This trade needs to happen

[chazley]

#3 overall pick (Favors) and Devin Harris for Tony Parker

One time R.C.?

[spursfan1000]

:lmao No way in hell this trade happens.

[rayray2k8]

They're not that stupid.
But you could a Lebron thread, noob. :toast

[chazley]

TP and #20 pick for #3 and Harris? Without including the #20 pick, it might be far-fetched, but 20/tp for 3/harris seems fair. I don't feel like the Nets are that high on Harris right now, and he has a long contract.

[m33p0]

why do you want this trade again? wasn't able to catch it the first time. Oo

[Agloco]

TP and #20 pick for #3 and Harris? Without including the #20 pick, it might be far-fetched, but 20/tp for 3/harris seems fair. I don't feel like the Nets are that high on Harris right now, and he has a long contract.

Hmmm...the worst team in the league isn't high on their floor leader? So the Spurs should be?

[MaNu4Tres]

Just want to ask a serious question...

Why don't people ever read other threads before making a thread on a redundant idea that has been discussed thoroughly?

[easy7]

I say trade the centerpiece and Bonner for Lebron and Bosh.

[Cane]

Just want to ask a serious question...

Why don't people ever read other threads before making a thread on a redundant idea that has been discussed thoroughly?

From the Derrick Favors thread I agree with your post there; good piece to bring up even if it is a redundant thread (can't say I'm innocent of that either):


As much as I value Parker, Spurs would have to consider Devin Harris and the #3 pick in the draft for Parker. It would really be a fair deal. IMO.

In my opinion, Parker has to have an All-Star type season by the All-Star break for the Spurs to really consider giving the extension Parker is looking for(the max-extension). If this scenario plays out then Spurs' future won't be as vulnerable from a talent standpoint.

On the other hand, if he has a so-so year, I don't see the Spurs giving Parker the max deal extension at any point in the season. Which would put the Spurs in a vulnerable position once the Free Agency period begins because of the chances of Parker signing elsewhere and leaving the Spurs empty handed. (This scenario is the most realistic in my opinion. I don't think Spurs are going to want to give Parker the max-level extension. And I believe Parker and his group will demand nothing but the max.)

If Spurs hold on to Parker and lose out on the gamble by him latching on to another team during Free Agency, the Spurs will still have around 15 million in cap space in free agency. Problem with that is top-free agents will no longer see San Antonio as a place to go win a championship. This reasoning and with San Antonio being a small market, makes me believe it will be a long-shot for the Spurs to sign any significant 10-13 million dollar player that's actually worth the money. To be honest they will probably have to overpay marginal talent to win any free agent over.

It's going to be a tough decision for the Spurs as it all unfolds. Hold on to Parker and run the risk of him going elsewhere and be left with nothing in return? Give in and overpay Parker the max level extension, crippling your franchise from a financial standpoint ? Or trade Parker now guaranteeing your franchise talent to replace a player of such caliber and also giving more flexibility to add talent with more finances? Tough decision for R.C and Pop. IMO


IMO. If I'm the Spurs and Net's offered me Devin Harris and the #3 pick in the draft for Parker, after much deliberation I'd have to probably agree.

[Ditty]

#3 pick for tony parker could be discussed (ray allen was traded for a top pick so it could happen) devin harris in this deal culd be a little too much possibly splitter right and/or the 20th pick and a future 1st round pick could be involved

[Agloco]

I would agree but I dont see the Nets putting that much value on TP. One thing in our favor would be the new owner wants to make the Nets a world team not just a US fan fav. He wants to merchandise all over the world and TP could help that right away.

On deal I was thinking about was ....its said the sixers want to get rid of the number 2 pick if they can get someone to take brand with it. They wanna biuld from the ground up follow me on this. Philly wants loads of cap space and is also seeking to rid themselves of Iggys contract.

We deal TP and RJ to philly for the number 2 pick, Iggy and Brand. right off the bat we have another guy who can defend, hit mid range jumper and post up in Brand who is bound to rebound in his second year off knee injury. We get Iggy who can play 2 or three and do a bit of everything.

Now with the number 2 pick we could take Turner or Favors or we could ship the pick to Minn for 3 first round picks and take The SF from Syc....whos name skips my mind Johnson I think at 4, at 16 we grab George who can develop and take Manus spot in a couple years, at 20 we grab Alabi who gives us shot blocking and a project for the future and at 24 we can take a flyer on someone like Richards from England or Williams from Memphis.

Alot to digest I know but but if we could grab that second pick we open alot of doors to improve quickly for now and in the future.

Great, but who runs the point in your scenario? And please don't say Hill......

[MaNu4Tres]

We deal TP and RJ to philly for the number 2 pick, Iggy and Brand. right off the bat we have another guy who can defend, hit mid range jumper and post up in Brand who is bound to rebound in his second year off knee injury. We get Iggy who can play 2 or three and do a bit of everything.


:wtf


Iguodala's Salary-
2010-2011= $12,345,250
2011-2012= $13,531,750
2012-2013=$14,718,250
2013-2014= (ETO)$15,904,750

Brand's Salary-
2010-2011=$15,959,100
2011-2012=$17,059,728
2012-2013= (ETO) $18,160,355

Need I say more?

[Agloco]

:wtf


Iguodala's Salary-
2010-2011= $12,345,250
2011-2012= $13,531,750
2012-2013=$14,718,250
2013-2014= (ETO)$15,904,750

Brand's Salary-
2010-2011=$15,959,100
2011-2012=$17,059,728
2012-2013= (ETO) $18,160,355

Need I say more?

I'd rather have Dalembert instead of Brand, but both are overpaid unfortunately. Brand more so.

Iggy? Well, he's productive and athletic. It's really hard for me to equate salary for some guys though.

[MaNu4Tres]

I think a trade of TP and Tiago's rights for Devin Harris and the third pick would be fair and smart for both sides. Both Devin Harris and Tony Parker 2 seasons ago were All-Stars and last season were injured. The plus to the Spurs getting Harris is that he is younger (not by much I know) and he is locked up long term with a nice contract. The plus for the Nets is that Tony is better, international (something the Russian guy wants to add to the team) and it might help them get LeBron.

As for the swap of the third pick and Tiago: if the Spurs do draft Derrick Favors it makes it a lot less likely for Tiago to come over because the front court has some minutes taken up by a really good young player. Tiago still might not come over to San Antonio, and there is no promise for the Nets either. So that's one less thing to worry about.

I guess the question is who would you rather part with Splitter or Blair?

Me personally I'd offer up Blair due to his physical liabilities that will always make him incapable defensively in the grand scheme of things.

Word is Spurs are already talking to Splitter and his agent.


During yesterday broadcast of Celtics-Magic, Eduardo Agra, of ESPN Brasil, who was broadcasting the game, said he talked with Tiago's agent and he said they are already talking with the Spurs.

If Spurs chose to throw Blair in the deal instead of Splitter, then there will be plenty of minutes for both Splitter and Favors.

Duncan/Favors
Splitter/McDyess

[ducks]

getting rid of tp would be ok if spurs did not resign manu

but then you would package duncan to and start complelty over

a new point guard would take 2 seasons to get used to where players want the ball

then you say let manu just run the point then
then why trade for harris who you do not know would work any better then rj

[ducks]

even if it wears him out ?
he played well one half of the season last year as it was

[MaNu4Tres]

Spurs have been optmistic about Splitter coming over all season. But would Pop be okay with two rookie players playing several NBA minutes? I know they are really good talents, but still I think of it as a stretch. Plus Pop likes DeJuan.

I think that's misunderstood entirely, Spurs have spent the past 10-13 years drafting out of the bottom of the 1st round and second round, where the talent isn't the best on most occasion. Causing Pop to be pessimistic about their ability to contribute right away. But one thing you can't knock Pop on is playing the rookie if they are significantly more talented than the players' competition. IE Parker over Daniels, Manu over Steve Smith, Blair over Ratliff (and Beno to a degree).

In regards of the long-shot scenario in trading for Favors, we are talking about the best big man in the draft and the #3 pick. Given these circumstances, questioning whether Pop would give him minutes is pretty silly, with all due respect.

As for Splitter, he's the best big man in Europe right now and just won the ACB MVP. I highly doubt Spurs would be willing to give him most of the MLE if they weren't going to give him quality playing time.

Both would get quality minutes if the long-shot fantasy scenario played out. IMO

[Dex]

...so when does next season start?

[ducks]

While you have some very valid points, it doesn't change the fact that both George Hill and DeJuan were limited in their minutes with the only reason that they were rookies. DeJuan was a lottery player and if he were 6'8" and had ACLs he probably could have been a top 3 draft pick.

Also Pop admitted that he is so busy with the NBA season he doesn't have time to watch other leagues play, so he doesn't know their games that well. Splitter is perhaps an exception, but Favors isn't. Plus Favors is only a year out of high school. He has lots to learn before he is a 25 minute player for a coach that learned under Larry Brown.
getting favors make since if you did not resign manu
favors is 3 years away

[Mel_13]

Brand can come in right now and give us a double double every night.

:lol

Just fire up the DeLorean and get the Elton Brand that played in the NBA from 1999-2007. That guy was really good until his achilles exploded in the summer of 2007. The guy that's going to collect over 50M in the next three seasons isn't anywhere near that good.

Average a double-double? The guy only had 7 double-doubles in 76 games last season.

[MaNu4Tres]

Yes please do say more. Are you looking to have a team of all low paid players? Good players are well paid. Brand can come in right now and give us a double double every night. He can play the high low game and allow TD a night off while we still have a legit post player who can score in the paint.

Iggy, is young, athletic can defend, shoot and slash and play SF OR SG. He can play in the half court or up tempo what else needs to be said.





:lol

Just fire up the DeLorean and get the Elton Brand that played in the NBA from 1999-2007. That guy was really good until his achilles exploded in the summer of 2007. The guy that's going to collect over 50M in the next three seasons isn't anywhere near that good.

Average a double-double? The guy only had 7 double-doubles in 76 games last season.

In addition to what Mel had to say, time and opportunity won't allow Brand to even put up the numbers he got this past year. Considering Tim will receive at least 80% of the touches he got last year, and considering the touches of Splitter and Blair. Those 3 players will demand more touches than Dalembert ever received, which only decreases the amount of touches Brand would receive if the idiotic scenario played out.

On top of that there's only so many uncontested rebounds available, and only so many shots the opponents put up per game to come to a conclusion that Brand will still get 10+ rebounds a game playing with Duncan (who takes up most of the uncontested rebounds). Brand would be sharing minutes and rebounds with Splitter and Blair. Because of this scenario and with the significant regression of the game, it's moronic to come to the consensus that he's a sure fire double double.

If you think the Spurs would consider taking on probably the worst contracts in the league and pay 28-33 million dollars for both of them from 2012-2014, you're crazy. Paying two non-All-Stars more than half the salary cap is nonsensical.



Yes please do say more. Are you looking to have a team of all low paid players? Good players are well paid.


If the nucleus was surrounded by low paid players like George Hill and DeJuan Blair, I'd rather go that route than take on a ridiculous overpaid contract for a marginal fringe starter, role player (Brand).

Taking on such contracts on extremely over paid players is not the way to do things if you're trying to run a successful franchise. IMO

[m33p0]

Average a double-double? The guy only had 7 double-doubles in 76 games last season.
i don't know which is more surprising. the fact that he had 7 double-doubles... or that he was able to play in 76 games. :lol

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Fucking 'A, rookie:

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=154883&page=5

[Mel_13]

That's where you're wrong. I watch the 76ers more than anyone on this entire board anyway I can. I'm just as much a 76ers fan as a Spurs fan. Elton Brand isn't 28 anymore sure, but he is still there. He can defend and block shots. He is still a scorer on the inside. Is he worth his contract? Hell no! But think of it this way. Does anyone remember when Chris Webber was traded to the 76ers? He was terrible. The main reason is that the 76ers run a full court game and Webber was better suited for the half court game, which is why he played better with the Pistons a couple years later. If Elton Brand joined a half court team such as the Spurs, then I totally see Brand averaging 15 and 8 with a block and a half. At best and maybe 10/7/1 at worst.

Come on, Phila. How are you gonna say I'm wrong and then agree with what I said? :lol

I said he wasn't anywhere near as good as the player we saw his first 8 years in the NBA when he racked up a bunch of 20/10 seasons. Back in those days I was always trying to figure out how he might wind up the Spurs. I also laughed at the notion that he would average a double-double. I didn't say he was finished or didn't belong in the NBA.

Anyway, you and others have pointed out the most significant factor in any discussion of Brand and the Spurs. That contract is terrible and there's no way the Spurs take it on.

[DPG21920]

Spurs can get 10/7 from Blair and pay him basically nothing. Under no circumstances should the Spurs take Brand.

[MaNu4Tres]

That's where you're wrong. I watch the 76ers more than anyone on this entire board anyway I can. I'm just as much a 76ers fan as a Spurs fan. Elton Brand isn't 28 anymore sure, but he is still there. He can defend and block shots. He is still a scorer on the inside. Is he worth his contract? Hell no! But think of it this way. Does anyone remember when Chris Webber was traded to the 76ers? He was terrible. The main reason is that the 76ers run a full court game and Webber was better suited for the half court game, which is why he played better with the Pistons a couple years later. If Elton Brand joined a half court team such as the Spurs, then I totally see Brand averaging 15 and 8 with a block and a half. At best and maybe 10/7/1 at worst.


Webber didn't put up better numbers on the Pistons.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/w/webbech01.html

He actually averaged 20 points a game on 43% shooting in his only full-season with the Sixers, opposed to the 11 points on 48% shooting in his only full season with the Pistons.

I respect your opinion but I disagree. It's hard for me to believe Brand will put up better numbers on the Spurs when his offensive opportunities and rebounds would all decrease to some extent given the front-court he would be joining. As I've stated in post #30.

[MaNu4Tres]

Stats lie in this case. Webber was forced to be that option. Just because a player puts up good numbers doesn't quite mean he played well. I know it doesn't quite make sense but I'll put it like this; just because Karl Malone's numbers are better than Duncan's doesn't mean that Karl Malone was better. Webber playes poorly but put up stats. When he was the 5th option on the Pistons team trying to win a championship he played amazing. Stats lie sometimes.

When you are comparing different players I can see your point. But when you are comparing the same player in this case Webber, it's tougher to understand Webber played better on the Pistons. IMO

Regardless of the way Webber played, it still doesn't change my opinion on what kind of production Brand would produce on the Spurs.

[tim_duncan_fan]

No one wants Elton Brand's lame, bloated contract carrying ass. He sucks.


Anyways, if by some miracle we can get the number 3 pick without giving up Tim, Manu or Hill, I think we do that shit.

[ynh]

Webber sure as hell was not amazing for the Pistons.

[lurker23]

Spurs can get 10/7 from Blair and pay him basically nothing. Under no circumstances should the Spurs take Brand.

This. I don't want to go into too much detail about hugely hypothetical trade scenarios such as Favors (pipe dream, at what cost?) or Brand/Iggy (too much money), but I don't want the Spurs to have to choose between Splitter and Blair (as much a glimpse at the future of the Spurs front court as we have at this moment). All things considered, both will be at bargain deals for big men the next three years (Splitter and his agent willing), and I fully expect Blair to be a 10/8 big man at 25 mpg next year. There aren't many of those, and next to none under $1mil/year.