iilluzioN
06-24-2009, 03:42 PM
The Richard Jefferson trade proves RC Buford and Gregg Popovich passed Business 101
You know the one rule of business that every sports pundit forgets: Buy low, sell high. It seems simple, but it is amazine (Damn, can you believe I really typed that? That was not intentional and I will not correct it.) how people can forget the most basic of business principles. Say it with me, "Buy low. Sell high".
http://cdn1.sbnation.com/images/blog/star-divide.v5547.jpg
It's a buyers market
Do you know what concern trolling is? It's prevalent in politics where one party starts telling the other party how they are messing up and how their decisions are going to hurt them. 95% of the time they are completely full of crap and are just trying to be negative or put a negative spin on something that has really no discernible downside. Sound familiar?
I give you Henry Abbott: (http://myespn.go.com/nba/truehoop)
Here's where the move seems to be slightly higher risk still: This robs the Spurs (http://www.sbnation.com/nba/teams/SAN) of cap space in 2010. So the analysis of this deal is not about what they gave up in the trade -- Bowen, Thomas and Oberto are worth Jefferson, for sure. But for this deal, in the summer of 2010, the Spurs would have been Tim Duncan (http://www.sbnation.com/nba/players/21776/Tim_Duncan), Tony Parker (http://www.sbnation.com/nba/players/21781/Tony_Parker) and oodles of cap space. Who would that have become? Somebody! Potentially somebody really special. And that's the player the Spurs silently included in this deal today.
and
It may well work out beautifully. But this is not a steal, nor is it a no-brainer. It's one of the highest-risk moves the Spurs have made in the Tim Duncan era.
I give you John Hollinger (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&page=spurstrade-090623): (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&page=spurstrade-090623)
That said, the Spurs took a larger risk on this deal than we're used to seeing from them. The deal basically takes San Antonio out of the 2010 free-agent market since Jefferson is owed $15 million in 2010-11 (he has an opt-out that he'd be insane to exercise)
(http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&page=spurstrade-090623)and Tim Varner (http://www.48minutesofhell.com/2009/06/23/richard-jefferson-to-san-antonio/#more-3281): (NOTE to Tim: Finish reading before you start hating on me for taking you out of context. Where's that smiley emoticon when I need it?)
Aside from landing Jefferson, the other story here is that the Spurs have moved away from their 2010 cap strategy. Jefferson's salary eats up everything they had on reserve for a big name free agent run.
Did you catch the commom meme there? 2010, 2010, 2010, 2010. Just checking to make sure you are reading. Now, I do have some concerns about this trade that I will address later, but losing our 2010 cap room is not one of them.
The Spurs just acquired a 29-year old wing who averages 20 points a game for 38-year old Bruce Bowen (http://www.sbnation.com/nba/players/21770/Bruce_Bowen), 37-year old Kurt Thomas (http://www.sbnation.com/nba/players/21922/Kurt_Thomas), and 34-year old Fabricio Oberto (http://www.sbnation.com/nba/players/21780/Fabricio_Oberto). We didn't kick in any draft picks. We didn't kick in any stashed assets. We didn't kick in any youth -- like George or Ian. When is that EVER a bad trade?
How much are people selling in this market? Consider this potential trade reported by Jeff McDonald and Mike Monroe (http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/spurs/Bruce_Bowen_Kurt_Thomas_and_Fabricio_Oberto_traded .html) at Mysa.com:
According to an Eastern Conference executive, Bowen, Oberto, Thomas and Roger Mason (http://www.sbnation.com/nba/players/21843/Roger_Mason) Jr. had been offered to the Nets (http://www.sbnation.com/nba/teams/NJN) in exchange for Carter and the Nets’ first-round pick in Thursday’s draft. The Spurs balked when the Nets asked for additional considerations, then turned their focus to Jefferson.
The Nets were in talks to give up Carter AND the 11th pick in the draft for the pupu platter of expiring contracts. When the Nets wanted extra pupu on the platter, the Spurs moved on.
Buy low. The Spurs just did it.
2010 is a sellers market
Everybody and their mother is creating cap space for 2010. Sure, a lot of big names are going to be free agents, but not that many. Most of them won't be worth the max deals they will get. But, they'll get them because every team is keeping cap space open for them. Most will return to their current teams. So, 2010 didn't really excite me that much in regards to the Spurs being able to lock up the next franchise player.
Back to Tim Varner (this is the sentence right after the one I pulled above):
But Jefferson is probably as good as any player they were likely to land next summer, so in that sense they’ve simply accelerated their rebuild with a player that can help them within Tim Duncan’s window.
I completely agree with this. Yes, Richard Jefferson (http://www.sbnation.com/nba/players/21550/Richard_Jefferson) probably is overpaid at $14 million this year. If this had been a free agent signing I would have been unhappy that we had spent so much on him. But, to give up what we did, I couldn't be happier.
We had a possibility of signing a player next year. A possibility. We could have ended up with nobody. That means we would have suffered through another 2009 campaign AND we would have had NOBODY making corner 3's and pulling down rebounds in 2011 and beyond.
You see, the Spurs changed their rules on us. When the luxury tax is no longer a hard limit on their decision-making, the opportunities are much more valuable. The Spurs front office and ownership realized this. If they bought now, and not next year, they get a lot more for their money.
It's just business 101. Buy low, sell high.
http://www.poundingtherock.com/2009/6/24/923484/the-richard-jefferson-trade-proves
You know the one rule of business that every sports pundit forgets: Buy low, sell high. It seems simple, but it is amazine (Damn, can you believe I really typed that? That was not intentional and I will not correct it.) how people can forget the most basic of business principles. Say it with me, "Buy low. Sell high".
http://cdn1.sbnation.com/images/blog/star-divide.v5547.jpg
It's a buyers market
Do you know what concern trolling is? It's prevalent in politics where one party starts telling the other party how they are messing up and how their decisions are going to hurt them. 95% of the time they are completely full of crap and are just trying to be negative or put a negative spin on something that has really no discernible downside. Sound familiar?
I give you Henry Abbott: (http://myespn.go.com/nba/truehoop)
Here's where the move seems to be slightly higher risk still: This robs the Spurs (http://www.sbnation.com/nba/teams/SAN) of cap space in 2010. So the analysis of this deal is not about what they gave up in the trade -- Bowen, Thomas and Oberto are worth Jefferson, for sure. But for this deal, in the summer of 2010, the Spurs would have been Tim Duncan (http://www.sbnation.com/nba/players/21776/Tim_Duncan), Tony Parker (http://www.sbnation.com/nba/players/21781/Tony_Parker) and oodles of cap space. Who would that have become? Somebody! Potentially somebody really special. And that's the player the Spurs silently included in this deal today.
and
It may well work out beautifully. But this is not a steal, nor is it a no-brainer. It's one of the highest-risk moves the Spurs have made in the Tim Duncan era.
I give you John Hollinger (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&page=spurstrade-090623): (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&page=spurstrade-090623)
That said, the Spurs took a larger risk on this deal than we're used to seeing from them. The deal basically takes San Antonio out of the 2010 free-agent market since Jefferson is owed $15 million in 2010-11 (he has an opt-out that he'd be insane to exercise)
(http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&page=spurstrade-090623)and Tim Varner (http://www.48minutesofhell.com/2009/06/23/richard-jefferson-to-san-antonio/#more-3281): (NOTE to Tim: Finish reading before you start hating on me for taking you out of context. Where's that smiley emoticon when I need it?)
Aside from landing Jefferson, the other story here is that the Spurs have moved away from their 2010 cap strategy. Jefferson's salary eats up everything they had on reserve for a big name free agent run.
Did you catch the commom meme there? 2010, 2010, 2010, 2010. Just checking to make sure you are reading. Now, I do have some concerns about this trade that I will address later, but losing our 2010 cap room is not one of them.
The Spurs just acquired a 29-year old wing who averages 20 points a game for 38-year old Bruce Bowen (http://www.sbnation.com/nba/players/21770/Bruce_Bowen), 37-year old Kurt Thomas (http://www.sbnation.com/nba/players/21922/Kurt_Thomas), and 34-year old Fabricio Oberto (http://www.sbnation.com/nba/players/21780/Fabricio_Oberto). We didn't kick in any draft picks. We didn't kick in any stashed assets. We didn't kick in any youth -- like George or Ian. When is that EVER a bad trade?
How much are people selling in this market? Consider this potential trade reported by Jeff McDonald and Mike Monroe (http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/spurs/Bruce_Bowen_Kurt_Thomas_and_Fabricio_Oberto_traded .html) at Mysa.com:
According to an Eastern Conference executive, Bowen, Oberto, Thomas and Roger Mason (http://www.sbnation.com/nba/players/21843/Roger_Mason) Jr. had been offered to the Nets (http://www.sbnation.com/nba/teams/NJN) in exchange for Carter and the Nets’ first-round pick in Thursday’s draft. The Spurs balked when the Nets asked for additional considerations, then turned their focus to Jefferson.
The Nets were in talks to give up Carter AND the 11th pick in the draft for the pupu platter of expiring contracts. When the Nets wanted extra pupu on the platter, the Spurs moved on.
Buy low. The Spurs just did it.
2010 is a sellers market
Everybody and their mother is creating cap space for 2010. Sure, a lot of big names are going to be free agents, but not that many. Most of them won't be worth the max deals they will get. But, they'll get them because every team is keeping cap space open for them. Most will return to their current teams. So, 2010 didn't really excite me that much in regards to the Spurs being able to lock up the next franchise player.
Back to Tim Varner (this is the sentence right after the one I pulled above):
But Jefferson is probably as good as any player they were likely to land next summer, so in that sense they’ve simply accelerated their rebuild with a player that can help them within Tim Duncan’s window.
I completely agree with this. Yes, Richard Jefferson (http://www.sbnation.com/nba/players/21550/Richard_Jefferson) probably is overpaid at $14 million this year. If this had been a free agent signing I would have been unhappy that we had spent so much on him. But, to give up what we did, I couldn't be happier.
We had a possibility of signing a player next year. A possibility. We could have ended up with nobody. That means we would have suffered through another 2009 campaign AND we would have had NOBODY making corner 3's and pulling down rebounds in 2011 and beyond.
You see, the Spurs changed their rules on us. When the luxury tax is no longer a hard limit on their decision-making, the opportunities are much more valuable. The Spurs front office and ownership realized this. If they bought now, and not next year, they get a lot more for their money.
It's just business 101. Buy low, sell high.
http://www.poundingtherock.com/2009/6/24/923484/the-richard-jefferson-trade-proves