson could be the best guy on a contender, Love could be the third-best guy and Foye could be a starter or a sixth man. But you're not winning anything if that's your top three. Too young, not quite talented enough. You need to acquire an experienced blue-chipper who can show everyone else the way (shades of Ray Allen and KG in Boston). And you have no chance of landing a marquee free agent because NBA players want no part of Sota when they can play for a well-run franchise in a warm city. Thanks anyway.

So what do you do? You have to bowl someone over with a big-time offer. That's why you call San Antonio and say, "We'll give you Foye, our No. 6 pick and Brian Cardinal's 2010 expiring contract for Parker." Note: The deal can't work until July 1.

OK, you're San Antonio again. Foye is a scoring point guard like Parker (his January/February splits: 27 games, 19.3 PPG, 40 percent 3FG), he's four years younger, he's a quality 3-point shooter, he's on the books for cheap ($8.3 million combined in '10 and '11), and between Foye and George Hill, you have a shot of replacing nearly all of Parker's numbers. Plus, you're adding the sixth pick and some much-needed young blood (maybe swingman James Harden, power forward Jordan Hill or shooter Stephen Curry); you'd have $27 million of expiring deals (Cardinal, Bruce Bowen, Fabby Oberto, Kurt Thomas, Matt Bonner and Roger Mason) for a possible mega-trade during the season; and you're selling high on Parker, who will never have more value than he does right now. You're telling me that trade doesn't make sense?

(Well, it makes sense to everyone but Parker and Eva Longoria, who just read the last few paragraphs screaming, "Nooooooooo! Noooooooooooo!!!!!")

Look, the biggest mistake fading contenders make is not audibling near the end of the run, when they can turn an expensive chess piece into multiple guys and an infusion of young blood. The Celtics had a chance to deal Kevin McHale (just a tad past his prime) for Sam Perkins and Detlef Schrempf in the late '80s and wouldn't do it; they could have headed into the '90s with a nucleus of Reggie Lewis, Perkins, Schrempf, Danny Ainge, Robert Parish and Larry Bird. Instead, they played the loyalty card with McHale and made the fatal mistake of dealing Ainge for Joe Kleine and Easy Ed Pinckney. You should only be loyal to franchise guys in a 30-team league. Everyone else is expendable. That's how the Spurs should be thinking. If they want to breathe new life into the Duncan era, Parker is the play. Sincerely, the dumbest writer on ESPN.com.

My dream scenario (http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3448953&postcount=10) had the Spurs landing Mayo and acquiring the fifth pick in some type of multiple team trade to draft Curry. And had it happened, I think we'd all be pretty happy about it. But seeing as this opinion caused quite the stir, I figured now was as good a time as any to revisit and see how you feel now upon reflection.

Would you have done that trade for Foye and Curry or Jennings (or something along those lines)?

[cutewizard]

Perhaps, but I don't think you ever improve your team by trading a star for pieces. That's particularly true if you intend to send that star to a team in your own conference and solve that team's most significant problem with an elite answer.

You might be able to get a few nice pieces from Portland for Parker, but I don't think it's feasible to get true talent-for-talent value in such a deal (since any such deal wouldn't include Roy or Aldridge) and meanwhile, you leave Portland with a 3-star core that looks a lot like the core that won the Spurs 3 titles from 2003 to 2007. Even in that scenario, whatever trade you've made likely leaves you to play catchup with Portland -- among others.

[cutewizard]

the spurs can still contend next year, but they must make key moves this summer, time's a wasting......

[Ignignokt]

Bill Simmons knowledge >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>..Spurstalk Knowledge

[Ignignokt]

Dees r teengs we know

[jjktkk]

Parker to Memphis for Mayo, Gay and Gasol.

Dream on.

[phxspurfan]

Dream on.

Gasol was an afterthought, Gay was leaving and Mayo was The Next Kobe last year, so this wasn't as outrageous as it seems now.


Of course Parker was worth a lot more last year too, so it's really out of the question now.

[The Truth #6]

I was in favor of trading Parker at the time. For the most part, I think Simmons has good opinions. Not sure about Foye but the #6 pick, looking back, would have given us a great talent.

[DPG21920]

I still don't like the trade from a win now perspective, but long term in hind sight would be pretty good.

[ffadicted]

Reading the original post hurt my brain so much

[Josepatches_]

Trade Parker? Why not if we improve the team. Parker for Foye and number 6? No,thanks.

Parker for Gay/Mayo + Gasol? I'd take it.
Parker for Josh Smith + Horford? I'd take it too.

[DPG21920]

:lol I bet you would take those deals

[Vic Petro]

I generally love Bill Simmons' writing, and a lot of the time he nails things more conventional writers completely miss, but that is the dumbest fucking trade I've ever heard.

Parker is one of the top 3 PGs in the league and at his peak over the next 3-4 years, so you trade him for a scrub like Foye and the number 6 pick in a weak draft? GTFOH!

Guys - I love Tony as much as you do. But calling him a top 3 PG is egregious. Tony Parker is better than Deron Williams, Chris Paul, Derrick Rose and Rajon Rondo? Again I love the player but let's temper the homerism.

I respect those that think trading Tony is nuts, and I totally agree that trading him for Foye + #6 is absurd. But to say he's the centerpiece for the next 8 years...do you really want your team built around an early 30's scoring PG whose game is predicated on speed and is making max money? Scares the shit out of me.

I'm not saying trade him at all costs - not by any stretch. I want to see Tony in a SA uniform next year. But some of these reactions to the Spurs even taking calls about it are way over the top. They'd be irresponsible not to at least explore what he's worth.

And as far as the Finals MVP thing...we all know who the real Finals MVP was that year. If Duncan wasn't getting triple teamed every play, Tony doesn't get those lanes straight to the bucket against a grossly inferior team.

[Mal]

Trade Parker? Why not if we improve the team. Parker for Foye and number 6? No,thanks.

Parker for Gay/Mayo + Gasol? I'd take it.
Parker for Josh Smith + Horford? I'd take it too.

Even AI from computer game would laugh at you