If Spurs' FO decides to go for another run

[MaNu4Tres]

Possible off-season scenario:

1) R.J for Varejao and Joey Graham- This would be my initial offer based on the decreasing value of Varejao, who is coming back from a torn ligament in his ankle; which ended his season in January. Another reason I'd initially offer just Jefferson is because Cleveland has a glaring hole at the small forward position and Varajao's deal is just as long or longer (if you want to include his last year, which has a team option) than R.J's deal.

If that doesn't work, I'd include Blair and ask them to give up Eyenga (being the better prospect) instead of Graham.

With the package of RJ and Blair, not only will Cleveland get their small forward which they desperately need, but they also receive a formidable power forward in Blair (for very cheap the next 2 years) who could see significant minutes behind and next to J.J Hickson.

Why Cleveland's asking price won't be high for Varajao: Anderson Varajao has 4 years remaining for a whopping 35.65 million. With a season ending torn ligament in his ankle (which occurred in January), his trade value isn't high as one may first assume. Fortunately, his last year of his deal has a team option. So in essence his deal has 3 years remaining worth 25-26 million.


2) I'd offer Portland Hill and 2011's first rounder for Batum.

Why would Portland consider it? Portland just traded for Gerald Wallace (has 2 years worth 21 million remaining), recently gave Roy a max extension, and signed Matthews to a 5 year deal worth roughly 32 million last off-season. Also taking into account of last years draft of Babbitt and Williams, it could be possibly that Portland has too much money locked into the 2/3 positions to extend Batum rightfully. At the same time, Andre Miller is 36 years old and the team has an option to keep him or not for next year. All of this information leads me to believe Portland would seriously consider a Hill for Batum swap.

3) I'd also look desperately to find a suitor for Bonner by packaging McDyess' partial guaranteed expiring. But I have a feeling Spurs' won't go there as long as Pop is in charge and as long as Bonner is included in the package. :depressed

4) In the free agency period, I'd actively pursue Battier, which could happen under the luxury tax if Spurs don't trade McDyess and just outright decline his option.

5)Then I'd go after a cheap 5th big and a cheap 3rd point guard.

Some names that pop out initially:
Possible 5th Bigs: Nazr Mohammed, Jeff Foster, Dan Gadzuric, Ryan Richards, DJ Mbenga, Dalembert (price will be too high), Kyrylo Fesenko

3rd PGs: Acie Law, Rhonnie Price

Possible new 10 man rotation:

C- Varejao
PF- Duncan
SF- Batum
SG- Manu
PG- Parker

C- Splitter
PF- Bonner
SF- Battier
SG- Anderson-Green-Butler
SG/PG- Neal (If Hill can run back up PG for 12-15 minutes a night, Neal can't be much worse; especially with Manu subbing out of the game early around the 6 minute mark then returning with the back-up unit to essentially run most of the sets at PG.)

This 10 man rotation is far more defensive than any Spurs' team in the past 5-6 years.

Believe.

[ChumpDumper]

I'm not even going to entertain fantasy trades or signings until the new CBA is hammered out.

[clambake]

spurs are gonna need a farm team to get rid of rj.

[MaNu4Tres]

I'm not even going to entertain fantasy trades or signings until the new CBA is hammered out.

Wise reasoning, although I couldn't help myself.

I honestly think nothing will change much in terms of the salary cap-luxury tax- and player salaries (if any of those 3 changes, it will be minimal IMO).

I think if anything will change (that correlates with the salary cap-lux tax- player salaries) will be the guaranteed length of the contracts tbh..

[yavozerb]

I'm not even going to entertain fantasy trades or signings until the new CBA is hammered out.

This and couldn't this thread go under the 10+ trade threads we have?

[ChumpDumper]

I think there will be pretty substantial changes across the board if the owners get their way -- and I don't see many scenarios where they don't.

[DesignatedT]

Pretty sure Portland made it known during the season after the Wallace trade that they have no interest in moving Batum.

[MaNu4Tres]

I think there will be pretty substantial changes across the board if the owners get their way -- and I don't see many scenarios where they don't.

In terms of player salaries (on a per year basis), you've got to be crazy you if think there will be "substantial" changes in that regard. It won't happen. If it does it will be very minimal. At the same time, player salaries has a direct effect on the size of the salary cap and the luxury tax.

Whatever you are hearing that makes you believe different is just garbage from the owners side, who are trying to set the bar as high as possible in order to get to a median in their favor.

If anything, you will see a change in the length of players' contract, but you won't see a change in the salary value on a per year basis.

[5in10]

Just wrote this in another thread, but I believe it applies here. I Think the only answer to our upset, is to keep pounding at that rock. The Grizzlies have proven themselves legit contenders and we lost by mere inches. Totally rebuilding would be idiotic and uncalled for. THE DRIVE FOR FIVE IS STILL ALIVE

start a lineup of:

Parker
Anderson
Butler/Green----whoever wins out the competition for starting spot
Duncan
Splitter

bench
Manu
Hill/Neal
Butler/Green Loser
Blair
Whomever we pick up this offseason.

Trim the Fat.

-After the beating OKC took from the grizzlies today, I'm convinced that the Grizzlies could very well go to the finals. They were the better team, but not by much. I would love to keep dyess but as like the 4th or 5th big man off the bench, and not at the cost of us losing out on a more talented big man. The drive for five is still alive, and I believe with just a couple of subtle changes, and a new mindset of defense first, that we could truly contend next year.

-Get rid of RJ, Bonner, Hill and Neal if we have to, to get a shotblocking big man. IF no one takes, keep bonner and RJ glued to the bench where theyd make nice cheerleaders and not have any pressure on them.

-I love me some neal, but to me everything he does is negated by him on the defensive side. Has anyone else in the nba given up as much and 1's as him?I also feel JA has the higher ceiling and can replace the production.

-I feel like we need to trim down the amount of wings we have, maybe im wrong. It has to affetct the way someone plays when you never know if you are gonna play or not.
-Look at the following big men this offseason:

Kenyon Martin- Tough gritty big man, with some range.

Kris Humpries- Dont know much about him, besides the fact that he was on my fantasy team this year, and rebounded at a kevin love rate, blocked the occasional shot, and scored about 10 a game. Could be case of just being on a bad team, with mr anti-rebound brook

Deandre Jordan- Atheltic shotblocking bigman that would be great for us, although I wonder if he could handle POP with his immaturity, and not sure where his BBiq lies.

Greg Oden- same as Jordan, with more IQ. problem is he is as fragile as an 95 year old man with osteoporosis. Someone is probably gonna offer way more to him than we ever could.

Yao Ming- This just sounds crazy. Would be great next to duncan. Im thinking , make an mle offer to him,, maybe just a one or two year contract? His value has never been lower. We wouldnt have to play him that many minutes hopefully increasing the likelihood that he wouldn't get hurt. Talk about presence though, depending on what he has left.

NENE- Love him as a player, but just dont see him fitting any needs for us, always seemed kind of soft to me.

Tyson Chandler- Doubtful, but one could only hope he sees his chances of winning a ring better with the spurs than mavs.

Anderson Varjao- Great defender, midrange shot, rebounder, and intangibles. Kind of brings the same things as tiago"blue collar worker". Maybe trading like bonner and blair for him would work.

OK I know some of these are pipe dreams, but let me hear your thoughts on what we should do.

[MaNu4Tres]

-Look at the following big men this offseason:

Kenyon Martin- Tough gritty big man, with some range.

Kris Humpries- Dont know much about him, besides the fact that he was on my fantasy team this year, and rebounded at a kevin love rate, blocked the occasional shot, and scored about 10 a game. Could be case of just being on a bad team, with mr anti-rebound brook

Deandre Jordan- Atheltic shotblocking bigman that would be great for us, although I wonder if he could handle POP with his immaturity, and not sure where his BBiq lies.

Greg Oden- same as Jordan, with more IQ. problem is he is as fragile as an 95 year old man with osteoporosis. Someone is probably gonna offer way more to him than we ever could.

Yao Ming- This just sounds crazy. Would be great next to duncan. Im thinking , make an mle offer to him,, maybe just a one or two year contract? His value has never been lower. We wouldnt have to play him that many minutes hopefully increasing the likelihood that he wouldn't get hurt. Talk about presence though, depending on what he has left.

NENE- Love him as a player, but just dont see him fitting any needs for us, always seemed kind of soft to me.

Tyson Chandler- Doubtful, but one could only hope he sees his chances of winning a ring better with the spurs than mavs.

Anderson Varjao- Great defender, midrange shot, rebounder, and intangibles. Kind of brings the same things as tiago"blue collar worker". Maybe trading like bonner and blair for him would work.

OK I know some of these are pipe dreams, but let me hear your thoughts on what we should do.

Only big in this cluster that makes some sense is Varejao. Everyone else is fantasy land mumbo-jumbo tbh.

[Spurs Brazil]

Possible off-season scenario:

1) R.J for Varejao and Joey Graham- This would be my initial offer based on the decreasing value of Varejao, who is coming back from a torn ligament in his ankle; which ended his season in January. Another reason I'd initially offer just Jefferson is because Cleveland has a glaring hole at the small forward position and Varajao's deal is just as long or longer (if you want to include his last year, which has a team option) than R.J's deal.

If that doesn't work, I'd include Blair and ask them to give up Eyenga (being the better prospect) instead of Graham.

With the package of RJ and Blair, not only will Cleveland get their small forward which they desperately need, but they also receive a formidable power forward in Blair (for very cheap the next 2 years) who could see significant minutes behind and next to J.J Hickson.

Why Cleveland's asking price won't be high for Varajao: Anderson Varajao has 4 years remaining for a whopping 35.65 million. With a season ending torn ligament in his ankle (which occurred in January), his trade value isn't high as one may first assume. Fortunately, his last year of his deal has a team option. So in essence his deal has 3 years remaining worth 25-26 million.


2) I'd offer Portland Hill and 2011's first rounder for Batum.

Why would Portland consider it? Portland just traded for Gerald Wallace (has 2 years worth 21 million remaining), recently gave Roy a max extension, and signed Matthews to a 5 year deal worth roughly 32 million last off-season. Also taking into account of last years draft of Babbitt and Williams, it could be possibly that Portland has too much money locked into the 2/3 positions to extend Batum rightfully. At the same time, Andre Miller is 36 years old and the team has an option to keep him or not for next year. All of this information leads me to believe Portland would seriously consider a Hill for Batum swap.

3) I'd also look desperately to find a suitor for Bonner by packaging McDyess' partial guaranteed expiring. But I have a feeling Spurs' won't go there as long as Pop is in charge and as long as Bonner is included in the package. :depressed

4) In the free agency period, I'd actively pursue Battier, which could happen under the luxury tax if Spurs don't trade McDyess and just outright decline his option.

5)Then I'd go after a cheap 5th big and a cheap 3rd point guard.

Some names that pop out initially:
Possible 5th Bigs: Nazr Mohammed, Jeff Foster, Dan Gadzuric, Ryan Richards, DJ Mbenga, Dalembert (price will be too high), Kyrylo Fesenko

3rd PGs: Acie Law, Rhonnie Price

Possible new 10 man rotation:

C- Varejao
PF- Duncan
SF- Batum
SG- Manu
PG- Parker

C- Splitter
PF- Bonner
SF- Battier
SG- Anderson-Green-Butler
SG/PG- Neal (If Hill can run back up PG for 12-15 minutes a night, Neal can't be much worse; especially with Manu subbing out of the game early around the 6 minute mark then returning with the back-up unit to essentially run most of the sets at PG.)

This 10 man rotation is far more defensive than any Spurs' team in the past 5-6 years.

Believe.

Good job MaNu4Tres

I'd like that team

[blkroadrunners]

No backup PG? I love Neal, but by all means he is not a PG. The starting unit is great, but that 2nd unit would have a hard time fluctuating offense even if you move Manu back to the bench or adjust TP and Manu's minutes accordingly.

If the price was right, I'd want the Spurs to sign TJ Ford as a second string PG as another playmaker.

[TD 21]

Not bad.

My problem with Varjao is his lack of mass (and the fact that he's "only" 6-10). He's an excellent face up/pick-and-roll defender, but he's like Noah, in that he can be overpowered by traditional, back to the basket centers. The Spurs need a big man, 6-11 or up, with the mass to adequately defend those types. Varejao is also a non shooter.

The other problem is, the Cavs overvalue him and would want a king's ransom in return for him. Jefferson wouldn't cut it, nor would adding Blair to Jefferson, because a Blair-Hickson front line is much too undersized in most cases.

As far as Hill, he along with Splitter and Neal, I would only trade if it's a no brainer. I wouldn't just trade them to plug a hole elsewhere, though. And I don't believe Neal can run backup point (just going with a minimal third type is cutting it way too thin; what if Parker had to miss even 2 weeks?)

And, like the Cavs with Varejao, the Trail Blazers overvalue Batum and would want a king's ransom. Maybe they'd be more apt to trade him with the Wallace acquisition, but with Wallace's age, mileage, injury history, style of play and reliance on athleticism, how many prime seasons does he have left? Not many.

The problem with this front line is that it lacks positional definition and has too many limited players who aren't suited to playing with one another. They need specific bigs to make it work. That's why, short of trading Blair, I think Okur fits best out of realistically attainable options (without gutting the roster), for reasons I detailed in the five step off season plan thread.

I'd desperately try to dump Jefferson and Bonner and target Chandler at SF. If he can't be attained, then I'd turn to Battier.

There's still an outside chance of making one final run, but if they think bringing back this team, adding a fifth big with some size and internal improvement from their young players is going to do it, then they're not going anywhere. The young players on this team are solid assets, but they all have limited upside and whatever improvement they make, will likely be offset by further decline from the veterans. A massive overhaul isn't necessary, but more than minor tweaking is.

[MaNu4Tres]

Not bad.

My problem with Varjao is his lack of mass (and the fact that he's "only" 6-10). He's an excellent face up/pick-and-roll defender, but he's like Noah, in that he can be overpowered by traditional, back to the basket centers. The Spurs need a big man, 6-11 or up, with the mass to adequately defend those types. Varejao is also a non shooter.

Who has the mass that is not only realistically available, but is a quality complimentary piece to relevant top 5-7 team? Okur I could understand. But he's the only one that I can think of that can be realistically attainable.


The other problem is, the Cavs overvalue him and would want a king's ransom in return for him. Jefferson wouldn't cut it, nor would adding Blair to Jefferson, because a Blair-Hickson front line is much too undersized in most cases.

They valued Varejao as a complimentary piece to a championship caliber team. They gave him his extension when LeBron was there. I highly doubt they value and look at him as a cornerstone type of player or a player to build around. The ship has sailed in Cleveland and they are in rebuilding mode. I doubt they hold Varejao in such of a high regard as you are implying. Not to mention, he is coming back from a season ending torn ligament in his ankle- which does hurt his trade value to an extent. I respect your opinion, but I think Varejao for R.J and Blair is more than plausible.


As far as Hill, he along with Splitter and Neal, I would only trade if it's a no brainer. I wouldn't just trade them to plug a hole elsewhere, though. And I don't believe Neal can run backup point (just going with a minimal third type is cutting it way too thin; what if Parker had to miss even 2 weeks?)

Hill goes into the same category as Neal- players who can handle the ball to a respectful degree (not saying they're Chris Paul obviously), both are guards who can defend opposing point guards and versatile enough to guard shooting guards as well; both guards are capable of bringing the ball up the court to get the team into offensive sets.

Are they your prototype "point-guard"? No they aren't. But given their size and ability to guard oppositions points guards and their given ability to spot up shoot off the creating ability of Manu and Parker, they're both capable of playing the 2 and 1 spot(when Manu is in the game).

Also, during the times Neal and Hill had to create this year, I'd say Neal was more successful in the all-important pick and roll within the Spurs offense throughout the year. Creating more separation to get off his own shot for himself and others. Giving him a little more opportunity to do this for 10-12 minutes a game wouldn't be too overbearing for Neal IMO. Not to mention (as I mentioned earlier), Spurs could go out and try to pry Acie Law or Ronnie Price from the free agent market with part of their MLE. This would give adequate insurance in case a situation like the one you presented arises.

FWIW, Hill was dreadful in creating and finding teammates like the prototype "point-guard" should. Yet, the Spurs still managed to yield the best record in the league with him filling the void the whole year. I don't think having Neal at the point guard position with Manu off the bench is terrible at all. Especially if you can go out and get an Acie Law (which I stated above) as a third point guard for emergency scenarios which you touched up on.

And another thing- you going through scenarios, which include one of the big 3 getting hurt is nitpicking. That's like me saying, "Well if Duncan gets hurt then Spurs are just left with Bonner, Spurs have to find a Carl Landry to back him up instead of Bonner."


And, like the Cavs with Varejao, the Trail Blazers overvalue Batum and would want a king's ransom. Maybe they'd be more apt to trade him with the Wallace acquisition, but with Wallace's age, mileage, injury history, style of play and reliance on athleticism, how many prime seasons does he have left? Not many.

Possibly, but the Blazers did make the move for Wallace. If they were scared of his mileage, injury history, style of play, ect., I doubt they make a move for him especially because of what he makes. And the same time, Blazers have over 100 million locked up into the 2/3 spot. All while, they have hungry rookies in Babbit and Williams waiting in the wings for next year. Not to mention, Miller being their only quality point guard (even though Patty Mills showed to be capable towards the end of the year). I'm willing to bet a Hill plus a 1st for Batum could get the Blazers to consider such a trade IMO.


The problem with this front line is that it lacks positional definition and has too many limited players who aren't suited to playing with one another. They need specific bigs to make it work. That's why, short of trading Blair, I think Okur fits best out of realistically attainable options (without gutting the roster), for reasons I detailed in the five step off season plan thread.

I think the one of the biggest problems with this team is active size at each position. Spurs have too many players in the rotation that are out manned and out-sized from a very important physicality stand-point, which stunts execution to a degree in important half-court sets on both ends of the court come playoff time. From Blair to Bonner to Hill to Neal. All of those players played huge roles and all were out-manned and out-bullied in rebound opportunities, in fighting through screens opportunities, on the defensive and offensive end (being dictated on what path to receive the ball through screens and also being dictated on where to set screens (Blair and Bonner's perspective). It hurt the Spurs execution when it said and done in the playoffs. Spurs need more ugly nasty ol-reliable physicality at every position possible. Size does matter.


I'd desperately try to dump Jefferson and Bonner and target Chandler at SF. If he can't be attained, then I'd turn to Battier.
.

I'd love Chandler as well, I just don't see how we could realistically attain him from Denver. Unless we trade McDyess, Anderson and a 1st to Denver for Birdman and Chandler. (Spurs would have to take back Birdman's contract, which has 3 years worth roughly 15 million.) I'd love it if they could take back Jefferson, but I doubt they would do such a thing with Gallinari manning the SF position.

And I agree with Battier obviously.

[DJ Mbenga]

new cba or not a rebuilding cavs would laugh at a varejo offer. they can get lots more for him than him.
portland loves batum and loves how cheap he is. hill means nothing to them especially since they have fernandez to do the same job.
dice is done. battier might just resign at memphis or command enough money it will be luxury tax status.
this should be the offseason: pray splitter becomes good.

[TD 21]

Who has the mass that is not only realistically available, but is a quality complimentary piece to relevant top 5-7 team? Okur I could understand. But he's the only one that I can think of that can be realistically attainable.

I didn't say it would be easy; but that's what the Spurs need. Varejao equates to spinning their wheels. They'd still be physically over matched against the big front lines and they'd have less shooting to combat them on the other end.


They valued Varejao as a complimentary piece to a championship caliber team. They gave him his extension when LeBron was there. I highly doubt they value and look at him as a cornerstone type of player or a player to build around. The ship has sailed in Cleveland and they are in rebuilding mode. I doubt they hold Varejao in such of a high regard as you are implying. Not to mention, he is coming back from a season ending torn ligament in his ankle- which does hurt his trade value to an extent. I respect your opinion, but I think Varejao for R.J and Blair is more than plausible.
At one point, Scott referred to Varejao as the best defensive center in the league. Obviously, that's beyond hyperbole and maybe it was a ploy to up his trade value, but it also shows how much they still value him. He's also a huge fan favorite and with attendance due to plummet in the coming years, I'm not sure they want to follow up James' departure by trading Varejao, unless it's a no brainer.


Hill goes into the same category as Neal- players who can handle the ball to a respectful degree (not saying they're Chris Paul obviously), both are guards who can defend opposing point guards and versatile enough to guard shooting guards as well; both guards are capable of bringing the ball up the court to get the team into offensive sets.

Are they your prototype "point-guard"? No they aren't. But given their size and ability to guard oppositions points guards and their given ability to spot up shoot off the creating ability of Manu and Parker, they're both capable of playing the 2 and 1 spot(when Manu is in the game).

Also, during the times Neal and Hill had to create this year, I'd say Neal was more successful in the all-important pick and roll within the Spurs offense throughout the year. Creating more separation to get off his own shot for himself and others. Giving him a little more opportunity to do this for 10-12 minutes a game wouldn't be too overbearing for Neal IMO. Not to mention (as I mentioned earlier), Spurs could go out and try to pry Acie Law or Ronnie Price from the free agent market with part of their MLE. This would give adequate insurance in case a situation like the one you presented arises.

FWIW, Hill was dreadful in creating and finding teammates like the prototype "point-guard" should. Yet, the Spurs still managed to yield the best record in the league with him filling the void the whole year. I don't think having Neal at the point guard position with Manu off the bench is terrible at all. Especially if you can go out and get an Acie Law (which I stated above) as a third point guard for emergency scenarios which you touched up on.

And another thing- you going through scenarios, which include one of the big 3 getting hurt is nitpicking. That's like me saying, "Well if Duncan gets hurt then Spurs are just left with Bonner, Spurs have to find a Carl Landry to back him up instead of Bonner."Hill isn't a true point guard, but he's quicker, which allows him to get into the paint easier off his own dribble. He's also a better finisher at the rim and get's to the line more. And having Hill and Neal in tandem, with Ginobili, means none have to exclusively play the point. If Hill is traded, that dynamic is out the window.

I like Hill as a complement to Ginobili and Parker. Yeah, the back court overall is sometimes physically over matched, but let's not lose sight of all of their positives. 1-4, it's the best back court in the league. I also think Hill is a championship caliber role player, which is difficult to find.

It's not nitpicking. I'm being realistic. Parker, like most players, generally misses at least a handful of games each season. Duncan, even if he goes down for a handful of games, they'll be at least three other rotation caliber bigs. They can just increase the minutes of Splitter, Blair and whoever they acquire to replace McDyess. If Parker goes down and Hill is traded, the options are running Ginobili into the ground, having Neal get exposed or playing a player who shouldn't be in a rotation on a team with championship aspirations (Law, Price, etc).



Possibly, but the Blazers did make the move for Wallace. If they were scared of his mileage, injury history, style of play, ect., I doubt they make a move for him especially because of what he makes. And the same time, Blazers have over 100 million locked up into the 2/3 spot. All while, they havehungry rookies in Babbit and Williams waiting in the wings for next year. Not to mention, Miller being their only quality point guard (even though Patty Mills showed to be capable towards the end of the year). I'm willing to bet a Hill plus a 1st for Batum can get the Blazers to think IMO.Batum is their safety net and heir apparent at the position. He's generally regarded as off limits, unless they can get an elite or near elite player.

I suspect Fernandez will be traded. That leaves Matthews, Wallace and two unproven rookies, to go with a gimpy Roy. Hill is a combo guard. He'd have been perfect next to Roy if he were the Roy of a few seasons ago. But now they need a primary creator on the perimeter, which is why they're always mentioned as primary suitors for Nash and Paul.


I think the one of the biggest problems with this team is active size at each position. Spurs have too many players in the rotation that are out manned and out-sized from a very important physicality stand-point, which stunts execution to a degree in important half-court sets on both ends of the court come playoff time. From Blair to Bonner to Hill to Neal. All of those players played huge roles and all were out-manned and out-bullied in rebound opportunities, in fighting through screens opportunities, on the offensive end (being dictated on what path to receive the ball through screens and also being dictated on where to set screens (Blair and Bonner's perspective). It hurt the Spurs execution when it said and done in the playoffs. Spurs need more ugly nasty ol-reliable physicality at every position possible. Size does matter. I agree. They're physically over matched almost everywhere. What it does, in addition to occasionally stunting execution somewhat is, it also makes execution all the more important. They're not going to run over/jump over teams, so everything's got to be precise. They definitely need more physicality and nastiness. They're far too unimposing.


I'd love Chandler as well, I just don't see how we could realistically attain him from Denver. Unless we trade McDyess, Anderson and a 1st to Denver for Birdman and Chandler. (Spurs would have to take back Birdman's contract, which has 3 years worth roughly 15 million.) I'd love it if they could take back Jefferson, but I doubt they would do such a thing with Gallinari manning the SF position.

And I agree with Battier obviously.I agree that he'd be difficult to acquire. I'd offer Anderson and the 1st. If McDyess' contract can't be used to acquire a quality big or to ship Jefferson or Bonner out, then I'd throw his contract in too. You're right, in that they'd probably try to get the Spurs to take Anderson, which isn't happening.

You know Battier would like to stay with the Grizzlies and they'd like to keep him. But even if they trade Mayo, they're set on the wings with Gay, Allen, Young and Henry. They've also committed big money to Gay, Randolph, Conley and are about to to Gasol. Plus, they'll have to pay Arthur when he's up. Which means they'll have to go cheap to flesh out the rest of the roster. I don't see a fit their.

He's obviously got prototypical Spur written all over him and has lived in Texas for going on five years. So assuming he leaves the Grizzlies, I think the Spurs would have the inside track. But it'll probably only happen if they can rid themselves of Jefferson and can't acquire Chandler or someone similar. Because if they're stuck with Jefferson, they'll be the matter of, not just lack of minutes, but too many older players, with declining athleticism, which is the opposite of what the team needs.

[SenorSpur]

Possible off-season scenario:

2) I'd offer Portland Hill and 2011's first rounder for Batum.

Why would Portland consider it? Portland just traded for Gerald Wallace (has 2 years worth 21 million remaining), recently gave Roy a max extension, and signed Matthews to a 5 year deal worth roughly 32 million last off-season. Also taking into account of last years draft of Babbitt and Williams, it could be possibly that Portland has too much money locked into the 2/3 positions to extend Batum rightfully. At the same time, Andre Miller is 36 years old and the team has an option to keep him or not for next year. All of this information leads me to believe Portland would seriously consider a Hill for Batum swap.

Absolutely love this possible scenario. Some very interesting potential incentives that you've raised on the part of Portland. In reading an offseason piece on their possible offseason priorities, it seems that coach McMillian feels strongly about them shoring up their center spot. They may look to become players in the Tyson Chandler or Samuel Dalembert sweepstakes. If that happens, there goes another double-digit, multi-million dollar contract. And if the new CBA includes a "hard cap" like some owners want, that could possibly force them to have to jettison some more players.

I know they love Batum, but with some other momre pressing needs, perhaps this is a good time to broach them on Batum.

[objective]

I don't think Cleveland would swallow 3 years of RJ's vomit just to lose Varajao. Adding Blair and demanding Eyenga is even worse, Eyenga should be one the few untouchables on that team. But hey, I could be wrong. I'd rather have Eyenga more than Varajao anyway, he and Splitter are similar.

Batum for Hill and a pick isn't much for Portland, and others have broken down why. If they did lose their minds I'd be very happy though.

McDyess might be worth more solo (like a deal with PHX for Pietrus) than packaged with Bonner. But any deal that dumps Bonner sounds pretty good right now.

Pursuing Battier I would argue is misguided. Setting aside whether the Spurs could get him (can they afford to spend the money, would he settle to sign with a worse team, etc), there is this issue: he is in decline. He would be better than RJ, but that's not the point.

Furthermore, wanting Battier is just another example of the mindset that led the Spurs to FAIL with Jefferson. The desire for a proven veteran already in decline while simultaneously believing that no 2nd rounder or unproven young player could possibly do the job.

The Spurs should not be looking to add the next Shane Batter; they should be looking to add the next Sam Young.

[jjktkk]

Would love to add Varajo. Gritty tough big, who doesn't need plays called for him. It would be nice to have one of the young sg/sfs in Anderson, Butler, and Green, to step up next year and provide some defense and athleticism.

[kaji157]

We have to trade for a mercenary that will destroy either of RJ legs making him retire.

After that we can start thinking.

[intlspurshk]

All the trade ideas sound great. However, after this playoff, all the SPURS players' trade value reach record low. So I don't think SPURS can make above trades when other teams can provide better offer. SPURS have to count on Butler, Green or Ryan Richard to see whether they can provide some speed, power and energy (chances are low though).

[timaios]

The only reason why the Spurs won 4 titles was because Tim Duncan was the best player in the world...
Put some right pieces around him and that was it.

Tim Duncan will be 36 next playoffs, Manu will be almost 35.

Unless you add someone like Dwight Howard or Lebron James (which is impossible), there is no way the Spurs are contenders again in the Duncan era.

The spurs will win 50+ games again for 2 or 3 more seasons but they will not compete with the young new teams : OKC, Memphis, Chicago, Miami.

Even the Lakers will need some new help, but the difference is that a guy like Dwight Howard or Chris paul could want to join them.

The stars of San Antonio, Dallas, Boston (and LA Lakers) are getting old... this is the beginning of a new era.

A small market like San Antonio can only really improve by the help of the draft... see David Robinson & Tim Duncan.

San Antonio need to suck for 2 or 3 years to draft in the top 5-8 during that span. They need a new great franchise player !

[Fireball]

All the trade ideas sound great. However, after this playoff, all the SPURS players' trade value reach record low. So I don't think SPURS can make above trades when other teams can provide better offer. SPURS have to count on Butler, Green or Ryan Richard to see whether they can provide some speed, power and energy (chances are low though).

not only the trade value of the players is low, but also no available player thinks of the Spurs as championship material anymore ...

[rjv]

not only the trade value of the players is low, but also no available player thinks of the Spurs as championship material anymore ...

varejao does not address our need to get bigger in the post

[MaNu4Tres]

varejao does not address our need to get bigger in the post

Blair's bigger? News to me..

[hater]

Varejao is 10x the defender Blair is

[baseline bum]

Why would Cleveland trade Varejao for Jefferson when they'r both getting paid through the 2013-14 season and Jefferson is owed $5 million more? You're not going to get anything positive for Dick.