General 2013 Free Agency Discussion

[Bruno]

2013 free agents list (http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/8589693/nba-free-agents-2013-2014)

Spurs' salary cap situation (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=202685)

[KL2]

Which players would you like the Spurs to sign? I'd like the Spurs to release Jackson unless he wants to resign for very cheap, Diaw same thing, Manu I'm not sure. Manu has said he may retire, even if he doesn't he said he's fine with he money he's made in his career and money doesn't matter meaning the Spurs could get him for dirt cheap. I just want Neal gone, he can't run the point and he's horrible defensively.

Mine in no particular order:
1. Toney Allen
2. Josh Smith
3. Derrick Favors
4. Paul Milsap
5. Pekovic
6. Ayon
7. Mozgov
8. Vucevic
9. Tyreke Evans


I know they can't afford all of them I'm not retarded, however I'd like to see at least 2 of these guys join the Spurs next season.

They need to go after Allen hard, if the Spurs really want to return to a defensive powerhouse they MUST get him, can you imagine a back court of him and Kawhi wreaking havoc? Disgusting.

I'd love to have Smith however I think he will get a max contract, Favors on the other hand isn't a proven star however I think he's got the potential to be one, this guy is a beast and could probably be had for around $10 mill.

Could someone please tell me how much the Spurs have to spend should they not resign Neal, Jack, Blair and Manu?

[TDMVPDPOY]

dunno about tony allen, can he score?

i think pekovic is an interesting case...

tyreke evans needs a new team to restart his career....

[Richie]

Utah has a team option on Favors, he isn't going to hit free agency

[Bruno]

A part of the 2013 summer for Spurs would be the amnesty claim. If Spurs have some cap space, using it on amnestied player could be the right move instead of trying to convince some free agents.

Marc Stein made a list of players eligible to be amnestied (http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/47965/the-steep-price-of-amnesty) last July , here is the updated version:

AMNESTY ELIGIBLE IN JULY 2013
ATLANTA – Al Horford
BOSTON – Avery Bradley, Paul Pierce, Rajon Rondo
CHARLOTTE – Tyrus Thomas
CHICAGO – Carlos Boozer, Luol Deng, Joakim Noah
DETROIT – Greg Monroe, Charlie Villanueva
LA LAKERS – Steve Blake, Kobe Bryant, Pau Gasol, Metta World Peace
MEMPHIS – Mike Conley, Rudy Gay, Zach Randolph
MIAMI – Joel Anthony, Chris Bosh, Udonis Haslem, LeBron James, Mike Miller, Dwyane Wade
MILWAUKEE – Drew Gooden, Larry Sanders
OKLAHOMA CITY – Nick Collison, Kevin Durant, Kendrick Perkins, Thabo Sefolosha
SACRAMENTO – DeMarcus Cousins, Francisco Garcia (team option), John Salmons
SAN ANTONIO – Matt Bonner, Tony Parker
TORONTO – Andrea Bargnani, Ed Davis, Amir Johnson, Linas Kleiza
UTAH – Derrick Favors, Gordon Hayward

Now, a list of players who have a legit shot at being amnestied:
CHARLOTTE – Tyrus Thomas
CHICAGO – Carlos Boozer
DETROIT – Charlie Villanueva
LA LAKERS – Steve Blake or Metta World Peace (likely Steve Blake)
MIAMI – Mike Miller
MILWAUKEE – Drew Gooden
OKLAHOMA CITY – Kendrick Perkins (long shot)
SACRAMENTO – John Salmons
TORONTO – Andrea Bargnani or Amir Johnson or Linas Kleiza (not sure what they will do)

There are some good players like Boozer who could help Spurs.

[elemento]

Bruno just a question

Will SA be able to make a bid without solving Manu's and Jackson's contract situation first considering their huge cap holds?

[Mel_13]

While not stated explicitly, this section from Coon's FAQ clearly implies that the Spurs could make a bid and then renounce players as needed to create the necessary cap room:

In order to submit a bid for a partial waiver claim, the bidding team must have cap room equivalent to the portion of their bid that would be charged to team salary in that season, plus the amount of any likely bonuses (see question number 72) for that season. If necessary, teams can create this cap room by waiving non-guaranteed players, but not by making trades. The team must make the cap room available immediately upon being awarded the amnesty claim.

http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q67

[Bruno]

Bruno just a question

Will SA be able to make a bid without solving Manu's and Jackson's contract situation first considering their huge cap holds?

If you can't reach a quick agreement with Jackson and/or Ginobili, there is the option of renouncing to their bird rights and sign them later in the summer with cap space.

Contracts signed with bird rights can be 5 years long instead of 4 and have a biggest annual raise (7.5% instead of 4.5%). The biggest annual raise is a detail and the extra year doesn't apply for player of Jackson's and Ginobili's age. At the end, renouncing to their bird rights wouldn't be really problematic.

[elemento]

Thanks Mel and Bruno :toast

[KL2]

I totally forgot about Iguodala, I think it makes the most sense to sign him, a great defender and he can score as well, perfect Manu replacement. He can shoot the 3 as well, good rebounder and passer, I think he would be a perfect fit here.

[TDMVPDPOY]

wattabout birdman? is his case over?

[CGD]

Wonder if the T. Thomas interest us still there. On paper an ideal post defender in the new age NBA.

on offense, Bargani could be interesting too where not forced to be the #1 option. To a lesser extent Villanueva too.

[intlspurshk]

Love to have Igou but I don't think spurs can compete with Dallas. Maybe Tony Allen C Boozer T Thomas AI Jefferson are more realistic. Spurs can let go S Jax Neal and Bonner to create the space (maybe Diaw as well if he opts out). BTW Spurs are going to sign Adam next year, right?

[Strategic]

2013 free agents list (http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/page/FreeAgents-12-13/nba-free-agents-2012-2013)

Spurs' salary cap situation (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=202685)


I noticed Donte Greene is showing up on Hoopshype as available. He fractured his ankle in August and the Nets aparently backed out on signing him? They show that he may be trying out with the Timberwolves. It looks like the money may right with him and the Spurs should be at least as attractive as the wolves. If he's rehab'd enough do you know a big down side to him, like maybe he thumbed his nose at Pop already? Just wondering about the man. His coach Paul Westphal had good things to say about his defense in this video, he is 6'11" plus he's still only 24.


www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySdySgljTU4

[Paranoid Pop]

In Bruno's projection, the spurs end up with 22M in cap space before resigning Manu, Sjax and Tiago. Doesn't seem like we will be left with much cap room (if any) to get any kind of difference maker... And that's if they waive Bonner and we all know it won't happen.

Of course Manu could retire, Sjax could not be resigned but these things won't happen either...

[Drz]

I'm going to plant a seed here, for a dream player that I would love to become available. I was enthralled with the idea of the Spurs drafting him last year when he was projected to go undrafted, but eventually he shot up the draft boards and we ended up drafting his teammate instead.

Kim English

I'm baffled to no end that the Pistons don't play him. So are the people on the Pistons baords. He looks great in his limited minutes on the floor. He looked great in his brief D-league stint. By all accounts he looks great in practice. SUPER hard worker, VERY smart player. Exceptional three point shooter. Better than average perimeter defender. Everything about him screams a floor of a contributing NBA player, and a ceiling of a true difference maker on a contender.

If the Pistons pull another Afflalo and inexplicably dump him, I really hope the Spurs swoop in and grab him as a replacement for a departing guard (Jackson most likely). I don't see any other player in the NBA that we could get for that cheap, who'd be that good.

[Richie]

Does anything think we could bring over Al Jefferson? He has spoken regularly that he grew up idolising Duncan and I heard it somewhere (perhaps Bruce Bowens podcast?) that Duncan has a lot of respect for Jefferson too.

Whether we could afford him along with Tiago and Manu is another issue. If we get both of them cheap ($7m and $5m respectively) we could offer $10m. Probably too little for him, but maybe the lure of playing with Duncan could sway him? Starting at $10m, we could offer him 44.5m/4 years. Doubt it would be enough.

Unlikely we could get all three so cheaply. We'll probably just end up resigning everyone we currently have. However, Bruno says Tiagos cap hold is only $7.5m so we could just hold off and resign him after we've grabbed a free agent and give him a bigger contract.

[Paranoid Pop]

We won't have the cap room but if Manu retires and for some reason we do have the cap room, big Al is a starter and he doesn't fit well next to Tim, none of them are mobile enough to guard PFs.

[Richie]

Ok after spending some time crunching the numbers, heres a possibility for the Spurs.

Assuming Diaw and Mills take their player options we could have $15m to sign free agents. This number is reached by using a $62m cap and taking in to account Splitter and Neals cap holds with the intention of signing them at the end of the summer with Bird Rights, and releasing Bonner and Blair.

For that $15m we would need to resign Manu and a new big man. We could increase that by renouncing the rights to Neal (+ ~$0.5m) or by salary dumping Mills and/or CoJo (+ ~$0.5m each). There could also be a possibility of asking Diaw to opt out and give him another 2 year contract ala RJ, leaving $4.7m on the table for a $7.2m/2 year deal (Starting at $3.5m) for example.

After we've spent this $15m, we can then sign Jackson with the Room exception $5.4m/2years, and Splitter and Neal for as much as the front office wants using bird rights. If Jackson wants a bigger contract than that, I'd let him walk, as the value in renouncing his cap hold and having money to offer a big free agent is too much to pass up.

Of course someone like Splitter could throw a massive spanner in the works by signing a big contract somewhere as a restricted free agent and forcing us to match before we have had a chance to sign a new guy. Would require some cooperation from him.

Basically, if Manu signs for $5m, we could spend $10m on a new big man AND give Splitter a market value contract using his bird rights.

[Chinook]

I don't think the Spurs should want to be under the cap next year. When you factor in cap holds and exceptions, there really isn't much upside to trying to save space. If Splitter gets 8, the first-rounder gets 1 and Manu and Jack get 10 together, the Spurs only have 3 Million bucks to work with. That's smaller than the MLE, so the Spurs would be over the cap. Even if the Spurs get under the cap by parting with Jack or Manu, they'd only be able to offer a free agent a contract starting at about $6- or 7 Million. That would let them beat out MLE offers from other teams. They'd also have the room exception, which could help sign a player like Hanga if for some reason a minimum contract couldn't get it done.

There are some good things that can come from that, but I don't know if it's worth giving up on Jack or Manu to make that happen. That doesn't even address Neal's contract situation.

[Richie]

Neal has a cap hold of only $1m. Keep him to the end of free agency and give him something like $3.5 if we want to keep him.

I'm not sure if you read what I wrote, so I'll cliff it. It is quite long.

Assuming $62m salary cap:

- We have $15m to sign Manu and a free agent. Hopefully Manu would be willing to take MLE money, around $5m, but if he took $7m that would still give us $8m for a free agent. We could get more by trading away Mills/Joseph or restructure Diaws contract to bump that up a couple million.

- At this point we will be up against the cap, so we resign Splitter and Neal using their bird rights.

- Jack gets the room exception, if he wants more then we can afford to lose him and play Kawhi 10min/game more. He will be 35 next summer, somebody might offer him more but he's not so important to us that we have to resign him imo.

There is a lot of quality in 2013 free agency for a team looking for a big man. Looking past the all stars of Howard, Bynum and Josh Smith, theres West, Jefferson, Millsap, Kaman, Brand, all of whom could really help us and see an end to Bonner/Blair for good and extend Timmys career.

[Chinook]

Neal has a cap hold of only $1m. Keep him to the end of free agency and give him something like $3.5 if we want to keep him.

I'm not sure if you read what I wrote, so I'll cliff it. It is quite long.

Assuming $62m salary cap:

- We have $15m to sign Manu and a free agent. Hopefully Manu would be willing to take MLE money, around $5m, but if he took $7m that would still give us $8m for a free agent. We could get more by trading away Mills/Joseph or restructure Diaws contract to bump that up a couple million.

- At this point we will be up against the cap, so we resign Splitter and Neal using their bird rights.

- Jack gets the room exception, if he wants more then we can afford to lose him and play Kawhi 10min/game more. He will be 35 next summer, somebody might offer him more but he's not so important to us that we have to resign him imo.

There is a lot of quality in 2013 free agency for a team looking for a big man. Looking past the all stars of Howard, Bynum and Josh Smith, theres West, Jefferson, Millsap, Kaman, Brand, all of whom could really help us and see an end to Bonner/Blair for good and extend Timmys career.

When talking about being under that cap, you always have to add $5-7 Million (it's only $5 Million for the Spurs this year, unless they get a trade exception from somewhere) to the salaries, as cap room only exists if a team is under the cap by more than this about at any point.

The Spurs can only keep a small hold on Splitter if he agrees to a contract and isn't swayed by potentially bigger offers from other teams (which you mentioned). As he is better than most other players the Spurs could potentially get, it makes sense to just use $8 Million to guarantee keeping him, in my opinion.

If they sign Manu for $7 Million (which I think is appropriately below his market value) extend a qualifying offer of Neal and keep their first-rounder (which I'd assume, seeing as they tend not to miss two years in a row), the Spurs only have about $5 Million to spend on a free agent, and they'd have to hope Jack takes the room exception. If they really want to keep Neal (which I doubt) and have to sign him early, then the total can fall to less than that, and they'd have an even smaller contract to offer.

I'd rather them just say "to hell with cap room," trade Jack this year for good players on long-term contracts, sign Splitter, Manu and Neal for whatever they want and still have a $5 Million contract they can offer to free agents. If you add in sign-and-trade deals, the Spurs may be able to get another $8 Million player in July or a good $5 Million player for Bonner's contract on draft night.

I understand they can get more cap room by jumping through certain hoops, but I don't think it's worth it when there are plenty of alternatives to just signing a player outright.

[Chinook]

Why the hell did I quote myself?

[Strategic]

I know he's getting a luke warm reception on ST, but has anyone heard any news concerning Donte Greene's tryouts this past week?

[Seventyniner]

I know he's getting a luke warm reception on ST, but has anyone heard any news concerning Donte Greene's tryouts this past week?

If the Baynes rumors are true, that fills the 15th and final roster spot. No room for Greene unless the Spurs make a trade (sending out more players than they take back of course) or cut someone (no real candidates for that).

[jyra]

I hope the Spurs take a look at Delonte West. He just signed in the D-League with the Legends. Cuban already said that there's no chance that they sign him again.

He would bring some much needed playmaking and defense to the backup point guard position. Another plus is that he has played a lot of minutes as a shooting guard, so he should be comfortable playing off the ball too.

Unfortunately the Spurs have already passed on other head cases like Blatche/Martin showing that they are not inclined to take a gamble.
It is definitely a red flag that he managed to get himself kicked out by a reputable coach like Carlisle though.

[Chinook]

I hope the Spurs take a look at Delonte West. He just signed in the D-League with the Legends. Cuban already said that there's no chance that they sign him again.

He would bring some much needed playmaking and defense to the backup point guard position. Another plus is that he has played a lot of minutes as a shooting guard, so he should be comfortable playing off the ball too.

Unfortunately the Spurs have already passed on other head cases like Blatche/Martin showing that they are not inclined to take a gamble.
It is definitely a red flag that he managed to get himself kicked out by a reputable coach like Carlisle though.

I think Memphis just signed West.

[jyra]

Any confirmation on that? It looks like they went away from West recently.

294880020499935233

[Mel_13]

West signed with the DLeague today:

http://www.nba.com/dleague/texas/legends_acquire_delonte_west_2013_01_25.html

[Chinook]

I guess that changed. I don't know what the Grizzlies are doing anymore.

Remember, though, that the Spurs have no roster spots open unless they trade someone.

[intlspurshk]

Tony Allen deserved to be chased even for overpaying him. Say 6-7m. With him, you can let Neal and S Jax go and Manu may no longer be a necessarity

[elemento]

Tony Allen is a very good defender but he is not worth 7m/year. He won't solve SAS problems when we have to guard Durant, Lebron or Melo. He is a 6'4 guard with zero offensive game and he doesn't make Manu expandable. Manu's role in SA is very important and SA won't let him go for a guy like Tony Allen.

If SA wants a capable defender, they should make an offer for Moute, who happens to have great size to guard anyone in the league and makes only 4m/year. Full MLE is the most I see Allen getting in the FA.

[intlspurshk]

Tony Allen can't solve all problems of SPURS but at least he can guard CP3, Harden, Wade, Kobe, Westbrook etc and, with Green as a backup, opponent's team SG are properly covered throughout the game. KL can guard Leborn, Durant, Melo, etc. If Cojo's development is successful, SPURS can cover opponent's team PG throughout the game as well. Considering NBA teams' offense is mostly generated by SG/SF/PG nowadays, the combo of Tony Allen / KL / Green / Cojo can disrupt most first tier teams' offense and TP's defense duty can be relieved with more energy saved for generating scoring.

In addition, it is expected that Tony Allen's offense output could be slightly improved after joining the SPURS (like Bowen). And SPURS future offense will still rely on (1) outputs from TP, TD and another random player who shoots 3pts and, to a lesser extent, (2) Tiago's pick n roll game with TP or hopefully Nando. As such, what you need from Tony Allen on offense side is probably 8pts & 5rbs which is achieveable.

Regarding the salary, SPURS have to pay a premium over MLE at least to beat the offer from his existing team and this premium will be at least more than 1 million. Anyway, honestly speaking, first tier FA in 2013 like Josh Smith / Igou will not pick SA and SA's prime objective is to retain Tiago, which would take 8 to 10 million. Could SPURS sign AI Jefferson with the remaining capspace? I doubt so and there are other teams like Dallas which would not mind overpaying. Manu's current health status poses concern and hence it won't make sense to spend 8 million to resign him. So I think Tony Allen is a realistic and sound investment by SPURS

[elemento]

We will have to disagree here then

Manu himself is a very good defender and the punch defensively that Tony Allen offers, doesn't cover the massive downgrade offensively without Manu.

Not only that, but SA will need someone else to lead the 2nd unit while Parker is not on the floor. Who replaces Manu in that role? We're gonna bet on Cojo's development and won't re-sign Manu while Timmy is still playing? I very much doubt it.

Bowen had no offensive game but he could shoot corner 3s at 40%. Allen can't shoot at all from anywhere.

Manu's health status poses concerns, I agree with you, but not re-signing Manu to give 7m/year to Tony Allen makes no sense at all. Manu brings too much to the table and even with health concerns he is worth it.

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

Tony Allen deserved to be chased even for overpaying him. Say 6-7m. With him, you can let Neal and S Jax go and Manu may no longer be a necessarity

A one legged, one eyed Manu is still >>> Tony Allen. Tony is a good player, I like him, he's a glue guy and will probably find a GM stupid enough to wildly overpay for him, but he doesn't fit on the Spurs at all.

[SpursIndonesia]

Tony Allen type of player only works successfully for title challange if your team has a prime real deal superstar who can carry the team in the post season and be a total focal point in offense. That certainly is not the description of this Spurs team, who NEEDS real contribution offensively from its role players to be successfull in the playoff.

[Richie]

Bruno, if we trade Jackson can we re sign him as a free agent? I understand we can't re sign a traded player for up to 1 year after he is traded if he is waived by the recieving team, but is it the same if they do not waive him and his contract just expires?

[Bruno]

Bruno, if we trade Jackson can we re sign him as a free agent? I understand we can't re sign a traded player for up to 1 year after he is traded if he is waived by the recieving team, but is it the same if they do not waive him and his contract just expires?

Spurs could go after him in July even if the other team waives him. The restriction to re-acquire a player is the earliest between a year after the trade and when the initial contract end up.

[Paranoid Pop]

Read that Andre Miller is unhappy with the minutes he has been getting lately.

Too bad we probably couldn't play him more than Denver, would have been a nice target. Shooting 21% from three would make it extremely hard to have him play 30 min in a 3 guards rotation, same problem as Tyreke Evans... At least on paper.

[Paranoid Pop]

Another player who'd be a very intriguing option is Austin Rivers, I know I know, but as much as he sucks right now he has probably better handles than Mills and De Colo. He shoots worse than both the upside could be great. Play him backup PG for now and develop him in the mold of TP the next few years.

Problem is what do we have that the Hornet would like? Not much, Green and Tiago are the only ones that can draw any interest, Tiago is probably already kinda old to be part of their core of the future...

Maybe something like Green + Mills + first round picks for Henry + Rivers

They'd never want to sell low anyway, not that early, but just throwing that out there.

[Chinook]

Maybe something like Green + Mills + first round picks for Henry + Rivers.

:lol Man, I have to give it to you. You've managed to come up with the worst trade for Danny Green that I've ever heard of. You deserve a spur for that on.

[Paranoid Pop]

Oops wrong thread, was used to the trade thread being on top.

But yeah I should try to come up with trades that don't Green once in a while.

[Bruno]

Now, a list of players who have a legit shot at being amnestied:
CHARLOTTE – Tyrus Thomas
CHICAGO – Carlos Boozer
DETROIT – Charlie Villanueva
LA LAKERS – Steve Blake or Metta World Peace (likely Steve Blake)
MIAMI – Mike Miller
MILWAUKEE – Drew Gooden
OKLAHOMA CITY – Kendrick Perkins (long shot)
SACRAMENTO – John Salmons
TORONTO – Andrea Bargnani or Amir Johnson or Linas Kleiza (not sure what they will do)

Right now, it looks like the player that will be amnestied by Toronto will be Bargnani. At $2M per year, he would be a reasonable gamble.

The Lakers situation is also noteworthy. Amnestying Blake will save them $12M, Artest will save $25M and Gasol will save $70M. Amnesty Gasol could be a legit option. D'Antoni can't make him work alongside Howard and Jordan Hill will be back next season to back up Howard. If Lakers amnesty Gasol, Spurs should throw all their cap space on a claim for him. If Spurs keep Splitter, and offer Ginobili $8M per year, they should have $8M left in cap space. They could be outbid but it's worth a try with most of the teams with cap space being in rebuilding mode and looking at younger players.

[pad300]

One guy I would like to see us go after is Mike Dunleavy (formerly of Milwaukee). He's a UFA, and given they traded for Reddick, I doubt they fight to keep him. His skill set is Barry-ish... He'd make a very nice Neal replacement (I don't think we are keeping Gary - some team will offer him $3 or 4 million a season...). Dunleavy's making $3.75 million this season, and will be expecting a smaller contract...he might even leave some money on the table to be on a contender (which he has never really been).

[elemento]

If LA amnesty Pau it's a no brainner for SA. I would offer pretty much everything left in cap space to get him. Can you imagine SA going to the next season with a front-court rotation of Timmy/Pau/Splitter/Diaw/Baynes ? WOW

I like Dunleavy as well, but he is more of a Jack replacement if we sign him. SA doesn't really need to replace Neal. He is too good to be a 3rd string SG and as a backup PG he is not very good.

[bluebellmaniac]

Bruno, I'm not up on all the players league-wide. Of the Players you mention as possibly being amnestied, which do you think would work best from a chemistry perspective? It looks like you already focused on the 4/5 need?

[Bruno]

Bruno, I'm not up on all the players league-wide. Of the Players you mention as possibly being amnestied, which do you think would work best from a chemistry perspective? It looks like you already focused on the 4/5 need?

Gasol is the best option, and by far. Boozer is also a damn nice player but I have some doubts he will be amnestied. Chicago might be fine with paying a little tax.

I'm not really focusing on 4/5, it's just than most of the players susceptible to be amnestied are playing these spots.

Aside of Gasol and Boozer, Villanueva/Bargnani/Thomas are talented but highly flawed bigmen. They could be worth a gamble with a very low offer. Mike Miller could be a fine backup SF if he is healthy enough.

Claiming amnestying players isn't the only way for Spurs to improve this summer, they might just sign a free agent with their cap space.

[timvp]

JJ Redick has to be considered since the Spurs were supposedly trying to trade for him and Redick supposedly was rooting for the Spurs to win the bidding war. Him having a home in Austin probably helps the Spurs chances.

That said, is anyone really that comfortable paying him the $7-8M it's gonna cost to sign him? I think it's a highly questionable investment given that he'll be 29 and whatever athleticism he has will be gone soon. It'd be great to having his shooting but, man, that'd be a gamble.

Redick obviously makes more sense if Ginobili retires and/or Green sucks in the playoffs. IMO, as of this typing, I'd rather the Spurs just re-sign Neal than pay more than two times more for Redick.

(Speaking of Neal, his leg injuries this year probably have torpedoed his market value. If he doesn't improve, I'm not sure he's going to get $2.5M per season.)

[elemento]

Quite honestly, I pass on Redick. I agree with everything tim said (bit old and very expensive) and I will add one more thing. Redick is a massive playoff choker. His numbers in the playoffs are terrible, Bonner-esque.

As for Neal, I don't know how the FO feels tbh. Do you guys see Buford making him a RFA or SA will simply let him walk because of the massive glut at the G position ?

I would be ok if the FO re-signs Neal (2-3m/year would be ok IMO) and the meltdown among Neal haters in ST would be funny.

[bluebellmaniac]

Thanks Bruno! I don't see Gasol getting amnestied. The cable deal the Lakers have make the luxury tax pretty much a nonissue. That plus the statement Gasol made the other week, it brought tears to Laker fans, that Kobe had told him that he missed him. I have to believe they'll keep him.

It'll be interesting what they do with Neal. We do have quite the glut at the 2.

[jesterbobman]

Apologies for longish post, trying to combine salary with FA with trade options.

Pasting in New link for ESPN Free Agents 2013/2014(Adjusted for players on New Teams)

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/8589693/nba-free-agents-2013-2014

Looking at our Roster and Assuming Mills and Diaw stay, We have

TD/Splitter/Baynes
Diaw/Bonner?(Amnesty/Cut)
Leonard/S-Jax
Green/Manu
Parker/De Colo/Mills/Joseph.

With Splitter, Manu and SJax obvious resign options(Can't imagine last 2 signing elsewhere, Given Manu's career and S Jax's reputation around the league(and his poor play this year). If we pencil those 3 in, the only really obvious hole is at PF/Backup Centre to complete a TD/Tiago/Boris 4 man unit.(And potentially a 3rd developmental wing, though that may be in the draft), and we'd probably have some amount of cap room left, especially if moves are made after SJax/Manu resign but before Tiago does.

Looking for Bigs in the FA list, interesting ones Josh Smith, Marreese Speights, Elton Brand, Carl Landry, David West, Dwight(Not Happening, but still), Sam Dalembert, Nik Pekovic, Kirilenko, Bynum(though I wouldn't touch given injury worry), JJ Hickson, Paul Millsap and Al Jefferson.

Removing Dwight, Bynum, Pek, West and Al Jefferson based on money(Based on reasonable ish thoughts of Tiago at Cap hold and Manu and Jack at combined 8m a year. More guys gone at higher numbers.) Leaves:

Marreese Speights, Elton Brand, Carl Landry, David West, Sam Dalembert, Kirilenko, JJ Hickson, Paul Millsap.

In Addition to the Players who are potential/Likely Amnesty Cuts as well as players on mid sized deals who could be trade targets to absorb into cap room. Your Derrick Williams, Amir Johnson types).

Marreese Speights
Elton Brand,
Carl Landry,
David West,
Sam Dalembert,
Kirilenko,
JJ Hickson,
Paul Millsap.

CHARLOTTE – Tyrus Thomas
CHICAGO – Carlos Boozer
DETROIT – Charlie Villanueva
LA LAKERS – Steve Blake or Metta World Peace (likely Steve Blake)
MIAMI – Mike Miller
MILWAUKEE – Drew Gooden
OKLAHOMA CITY – Kendrick Perkins (long shot)
SACRAMENTO – John Salmons
TORONTO – Andrea Bargnani or Amir Johnson or Linas Kleiza (not sure what they will do)

Is there any way we could get a ordered/tiered ranking of these players based on think tank opinion, Take out players who don't fit or will get paid more somewhere else(Definitely a possibility, I think Millsap should get more than we can give) and get down to a short list of likely options for that 3rd/4th big slot.

[Mel_13]

It's fun to think about more expensive free agents, but if the Spurs bring back Splitter and Manu we're probably looking at the MLE as the largest salary slot that the Spurs will be able to offer.

[jesterbobman]

Yeah going by Bruno's salary cap math a 8m Manu/Jax + cap hold Tiago would give us around 6. West seems to make sense staying with Indiana(I really just left him on to stop any "What about David West?" Comments.) It is possible they'll sign for less and we'll have 10m in cap room, so the remaining guys are at least semi realistic options. Obviously most won't sign here, just trying to get a list of >0.1% options who are good players.

[Mel_13]

I understand. I'd say Brand and Landry are good MLE targets. West, Hickson, Millsap, and Kirilenko will be too expensive. Dalembert isn't good enough to pay the MLE. Speights may be priced right at the MLE, but I don't like his BBIQ or his motor. I'd rather have Brand or Landry.

[Spursfanfromafar]

I understand. I'd say Brand and Landry are good MLE targets. West, Hickson, Millsap, and Kirilenko will be too expensive. Dalembert isn't good enough to pay the MLE. Speights may be priced right at the MLE, but I don't like his BBIQ or his motor. I'd rather have Brand or Landry.

Brand would be a good addition as backup PF/C. Landry, I think will be retained by Golden State for whom he is a vital cog. Brand OTOH is liked by and likes Popovich and is also friendly with Duncan IIRC.

[Bruno]

The key to cap space is how much money Manu will ask. $6M per year? $8M per year? $10M per year?

If Manu is fine with $6M per year, Spurs could have almost $11M in cap space (with Diaw and Mills opting in). With that kind of money, you could go after high level free agents like Millsap or Al Jefferson.

And after having used the cap space, Spurs would have the room exception to sign another player like a backup SF.

[Spursfanfromafar]

The key to cap space is how much money Manu will ask. $6M per year? $8M per year? $10M per year?

If Manu is fine with $6M per year, Spurs could have almost $11M in cap space (with Diaw and Mills opting in). With that kind of money, you could go after high level free agents like Millsap or Al Jefferson.

And after having used the cap space, Spurs would have the room exception to sign another player like a backup SF.

Manu could possibly go for $6M a year provided he gets a 3 year (3rd year partially guaranteed option). And that is par course for the amount of time he plays even as he will be the Spurs SG lynchpin.

[Bruno]

Manu could possibly go for $6M a year provided he gets a 3 year (3rd year partially guaranteed option). And that is par course for the amount of time he plays even as he will be the Spurs SG lynchpin.

I really don't know what kind of contract Manu will get this summer. He is still very good but he will be 36 years old and injury prone.

The market for Manu should also be very small. Contenders will be the teams the most interested in him but they won't have cap space so their max offer will be $16.1M/3 years for the teams bellow the apron. Only 3 teams currently above .500 will have realistically cap space this summer (Houston, Utah and Atlanta). They are young and not so good so Manu won't necessarily makes a lot of sense for them.

Add to that Manu clearly saying before the season that he won't sign with another team and it won't be the typical scenario where a new contract is defined by the free agent market.

[elemento]

I understand. I'd say Brand and Landry are good MLE targets. West, Hickson, Millsap, and Kirilenko will be too expensive. Dalembert isn't good enough to pay the MLE. Speights may be priced right at the MLE, but I don't like his BBIQ or his motor. I'd rather have Brand or Landry.

I am with you on this Mel. I always thought Landry would flourish in a better system like ours. He has always been a good player in my opinion. He was putting very good numbers (and starting over Scola) in Houston before he was traded for Kevin Martin and now he is one of the best "off the bench" BIGs in the NBA in GS.

Brand is a typical SA target. Vet that knows how to play the game and SA gets him in the end of his career, much like Dice, Thomas, etc.

West and Millsap are better but they will make 10m/year at least.

And now that SA has cap space we can't rule out the idea of claiming a player from amnesty as Bruno said. Boozer would definitely be a decent name.

[Mel_13]

The key to cap space is how much money Manu will ask. $6M per year? $8M per year? $10M per year?

If Manu is fine with $6M per year, Spurs could have almost $11M in cap space (with Diaw and Mills opting in). With that kind of money, you could go after high level free agents like Millsap or Al Jefferson.

And after having used the cap space, Spurs would have the room exception to sign another player like a backup SF.

What are you using as your estimated 2013-14 salary cap figure?

[Bruno]

What are you using as your estimated 2013-14 salary cap figure?
$62M

[Richie]

The cap figure and Manus contract will be the factors which decide whether we can bring in a decent free agent.

I'd happily throw $6-8m at Brand for 3 years.

[TD 21]

Mini mid-level - minimum targets: Harris, Brand, C. Brewer, Augustin, Billups, Clark, D. Wright, W. Johnson, Carroll, Webster.

If I had to guess, Harris, Brand and D. Wright, are probably the most likely candidates.

Harris is the one most will probably scoff at. But I wouldn't be shocked if they look at him (and Augustin) the way they did Ford a few off seasons back: Former starter, still relatively young, value has plummeted to the point where he can most likely be had on an inexpensive one year deal and has something to prove.

[Chinook]

Wes Johnson for the room exception would be a steal. He's obviously talented, and it seems like he's never really had stable coaching during his career. It'd be nice to see him back up Leonard for a couple of years and giving the Spurs some more options for the summer of 2015, when the Big Three era will almost certainly be over and Green, Leonard and Joseph are slated to be free agents.

[Chinook]

I understand. I'd say Brand and Landry are good MLE targets. West, Hickson, Millsap, and Kirilenko will be too expensive. Dalembert isn't good enough to pay the MLE. Speights may be priced right at the MLE, but I don't like his BBIQ or his motor. I'd rather have Brand or Landry.

Is this the Landry in Golden State? If so, it looks like he's signed (with a player option) for next season. I don't see why he'd opt out if he was only going to get another MLE deal. This is especially true if the Spurs try to bring over someone like Hanga, as that would probably cut into the MLE.

[elemento]

I like Wes as well Chino

Obviously he was not a good enough to be the 4th pick overall, but I think he can be a solid SF going forward.

He came old to the league and he was supposedly to be ready. Problem is that Minny tried to play him as a SG and his lack of ball-handling and dribble skills kill him as a SG prospect. He can't be a SG and will never be a SG. It killed his confidence in Minny.

I think Minny should have tried to develop him into a defender/3-pointer specialist. No doubt in my mind he can be this type of player. He is athletic, he has great size for a SF and great work-ethic.

I would not mind him for cheap at all, even though there will be some nice backup SFs out there after this season. I don't think SA will have a problem to find a backup SF if Jack asks too much. The room exception is absolutely the most SA should spend to get a backup SF. It doesn't make any sense to spend more to get a backup for Leonard.

[elemento]

Is this the Landry in Golden State? If so, it looks like he's signed (with a player option) for next season. I don't see why he'd opt out if he was only going to get another MLE deal. This is especially true if the Spurs try to bring over someone like Hanga, as that would probably cut into the MLE.

It's him. I think he would opt out Chino. He has 4m PO. I don't think he would refuse a full MLE deal. He is not really young and he won't make much more than that. Maybe a Bass-type of contract.
If SA brings Hanga, I don't think he would get more than what Nando got. They could use the room exception on him.

[Bruno]

Unless he has some kind of amazing end of the season, Hanga won't get more than a minimum salary. And IMO, Spurs won't even be interested in signing him for the min. Hanga has shown nothing in Europe.

[Chinook]

It's him. I think he would opt out Chino. He has 4m PO. I don't think he would refuse a full MLE deal. He is not really young and he won't make much more than that. Maybe a Bass-type of contract.
If SA brings Hanga, I don't think he would get more than what Nando got. They could use the room exception on him.

I was thinking of it in terms of years, not dollar amount.

Provided the Spurs never go under the cap, the longest min contract they can offer is two years. If they want to offer more (and they might if they like Hanga but think he is a project who could take a few years to develop), they'd have to use part of the MLE. Just like the last couple of years, the Spurs may not want to offer the full MLE in hopes of signing someone to a longer deal.

I also don't understand the idea that Landry is definitely more than a $4 Million player (meaning he would opt out), but not more than a $5 Million player (where the MLE would get him). He's in the same situation as Diaw and Mayo: They'll either play well enough that they're not as affordable as they were before, or they play poorly enough that they opt in even though they aren't worth their contracts. I can definitely understand your reasoning of why it would make sense for Landry to opt out (not just for the extra million next year, but for the long-term security), but I think he only opts out if he prices himself out of MLE range. He could always make a tactical mistake and opt out when he shouldn't've, though.

[Chinook]

And just so we're all clear, the Spurs will not have both the MLE and the room exception this year. They'll have one or the other.

[elemento]

I got what you said Chino, but as Bruno said, there's no reason to believe that Hanga would get more than a min contract. If he comes, he will probably get a Baynes type of contract. As for the SAS cap, if the cap figure is around 62m as Bruno stated, SA will have cap space even after re-signing Splitter and Manu. They won't use the MLE.

As for Landry, it's not only more money and but long-term security. He played well this season, but I don't think there's a market for him as a starting PF, unless he plays for a really bad team. Mayo's situation is a bit different because people were wondering if he was in a bad situation in Memphis and could flourish in a better environment. Mayo is younger and he got the starting job from day 1, unlike Landry, who will be a bench player as long as he stays in GS because Lee will always start.

I can see Landry getting more than the MLE, but not much more than that. Let's say he gets a Bass/Glenn Davis-type of offer (around 6m/year). Do you really see him turning it down?Landry turns 30 y/o this year. I don't see it.

In my opinion, if he receives a long-term offer (MLE as the floor), he takes it and opts out.

[Chinook]

elemento (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=20945) (when did you get bolded, by the way?) It doesn't work that way, though. Landry can't wait to see his market before opting out. He has to trust his agent's advice on the matter. No teams can negotiate a contract that requires a player to opt-out to get it, it'd be considered tampering. That's even supposed to apply to teams re-signing their own free agents after they opt out (like the Spurs did with Jefferson), but that's a lot harder to enforce.

I agree on everyone's opinions on Hanga, but I was just saying that the Spurs may want to give Hanga a three- or four-year minimum deal so that they have the time to see if he can develop. To do that, they'd need to either have cap space for him use part of the MLE. Besides guaranteeing him that first year, there's no downside to such a deal for the Spurs. It would be a bad deal for Hanga, though, as he'd have to risk playing under market value if he ends up succeeding but still risks getting cut if he fails. Baynes didn't have to accept such a deal from the Spurs (although it was originally reported that he had), because he had the leverage of a productive career in Europe. Hanga, at best, has about the same leverage as Neal did when he signed his deal a couple of years ago.

[Chinook]

Also, the Spurs will only have cap space next season if they want it. They won't start the off-season with it, as they'll have several large cap holds. They can technically re-sign Manu, Jack and Splitter for reasonable deals and still be over the cap with Horry's hold and the MLE factored in. They can always release the holds and go under the cap if they want to, but once they do, they will be unable to go back over and use anything more than the room exception.

Staying over the cap could work in their favor. For example, let's say that Atlanta offers Splitter $11 Million in free agency (not likely, but possible), and the Spurs decide to let him go and replace him with Josh Smith. Two things could happen here:

1) The Spurs could relinquish their cap holds, giving them about $24 Million (assuming they keep their pick). They then sign Smith at, let's say, $14 Million. They then re-sign Manu for $7 Million. That only leaves $5.5 Million between cap space and the room exception (which can't be combined, mind you) to sign free agents, Jack or Neal.

2)The Spurs could do a sign-and-trade with the Hawks for Smith at something like $14 Million. The Spurs would have only $52 Million dollars in salary committed for the year, but would still be "over the cap." They could then re-sign Manu and Jack (and Neal or Blair) for whatever they want and still have the full MLE to use (or the tax-payer's MLE). They could do S&T's with the other free agents and get even more players, but that would put them really close to the tax.

There are definitely mixed strategies that the Spurs could use, but I'm just trying to say that smart teams won't just make as much cap space as they can unless they have a good plan for it.

[elemento]

elemento (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=20945) (when did you get bolded, by the way?) It doesn't work that way, though. Landry can't wait to see his market before opting out. He has to trust his agent's advice on the matter. No teams can negotiate a contract that requires a player to opt-out to get it, it'd be considered tampering. That's even supposed to apply to teams re-signing their own free agents after they opt out (like the Spurs did with Jefferson), but that's a lot harder to enforce.

I agree on everyone's opinions on Hanga, but I was just saying that the Spurs may want to give Hanga a three- or four-year minimum deal so that they have the time to see if he can develop. To do that, they'd need to either have cap space for him use part of the MLE. Besides guaranteeing him that first year, there's no downside to such a deal for the Spurs. It would be a bad deal for Hanga, though, as he'd have to risk playing under market value if he ends up succeeding but still risks getting cut if he fails. Baynes didn't have to accept such a deal from the Spurs (although it was originally reported that he had), because he had the leverage of a productive career in Europe. Hanga, at best, has about the same leverage as Neal did when he signed his deal a couple of years ago.

A couple of days ago I think :lol (appreciate it btw)

I know that Landry can't wait to choose his PO, but we all know that his agent will "talk" to a lot of FOs in order to gather info about his client. In Dick's case, there's no way him hell that he would opt out a 15m contract without a guarantee that he would get a long-term one. Even if we assume that Landry's agent doesn't do it, we can tell that Landry is easily an MLE player at least.

I agree with you that there's no downside to give a 3/4 year deal to Hanga, especially considering that it won't be necessarily fully guaranteed. I think the FO only does it when they feel he is ready to contribute though. I don't think SA gambles on Hanga (even if it's a min contract) if they think he is not ready.

As for the cap, there are too many different scenarios, I agree with you. The case I used (re-signing Manu and Tiago, then using the remaining cap) is the most probable move, that's why I used it.

I understand that your scenario could happen (hell no to Smith at 14m/year btw), even though we can all agree that it's less likely to happen.

[pad300]

The downside to giving Hanga a deal is that a) it's a roster slot gone and b) Is he good enough to get time and develop with the Spurs (or the Toros), vs. playing in Spain (>> D League, < NBA).

[Chinook]

The downside to giving Hanga a deal is that a) it's a roster slot gone and b) Is he good enough to get time and develop with the Spurs (or the Toros), vs. playing in Spain (>> D League, < NBA).

In a vacuum, sure. But having him on the Toros could be better if the Spurs think he's not getting the proper development overseas. They can guarantee him minutes in Austin, and he'd be able to work with the Spurs' coaches, which he doesn't get to do as consistently now.

It's the same thing with Ryan Richards. If they don't look to be developing in Europe, sign them to a long-term, non-guaranteed deal and see what they've got when they can't use coaching as an excuse. That might seem like a waste of a roster spot, but to be honest, it's not any different than what's going on with Joseph right now. If the Spurs think that he's developed well, they might be more inclined to try that with other players.

Hanga (and Richards) is getting kind of old. If there's any hope of him developing into an NBA player, the Spurs should try to bring him over.

[Chinook]

As for the cap, there are too many different scenarios, I agree with you. The case I used (re-signing Manu and Tiago, then using the remaining cap) is the most probable move, that's why I used it.

I understand that your scenario could happen (hell no to Smith at 14m/year btw), even though we can all agree that it's less likely to happen.

Of course, it really depends on a lot of factors. If the Spurs use Bonner's contract to get another player during the draft (which is harder to do now that Blair didn't get moved), then it's very possible that the Spurs end up with less than $5 Million in cap space after re-signing Ginobili and Splitter. I don't think the Spurs will go under the cap unless they have a deal in place with a free-agent. There's just no upside to doing it at the start of free agency.

[pad300]

Awful thought of the day. Are the Spurs allowed to pay Bonner's buyout ($1 Million) and then resign him to a cheaper contract ($6 Million/3 years?) ?
Yes, I want him gone, either traded or bought out, but is this a legal option for the Spurs? Cause it sure seems a Spurs-y move. Someone in the FO clearly likes the guy...

[Chinook]

Awful thought of the day. Are the Spurs allowed to pay Bonner's buyout ($1 Million) and then resign him to a cheaper contract ($6 Million/3 years?) ?
Yes, I want him gone, either traded or bought out, but is this a legal option for the Spurs? Cause it sure seems a Spurs-y move. Someone in the FO clearly likes the guy...

Should be legal. Teams waive players and re-sign them all the time. The Spurs did it with Green a couple of years back.

They'd need cap space or part of their MLE to give him that type of deal, though.

[Bruno]

The best to do with Bonner would be to use the amnesty on him and create more cap space.

[TD 21]

Agree with pretty much everything Chinook and elemento said about Johnson, other than the former saying Johnson "would be a steal at the room exception". His stock has fallen so far, it wouldn't shock me if he doesn't even get a guaranteed contract, but if he does, it'll probably be at the minimum. On a two year deal, whether fully guaranteed or not, he makes a lot of sense. With the way Leonard is coming along, all they really need is about 15 mpg anyway.

Even if they signed him, I believe D. Wright should be the primary focus. Long, athletic, good three-point shooter, good rebounder (for an SF, of course) and still young. He makes a lot of sense as a backup to Leonard and as a small ball PF.

[td4mvp2k]

The Cleveland Cavaliers have waived forward Josh Selby, Cavaliers General Manager Chris Grant announced today from Cleveland Clinic Courts. The Cavaliers roster now stands at 14.

Selby played in 11 games for the Canton Charge this season, averaging 15.3 points, 6.5 rebounds and 4.2 assists in 32.9 minutes per games. He also appeared in 10 games for the Memphis Grizzlies this year, averaging 2.0 points in 5.9 minutes per game. Selby was acquired by the Cavs from the Grizzlies via a trade on January 22nd, 2013.

http://www.nba.com/cavaliers/releases/waive-selby-130303

[elemento]

Forward Josh Selby ?

He is a guard. Considering what Cleveland has right now at the 1-2 positions, I thought they would keep him. He is talented. I remember when he was the number 1 high school player of the Nation.

Some team will gamble on him.

[td4mvp2k]

I didnt think a team like the Cavs would waive him.

[td4mvp2k]

The Atlanta Hawks have waived forward/center Jeremy Tyler, Hawks President of Basketball Operations/General Manager Danny Ferry announced Wednesday.

Acquired from the Golden State Warriors on Feb. 21, Tyler appeared in one game for the Hawks (March 4 at Denver), grabbing three rebounds in five minutes of action.

http://www.nba.com/hawks/#/story/news/hawks-waive-jeremy-tyler

[elemento]

I remember some of my Spurs fellows wanted Tyler back in the draft.

He had some character/maturity issues back then and I don't doubt he still has it. He will have to prove his value in the D-league, otherwise, he goes back to minor leagues Europe/Asia.

[elemento]

Tyler Honeycutt was waived by the Rockets btw.

[td4mvp2k]

Dont know if Honeycutt is more then some of the players Spurs have with Toros but Tyler would be good.

[td4mvp2k]

Los Angeles Clippers today waived forward Trey Thompkins. The 37th overall selection of the 2011 NBA Draft by the Clippers out of Georgia, Thompkins averaged 2.4 points and 1.0 rebounds in 24 games during his rookie season. He did not appear in a game this season due to a left knee bone bruise.

"We want to thank Trey for his contribution to the Clippers,” Clippers head coach Vinny Del Negro said. “Unfortunately, he was never able to truly showcase his talents this season due to injuries. We wish him all the best and believe he has a bright future."

The Clippers roster currently stands at 14.

nba.com

[pad300]

A review of the roster structure in 2014

Assuming No trades, the following people are guaranteed

C: TD, Baynes
PF:
SF: Kawhi
SG: Green, Nando
PG: TP, Cojo

People who have options that they can choose to stay on the roster
C:
PF: Diaw
SF:
SG:
PG: Mills

People who the FO has options to get rid of, and who will likely be gotten rid of...
C:
PF: Bonner
SF:
SG:
PG:

FA's that I am confident we will try to resign

C:
PF: Splitter
SF:
SG: Manu
PG:

Assuming a 15 man roster and 3 slots per per position gives us this:

C: Duncan, Baynes , ______
PF: Splitter, Diaw , ______
SF: Kawhi , ______, ______
SG: Green , Manu
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nando
PG: TP, Cojo , Mills

Black and bold are confirmed, blue are I am confident we will retain, somehow, orange is quite iffy - I can see both the team and the player having reasons to move on. (IMO).

Note that without Mills leaving, we have 6 at PG & SG already - which is another reason (besides his D, and my suspicion that he will get a good FA offer from someone else) that Gary Neal is going to leave.

If Mills leaves, this leaves us with one spot to fill at PG/SG, two at SF, and two big men - one C and one PF. This spread of available slots does mean that we can draft BPA, without worrying about positional space or finding the player a spot in Europe...

[CGD]

The starting 5 are set for next year. Think the needs in FA/draft are backup SF and backup PF. Depending on what Manu does at some point Spurs will need to address the SG position but so long as he resigns its not a priority. Cojo has convinced me he can play backup pg.

For this offseason: Id be happy with signing Big Al, someone like Dorrel Wright to replace SJax, and drafting a project big at #29. Spurs say bye to Neal, Blair, SJax, and amnesty Bonner.

[elemento]

Hard to predict anything not knowing how much Manu and Tiago get in the off-season.

I'd say I would be pretty happy with a backup SF (so many options this off-season), a decent VET big (someone like Landry or Brand) and young prospect BIG with the 1st round pick.

Blair and Bonner have to go. Their time in SA is over.

Not sure about Neal. I like him for cheap but SA has so much depth at the 1/2 positions.

[BackHome]

Well we know Tiago is going to get paid, to bad all you haters out there but teams will pay him if we don't.

Manu I am pretty sure signs a friendly deal since I don't see him moving his wife and young kids to a new city.

CoJo - Who ever is training him needs a huge bonus cause he is a totally different player this year (Gotta give CoJo Props for his work ethic) - He can and will probably take Neal's place on the team.

SJAX- I just think we can get better by this draft or through free agency his body is showing wear and tear not close to the player he was.
Blair- Gone

C: Splitter//Baynes
PF: Duncan/Diaw/Bonner
SF: Kawhi/Omri/Hanga
SG: Manu/Greene/Hanga
PG: Tony, CoJo/De Colo

Will be very interesting to see what positions the Spurs get during the draft this year.

[KL2]

I think SA is going to be able to get JAX, Manu and Diaw for dirt cheap, Jack has been playing terrible all season long, teams also view him as a troublemaker. I'm hoping other teams will view Diaw as a product of SA's system, scaring them away from giving him more than he's worth or even making an offer. Manu said money doesn't matter and he hasn't really been playing well either thus driving down his price.

The Spurs may have found their backup PG with Cojo as well, just great news for the Spurs. If this is the case all they really need to do is focus their attention on a PF after they resign Splitter.

[Richie]

I think SA is going to be able to get JAX, Manu and Diaw for dirt cheap, Jack has been playing terrible all season long, teams also view him as a troublemaker. I'm hoping other teams will view Diaw as a product of SA's system, scaring them away from giving him more than he's worth or even making an offer. Manu said money doesn't matter and he hasn't really been playing well either thus driving down his price.

The Spurs may have found their backup PG with Cojo as well, just great news for the Spurs. If this is the case all they really need to do is focus their attention on a PF after they resign Splitter.

Diaw has a player option which he will almost certainly pick up.

However, we might be able to get him to opt out to save us $1m or so. He's due $4.7m, maybe he'd opt out if we offered him a new deal of $7.5m/2yr.

[BackHome]

So if Blair/SJAX/Neal/ are not signed and if we amnesty Bonner how much will that get us under the cap?

[Bruno]

So if Blair/SJAX/Neal/ are not signed and if we amnesty Bonner how much will that get us under the cap?

In the following case:
- Spurs renounce to Blair, Jackson and Neal.
- Spurs amnesty Bonner.
- Diaw and Mills opt in.
- Spurs trade away their first round pick or use him on a draft and stash player.
- Spurs re-sign Splitter and Ginobili.

Then a guesstimate of Spurs cap space would be: $16.3M minus Ginobili's new salary. So, for example, if Manu sign a new contract staring at $6M, Spurs would have $10.3M to offer at free agents.

If you want to tweak this number:
- Mills opting out would create $0.6M more in cap space.
- Spurs keeping their first round pick and using it on a player they would sign this summer would eat between $0.4M and $0.6M in cap space.

[Richie]

Bruno (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=2449), that's assuming a $62m salary cap?

If we had $10m to spend, we could lure the likes of Millsap, Jefferson or West. That would be fantastic IMO

Also, would a draft pick really make a difference? We'll have a $490k cap hold on the roster spot regardless, the draft pick might only remove ~$300k from cap space?

[Chinook]

In the following case:
- Spurs renounce to Blair, Jackson and Neal.
- Spurs amnesty Bonner.
- Diaw and Mills opt in.
- Spurs trade away their first round pick or use him on a draft and stash player.
- Spurs re-sign Splitter and Ginobili.

Then a guesstimate of Spurs cap space would be: $16.3M minus Ginobili's new salary. So, for example, if Manu sign a new contract staring at $6M, Spurs would have $10.3M to offer at free agents.

If you want to tweak this number:
- Mills opting out would create $0.6M more in cap space.
- Spurs keeping their first round pick and using it on a player they would sign this summer would eat between $0.4M and $0.6M in cap space.

So do you think there's anything to the strategy of agreeing with Splitter, but waiting to ink the deal and keeping only the cap hold on the books until after they've used up the cap space? Do you see Splitter's starting salary as being significantly different than his cap hold?

[Bruno]

Bruno (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=2449), that's assuming a $62m salary cap?

Yeah, it is. $62M might sound optimistic but there are some signs that shows a significant raise of the BRI.
Maybe the most tangible of it these signs is the league raising the max salary by 5.8% between 2011-2012 and 2012-2013. Since max salaries are derived from the BRI, such a big raise is surely a sign that the NBA projections are optimistic.



Also, would a draft pick really make a difference? We'll have a $490k cap hold on the roster spot regardless, the draft pick might only remove ~$300k from cap space?

The rookie scale for the first year of the 29th pick is $887K, so with the cap hold, keeping the pick would cost $397K to be exact.
I said $0.4M/$0.6M because there is a gray area about cap hold for unsigned first round pick and msot of the time their cap hold is 120% of the rookie scale.
You can read more about that here:
http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q50


So do you think there's anything to the strategy of agreeing with Splitter, but waiting to ink the deal and keeping only the cap hold on the books until after they've used up the cap space? Do you see Splitter's starting salary as being significantly different than his cap hold?

My figures are with Splitter cap hold of $7.5M, so they don't change even if Splitter sign a max deal.

If he doesn't suck in the playoffs, I think Splitter will be paid above his cap hold. $10M per year sounds fair for that kind of bigman. In that case, and if Spurs want to use their cap space, agreeing with Splitter to a contract and waiting to sign him is the way to go.

[Richie]

Also Bruno, my maths is different to yours. Assuming Mills and Diaw re sign, we have 37.9 committed to 8 players + Bonner. I'm assuming Bonner doesn't take a roster spot. Tiago's cap hold takes spot #9 and we re-sign Manu for spot #10. We then have two cap holds for #11 and #12 of 490k each.

That leaves us with around $15.5m in cap space (before Manu signs), assuming a $62m cap. When signing a free agent, are you able to include the cap hold on that spot in the maximum you can give them? That would account for the ~$500k difference between us.

[Bruno]

Also Bruno, my maths is different to yours. Assuming Mills and Diaw re sign, we have 37.9 committed to 8 players + Bonner. I'm assuming Bonner doesn't take a roster spot. Tiago's cap hold takes spot #9 and we re-sign Manu for spot #10. We then have two cap holds for #11 and #12 of 490k each.

That leaves us with around $15.5m in cap space (before Manu signs), assuming a $62m cap. When signing a free agent, are you able to include the cap hold on that spot in the maximum you can give them? That would account for the ~$500k difference between us.

I'm using these numbers:
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=202685


Spurs team salary in the 2013 summer:
Tony Parker: $12,500,000
Tim Duncan: $10,361,446
Boris Diaw: $4,702,500
Danny Green: $3,762,500
Nando De Colo: $1,463,000
Kawhi Leonard: $1,887,840
Patrick Mills: $1,133,950
Cory Joseph: $1,120,920
Aron Baynes: $788,872
Roster cap hold: $490,180
Roster cap hold: $490,180
Roster cap hold: $490,180

Total: $39,191,568

In this scenario and with a $62M salary cap, Spurs will have $22.8M in cap space next summer.

$22.8M - $7.5M (Splitter cap hold) + $1M (2 roster cap hold remove) => $16.3M

[Richie]

I'm using these numbers:
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=202685


$22.8M - $7.5M (Splitter cap hold) + $1M (2 roster cap hold remove) => $16.3M

Ah I see. I was including Bonners salary, you're assuming he is amnestied. I'm not sure which is more likely tbh, the extra $1m saved could be worth it in free agency.

[ABC]

Anyone think the Spurs will try to get Josh Smith or Howard and let Splitter walk?

[Richie]

Anyone think the Spurs will try to get Josh Smith or Howard and let Splitter walk?

While it's possible, I think the Spurs is known as an organisation that shows loyalty to players. If we ask Splitter to hold off on signing with somebody as a restricted free agent for us to make a move, I hope we don't then screw him over and go for Smith or Howard.

If Splitter decides he doesn't want to give us the freedom to sign a free agent and signs a big deal as an RFA early in the summer, I hope we explore the likes of Smith and Howard as options in the days we have to decide about matching.

In all likelihood though, we'll bring back Splitter regardless. I doubt Howard or Smith would come to SA, and the gamble of letting Splitter leave would be too high

[CGD]

^
Dont think Spurs swing for Howard/Smith (or any other big) this summer, though, I personally am an Al Jefferson fan. The only position I can see them throwing money at is SG/SF as they deal with replacing Manu into the furture. Someone like Tyrke Evans comes to mind.

But unless Manu retires or it becomes painfully apparent that he can't sustainably help in a long playoff run, the only openings on the roster are at back-up SF and one PF/C position. You have to think one of those is addressed with the first rounder, possibly the latter. It is unclear to me whether Hanga, who Pop said should be able to come this summer, can play at the SF.

[Richie]

^
Dont think Spurs swing for Howard/Smith (or any other big) this summer, though, I personally am an Al Jefferson fan. The only position I can see them throwing money at is SG/SF as they deal with replacing Manu into the furture. Someone like Tyrke Evans comes to mind.

But unless Manu retires or it becomes painfully apparent that he can't sustainably help in a long playoff run, the only openings on the roster are at back-up SF and one PF/C position. You have to think one of those is addressed with the first rounder, possibly the latter. It is unclear to me whether Hanga, who Pop said should be able to come this summer, can play at the SF.

Possibly, but with such a late pick (looking like #29) I wouldn't be surprised to see a draft and stash player taken.

Following on, even if one of those positions is taken in the draft there it is unlikely they will be in the rotation right away. I think it's more likely that whoever is picked spends a year with the Toros ala Joseph than getting minutes outside of garbage time. It is of course possible though.

I have thought for a while that a PF/C is vital for us. A rookie is very unlikely to cut it IMO, we need someone who can come in and take minutes from Duncan from day 1. Im a big West fan, and someone like him, Jefferson, Millsap etc... would allow us to reduce Duncans minutes by 3 or 4 per game and sit him on b2bs.

Signing a decent free agent would also give us more flexibility going forwards after Duncan retires, either an extra asset to trade if we blow it up or another solid piece to try and contend in the post-Duncan era. A player like Millsap would fill both of these roles perfectly.

[Pop]

I like the Tyreke Evans idea and I talked a lot about him in the trade ideas thread.

Imo Baynes will be a very good backup for Tim next year and could be even this year but that's just my opinion so if they keep Splitter, I'd pay a guard, Green is incredibly limited, Manu is slowing down, I'd pay Evans to have a three guard rotation of TP-Evans-Manu.

But if we pay a guard we may have to trade Green.

[Bruno]

I like the Tyreke Evans idea and I talked a lot about him in the trade ideas thread.

Imo Baynes will be a very good backup for Tim next year and could be even this year but that's just my opinion so if they keep Splitter, I'd pay a guard, Green is incredibly limited, Manu is slowing down, I'd pay Evans to have a three guard rotation of TP-Evans-Manu.

But if we pay a guard we may have to trade Green.

My feeling is that Spurs priority should be to get a bigman with their cap space.

Saying that, playoffs will tell a lot on what Spurs should do this summer. Before them, it's hard to know what Spurs summer's plan should be. A guard could be the priority if Manu struggled and Green choked like he did against OKC last season. It could be unnecessary if Manu raise his level for the playoffs and Green remains solid.

For the guards spots, you also had to wonder what kind of role do you want to give to Joseph and De Colo next season. They should be theoretically better than this year but do you want to have them in the rotation?

[CGD]

^
I suppose it all turns on the Manu situation, and trusting in the development of Leonard as the Spurs look into the fast-arriving future (2 years from now). Leonard hasn't convinced me yet that he can be the primary option down the stretch, though, his lack of touches has something to do with that. I hope I'm wrong, but I dont see any of CJ, Nando, Mills, or Hanga being that either. Evan's is interesting bc his star has fallen a bit, and could be primed for rebound. I'm sure there are other options too, and who knows what will happen in the draft.

Conventional wisdom says that if you are going to spend money then spend on a big. It would be pretty awesome to get someone that is not only willing to accept a bench role, but that will be there will into the post-Duncan era. This is why I favor Al Jefferson. He has the demeanor, and personality to accept that role. Howard/Smith are unrealistic, West will stay with the Pacers, and Milsap seems redundant with what is on the roster already.

The possibilities with cap space are exciting. Not sure what the competitive landscape will be this summer, but I have to think the Spurs are in one of the better cap space situations.

[Bruno]

^
I suppose it all turns on the Manu situation, and trusting in the development of Leonard as the Spurs look into the fast-arriving future (2 years from now). Leonard hasn't convinced me yet that he can be the primary option down the stretch, though, his lack of touches has something to do with that. I

It would kinda weird to start worrying about the post Parker era this summer while he will be 31 years old and is currently playing his best basketball ever.

I don't really see Tyreke Evans being a good fit with the current Spurs team. There will have a serious lack of spacing if you pair him with Parker and Leonard.

[Martin R]

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

It looks like he plays like somebody I know....

[Pop]

After a game like tonight it's a tough call, Asik outrebounded Tim and Splitter combined and our SG rotation looked even worse.

[TD 21]

Thinking about this some more, you don't diligently plan and work towards significant cap space for years and then go into free agency with the intention of just adding a few 7th-9th men (particularly as a team with legit championship aspirations) and calling it a day. I've got to believe they're thinking bigger than that.

With that in mind, using Bruno's estimated cap for next season of approximately $62M and making the following presumptions: Ginobili re-signs for $7M, Splitter re-signs for $9M, they devote the room exception ($2.5M) to a backup SF, Bonner is disposed of in some fashion without salary coming back, Blair and Neal are gone, Diaw and Mills opt in and they utilize the 1st (just over $1M) on a player who'll play for them immediately, that would leave them with between $10-11M in cap space.

Backup PG and SF are current holes, but given the starter's at those positions, it's safe to say they'd be looking for a starting PF. There's three candidates who are going to make that much or more: Smith, who's going to be out of their price range, West, who's likely going to re-sign and then there's Millsap, who I see as their number one target.

I don't think they were ever entirely comfortable making Splitter the starting PF and that they did so by default. Ideally, I think they'd like to make him the third big until Duncan retires. It might sound steep for $9M, but Gibson and Anderson make close to that and play the same role.

[Richie]

TD 21, I'm pretty sure with your hypothetical situation (and $62m cap) we would have $16.2m to split between Manu and a free agent. If Manu eats up $7m, I don't think we could have Millsap for $9m. If the cap stays the same, that could be as little as $7m for a free agent which won't get us anybody significant.

The Manu contract really makes or breaks us. Anything over the MLE and I think we will struggle to attract a decent free agent.

[Chinook]

Don't forget that there is a period where players can teams can agree to a deal without anything being signed. So the Spurs will have time to work out a deal with a free agent before anyone can even give Splitter an offer sheet to sign. If the Spurs plan to make a big free-agent splash, they will probably be able to do what while Splitter only counts for $7.5 Million in cap space.

[szkorhetz]

What about Corey Brewer as the backup SF? He is long, athletic, amazing defender, can knock down the occasional three pointer. I love him and I think he would fit in the system.

[TD 21]

TD 21 (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17781), I'm pretty sure with your hypothetical situation (and $62m cap) we would have $16.2m to split between Manu and a free agent. If Manu eats up $7m, I don't think we could have Millsap for $9m. If the cap stays the same, that could be as little as $7m for a free agent which won't get us anybody significant.

The Manu contract really makes or breaks us. Anything over the MLE and I think we will struggle to attract a decent free agent.

I don't know where you got $16.2M from.

Upon further review, my math was slightly off in two cases, though by miniscule amounts. The room exception is $2.652, not $2.5M and Baynes makes about 5K more than I'd remembered. So they'll probably end up with closer to $10M than $11M in cap space. Still, that should put them squarely in the Millsap sweepstakes.

I had previously said that they could match any offer Splitter receives and avoid the tax and that's true, but if their plan is to sign Millsap, then the exact amount Splitter get's becomes far more important. With Ginobili, I think they'll do with him what they did with Duncan. Discuss parameters (a range and a number he won't get less than), but try to get done what they want to get done outside of him, then give him what's leftover.

Chinook, where did you get $7.5M from?

[Mel_13]

Chinook, where did you get $7.5M from?

That's his cap hold. Until the moment he signs a new contract, that's the amount he counts against the cap. The Spurs can sign a free agent while counting 7.5M as Splitter's number and then subsequently sign him to any number up to the maximum, even if it takes them well over the salary cap. They would still have the room exception in that scenario.

The 16.2M number comes from a post by Bruno somewhere in the Think Tank. He calculated the max cap space in the most favorable scenario. 16.2M was the sum of Manu's salary and available cap space.

[TD 21]

That's his cap hold. Until the moment he signs a new contract, that's the amount he counts against the cap. The Spurs can sign a free agent while counting 7.5M as Splitter's number and then subsequently sign him to any number up to the maximum, even if it takes them well over the salary cap. They would still have the room exception in that scenario.

The 16.2M number comes from a post by Bruno somewhere in the Think Tank. He calculated the max cap space in the most favorable scenario. 16.2M was the sum of Manu's salary and available cap space.

I read that wrong. I thought he meant they'd only have $7.5M in cap space.

By "most favorable scenario", you mean he made every presumption (Mills opting in is admittedly questionable) I made?


Not that the specifics aren't important, but quite honestly, whether the number is $9M, $10M, whatever, if they want him and think they can get him at a certain number, they're not letting a relatively small amount stand in the way. There's numerous ways to shave an extra million here or there.

[Chinook]

By "most favorable scenario", you mean he made every presumption (Mills opting in is admittedly questionable) I made?

Sort of. He also assumed Bonner would count for $1 Million (EDIT: He didn't actually say that; he said they'd amnesty him.) and that the Spurs would NOT have to pay a salary for a first-rounder. That may make up the difference

Again, though, if you had assumed Splitter would count for $9.5 Million in your calculations, you have an extra $2 Million to work with now.

EDIT: Interestingly enough, he didn't seem to account for the fact that the roster charges would go away as players were added. Meaning that the Spurs would have $22.8 Million counting three roster charges, but as they added players, they'd actually be able to spend about $24.3 Million, so long as that money were spread among at least three players. If it were only spread between two, then the Spurs would have about $23.8 Million to spend, and if it were possible for it to be spent on a single player, then they would have about $23.3 Million to spend. Otherwise, one would be counting the roster charges twice. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, Bruno (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=2449).

[Chinook]

This is actually what Bruno said in the salary thread:


How much cap space Spurs could had in the 2013 summer:
It's early to answer at that question but let's give it a try.
Let's make first some assumptions:
- The salary cap is $62M.
- Spurs use the amnesty rule on Bonner.
- Diaw and Mills decides to pick their option and stay.
- Spurs either use their first round pick on a draft and stash player or trade him away.

Spurs team salary in the 2013 summer:
Tony Parker: $12,500,000
Tim Duncan: $10,361,446
Boris Diaw: $4,702,500
Danny Green: $3,762,500
Nando De Colo: $1,463,000
Kawhi Leonard: $1,887,840
Patrick Mills: $1,133,950
Cory Joseph: $1,120,920
Aron Baynes: $788,872
Roster cap hold: $490,180
Roster cap hold: $490,180
Roster cap hold: $490,180

Total: $39,191,568

In this scenario and with a $62M salary cap, Spurs will have $22.8M in cap space next summer. Diaw opting out will create an additional $4.2M in cap space and mills opting out another $0.6M.

You take away Splitter's 7.5 and Neal's 1.1 (and add back the 490k from the cap holds), and you get about $15.7 to spend between Ginobili and a free agent. I'm sure my numbers are off a little, but that's what I got from doing rough calculations.

Note, though, that this is just the amount the Spurs have to pay this season. With increases, they can offer up to $16.7 Million a year on four-year deals. Functionally, a two-deal, $13 Million deal for Ginobili would take up $6.37 Million next season, leaving the Spurs with enough money a $39.9/4 deal. By not extending a qualifying offer to Neal (but keeping his cap hold), the Spurs can sign a player to a $41.14/4 deal (combining to be $16.8 Million per season for both deals).

So taking increases into consideration allows the Spurs to fit a little more under the cap that they would by just looking at average salaries.

EDIT: I added some stuff now that I had a little time. Obviously, all of these numbers can be off due to me making false assumptions. However, the idea behind the numbers should be correct. If $16.2M is the correct amount, then the Spurs could offer $17.3 Million per season on four-year deals.

[Bruno]

Yeah, Spurs will have about $16M to split.

At the end, it isn't that interesting to look at number within a few $100K because there is a huge uncertainty about what the cap number will be.

The $62M figure is a wild guess and it could be very well be $60M or $65M. Factors like Lakers TV mega deal or the Nets moving to Brooklyn should help to see the BRI significantly increase. Stern even said in November that he was estimating this year revenues to $5B which would result in a salary cap around $70M.

[Richie]

Would a very high cap raise (i.e. $70m) be a blessing or a curse for the Spurs?

[TD 21]

I think we're all in agreement that there's a good chance they'll be able to offer a free agent something in the vicinity of $10M/year.

Teams I could see vying for Millsap . . .

Hawks: If they lose Smith, even though the greater need is at center, he'd work in a three big rotation.

Bobcats: Have the worst group of bigs in the league and could use a high character veteran, who's more than a bit player.

Pistons: Have one of the two best young big tandems in the league to build around, but neither is a floor spacer. Adding him would give them an excellent three big rotation going forward.

Rockets: Between Howard, Bynum and Smith, they've got bigger fish to fry. But should they strikeout on them, they'd figure to have a good shot, given the promising young talent they've got, plus how good a fit he'd be.

Spurs: They'd also figure to have a good shot, since they'd give him by far the best chance at a championship in the short term. He'd give them hands down the best big rotation in the league.

Jazz: Only if they don't re-sign Jefferson, otherwise they'd have the same problem they have now.


Richie, the higher the cap, the better, for the simple fact that it would give them even more financial flexibility. And even at $70M, that still wouldn't open up cap space for any of the glamor teams.

[Richie]

Richie, the higher the cap, the better, for the simple fact that it would give them even more financial flexibility. And even at $70M, that still wouldn't open up cap space for any of the glamor teams.

I'd have to wonder whether the Spurs could afford to pay $70m, or more since they will still be able to offer up to the cap and then re sign Splitter. Also, it would mean Splitter getting closer to $15m than $10m with so much more money available to teams.

[Pop]

I'm not sure why most of you seem set on a starting PF. Splitter is at his best at PF where his suspect rebounding is less of an issue, sure his PER took a hit but the starting lineup as a whole is very successful. So the best move could be to look for a backup center if they don't believe Baynes is going to be a game changer.

Someone like Dalembert could be good, gives you rim protection and great rebounding when Tim is sitting.

I'd love to get Jack back if money is not an issue tbh.

Also something I don't see mentioned is the longer term strategy, they should think about having flexibility the year Manu retires. I talked about Evans because I see someone who could fit well with both TP and Green. Then next year Bledsoe and Hayward are gonna be RFA, pretty sure it'll be impossible to steal Hayward obviously and I don't think Bledsoe is all that realistic either but he could be a terrific fit in a 3 guards lineup with TP and Green, shooting over 40% from 3 this year and one the best PG defender in the league to switch the D when he'd play SG next to TP...

I think they have to think about the bench production and still optimize to get significant upgrades and players that can play 30+ minutes because they complement what we have already well.

The best option this summer could be to overpay a backup center on a short deal.

[Chinook]

I'm not sure why most of you seem set on a starting PF. Splitter is at his best at PF where his suspect rebounding is less of an issue, sure his PER took a hit but the starting lineup as a whole is very successful. So the best move could be to look for a backup center if they don't believe Baynes is going to be a game changer.

I understand why you say that, but I disagree. I think the starting lineup is better with Splitter as the power-forward because Splitter is better than Diaw. It's not because Splitter is a natural fit there. On the flip side, the bench is awful because Splitter fit best with that unit. He gave Ginobili an elite pick-and-roll partner, and Splitter himself operated better when he had Bonner spread the floor for him. Even though the Spurs' defense has been better this season, I don't know if I'd say the whole team is better.

A starting-caliber power-forward would help the Spurs by allowing them to put Splitter back where he belongs. It's also possible that this player would be a more versatile scorer than Splitter is, which would only help the starting unit. Also, if this player is a better rim protector than Splitter, the unit's defense may get better than it is right now.

Even if you don't believe that Splitter should be on the bench, getting a starting-caliber player is still a good idea. With Ginobili's decline, it's hard to see how the bench is going to survive without at least one really good player. Even if you bring a player like Milsap off the bench, he's be worth a hefty deal. That's even more of a concern if Ginobili goes to the starting unit next season. I think Pop needs to commit to playing one of Duncan and Splitter at all (important) times. This decreases the need for a backup center. A rotation of Duncan, Splitter and starting-caliber power-forward, with a little Diaw thrown in and Baynes for scrub minutes seems more than solid to me.

Obviously, we could compromise on an elite scoring center like Al Jefferson. He has enough offense to buoy the bench while also providing the back-up center you covet. I'd have major concerns over Jefferson's fit with Duncan and Splitter, though. In general, I don't see an impact bench big on the market right now. I like Dalembert as a back up if Splitter left in free agency, but I don't really like him as the player on whom the Spurs blow their cap space.

[Pop]

Well I want a starting caliber player as well, I just want that player to be a guard.

Like you said, with Manu declining, then it's TP and... No one good enough basically in the backcourt...

On the other hand I think our frontcourt is simply lacking in the rebounding departement and might not need a huge change, I even think Baynes could be enough to give the much needed rebounding boost backing up TD.

Tbh I wouldn't feel very confortable betting everything on Millsap when I got completely owned by Boris last year, maybe that's not completely rationnal but that's a big part of it.

[Richie]

Well I want a starting caliber player as well, I just want that player to be a guard.

Like you said, with Manu declining, then it's TP and... No one good enough basically in the backcourt...

On the other hand I think our frontcourt is simply lacking in the rebounding departement and might not need a huge change, I even think Baynes could be enough to give the much needed rebounding boost backing up TD.

Tbh I wouldn't feel very confortable betting everything on Millsap when I got completely owned by Boris last year, maybe that's not completely rationnal but that's a big part of it.

We need another big so we can rest Tim more. Drop his minutes to 27min/game and sit him on all back to backs.

Also, the only way we get this kind of cap space is by letting go of Bonner and Blair. That leaves us with Timmy/Tiago/Diaw/Baynes. Without another legit big, that would mean Baynes getting a regular 10 min/game and with any injury or rest (for Timmy) we would be forced to play Baynes 25+ min. That's just too much, you can't win games with a scrub playing that many minutes regularly IMO.

I can see the argument for another back court player, but Manu is almost certain to come back and if we want to go away from him I think we'd be better served giving Kawhi those touches. and still have Green giving us elite 3 point shooting for 30+ min/game

[Chinook]

Well I want a starting caliber player as well, I just want that player to be a guard.

Like you said, with Manu declining, then it's TP and... No one good enough basically in the backcourt...

On the other hand I think our frontcourt is simply lacking in the rebounding departement and might not need a huge change, I even think Baynes could be enough to give the much needed rebounding boost backing up TD.

Tbh I wouldn't feel very confortable betting everything on Millsap when I got completely owned by Boris last year, maybe that's not completely rationnal but that's a big part of it.

I don't think the Spurs need another starting-caliber guard unless Ginobili retires. That would give them four starting guards, two back up points to go along with one starting small-forward and only two legitimate bigs (and Diaw). That seems really unbalanced. If Manu comes back, he'll get his minutes. Green's going to get his minutes, and obviously Parker will get his. That really doesn't leave a lot of room for a player like Redick (although in a vacuum, Monta Ellis would not be a bad fit next to Ginobili, especially if Diaw is also there to handle that ball some). If the Spurs really will have about $10 Million to spend in the summer, I'd much rather use it on someone who can play with Duncan and Splitter and not be a liability against mobile fours the way Splitter is now. I'd take Millsap or West over Redick or Ellis any day.

[Pop]

I don't think the Spurs need another starting-caliber guard unless Ginobili retires. That would give them four starting guards,

Ok I guess you meant shooting not starting, because there one and a half starting caliber guard.


two back up points to go along with one starting small-forward and only two legitimate bigs (and Diaw). That seems really unbalanced. If Manu comes back, he'll get his minutes.

Yes he will, when he's healthy. Betting a season on Manu's health if we can help it does seem borderline irrational tho.


Green's going to get his minutes, and obviously Parker will get his. That really doesn't leave a lot of room for a player like Redick (although in a vacuum, Monta Ellis would not be a bad fit next to Ginobili, especially if Diaw is also there to handle that ball some).

Well I think we could move Green to move up in the draft, maybe send him to Minnesota for the 25th pick or something if we can get a significant upgrade in free agency. It's like saying that Diaw is gonna get his minutes no matter what, I don't know how you can say that about a Danny Green. But yeah the three main guards are TP, Manu and Green right now, the problem is that Manu is declining quickly and he has priority over Green for obvious reasons.


If the Spurs really will have about $10 Million to spend in the summer, I'd much rather use it on someone who can play with Duncan and Splitter and not be a liability against mobile fours the way Splitter is now. I'd take Millsap or West over Redick or Ellis any day.

I hear you, I agree that Redick and Ellis are not huge upgrades, but it's not that simple, if we can pursue Bledsoe next year or instead be stuck with Millsap who is on a downward spiral, it doesn't sound as clear cut. The only thing that's for sure is that it's a very important choice since it'd be the last time we'd have any flexibily in the Duncan era.

[Pop]

And of course there's number where the Spurs won't feel it's worth matching the offer for Splitter since he's not even close to a max player so that could change everything as well.

[Chinook]

Ok I guess you meant shooting not starting, because there one and a half starting caliber guard.

I meant starting, meaning I was counting Parker, Green, Ginobili and whichever guard the Spurs bring in under your scenario as the four starters.


Yes he will, when he's healthy. Betting a season on Manu's health if we can help it does seem borderline irrational tho.

True. But that's less of a big deal if the Spurs can bring in a good young wing like Wes Johnson (I know he's not exactly "good", but you know what I mean), allow De Colo, Joseph, Green and Leonard to take bigger roles, and bring in a good big to fix the bench (by playing with the second unit and/or allowing Splitter to move back to the bench. If the Spurs can become a better, more balanced team, then Ginobili won't be as needed.


Well I think we could move Green to move up in the draft, maybe send him to Minnesota for the 25th pick or something if we can get a significant upgrade in free agency. It's like saying that Diaw is gonna get his minutes no matter what, I don't know how you can say that about a Danny Green. But yeah the three main guards are TP, Manu and Green right now, the problem is that Manu is declining quickly and he has priority over Green for obvious reasons.

If Ginobili is truly in decline (if this is how he's going to be for the rest of his career) then Green is the best two-guard on the Spurs. I know you don't like him, but every metric out there shows he's a great fit in the starting lineup, and he's still young enough to get significantly better. Because he's signed to a reasonable deal, there's little question he's worth more than a mid-20s pick to the Spurs. The Spurs used the 20th pick on James Anderson a few years ago, and Green's a better player. Unless there's a player at 25 they feel can be the Kawhi or shooting-guards, they will not move Green.


I hear you, I agree that Redick and Ellis are not huge upgrades, but it's not that simple, if we can pursue Bledsoe next year or instead be stuck with Millsap who is on a downward spiral, it doesn't sound as clear cut. The only thing that's for sure is that it's a very important choice since it'd be the last time we'd have any flexibily in the Duncan era.

Indeed, this is a very important summer. It's possible the Spurs swing for the fences and try to bring in a disgruntled potential star like Cousins or Derrick Williams to pair with Leonard and make Duncan's job easier. I actually don't hate the Ellis idea (not that the Spurs can afford him), because he should be able to work with both Ginobili and De Colo/Joseph. I do think the bench is broken right now, though. Even if Ginobili can come back this season and boost it for the playoffs, something has to be done to avoid this type of lull again. Whichever players the Spurs feel will be the best at doing that, regardless or position, will get the call. We just have to hope they make the right one.

[pad300]

Anybody got access to this?

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/9109226/nba-top-30-free-agents-2013-ranked-average-annual-value

It might be of interest given we should have some cap-space...

[Bruno]

Anybody got access to this?

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/9109226/nba-top-30-free-agents-2013-ranked-average-annual-value

It might be of interest given we should have some cap-space...

http://hawksquawk.net/community/topic/378841-interesting-perception-of-what-the-2013-free-agents-are-worth/

[jesterbobman]

From the hawksquawk thread, Splitter valued at 3yrs, 21m and Millsap at 9million a year. Both should get more, and if Millsap got 9 and it wasn't from the Spurs, I'd be disappointed(Unless they got someone else good on a similar steal).

[pad300]

http://hawksquawk.net/community/topic/378841-interesting-perception-of-what-the-2013-free-agents-are-worth/

Interesting set of valuations. He's calling splitter at $7M per year, and Ginobili at $5.5M. That implies we are in Max FA territory if we want to be, after signing those two...I'm not sure I believe it.

[Bruno]

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/9124480/nba-separating-nba-teams-tiers-salary-cap-restrictions


We don't have firm values for next season's cap and tax levels yet (they're dependent on this season's revenues, which are largely dependent on which teams make the playoffs and how deep they go). At this point we can say the salary cap will be in the $58.5-60 million range next season, and the luxury-tax threshold will be somewhere in the $71.5-73 million range.

If the cap is really that low, it won't be a good news for Spurs.

[Richie]

A $60m cap would still give us a shot at a decent free agent as long as Manu took MLE money. Manu for $5m and a free agent for $9m would still give us room to improve.

[Chinook]

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/9124480/nba-separating-nba-teams-tiers-salary-cap-restrictions



If the cap is really that low, it won't be a good news for Spurs.

Thanks for that info. That's a lot lower than I was expecting. Honestly, the Spurs may not really have more than the MLE to use on a player this off-season. It may behoove them to try to trade Bonner instead of cutting him.

[bluebellmaniac]

Sham has updated salary inf on all the teams (just saw his tweet). All hail the great and powerful Sham!!!

Here's a link to the Spurs info:
http://data.shamsports.com/content/pages/data/salaries/spurs.jsp

[objective]

I was under the impression that Baynes had signed a 2+1+1 contract for some reason.

But Sham has him only signed through next year before being an RFA.

If true, that's very disappointing.

[Chinook]

I was under the impression that Baynes had signed a 2+1+1 contract for some reason.

But Sham has him only signed through next year before being an RFA.

If true, that's very disappointing.

It was reported that that was the case for the first few days of that ordeal. It eventually got clarified to be a two-year deal with nothing added on.

Technically, that reported deal was impossible anyway. Baynes could only have one option in his deal. It was possible for those last two years to be non-guaranteed, but that's different than what was reported.

[objective]

I don't see why it would have been impossible. It would just be the kind of deal that Blair and Parsons have. And like Blair it would have been possible because the full MLE wasn't spent that summer, only the majority (McDyess with Blair and Diaw with Baynes).

[Chinook]

I don't see why it would have been impossible. It would just be the kind of deal that Blair and Parsons have. And like Blair it would have been possible because the full MLE wasn't spent that summer, only the majority (McDyess with Blair and Diaw with Baynes).

According to the CBA, each contract can have no more than one option (except for rookie-scale contracts). The deals you mentioned (at least Blair's) didn't actually have options; they had non-guaranteed years. As I said, in some ways those are functionally equivalent. But there are ways in which they're not. The biggest thing I can think of is that the player gets a little more freedom in contracts with options. A team has to decide to pick up a player's option before the off-season (except for first-round picks on rookie-scale deals), so the players can't be traded and cut in an option year for salary relief like they can when they just have non-guaranteed contracts. And some contracts with options give the player veto rights (not in any case we're talking about, but in general like with Diaw and Mills).

So if I were a player, I'd rather get option years (even team options) because I'd have a better grasp on what's going to happen to me. The only players who sign for two or three non-guaranteed years are players who have no leverage (like second-round picks). Baynes was not that desperate, so it didn't make sense for him to agree to that.

[Richie]

Bruno, I've noticed Shawn Marion doesn't have a free agent thread. He has an early termination option, and might opt out to sign with a contender.

[Bruno]

Bruno, I've noticed Shawn Marion doesn't have a free agent thread. He has an early termination option, and might opt out to sign with a contender.

Well, I didn't make one because I think he won't opt out but I'll made one if you want.


More globally if someone want to talk about a somewhat relevant draft prospect/free agent/international player/trade target... don't hesitate to ask for a thread about him.

[CGD]

Other than the Spurs, who are the teams with a decent amount of cap-room this off-season? Trying to figure out who will even be a player in the market, with many teams already trying to shed salary.

[Mal]

PG Parker/De Colo/Joseph
SG Green, Manu(3mil)
SF Leonard, SJax (2mil)
PF Duncan, Diaw
C Splitter(11mil),Ozi dude.
+ 1st rounder

Needs - 3pt shooter sg/sf (Reddick, Korver), PF/C with 3pt range (Millsap ??)

Can Spurs afford resigning Manu, Jax, Tiago and add Korver(way cheaper than Reddick) and PF (Smith, Sap, Big Al) ?? Assuming Manu, Jax and Korver would be signed for 7mil at largest ? Pretty stucked team, with a lot of weapons, and players without possiblity of playing heavy minutes.

[TheGoldStandard]

PG Parker/De Colo/Joseph
SG Green, Manu(3mil)
SF Leonard, SJax (2mil)
PF Duncan, Diaw
C Splitter(11mil),Ozi dude.
+ 1st rounder

Needs - 3pt shooter sg/sf (Reddick, Korver), PF/C with 3pt range (Millsap ??)

Can Spurs afford resigning Manu, Jax, Tiago and add Korver(way cheaper than Reddick) and PF (Smith, Sap, Big Al) ?? Assuming Manu, Jax and Korver would be signed for 7mil at largest ? Pretty stucked team, with a lot of weapons, and players without possiblity of playing heavy minutes.

The Spurs have enough SG/SF who opt to shoot 3 point shots, what they need is a backup PG who can penetrate, dish the ball and rebound and a PF/C with height who can shoot a jump shot, rebound and block shots. Devin Harris is a nice option, Jerrett Jack, Al Jefferson, Milsap.

[DesignatedT]

Anyway possible that Ben Gordon opts out of his 13M/yr contract? :lol

[Man In Black]

The Spurs have enough SG/SF who opt to shoot 3 point shots, what they need is a backup PG who can penetrate, dish the ball and rebound and a PF/C with height who can shoot a jump shot, rebound and block shots. Devin Harris is a nice option, Jerrett Jack, Al Jefferson, Milsap.

Livingston from the Cavs can handle the backup PG.

[CGD]

Read recently that Houston may look to trade Thomas Robinson this summer as they try to clear the cap room necessary to make a play for Howard. If we send them Bonner's contract this summer (or mills or neal) in exchange, Rockets would shed over 2m right there. Robinson would be an awesome project big, and probably better than anything in the draft this year.

http://espn.go.com/nba/dailydime/_/page/weekenddime-130405-06/weekend-dime

[Chinook]

Read recently that Houston may look to trade Thomas Robinson this summer as they try to clear the cap room necessary to make a play for Howard. If we send them Bonner's contract this summer (or mills or neal) in exchange, Rockets would shed over 2m right there. Robinson would be an awesome project big, and probably better than anything in the draft this year.

http://espn.go.com/nba/dailydime/_/page/weekenddime-130405-06/weekend-dime

I have had similar thoughts (about other players), but if the Spurs find a way to amnesty Bonner, they then can just use their cap space to trade for Robinson. That would be much more attractive than making the other team take on salary.

A draft-night trade is a different story, however. Bonner's contract may be a much better tool to use then.

[Bruno]

From what I've seen of him, Thomas Robinson looks like a bust in the Shelden Williams mold.

[Captivus]

I don't think the Spurs will resign Jackson, he is gone, no matter what he does in the POs. IMO.
Diaw will probably stay.
Not sure about Mills, if I had to guess, he will also stay. How many options does this guy really have?
The Spurs will overpay Tiago, he is a MUST for the years to come. They will not let him walk away.
Neal, this guy has probably more options than Mills.

Bonner and Blair...I don't know, hopefully they used them to get higher picks or just let them walk.

[Richie]

With Jackson gone, do we need to be looking at a wing player now instead of a big?

We'll need a backup 3 regardless, but with questions over Manu's fitness going forward we might need to commit some cap space to a swingman.

However, if we do go for a big we would still have the room exception to offer. Kyle Korver would be a good option as a backup. Even though he's 32 he might command more than the room exception though.

[KL2]

With Jackson gone, do we need to be looking at a wing player now instead of a big?

We'll need a backup 3 regardless, but with questions over Manu's fitness going forward we might need to commit some cap space to a swingman.

However, if we do go for a big we would still have the room exception to offer. Kyle Korver would be a good option as a backup. Even though he's 32 he might command more than the room exception though.


I'd love Korver as a backup, what position is he exactly though? He's listed as a SG but I could've sworn he played at SF with CHI. A SG that could also play SF would be perfect for this team with Jack's departure, Manu's injuries, and the possibility that some team over pays for Neal.

[Richie]

-
I'd love Korver as a backup, what position is he exactly though? He's listed as a SG but I could've sworn he played at SF with CHI. A SG that could also play SF would be perfect for this team with Jack's departure, Manu's injuries, and the possibility that some team over pays for Neal.

He's a shooting guard but he stands 6'7" so he can play some SF. He wouldn't be able to defend any elite SFs like Durant or Lebron though.

[TD 21]

-

He's a shooting guard but he stands 6'7" so he can play some SF. He wouldn't be able to defend any elite SFs like Durant or Lebron though.

No, he's an SF and despite him playing both throughout his career, that's all he should be. He lacks the quickness to defend SG's and the ball skills to play it on offense, thereby making him an SF by default.

He's not what the Spurs need, though. They need a bigger SF, that can defend at least respectably in addition to shooting the three at least respectably. D. Wright makes the most sense, but I suspect they end up with Casspi.

[exstatic]

Does anyone else think the Spurs might be players in the amnesty game this summer with any cap room they might have?

[Bruno]

The Jackson fiasco must remind Spurs to be careful that players are fine with the role they will have. It's even more true for players with big egos. Spurs should avoid to create logjams and stockpile players just because they are good.

Pop recent quotes about Kawhi playing heavy minutes is also to take into account for next season. Either the backup SF signed will play little minutes or he will have to play alongside Kawhi. I don't think it's a necessity to be quick to be paired with Kawhi on the wings because Kawhi can defend most of the SGs but what is needed is being a very good long range shooter. Players like Dunleavy, Dorrel Wright, Korver or Casspi fit that mold. Signing one of them means that he won't only be limited to the few minutes available behind Kawhi at SF.

[TD 21]

Spurs should avoid to create logjams and stockpile players just because they are good.

They should also avoid handing a rotation spot to limited, low upside players, who haven't given reason to believe they'll be deserving of a larger role. Good teams don't do that and they especially don't out of fear about how another player will handle a potentially diminished role. In fact, they usually do the opposite and stock themselves with as much depth as they can get. Look no further than the Heat, who have Miller, Lewis and Anthony (I include him because of his contract) as non rotation players.


I don't think it's a necessity to be quick to be paired with Kawhi on the wings because Kawhi can defend most of the SGs but what is needed is being a very good long range shooter.

Being a respectable or better defender should matter, too.

[Chinook]

I'm starting to think it's not a lock that Bonner is gone next season. He's been making shots recently, and if he has any semblance of his regular-season game in the playoffs, he may be worth keeping around, or at least holding onto for a trade at the deadline. If that ends up being the case, then the whole plan of the Spurs having cap room this summer goes out the window. They'd be very close to the MLE if they kept Bonner, re-signed Ginobili for $6 Million, used Splitter's cap hold and kept their first-rounder.

If the Spurs end up not having cap room this summer, then not trading Jack could end up being a really bad move. (I say this without knowing which deals the Spurs could have made, of course.)

[Bruno]

Look no further than the Heat, who have Miller, Lewis and Anthony (I include him because of his contract) as non rotation players.

Spurs aren't the Heat where players can just be happy to sit on the bench because they have a great shot at getting a ring at the end of the season. The ring chaser era is over for Spurs.

[venitian navigator]

Spurs aren't the Heat where players can just be happy to sit on the bench because they have a great shot at getting a ring at the end of the season. The ring chaser era is over for Spurs.

Please, don't tell it to Timmy...
and, for what it's worth, we're still this season, and probably also next one, one of the top five teams in the league.
So, if anybody wants a chance to the title, can look at our team as a legitimate one...
obviously, we're not the Heat, but differently from the Heat we can give players good roles and a decent amount of playing time, if they deserve it (by the way, I'm really sorry for SJ but he behaved like he was a nba star and not a player intelligent enough to understand that the main reason Spurs were paying him 10 millions was just 'cause, trading for him, they had the luxury of giving away RJ).

[pad300]

I'm starting to think it's not a lock that Bonner is gone next season. He's been making shots recently, and if he has any semblance of his regular-season game in the playoffs, he may be worth keeping around, or at least holding onto for a trade at the deadline. If that ends up being the case, then the whole plan of the Spurs having cap room this summer goes out the window. They'd be very close to the MLE if they kept Bonner, re-signed Ginobili for $6 Million, used Splitter's cap hold and kept their first-rounder.

If the Spurs end up not having cap room this summer, then not trading Jack could end up being a really bad move. (I say this without knowing which deals the Spurs could have made, of course.)

Given his current injury woes, doe Gino get $6 million per year, or $6 million/2years? As I think Bruno pointed out earlier, Wing players getting big contracts at his age are pretty much don't exist. Especially ones with injury histories...

[Chinook]

Given his current injury woes, doe Gino get $6 million per year, or $6 million/2years? As I think Bruno pointed out earlier, Wing players getting big contracts at his age are pretty much don't exist. Especially ones with injury histories...

I don't think $6 Million-per-year deal is an unreasonable at all. Even in his injured state, he's still worth about that much. That being said, since Duncan took significantly less than he was worth, it might be possible for Ginobili to return for the room exception. If he were to do that, the Spurs would actually have quite a lot of cap space even if they kept Bonner (in the neighborhood of $12 Million).

I think Ginobili's deal, like Duncan's was last year, will be dependent on whatever money the Spurs have left over after free agency. Had the Spurs had more than $10 Million under the tax this year, Duncan would have gotten more than he did. In that same way Ginobili may agree to take a lot less if the Spurs present to him a plan to bring in talent in free agency.

[TD 21]

Spurs aren't the Heat where players can just be happy to sit on the bench because they have a great shot at getting a ring at the end of the season. The ring chaser era is over for Spurs.

That's right, they're not the Heat; they're not as good as them, which is why it doesn't make sense for them to have less proven rotation caliber players.

Big deal if a player or two aren't thrilled with their roles. If their vaunted culture is as great as it's made out to be, then that shouldn't matter. Besides, it's basically unavoidable, unless you want to stock the back end of the roster with guys who really shouldn't be in the league and are just happy being in it, whether they play or not. Otherwise, that's the consequence that comes with having quality depth.

[Richie]

I don't think $6 Million-per-year deal is an unreasonable at all. Even in his injured state, he's still worth about that much. That being said, since Duncan took significantly less than he was worth, it might be possible for Ginobili to return for the room exception. If he were to do that, the Spurs would actually have quite a lot of cap space even if they kept Bonner (in the neighborhood of $12 Million).

I think Ginobili's deal, like Duncan's was last year, will be dependent on whatever money the Spurs have left over after free agency. Had the Spurs had more than $10 Million under the tax this year, Duncan would have gotten more than he did. In that same way Ginobili may agree to take a lot less if the Spurs present to him a plan to bring in talent in free agency.

If ginobili came back for the room exception I'd be dancing. We'd have enough cap room to add a quality big and a wing player in free agency.

I think its a pipe dream though. I think he should get MLE money at most due to injuries, and best case would be a ray Allen contract

[Chinook]

If ginobili came back for the room exception I'd be dancing. We'd have enough cap room to add a quality big and a wing player in free agency.

I think its a pipe dream though. I think he should get MLE money at most due to injuries, and best case would be a ray Allen contract

The difference between Allen's deal and the room exception is only about 900k total. If Ginobili is willing to take such a small deal to stay with the team, he'd probably be willing to take a little bit less. As you know, getting Ginobili to agree to the room exception ($5.4M/2) instead of a $6.3M/2 opens up that full $3.1 Million of cap room. Even if the Spurs hold onto Bonner, they'd still have enough room to sign a player to a near-max deal. The idea of giving the Spurs the most flexibility they've had in a decade, while also keeping their core together, may be enough to sway Ginobili to not look for other offers after they renounce his Bird rights. Then, if the plan fails, they can always give Ginobili a bigger deal with their cap space.

[Richie]

The difference between Allen's deal and the room exception is only about 900k total. If Ginobili is willing to take such a small deal to stay with the team, he'd probably be willing to take a little bit less. As you know, getting Ginobili to agree to the room exception ($5.4M/2) instead of a $6.3M/2 opens up that full $3.1 Million of cap room. Even if the Spurs hold onto Bonner, they'd still have enough room to sign a player to a near-max deal. The idea of giving the Spurs the most flexibility they've had in a decade, while also keeping their core together, may be enough to sway Ginobili to not look for other offers after they renounce his Bird rights. Then, if the plan fails, they can always give Ginobili a bigger deal with their cap space.

I agree, but I think the Ray Allen figure is the minimum that Manu would consider, and even then I dont think it's enough. Its tough because we need to weigh his actual production and injury issues vs his loyalty. Tbh if he walks in to the room and demands $7m per year, he should get it. He deserves it, but it could be the difference between another championship or not.

Also if I'm in Manus position and the FO asks me to take a massive pay cut to Room Exception levels, I'd demand they amnesty Bonner. If the Spurs are going to low ball Manu to chase free agents, they should be doing everything possible to maximise cap room and Bonner is very expendable.

[pad300]

I don't think $6 Million-per-year deal is an unreasonable at all. Even in his injured state, he's still worth about that much. That being said, since Duncan took significantly less than he was worth, it might be possible for Ginobili to return for the room exception. If he were to do that, the Spurs would actually have quite a lot of cap space even if they kept Bonner (in the neighborhood of $12 Million).

I think Ginobili's deal, like Duncan's was last year, will be dependent on whatever money the Spurs have left over after free agency . Had the Spurs had more than $10 Million under the tax this year, Duncan would have gotten more than he did. In that same way Ginobili may agree to take a lot less if the Spurs present to him a plan to bring in talent in free agency.

What ever else happens, the bolded bit will not work... Until Gino's status is settled, he has a cap hold of $19,136,250 (according to Sham sports). Until that goes away, we have no cap space (approximately)... So they have to settle on a deal with Gino or renounce his rights before they do just about anything else.

[Chinook]

What ever else happens, the bolded bit will not work... Until Gino's status is settled, he has a cap hold of $19,136,250 (according to Sham sports). Until that goes away, we have no cap space (approximately)... So they have to settle on a deal with Gino or renounce his rights before they do just about anything else.

That only matters if the Spurs re-sign Ginobili with Bird rights. No scenario laid out by in this thread supposes that. Therefore, it makes more sense to renounce Ginobili and then re-sign him later. They can agree to a deal with him and still renounce him, especially if he agrees to take the room exception.

[Chinook]

I agree, but I think the Ray Allen figure is the minimum that Manu would consider, and even then I dont think it's enough. Its tough because we need to weigh his actual production and injury issues vs his loyalty. Tbh if he walks in to the room and demands $7m per year, he should get it. He deserves it, but it could be the difference between another championship or not.

Also if I'm in Manus position and the FO asks me to take a massive pay cut to Room Exception levels, I'd demand they amnesty Bonner. If the Spurs are going to low ball Manu to chase free agents, they should be doing everything possible to maximise cap room and Bonner is very expendable.

I think that's true in a vacuum. But Spurs would gain more flexibility by trading Bonner for a player making $6 Million than they would by releasing him. If that's part of the Spurs' plan, or if Bonner plays well this post-season (one of which needs to happen anyway for keeping Bonner to make sense), then that could well be in the plan they pitch to Ginobili. It's unlikely that the Spurs will spend $16 Million on one player, so getting a $12 Million player through free agency and a $6 Million player through trade may be better than getting a $12 Million player and only having $4 Million to sign someone else.

[pad300]

Recalling how the Spurs have often signed D-leaguers for trials at the end of the season, which have turned into bigger chances with the team in the next season, if T-mac doesn't shit the bed in his (limited hopefully) post-season minutes, does he stick. He could fit really nicely into that backup 3 hole - can shoot, handle the ball and pass, BB-IQ. If he puts his heart into it, he can probably defend. His physical profile, even in his old age, is damn good for a spurs signing...

[ace3g]

O.J. Mayo opted to become a free agent

[exstatic]

O.J. Mayo opted to become a free agent

He sucks.

[ace3g]

Chase Budinger?

[ABC]

Chase Budinger?

Most places have him listed as a restricted free agent, but Sham doesn't have a qualifying offer down for him. I'm assuming it's a typo (or I'm reading it wrong).

http://data.shamsports.com/content/pages/data/salaries/timberwolves.jsp

Anyway, if he were unrestricted, he'd be one of my top choices for backup SF, but I think he's restricted and Minnesota will pay to keep him. They traded the 18th pick for him a year ago, so I don't think they'll let him walk.

[Chinook]

Most places have him listed as a restricted free agent, but Sham doesn't have a qualifying offer down for him. I'm assuming it's a typo (or I'm reading it wrong).

http://data.shamsports.com/content/pages/data/salaries/timberwolves.jsp

Anyway, if he were unrestricted, he'd be one of my top choices for backup SF, but I think he's restricted and Minnesota will pay to keep him. They traded the 18th pick for him a year ago, so I don't think they'll let him walk.

Budinger should be a UFA. He's a non-first-round pick in his fourth season. So he's passed his restricted years. Minnesota may well try to keep him, but they've also shown a willingness to let go of underperforming draft picks. If they dumped fourth-overall pick Wes Johnson for nothing, then they certainly may just let Chase walk.

[ABC]

Budinger should be a UFA. He's a non-first-round pick in his fourth season. So he's passed his restricted years. Minnesota may well try to keep him, but they've also shown a willingness to let go of underperforming draft picks. If they dumped fourth-overall pick Wes Johnson for nothing, then they certainly may just let Chase walk.

I think you're right. Espn still has him listed as restricted, but his Spurstalk 2013 Free Agent thread has removed the RFA listing, so that's good enough for me. :)

I know he didn't play great, but he played ok considering he was coming back from an injury. I think Minnesota will make him an offer, but since he's unrestricted, he'd be a pretty good target for the Spurs in my opinion. Thanks to ace3g for bringing him up.

[CGD]

Chase Budinger?

Over Casspi?

[benefactor]

Over Casspi?
Easily.

[ABC]

I know I'm forgetting players and it will all depend on other roster moves, but for backup small forward, I think I have this order at the moment:

Dorrell Wright
Budinger
Kyle Korver
Casspi

For me, the backup SF has to be able to hit 3 pointers. After that, defense would be nice, but having both might be asking too much.

Who am I forgetting?

[pad300]

Who are you forgetting.
At least 2 vet possibles:
Dunleavy
T-Mac
The FO likes long-service vets with a wide variety of skills... They may already have "gotten over themselves".

[ABC]

Who are you forgetting.
At least 2 vet possibles:
Dunleavy
T-Mac
The FO likes long-service vets with a wide variety of skills... They may already have "gotten over themselves".

I had forgotten about Dunleavy. Thanks. I kind of think McGrady is done, personally. Hope I'm wrong. I was going to try to rank them, but I failed, so I tried putting them in tiers:

Tier 1
Dorrell Wright
Budinger
Dunleavy
Korver

Tier 2:
Casspi

Tier 3:
Luke Babbitt
Xavier Henry

Any others?

[pad300]

I wouldn't write off McGrady. The FO thought enough of him to bring him in for this playoff run. Which gives him a leg up on the other candidates: he can demonstrate the ability to fit into the locker room. Even if he spends this whole run sitting in a suit, if he's a good team guy, that will count in his favor with the FO in the summer.

[ABC]

I wouldn't write off McGrady. The FO thought enough of him to bring him in for this playoff run. Which gives him a leg up on the other candidates: he can demonstrate the ability to fit into the locker room. Even if he spends this whole run sitting in a suit, if he's a good team guy, that will count in his favor with the FO in the summer.

Fair enough. I don't really know what he's capable of right now. I'm just basing my opinion on the fact that he had two minimum deals in a row and then nobody signed him at all until the last week of this season. It doesn't seem like his current ability is regarded very highly around the league.

[pad300]

Fair enough. I don't really know what he's capable of right now. I'm just basing my opinion on the fact that he had two minimum deals in a row and then nobody signed him at all until the last week of this season. It doesn't seem like his current ability is regarded very highly around the league.

Then he'll come cheap. Another thing the FO likes...

Sean Marks was on the roster for years...

[Bruno]

There are too Wesley Johnson, Martell Webster, Anthony Morrow, Matt Barnes...

At the end, it will also depend on what kind of money Spurs are ready to spend on their backup SF: min salary, room exception, MLE, cap space..

[TD 21]

Henry and Morrow (he should be utilized exclusively at SG, unless the opposition is playing some whacky lineup with three small guards) aren't SF's.

Wesbter, Budinger and Barnes, are most likely re-signing, while Wright and Korver, probably aren't, but with the exception of Barnes, all figure to exceed the room exception and I don't see the Spurs going beyond that for a position that requires approximately 12 meaningful mpg. Dunleavy's the one who might check off both boxes, but considering the lack of athleticism and wing defense off the bench, he shouldn't be a candidate.

[ABC]

Then he'll come cheap. Another thing the FO likes...

:lol Touché


There are too Wesley Johnson, Martell Webster, Anthony Morrow, Matt Barnes...

At the end, it will also depend on what kind of money Spurs are ready to spend on their backup SF: min salary, room exception, MLE, cap space..

I hadn't thought of Johnson or Webster. Thanks. Hard to believe Barnes would come to the Spurs. He hasn't been interested in the past, if I remember correctly. He likes California. I hope they don't target Morrow.

And yeah. I'm assuming they will target a big first and the backup SF will get the leftovers, but guessing what the Spurs will do is an exercise in futility. It's fun though :)


...but with the exception of Barnes, all figure to exceed the room exception and I don't see the Spurs going beyond that for a position that requires approximately 12 meaningful mpg.

I think several of the players discussed will be available for the room exception. I guess we'll see.

[Chinook]

I'd rather see the Spurs pick up Wes Johnson. It'd be nice to have more talent to develop instead of just getting a care-taker. If Johnson were to work out, he could compete with Green for playing time, or (my dream here) form a solid three-wing rotation with Leonard and Green in a couple of years. If the Spurs could get him for around the minimum like TD 21 suggested a while back, then that's like getting a free draft pick.

[Mal]

What about going after Luis Scola ? He`s 33, 2yrs @4,5mln each. He`s still decent player for such amount, and probably avaible as salary dump move.

[TD 21]

What about going after Luis Scola ? He`s 33, 2yrs @4,5mln each. He`s still decent player for such amount, and probably avaible as salary dump move.

I wouldn't be surprised if he's one of their fallback options (if not the fallback option), if they miss on Millsap and they're committed to finding a starting PF and moving Splitter back to the bench. Though less athletic and a worse defender, he provides the majority of what Millsap does, only at a fraction of the cost. Plus, on and off court, you know he'd be a great fit chemistry wise.

What a letdown it'll be if they use their cap space on Scola and Casspi, though. Granted, they'd still have a good amount of flexibility and they would balance the roster better from a positional standpoint, but still. For a team in need of athleticism and defense in these spots, neither fits the bill.

[Chinook]

What a letdown it'll be if they use their cap space on Scola and Casspi, though. Granted, they'd still have a good amount of flexibility and they would balance the roster better from a positional standpoint, but still. For a team in need of athleticism and defense in these spots, neither fits the bill.

I agree that the Spurs could really use some athleticism. We've talked at length in this thread about athletic threes, but are there any fours out there that you like on the free-agent or potential trade market? With Leonard, Green and Ginobili almost guaranteed to soak up most of the wing minutes, there's only so much impact an athletic wing can have. I agree about having Ginobili insurance, but I'd still prioritize a big other that.

[Mal]

I agree that the Spurs could really use some athleticism. We've talked at length in this thread about athletic threes, but are there any fours out there that you like on the free-agent or potential trade market? With Leonard, Green and Ginobili almost guaranteed to soak up most of the wing minutes, there's only so much impact an athletic wing can have. I agree about having Ginobili insurance, but I'd still prioritize a big other that.

I`d go after Gerald Henderson. He could be avaible for part of MLE.

[CGD]

Earl Clark is interesting.

[Chinook]

I`d go after Gerald Henderson. He could be avaible for part of MLE.

Sure, but I'm talking about bigs here.

[TD 21]

I agree that the Spurs could really use some athleticism. We've talked at length in this thread about athletic threes, but are there any fours out there that you like on the free-agent or potential trade market? With Leonard, Green and Ginobili almost guaranteed to soak up most of the wing minutes, there's only so much impact an athletic wing can have. I agree about having Ginobili insurance, but I'd still prioritize a big other that.

An athletic SF that's big enough to serve as a small ball PF (like D. Wright) is preferable. But yeah, when Ginobili's healthy, the vast majority of the wing minutes are going to Leonard, Green and him.

As far as athletic PF's go (that they could afford), free agents: B. Wright, Clark, Hickson, trade bait: Udoh, D. Williams, Vesely, amnesty candidate: T. Thomas.

Despite how bad he's been the past few years, T. Thomas is the most intriguing of the bunch, but he's so far gone that I don't even think they'd bother at this point. D. Williams, as we discussed ad nauseam months ago, is intriguing and B. Wright and Clark are mildly intriguing.

[Spursfanfromafar]

Martell Webster makes a lot of sense. For one, he is still young (just 26), is a very good three point shooter (41+% this year), and is versatile on offense and a decent defender, who can also learn in Pop's system. He carried the Wizards through a miserable phase this year and they are keen on re-upping him... but with the Wizards' guaranteed losing culture next season, it should not be difficult to pry Webster from them.

[jyra]

327507347704516609

Maybe he is still an option for the offseason.

[jesterbobman]

General question: How well does Matt Bonner have to play to be kept around? Because if he plays similar to how he has so far, he's worth his money, but that makes it hard to sign another top line big.

I know he's not an option if he's amnestied, but what about if he's bought out?

[Chinook]

General question: How well does Matt Bonner have to play to be kept around? Because if he plays similar to how he has so far, he's worth his money, but that makes it hard to sign another top line big.

I know he's not an option if he's amnestied, but what about if he's bought out?

The Spurs could re-sign him once he clears waivers, if that's what you're asking. But they'd probably have to give him the same amout of money and probably one a long-term deal. I'm thinking they keep him. He's earned it so far, and if he keeps up this quality of play, he's as helpful as pretty much anyone the Spurs could get, especially if they still want to keep Diaw.

[Bruno]

If Spurs are doing well as a team in these playoffs and if players like Bonner and Joseph keep looking good, an option for Spurs would be to keep Bonner and to be careful with long term money by, for example, only signing Ginobili and Splitter to multiyear contracts. By doing that, Spurs will have a lot of cap space for the 2014 summer.

Bottom line, is that it's too soon to really have a clear battle plan on what Spurs should do in FA because it will highly depend on Spurs performances both individually and collectively in these playoffs.

[Bruno]

Well, with Spurs reaching the finals, it could trigger a quiet offseason for them.

I could imagine the following one:
- Diaw pick his option.
- Mills may or may not pick his option but I think he will.
- Spurs keep Bonner.
- At #28, Spurs draft Jackie Carmichael.
- At #58, Spurs draft and stash a player.
- Splitter and Ginobili are re-signed.
- Blair, McGrady and Neal aren't re-signed.
- Spurs sign Casspi.
- If Mills opt out, Spurs sign a cheap guard that is a good scorer/shooter for depth purpose.

[Richie]

The only thing that would change anything is how Bonner has played in the playoffs. He played good post defence against both Memphis and Lakers. If we keep him, our cap space goes down to MLE levels and is much less enticing to free agents.

Even if we win, I'd still waive him and try to get more front line help, but that's just me.

[Chinook]

Well, with Spurs reaching the finals, it could trigger a quiet offseason for them.

I could imagine the following one:
- Diaw pick his option.
- Mills may or may not pick his option but I think he will.
- Spurs keep Bonner.
- At #28, Spurs draft Jackie Carmichael.
- At #58, Spurs draft and stash a player.
- Splitter and Ginobili are re-signed.
- Blair, McGrady and Neal aren't re-signed.
- Spurs sign Casspi.
- If Mills opt out, Spurs sign a cheap guard that is a good scorer/shooter for depth purpose.

No Bertans?

I definitely want the Spurs to continue their youth movement, so I'd like to see at least two rookies come over the spend the year in Austin. We can talk about championship windows all we want, but the Spurs ceiling has risen to this point in large part because of the success for the Spurs' draft picks and developed players. If Casspi can reach new heights here, great, but otherwise, I wouldn't be against either keeping McGrady or letting a rookie back up Leonard.

I'm not a huge fan of Carmichael, and I'd rather get a player with more upside as the sixth big. I'd like to stash the pick if such a big can't be acquired. It will be interesting to see how the Spurs handle their bigs, as Baynes will probably warrant some playing time next season.

[Bruno]

No Bertans?


I'm not sure what is the best to with Bertans but, with his team being qualified for next season Euroleague, the best option might be to let him one more year in Europe. He is for sure a talented player but he is still very young and has a lot of work to do on his body.

[Spursfanfromafar]

Some report in a paper suggested that Pierce was in line for a cut from the Celtics. He is one target that the Spurs could go after, if available in a cheap deal. On paper, a perfect fit for both parties. With the Spurs releasing Neal and McGrady, Pierce could be a good SF backup fit in a six man wing featuring Parker, Green, Leonard, Joseph, Manu, Pierce.

[Anonymous Cowherd]

for me, assuming Diaw stays, Splitter stays, we keep Bonner OR bring over Bertans, and our draft strategy is best available as per usual, then a second string SF is the clear priority for free agency. Plenty of options; AlFarouq Aminu, Mike Dunleavy, Corey Brewer, Dorrell Wright, Omri Casspi. Sure I'm missing some decent possibilities out.

[Chinook]

I just don't know why the Celtics wouldn't amnesty Pierce.

[Mel_13]

I just don't know why the Celtics wouldn't amnesty Pierce.

His contract becomes fully guaranteed on June 30th. They have to trade him or buy him out before that date. Otherwise, he gets all 15 million.

[Chinook]

His contract becomes fully guaranteed on June 30th. They have to trade him or buy him out before that date. Otherwise, he gets all 15 million.

They should Bonner him (by that, I mean offer to guarantee him more money if he pushes his guarantee date back so they can amnesty him), then. He gets more money, and it's extremely unlikely someone would claim him.

EDIT: Thanks for the clarification, though.

[Mel_13]

They should Bonner him (by that, I mean offer to guarantee him more money if he pushes his guarantee date back so they can amnesty him), then. He gets more money, and it's extremely unlikely someone would claim him.

EDIT: Thanks for the clarification, though.

They could do that, but it seems to me that if they're going to part company that Pierce is much more valuable as a trade piece than an amnesty or buyout candidate.

[Chinook]

They could do that, but it seems to me that if they're going to part company that Pierce is much more valuable as a trade piece than an amnesty or buyout candidate.

Sure, but I mean as opposed to just waiving him.

Also, they could negotiate a date-change while still trying to trade him. The change wouldn't affect any other teams (expect making them pay a little more money), so it'd pretty much be contingent on them not trading him.

[lmbebo]

Wrong forum, but can't create a thread. Rockets looking to salary dump Thomas Robinson. Should spurs look into acquiring and developing him?

The Rockets have made clear to multiple rival teams that they plan to accept the best offer to move Robinson and eliminate his $3.52 million salary for the 2013-14 season.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/nba--houston-rockets-trying-to-trade-thomas-robinson-to-free-up-cap-space-for-run-at-dwight-howard-215915027.html

[Chinook]

Wrong forum, but can't create a thread. Rockets looking to salary dump Thomas Robinson. Should spurs look into acquiring and developing him?

The Rockets have made clear to multiple rival teams that they plan to accept the best offer to move Robinson and eliminate his $3.52 million salary for the 2013-14 season.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/nba--houston-rockets-trying-to-trade-thomas-robinson-to-free-up-cap-space-for-run-at-dwight-howard-215915027.html

I imagine you've found the Robinson thread already, but don't forget there's a trade thread here, too.

[lmbebo]

I imagine you've found the Robinson thread already, but don't forget there's a trade thread here, too.
Hi

As soon as I tried to start the thread, I saw it pushed to the top. I think I posted in it. Then found another thread in the main forum.

Thanks though

[Captivus]

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1656251-idiots-guide-to-the-new-nba-free-agency-rules

Idiots' Guide to the New NBA Free Agency Rules


The NFL has a real salary cap. A "hard" cap. Teams are simply not allowed to spend one dollar above a certain payroll total.
It's very simple.
The NBA (http://bleacherreport.com/nba) doesn't operate that way. It has a "soft" cap—which makes everything confusing.
But the new collective bargaining agreement, signed to end the lockout in December 2011, has moved the league closer towards what will be a hard cap in practical terms for most teams most of the time. This fact has affected offseason player movement last summer, but now that all of the new CBA's provisions have kicked in, the transition is complete.
The league has entered its new salary cap era, and teams with high payrolls now face severe restrictions on the ways they can acquire new players. This isn't your father's CBA, and the effects of the "harder" cap will be seen across the free-agent market.
First, some history.
http://img.bleacherreport.net/img/article/media_slots/photos/000/888/178/hi-res-158788318_crop_exact.jpg?w=650&h=440&q=85 Bruce Bennett/Getty Images

The Salary Cap
In the past, the NBA's structure has meant that the salary cap was a cap in name only. Through trades and various payroll exceptions, teams have been able to (and almost all did) go above the cap regularly. It is a reality that has allowed even wild-spending teams to be at least small players in the free-agent market.
Under the old CBA, there were some (small) penalties for spending above the cap level. But they were minimal, and most teams operated most seasons in excess of that level. In practice, teams seemed to view the structure more as if there were benefits for being under the cap than there were drawbacks for going over.
There were two limitations of note for going above the cap:


Teams below the cap could spend up the cap level on any free agents they want; teams above the cap were limited to acquiring free agents through the "mid level" and "biannual" exceptions (which have allowed teams to sign player to salaries starting around roughly around $6 million and $2 million in recent seasons).



Teams below the cap were able to engage in trades for high-salaried players without sending back players making equivalent salaries. Teams above the cap must match salaries in trades. An example of how this can benefit an under-the-cap team: Midway through the 2011-12 season, the Indiana Pacers were able to trade merely a second-round pick to the Toronto Raptors for Leandro Barbosa, who made roughly $8 million. An over-the-cap team would have had to send back a player (or players) who made around $8 million.

Given the difficulty it takes to hire 15 quality guys to play professional basketball for under $58 million (the cap level in recent years), the mid-level exception has been the method most good teams have relied on to acquire new talent. The other has been sign-and-trade deals, in which over-the-cap teams could get another team to sign a free agent and then send him their way. (This is how the Los Angeles Lakers acquired Steve Nash last summer).
Neither is as good as being below the cap.
But since it is nearly impossible to both win games and stay under the cap, most teams trying to win games always lived above the cap unless they were specifically shedding enough salary to get under the cap for luring a big-name free agent. In a typical season, however, only around five teams—if that—would be far enough below the salary cap each summer to be in a position to sign major free agents.
http://img.bleacherreport.net/img/article/media_slots/photos/000/888/179/hi-res-150133536_crop_exact.jpg?w=650&h=440&q=85 Kevork Djansezian/Getty Images

The Luxury Tax
Above the salary cap is the luxury tax threshold.
This is a payroll level (around $70 million) that, once a team passes, requires it to kick back money to the league. The theory is that teams spending above the luxury tax level are being reckless (and may be over-leveraging their big-market advantage), so they have to pay a fee for doing so. Those dollars are then piled up by the league, which distributes payments at the end of the season, through revenue sharing, to the more fiscally responsible teams.
That extra cost—a minor annoyance to teams like the Lakers and New York Knicks—was the only penalty for spending mass sums on payroll, however.
Whether it spent $71 million or $171 million (a hypothetical payroll level that no team has ever come close to hitting), the team still retained all the privileges of every other team over the cap. No matter how much a team spent, it never lost the ability to keep acquiring players by using salary cap exceptions (mid-level and biannual) or conducting sign-and-trade deals.
That has changed. In a big way.
Enter "The Apron."

The Apron
Now, above the luxury tax is a spending category that severely restricts a team's ability to acquire new players.
This "apron" kicks in at $4 million above the luxury tax level.
Teams that operate below the apron retain all the player-acquisition rights of any franchise that is over the cap. But teams over the apron forfeit several of the most tried-and-true ways teams have used to improve:


They cannot engage in sign-and-trade deals.



They cannot use the biannual exception (which has allowed teams to sign a player with a first-year salary around $2 million in recent years).



They can still use the mid-level exception, but it becomes a "mini mid-level exception." The tool that once allowed over-the-cap teams to sign players to a league-average salary (around $5 million in recent years) now becomes much less enticing (falling to around $3 million).

The intent was clear: The NBA no longer wants teams that spend wildly to continue improving.
The league didn't institute a hard cap. It just instituted a "cross this line and you're pretty screwed" threshold. By limiting the ways a team can improve once it passes the apron (in addition to making the luxury tax payments much more expensive), the new CBA forces teams to be more fiscally responsible—or else be stuck with the same roster they have right now.
The Brooklyn Nets are the most obvious case study.
Wanting to make a big splash when it arrived in Brooklyn, the team spent wildly, giving a max contract to Deron Williams, trading for Joe Johnson and his huge salary and handing out Monopoly money paydays to Brook Lopez and Kris Humphries.
But now the team has a bloated payroll that might not even allow it to retain Andray Blatche in the offseason, let alone find anyone else willing to take the tiny contracts they are able to offer (via the mini mid-level exception and veteran minimum deals).
For a franchise that just lost in the first round of the playoffs to a Chicago Bulls team without Derrick Rose (http://bleacherreport.com/derrick-rose) and with the flu, the new realities of the CBA and the apron are about to throw a wet blanket on the spending fest that took place before the team relocated.

The Mid-Level Exception
The new CBA also tinkered with the mid-level exception for all teams above the cap. In the past, teams could offer free agents a five-year deal starting at the league average salary (which was nearly $6 million in 2010-11).
Now, teams below the apron can only offer a four-year deal starting with a first-year salary around $5 million, according to Larry Coon of ESPN (http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/page/CBA-111128/how-new-nba-deal-compares-last-one). As noted above, teams above the apron can only offer the mini mid-level, which is for just $3 million, but also can only run a maximum of three years.
This duration restriction is just one more way that teams above the apron suffer a competitive disadvantage in the free-agent market.

The Room Exception
The so-called "room exception" is new in the current CBA. The rationale for including it follows the same logic as the rest of the new provisions: Encourage teams to spend less.
In the past, teams that were, for example, one dollar over the salary cap were awarded the right to use the mid-level exception to sign a player to a deal with a starting salary around $5 million.
But a team that was frugal but only able to get, say, $1 million below the cap was out of luck. It wasn't permitted to use the mid-level that the $1-over-the-cap team could use. So that was a bummer because there is no way to sign a quality player for $1 million.
Some benefit for being thrifty.
The league, with controlling salary costs in mind, naturally wants teams to not spend on salary where possible, so the room exception was created to reward teams that are just a little bit under the cap.
Now, those teams can offer a contract with a starting salary of up to $2.5 million even if that would take them over the cap.
http://img.bleacherreport.net/img/article/media_slots/photos/000/888/182/hi-res-109057052_crop_exact.jpg?w=650&h=440&q=85 Sam Greenwood/Getty Images

The Amnesty Provision
The new CBA included what essentially is a salary cap "get out of jail free card." Each team was allowed to make one mistake contract disappear permanently off its books.
The ramifications for this on the free agency market are two-fold:


It has introduced new free agents to the market. Half the teams have already used their amnesty, and the number of players eligible to be amnestied is dwindling. So the provision's effect on free agency will be marginal this offseason compared to years past, but there still may be an extra player or two out there.



Any team that uses the provision may become a bigger player in the market. To use a wild hypothetical example: The Lakers could amnesty Kobe Bryant (http://bleacherreport.com/kobe-bryant) and not re-sign Dwight Howard (http://bleacherreport.com/dwight-howard). This would improbably put them under the salary cap and allow them to go after players who they otherwise would not have been in the market for.

As far as the amnesty process goes, the player still receives the full amount left of the contract that he is owed; the total simply no longer counts against his team's salary cap/luxury tax/apron status.
Amnestying a player is the same as waiving him, and other teams are allowed to make bids for his services. Teams can bid any sum up to the player's full previous salary. The team that makes the winning bid then pays the player that total while the original team makes up the difference so that the player gets the full salary he had negotiated for years ago.
There are two other main restrictions:


The player's contract must have been signed under the old CBA; anyone signed (to an original deal or a contract extension) after the end of the lockout is not eligible.



The contract must have been signed by the team that amnesties the player; a team cannot trade for a player on a "legacy" contract and then amnesty him.

Here is a full list of the players who have been amnestied so far, according to Larry Coon's Salary Cap FAQ (http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q67):


Brooklyn Nets: Travis Outlaw
Cleveland Cavaliers: Baron Davis
Dallas Mavericks: Brendan Haywood
Denver Nuggets: Chris Andersen
Golden State Warriors: Charlie Bell
Houston Rockets: Luis Scola
Indiana Pacers: James Posey
Los Angeles Clippers: Ryan Gomes
Minnesota Timberwolves: Darko Milicic
New York Knicks: Chauncey Billups
Orlando Magic: Gilbert Arenas
Philadelphia 76ers: Elton Brand
Phoenix Suns: Josh Childress
Portland Trail Blazers: Brandon Roy
Washington Wizards: Andray Blatche

Recently, Kevin Pelton of ESPN (https://twitter.com/kpelton/status/338525047452995586) tweeted that there are roughly "44 players in the league left still eligible for the amnesty provision."
Bryant is one. It seems hard to believe—impossible, really—that the Lakers would make such a drastic move to save money.
But Bryant is trying to recover from a devastating injury and is on the books for more than $30 million next year, according to ShamSports (http://data.shamsports.com/content/pages/data/salaries/lakers.jsp)—a sum that will cost the team at least twice that total in real dollars (presuming they re-sign Dwight Howard) due to the luxury tax.
Mike Miller is another player who could be on the amnesty block.
The Miami Heat are facing a huge tax bill of their own, and Miller has been hobbled by injuries and age. If the team doesn't think he can contribute next season, they can amnesty him and save some $20 million over the next two years in real dollars.
The new CBA has changed the league drastically. Free-spending ways now severely impede a team's ability to improve. The NBA has come closer to having a hard cap.
The structure remains dizzyingly complicated, however, so fans hoping their teams can sign a new player this summer shouldn't feel bad if they are confused. A lot of league executives still seem to be.
The biggest takeaway is that spending too much restricts movement.
How much?
Well, the Nets have gotten to the point where they are probably hoping that the Heat amnesty Mike Miller so that they can offer him a mini mid-level exception.
That bad.
Spend responsibly, my friends.
Note: Unless otherwise sourced, the information used in this post was gathered by reviewing league sources as well as reading the work of and having conversations with Larry Coon of ESPN and Hoopsworld.

[Bruno]

One of the key for Spurs off-season, is whether or not there is a player who will command more than the MLE that they could realistically get.

A list of non-PG potential free agents worth more than the MLE:
Josh Smith
Gerald Henderson (RFA)
OJ Mayo (PO)
Andre Iguodala (PO)
David West
Dwight Howard
Monta Ellis (PO)
JJ Redick
Nikola Pekovic (RFA)
Andrei Kirilenko (PO)
JR Smith (PO)
Kevin Martin
Andrew Bynum
Tyreke Evans (RFA)
Al Jefferson
Paul Millsap

It might be sounds like a big list but a lot of these players surely won't be in play:
- Some won't be interested in joining Spurs like Dwight Howard or Andrew Bynum.
- Some are poor fit with Spurs game like Josh Smith, OJ Mayo, Monta Ellis, JR Smith...
- Some will likely re-sign with their team like David West or Kirilenko.
- RFAs like Pekovic or Evans will be harder to get because of their restricted status.

At the end, realistic targets could be reduced to an handful of players: JJ Redick, Kevin Martin, Al Jefferson, Paul Millsap...

[Anonymous Cowherd]

erm, Big Al, YES PLEASE. not so much the rest.

[ABC]

At the end, realistic targets could be reduced to an handful of players: JJ Redick, Kevin Martin, Al Jefferson, Paul Millsap...

I think you've said you like the idea of the Spurs signing Al Jefferson before. If the Spurs resign Splitter and sign Jefferson, what would you envision the bigs' rotation looking like? A lot of people think having Jefferson and Duncan on the court wouldn't work defensively and the 10+ million that Jefferson will get would be a lot to pay for him to just get the backup center minutes.

Can the Spurs get away with 10 or 15 minutes of Jefferson and Duncan on the court together? Or, if the Spurs don't resign Splitter, do you think Duncan and Jefferson could work for much longer stretches?

[eDizzle20]

Regardless of the financials, it would be extremely tough to have both on the same team. For almost all of his career Big Al has been a starter. Tiago has most certainly turned into a permanent starter as well. I doubt either would want to sign with a team where they would not start. However, I would guess that between the 4 and 5 position (96 min./game combined) that Tim gets 25/game, Tiago: 25/game, Big Al: 33/game, Diaw: 13/min. This also means that either Baynes or Bonner would be riding the pine and the is probably cut.

[Bruno]

I think you've said you like the idea of the Spurs signing Al Jefferson before. If the Spurs resign Splitter and sign Jefferson, what would you envision the bigs' rotation looking like?

I Like Al Jefferson but there are two big question mark around him:
1) Can he play alongside Tim?
2) Can Spurs sign him while re-signing Manu and Tiago?

You have talked 1). For 2), the answer is likely, only if Manu is fine with the room exception which would be way below his market value.

Paul Millsap doesn't have these issues as he can easily be paired with Tim or Tiago and because he would be cheaper. When you look at how players would fit with Spurs and the financial numbers, he is pretty much the best option available. Saying that, I'm not a huge of Millsap but that's another story.

And Spurs can have the reasoning that the free agent class isn't good. Al Jeff would be a bad fit and players like Millsap, Martin or Redick aren't worth throwing a lot of money to. In that case, they could just have a passive approach this summer. They can wait to see if there is a team desperate for cap space to get a great trade or wait to see if there is a quality player being amnestied. Worst case would be nothing happening and Spurs would still have a very good team with cap space for the 2014 summer.

[TD 21]

I Like Al Jefferson but there are two big question mark around him:
1) Can he play alongside Tim?
2) Can Spurs sign him while re-signing Manu and Tiago?

You have talked 1). For 2), the answer is likely, only if Manu is fine with the room exception which would be way below his market value.

Paul Millsap doesn't have these issues as he can easily be paired with Tim or Tiago and because he would be cheaper. When you look at how players would fit with Spurs and the financial numbers, he is pretty much the best option available. Saying that, I'm not a huge of Millsap but that's another story.

And Spurs can have the reasoning that the free agent class isn't good. Al Jeff would be a bad fit and players like Millsap, Martin or Redick aren't worth throwing a lot of money to. In that case, they could just have a passive approach this summer. They can wait to see if there is a team desperate for cap space to get a great trade or wait to see if there is a quality player being amnestied. Worst case would be nothing happening and Spurs would still have a very good team with cap space for the 2014 summer.

I don't even see them bothering to pursue Jefferson, for all the obvious reasons. Millsap, I've long said will likely be their number one target (and I heard a while back it may only take 3/$24M to sign him; who knows whether that's actually true or not). But with their run to the Finals and Bonner finally nutting up in the process, they might just forgo any major moves and instead see what comes their way up to the deadline or, as you said, wait until next summer. Of course, a poor showing by him specifically and the team in general, in the Finals, could easily change that.

But right now, they probably just re-sign Ginobili and Splitter, sign Casspi, let Blair, McGrady and Neal walk and then fill one or both of final two roster spots (could be three, if Mills opts out) either with one or both of their draft picks, or should they draft and stash, then some minimal free agent or someone who performs well in Summer League/training camp. An athletic PF or combo forward would make the most sense, as well as a depth scoring guard, should Mills opt out.

[Stump]

I don't find the big free agents that we have a realistic shot at signing to be very appetizing. I wonder if it would be better to pursue a strategy of absorbing other teams' contracts, allowing them to build more cap space while we accumulate assets. The Thomas Robinson situation is an obvious example, as is Dallas' bizarre interest in shedding the 13th pick. Surely there are a few more opportunities out there that could be worthwhile.

[ABC]

Regardless of the financials, it would be extremely tough to have both on the same team. For almost all of his career Big Al has been a starter. Tiago has most certainly turned into a permanent starter as well. I doubt either would want to sign with a team where they would not start. However, I would guess that between the 4 and 5 position (96 min./game combined) that Tim gets 25/game, Tiago: 25/game, Big Al: 33/game, Diaw: 13/min. This also means that either Baynes or Bonner would be riding the pine and the is probably cut.

Yeah, it might be a challenge to get them all minutes, mostly because of matchups, small ball, etc. Still, Jefferson is a very talented, relatively young big who has been very complimentary of the Spurs in the past so it's interesting to think about whether they could make it work.


For 2), the answer is likely, only if Manu is fine with the room exception which would be way below his market value.

I don't have an entirely firm grasp on the Spurs financial situation, but I think earlier in this thread people were estimating, including Splitter's cap hold, the Spurs would have around $16 million in cap space before resigning Ginobili. I was thinking Ginobili could sign for 5-6 million and the Spurs would still possibly have room for Jefferson.

But yeah, as you and others have said, maybe free agency this year isn't the best way to improve the Spurs' roster. Using our cap space in other ways or saving it for next might end up being better.

[Bruno]

I don't have an entirely firm grasp on the Spurs financial situation, but I think earlier in this thread people were estimating, including Splitter's cap hold, the Spurs would have around $16 million in cap space before resigning Ginobili. I was thinking Ginobili could sign for 5-6 million and the Spurs would still possibly have room for Jefferson.

It's possible but my guess is that Jefferson new contract will start at least at $12M.

[BackHome]

I just don't see it working out for the Spurs because he is probably going to get 12 mill so that is more then we can afford. I would be happy if the Spurs kept everyone except Neal and Blair and looked at trading De Colo if we can move up and get a player we like in the draft.

[CGD]

I don't find the big free agents that we have a realistic shot at signing to be very appetizing. I wonder if it would be better to pursue a strategy of absorbing other teams' contracts, allowing them to build more cap space while we accumulate assets. The Thomas Robinson situation is an obvious example, as is Dallas' bizarre interest in shedding the 13th pick. Surely there are a few more opportunities out there that could be worthwhile.

This is an interesting thought. Who are teams with decent draft position AND shitty (shortish term) contracts the Spurs could absorb? Dallas makes sense, but out of principle doubt theyd deal with the Spurs.

[cdcast]

How aggressive they are this summer making moves depends on how they view summer 2014.
Do they have a shot at signing a couple of the big free agents? Probably not.

Their best chance at getting a quality big might be through a trade. Teams will be trying to clear cap space to
sign max free agents or trying to re-sign their own free agents. The Bonner contract will be important.

[BackHome]

Yeah the Howard frenzy is going to make some teams do some really dumb things which I hope the Spurs can take advantage in a trade.

[DrunkTXLabrat]

i don't see free agency being a great place to shop this offseason. maybe one player like aminu. or, probably not, but millsap. i think with all the jefferson loves timmy talk, maybe they could throw a ridiculously low offer at him. and see just how much he'd love to play and learn from timmy. but the robinson and #13 dump type deals are juiciest, imo.

[CGD]

Yeah the Howard frenzy is going to make some teams do some really dumb things which I hope the Spurs can take advantage in a trade.

The big players will be Houston and Atlanta, and Dallas to a lesser extent. Atlanta really doesn't need to clear any space, and could even sign Howard and CP3 straight up. Houston and Dallas are the ones to watch for moves.

[Chinook]

The big players will be Houston and Atlanta, and Dallas to a lesser extent. Atlanta really doesn't need to clear any space, and could even sign Howard and CP3 straight up. Houston and Dallas are the ones to watch for moves.

Atlanta actually does need to make a trade to afford Paul and Howard. They're about $2.5 Million short even after waiving their non-guarantees. They'll need to sign-and-trade for one of them.

[100%duncan]

Bruno if and it's a BIG IF, the spurs win the 'ship this year? Do you acquire new players ala blow up a championship squad and try to improve for more or you stick with the group?

[Richie]

I don't find the big free agents that we have a realistic shot at signing to be very appetizing. I wonder if it would be better to pursue a strategy of absorbing other teams' contracts, allowing them to build more cap space while we accumulate assets. The Thomas Robinson situation is an obvious example, as is Dallas' bizarre interest in shedding the 13th pick. Surely there are a few more opportunities out there that could be worthwhile.

I think the Spurs should jump at the chance of eating TRobs contract. He is only guaranteed through next year and he was a #5 pick in a really strong draft.

I think if we want to go the free agency route, it has to be next year. The cap will go up by $4m so we can give Manu a big contract now ($10m) and a smaller one next year. With the cap at only $58.5m, we will barely be able to offer more than the MLE.

I'd rather kick the can down the road than overpay an average player this year through desperation.

[Bruno]

Bruno if and it's a BIG IF, the spurs win the 'ship this year? Do you acquire new players ala blow up a championship squad and try to improve for more or you stick with the group?

Spurs having a quiet offseason is the most likely scenario even if they don't win the title.

If Manu and/or Tim retires, it would of course change that. If another team throw crazy money at Splitter, it could change that too. Now, early indications are neither Tim or Manu will retire and Splitter hasn't been great in the postseason which should reduce his market value. The projected low cap number also means that teams will have less money to offer at Splitter.

I fully expect Spurs next year team to be about the same than this year with minor changes (new backup SF, Neal maybe gone, a PF project...)

[Baam]

I would take Neal back in a heartbeat because his value is low right now and we know he's better than that when he's healthy but then again there's too many guards on the roster so some of them gotta go.

Personally I think we can (have to) become a better small ball team, Splitter is good to match tall frontlines but he's not the kind of player who can bully smaller players consistently so if we bring him back I'd like them to draft a good wing who could make us better than Bonner/Neal when going small. The alternative would be to go after West who has been impressive vs small ball and let Tiago walk.

[Bruno]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/basketball/8773461/Tom-Abercrombie-jets-to-USA-for-tilt-at-NBA/


New Zealand Breakers and Tall Blacks basketball star Tom Abercrombie is off to the United States for a "now-or-never" crack at an NBA contract.

Abercombie flies out of Auckland tomorrow for mini-camp opportunities with NBA franchises the San Antonio Spurs, Milwaukee Bucks, Houston Rockets and Dallas Mavericks.

I remember some talks about Abercrombie three years ago after his very good 2010 world championship.

[jesterbobman]

Beaten to the punch. I hope Abercrombie sticks somewhere(So there will be 2 New Zealanders in the NBA), and he can't be on a more successful team(Breakers 3-peated in the ANBL). Has sufficient size and skill to have value to someone. Definitely worth a tryout.

[DrunkTXLabrat]

maybe this is just the lebron block talking.

but, if the spurs don't re-sign splitter. is there enough money and championship contender clout, to court josh smith? he'd be a clear defensive upgrade over splitter. i think he can learn a more reliable shot, from chip. with no splitter, smith could be the pick and roll man. i think smith would excel in splitters role. especially with a whole training camp to acclimate.

also the draft need would be a big. that's nice, with such good pickins'... dieng, gobert, nogueria, muscala, or withey? and hope baynes benefited from a season of early development.

[Chinook]

maybe this is just the lebron block talking.

but, if the spurs don't re-sign splitter. is there enough money and championship contender clout, to court josh smith? he'd be a clear defensive upgrade over splitter. i think he can learn a more reliable shot, from chip. with no splitter, smith could be the pick and roll man. i think smith would excel in splitters role. especially with a whole training camp to acclimate.

also the draft need would be a big. that's nice, with such good pickins'... dieng, gobert, nogueria, muscala, or withey? and hope baynes benefited from a season of early development.

Smith is actually pretty awful. He's not an upgrade to Splitter defensively, as Tiago is a much better man defender and underrated help defender. Smith gets blocks, but they come from being out of position. Right now, he's a combo-forward who really can't consistent guard either the three or four. Add in the fact that he wrecks spacing, and it becomes pretty difficult to see how the Spurs would improve with Smith.

That being said, yes, there should be enough money to sign Smith if Splitter is let go. The Spurs have about $18 Million to split among Ginobili, Splitter and free agents. So with no Splitter and a cheap Ginobili, the Spurs could probably make a competitive offer.

[Duncan2177]

I would take Millsap or Jefferson instead of Smith.

[Baam]

Smith is actually pretty awful. He's not an upgrade to Splitter defensively, as Tiago is a much better man defender and underrated help defender. Smith gets blocks, but they come from being out of position. Right now, he's a combo-forward who really can't consistent guard either the three or four. Add in the fact that he wrecks spacing, and it becomes pretty difficult to see how the Spurs would improve with Smith.

That being said, yes, there should be enough money to sign Smith if Splitter is let go. The Spurs have about $18 Million to split among Ginobili, Splitter and free agents. So with no Splitter and a cheap Ginobili, the Spurs could probably make a competitive offer.

How would he wreck the spacing when Splitter has zero range and Smith can kind of shoot the 3? At worst it'd be a tie.

That said I don't know how much better it'd really make us, feels like in the POs it would help quite a bit, having someone aggressive who can create his own offense. He'd be probably great vs OKC and Miami (smallball) and probably not that good vs the big frontlines but then again Pop played "small" a lot vs these team with a heavy dose of Bonner so who knows...

[Chinook]

Smith was a bad Durant/James defender, so it wouldn't help against those teams. He's really just a player that gets blocks and dunks -- definitely not worth the contract he's going to get.

Smith hurts spacing because a player who can't shoot the three but tries anyway is much worse than a player who doesn't try. Splitter instead is constantly moving to set screens and roll to the rim. If Smith came in and did the same thing, then he'd not hurt the spacing as much. But if that's all he's going to do on offense, then he's not an upgrade to Splitter at all.

I supported the idea of trading for Smith using Jack's contract. That way, Splitter could move back to the bench. There's no way I'd consider Smith over Splitter, though, unless the Spurs are confident that Baynes could do the same things Splitter can now.

[Baam]

Smith was a bad Durant/James defender, so it wouldn't help against those teams. He's really just a player that gets blocks and dunks -- definitely not worth the contract he's going to get.

Smith hurts spacing because a player who can't shoot the three but tries anyway is much worse than a player who doesn't try. Splitter instead is constantly moving to set screens and roll to the rim. If Smith came in and did the same thing, then he'd not hurt the spacing as much. But if that's all he's going to do on offense, then he's not an upgrade to Splitter at all.

I supported the idea of trading for Smith using Jack's contract. That way, Splitter could move back to the bench. There's no way I'd consider Smith over Splitter, though, unless the Spurs are confident that Baynes could do the same things Splitter can now.

I hear you, deep down I don't think he's worth the money but our small ball lineups suck with Neal and Bonner, if he can't defend Bronbron he can probably guard whoever is playing SF pretty well and switch with Kawhi and on the other end he could take Bronbron in the post to wear him out a little bit (or Durant who is weak in the post) and Lebron wouldn't be able to switch on Parker with someone like that...