LMA Trade Talk

[raybies]

Ok, First off I'd like to apologize for another LMA trade thread, but I just had to get my thoughts out. I typically only write about things that sincerely interest me. So here is my science fiction like post about LMA and some thoughts and trade options.

Thoughts:
First off, watching Durant walk away for nothing should be a lesson to all decision makers. Sure on one hand you can keep it together for one last run and hope for the best, but if you fail, you risk losing a major piece for nothing. The effects of which can bring you down from a contender to a fringe playoff team like I believe OKC will ultimately become. This brings me to my first point. When you have a player that is homegrown and has those ties you can rest more peacefully at night because that's all they have known and you have a head start with relationships and favorable emotions. When we had Tim Duncan, we risked it all and banked on those relationships. And plus a guy like Duncan, you pretty much be crazy to trade. In our case, Duncan stayed and the rest was history. But Aldridge is different, he has no ties here. He signed as a free agent. He was not drafted by us. He has no fond memories of the past to fall back on when it hits the fan. Sure he talks up the organization but does it come off as insincere to anyone else but me around here. Does he really want to be here or is he here because nothing better was available. It's like being in a relationship because no-one better has arrived. You're not in love. In the end you either leave that person when you find someone else you love or you learn to love. I think the only way the latter happens is if we win the ship this year. But here's the problem. LMA's value is at it's highest right now because he has years on his deal and considering the current cap it's a bargain. So we risk a greater return for the lure of winning his affection. If we don't win, next year we'll have given teams with honest interest with assets the leverage needed to make a lesser bargain. You'd hope that a bidding war starts but then you have to take into account user preference. Where does LMA want to go. A class organization like the Spurs, can only salvage their image by appeasing his requests of location cause he's the one that has to resign. And I say salvage cause, how can a family org, that does things the right way, can't keep an FA, and that FA being the most important acquisition off the market in franchise history.

So you have to think from PATFO's perspective, is the juice worth the squeeze. Is he a player you want to risk possibly years of rebuilding for. Do you want to pay for his next max contract when it could exceed 30 mil(?Cap #s please). Is he the character that you want in the locker room or did you sign him for the same reason he signed with you. Are LMA and PATFO cuddle buddies, just not wanting to be alone and feel like someone is there. Did we sign him to remain relevant and extend the contender window or did you sign him because you believed he modeled your culture. Most know we sacrificed a lot for LMA. The built not bought moniker died. The beautiful game died. Wasn't that what are signature was?

You got to think about the future now. Right now San Antonio is a hot destination because of reputation. We are basically a living legend. The respect will never be higher imo. Pop is known as best coach in the game. The front office is seen with great regard to build contenders and a safe bet to succeed. And the organization is first class. Some believe that losing LMA would hurt our ability to sign FA's in the future but I disagree. Pop has at least four more years before he retires. He's coaching the next Olympic team for team USA. You have Kawhi as a centerpiece which is a legitimate MVP DPOY candidate but after that you have questions. Who will be the next Tony, Manu, Hill, or Kawhi. Is it Murray or Bertans? The time to build is now, because once Pop retires all bets are off. Then you hope we can hire the right minds. Will the same trust be there that is now when say an Ettore Messina is head coach and no experience is there. Is he the next Blatt. Man I hope we get Coach Bud back but I'm not gonna go on a tangent here. I'm sure we can get those C list players that can be B list players like say a Paul Millsap type. And we could probably unearth another Danny Green or Gary Neal, or maybe Jon Simmons. But we can safely assume we have a 3-4 year window before Pop is gone and how do you want to leave the franchise. Do you want to leave the franchise in rebuilding mode after a plan that was more short term than long term or do you want to already be on the rise with say a few pieces that are primed to enter their best stages of their career. Think about this cause this is what it is basically.

Some mention the Spurs conservative ways as keeping LMA but I'm here to say maybe it's more conservative to sell high and not risk losing him for nothing. IMO it's safer to start now long term wise. But could we remain competitive now. Imo we can. I actually think Pau is a better offensive player than LMA even at his age. He can post and he can pass. LMA skill set killed the beautiful game, but maybe with the right pieces you could see it come back. Maybe I need to let it go. I think if you get a big back and a young prospect and a first you do it. So now that brings me to some trade scenarios.


In my mind there's only two places and that's Boston and Phoenix.

Phoenix is the obvious one because that's what our comp was during our courtship. Maybe he really wanted to go there but he played it safe. In Phoenix or Boston he would be the first option. Maybe that's what he wants.

In Phoenix the trade scenarios would center around

Brandon Knight/ Tyson Chandler with a Middle filler like Pj Tucker a young big like Chriss or Bender and a first for LMA and pieces like Forbes and/or Anderson

I do not like this deal at all because Tyson is on decline and both lock up money for a few years. Knight is not the playmaker you want out of a point guard. He's more a shooting guard.

So this brings us to where all the rumors began and that's in Boston.

In Boston a scenario might look like this

Amir Johnson with a couple young players with upside for LMA and Anderson.

Now Danny Ainge is one of the best at extracting players on good deals. He's not going to let us do him like we did Larry Legend. So with that being said, he's not going to want to part with that first round pick if we choose a certain player.

Alex Kennedy (https://twitter.com/AlexKennedyNBA)Alex (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=18999)KennedyNBA
Yesterday, Jaylen Brown said that he met with the Celtics, Bulls, Hawks, Timberwolves, Kings, Spurs and Rockets while at the NBA Combine.

For some reason, we managed to meet with Jaylen Brown at the combine, but why? Every mock had him in the lottery so why did we meet him. What made us think we could acquire him. Perhaps this LMA story is farther along in the organization then we know. This would explain the leak from Boston's side to weaken the trade value so that way they wouldn't have to give the first and Brown. Well that's one theory imo. I'm having fun.

Also with Amir on a one year deal you retain flexibility while acquiring a solid starter that would fit with your SL. With his salary off the books you could feasibly have some room to either resign your free agents or go after someone like a Serge Ibaka. And this kid Brown is very intellectual and can ball. He has potential to be a two way player. Pair that with Kawhi and you could have the best wing play in years to come.

Edit: So would you take Amir Johnson, Jaylen Brown, and Jerebko with Brooklyn's first for LMA and Anderson for example?
Jerebko is on a one year 5 million deal. More flexibility. Jackson wouldn't work.
I would.

[Chinook]

No offense, man, really. But for fucks sake, you don't trade someone because you might not keep them in two years. If LMA signs with some one else, the Spurs didn't get nothing. They got three years of an All-Star big. How many All-Star years will they get in a trade? How many more will they get in a trade than they could have just gotten if they had just kept LMA and done something else?

The answer should just be no. There's no value in letting contracts dictate trades in most cases.

[raybies]

No offense, man, really. But for fucks sake, you don't trade someone because you might not keep them in two years. If LMA signs with some one else, the Spurs didn't get nothing. They got three years of an All-Star big. How many All-Star years will they get in a trade? How many more will they get in a trade than they could have just gotten if they had just kept LMA and done something else?

The answer should just be no. There's no value in letting contracts dictate trades in most cases.

Well, i must say i'm thinking out loud with this post. As I said Science fiction like, but I think it's something that has to be considered. I'm not PATFO and I do think they at least play this year out to possibly win his affection, but i ponder if it's worth the risk. You look at your chances vs a team like GS with a roster that is presently constructed and you like your chances. I think our strengths mesh well with there weaknesses.

Sorry man, just worked an 12 hour overnight and had some thoughts.

[SpursforSix]

Well, i must say i'm thinking out loud with this post. As I said Science fiction like, but I think it's something that has to be considered. I'm not PATFO and I do think they at least play this year out to possibly win his affection, but i ponder if it's worth the risk. You look at your chances vs a team like GS with a roster that is presently constructed and you like your chances. I think our strengths mesh well with there weaknesses.

Sorry man, just worked an 12 hour overnight and had some thoughts.

wtf

[Chinook]

Well, i must say i'm thinking out loud with this post. As I said Science fiction like, but I think it's something that has to be considered. I'm not PATFO and I do think they at least play this year out to possibly win his affection, but i ponder if it's worth the risk. You look at your chances vs a team like GS with a roster that is presently constructed and you like your chances. I think our strengths mesh well with there weaknesses.

Sorry man, just worked an 12 hour overnight and had some thoughts.

And that's fine. I totally understand that. I'm just saying that value isn't what you could get in a trade. That's only part of it. LMA is valuable because of what he does, not because what he can fetch on the market. There is a type of value that is simply hoarded like Boston's picks or Philly's bigs. And there is value that is constantly being used, like star players

[raybies]

wtf

I'm going to bed lol

[offset formation]

No offense, man, really. But for fucks sake, you don't trade someone because you might not keep them in two years. If LMA signs with some one else, the Spurs didn't get nothing. They got three years of an All-Star big. How many All-Star years will they get in a trade? How many more will they get in a trade than they could have just gotten if they had just kept LMA and done something else?

The answer should just be no. There's no value in letting contracts dictate trades in most cases.

[MaNu4Tres]

And that's fine. I totally understand that. I'm just saying that value isn't what you could get in a trade. That's only part of it. LMA is valuable because of what he does, not because what he can fetch on the market. There is a type of value that is simply hoarded like Boston's picks or Philly's bigs. And there is value that is constantly being used, like star players

The variables and skill-sets with Star players are all different and complex though. Star players aren't always huge net positives as their PPG or " All- Star nomination" may imply. Aldridge made the All-Star team last year more because the Spurs had the 2nd best record in the NBA and coaches felt the Spurs needed a second representative out of respect. Aldridge didn't play great ball the first half of last year.

Also, you're forgetting that Spurs could get a piece or pieces that can help right now too, while still netting assets for the future. Those pieces they may attain to help now, may not be All-Stars on paper, but their skill-sets, efficiency on O, effectiveness on D, could be exactly what the Spurs need to still get the same returns or close to the same returns from a W or L perspective.

[K...]

generally, it would be terrible malpractice, like Cuban Tyson Chandler malpractice, to suggest trade issues so early. Simply being a top 4 team, that proved capable of beating the likely elite competition without their second best defender would suggest so. At least wait until Blake Griffin rapes him top freak out

This doesn't mean that lma is not "on the market" but there's no obvious trade to make us better that will be easily accomplished.

Also this rumor came from the Harlem/,apo trash mill. I'm inclined to use common sense over those "sources"

[MaNu4Tres]

generally, it would be terrible malpractice, like Cuban Tyson Chandler narrative malpractice, to suggest trade issues so early.

This doesn't mean that lma is not "on the market" but there's no obvious trade to make us better that will be easily accomplished.

Also this rumor came from the Harlem/,apo trash mill. I'm inclined to use common sense over those "sources"

Actually it was from me.. and the guy I've spoken with is reliable to me. Take that for what its worth even though I'm just an poster on Spurstalk.

[Chinook]

The variables and skill-sets with Star players are all different and complex though. Star players aren't always huge net positives as their PPG or " All- Star nomination" may imply. Aldridge made the All-Star team last year more because the Spurs had the 2nd best record in the NBA and coaches felt the Spurs needed a second representative out of respect. Aldridge didn't play great ball the first half of last year.

Also, you're forgetting that Spurs could get a piece or pieces that can help right now too, while still netting assets for the future. Those pieces they may attain to help now, may not be All-Stars on paper, but their skill-sets, efficiency on O, effectiveness on D, could be exactly what the Spurs need to still get the same returns or close to the same returns from a W or L perspective.

You underestimate the on-court value of star players. You don't make that up with role-players. Amir Johnson is not going to do anything close to what LMA can do, for example. He might put up some good stats, but he won't be able to put a team on his back and score 40 points in a playoff game. That's what makes LMA a five-time All-Star and why he was such a free-agent prize. Nothing the Spurs can trade for will provide that same potential for an immediate foundation piece. Like LMA, those guys aren't on the trade market.

[K...]

Actually it was from me.. and the guy I've spoken with is reliable to me. Take that for what its worth even though I'm just an poster on Spurstalk.

It's been suggested that there's a three team trade at issue. The spurs can't trade with warriors, clippers, cavs due to competitiveness.
There are only so many players better than lma and most play for those three teams. We lack assets to get Davis, Kat, etc

Unless the spurs really want Parker out, (to the extent they'd create a whole at pf, presumably starting dedmon) there is no good trade for lma

[sasaint]

Ok, First off I'd like to apologize for another LMA trade thread, but I just had to get my thoughts out. I typically only write about things that sincerely interest me. So here is my science fiction like post about LMA and some thoughts and trade options.

Thoughts:
First off, watching Durant walk away for nothing should be a lesson to all decision makers. Sure on one hand you can keep it together for one last run and hope for the best, but if you fail, you risk losing a major piece for nothing. The effects of which can bring you down from a contender to a fringe playoff team like I believe OKC will ultimately become. This brings me to my first point. When you have a player that is homegrown and has those ties you can rest more peacefully at night because that's all they have known and you have a head start with relationships and favorable emotions. When we had Tim Duncan, we risked it all and banked on those relationships. And plus a guy like Duncan, you pretty much be crazy to trade. In our case, Duncan stayed and the rest was history. But Aldridge is different, he has no ties here. He signed as a free agent. He was not drafted by us. He has no fond memories of the past to fall back on when it hits the fan. Sure he talks up the organization but does it come off as insincere to anyone else but me around here. Does he really want to be here or is he here because nothing better was available. It's like being in a relationship because no-one better has arrived. You're not in love. In the end you either leave that person when you find someone else you love or you learn to love. I think the only way the latter happens is if we win the ship this year. But here's the problem. LMA's value is at it's highest right now because he has years on his deal and considering the current cap it's a bargain. So we risk a greater return for the lure of winning his affection. If we don't win, next year we'll have given teams with honest interest with assets the leverage needed to make a lesser bargain. You'd hope that a bidding war starts but then you have to take into account user preference. Where does LMA want to go. A class organization like the Spurs, can only salvage their image by appeasing his requests of location cause he's the one that has to resign. And I say salvage cause, how can a family org, that does things the right way, can't keep an FA, and that FA being the most important acquisition off the market in franchise history.

So you have to think from PATFO's perspective, is the juice worth the squeeze. Is he a player you want to risk possibly years of rebuilding for. Do you want to pay for his next max contract when it could exceed 30 mil(?Cap #s please). Is he the character that you want in the locker room or did you sign him for the same reason he signed with you. Are LMA and PATFO cuddle buddies, just not wanting to be alone and feel like someone is there. Did we sign him to remain relevant and extend the contender window or did you sign him because you believed he modeled your culture. Most know we sacrificed a lot for LMA. The built not bought moniker died. The beautiful game died. Wasn't that what are signature was?

You got to think about the future now. Right now San Antonio is a hot destination because of reputation. We are basically a living legend. The respect will never be higher imo. Pop is known as best coach in the game. The front office is seen with great regard to build contenders and a safe bet to succeed. And the organization is first class. Some believe that losing LMA would hurt our ability to sign FA's in the future but I disagree. Pop has at least four more years before he retires. He's coaching the next Olympic team for team USA. You have Kawhi as a centerpiece which is a legitimate MVP DPOY candidate but after that you have questions. Who will be the next Tony, Manu, Hill, or Kawhi. Is it Murray or Bertans? The time to build is now, because once Pop retires all bets are off. Then you hope we can hire the right minds. Will the same trust be there that is now when say an Ettore Messina is head coach and no experience is there. Is he the next Blatt. Man I hope we get Coach Bud back but I'm not gonna go on a tangent here. I'm sure we can get those C list players that can be B list players like say a Paul Millsap type. And we could probably unearth another Danny Green or Gary Neal, or maybe Jon Simmons. But we can safely assume we have a 3-4 year window before Pop is gone and how do you want to leave the franchise. Do you want to leave the franchise in rebuilding mode after a plan that was more short term than long term or do you want to already be on the rise with say a few pieces that are primed to enter their best stages of their career. Think about this cause this is what it is basically.

Some mention the Spurs conservative ways as keeping LMA but I'm here to say maybe it's more conservative to sell high and not risk losing him for nothing. IMO it's safer to start now long term wise. But could we remain competitive now. Imo we can. I actually think Pau is a better offensive player than LMA even at his age. He can post and he can pass. LMA skill set killed the beautiful game, but maybe with the right pieces you could see it come back. Maybe I need to let it go. I think if you get a big back and a young prospect and a first you do it. So now that brings me to some trade scenarios.


In my mind there's only two places and that's Boston and Phoenix.

Phoenix is the obvious one because that's what our comp was during our courtship. Maybe he really wanted to go there but he played it safe. In Phoenix or Boston he would be the first option. Maybe that's what he wants.

In Phoenix the trade scenarios would center around

Brandon Knight/ Tyson Chandler with a Middle filler like Pj Tucker a young big like Chriss or Bender and a first for LMA and pieces like Forbes and/or Anderson

I do not like this deal at all because Tyson is on decline and both lock up money for a few years. Knight is not the playmaker you want out of a point guard. He's more a shooting guard.

So this brings us to where all the rumors began and that's in Boston.

In Boston a scenario might look like this

Amir Johnson with a couple young players with upside for LMA and Anderson.

Now Danny Ainge is one of the best at extracting players on good deals. He's not going to let us do him like we did Larry Legend. So with that being said, he's not going to want to part with that first round pick if we choose a certain player.

Alex Kennedy (https://twitter.com/AlexKennedyNBA)Alex (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=18999)KennedyNBA
Yesterday, Jaylen Brown said that he met with the Celtics, Bulls, Hawks, Timberwolves, Kings, Spurs and Rockets while at the NBA Combine.

For some reason, we managed to meet with Jaylen Brown at the combine, but why? Every mock had him in the lottery so why did we meet him. What made us think we could acquire him. Perhaps this LMA story is farther along in the organization then we know. This would explain the leak from Boston's side to weaken the trade value so that way they wouldn't have to give the first and Brown. Well that's one theory imo. I'm having fun.

Also with Amir on a one year deal you retain flexibility while acquiring a solid starter that would fit with your SL. With his salary off the books you could feasibly have some room to either resign your free agents or go after someone like a Serge Ibaka. And this kid Brown is very intellectual and can ball. He has potential to be a two way player. Pair that with Kawhi and you could have the best wing play in years to come.

Edit: So would you take Amir Johnson, Jaylen Brown, and Jerebko with Brooklyn's first for LMA and Anderson for example?
Jerebko is on a one year 5 million deal. More flexibility. Jackson wouldn't work.
I would.

It briefly crossed my mind that - with your writing style - you might be an SAGirl alt :lol ; I appreciate your thoughts. The ability to maximize the value of any asset - both in the present and in the future - is one of the most fundamental, important and and difficult skills for any FO to master. Contract considerations, player motivation/fit/compatibility, and alignment with other players and their ages/career trajectories and contractual demands all play an important role. Given those factors, several of us on ST believe it might be better to move LMA sooner rather than later - depending on the value the team could get in return now. Your observation about PATFO's interest in Jaylen Brown is interesting. It seems unlikely to me that it was advanced scouting in anticipation of a possible trade, but who knows? :toast

[MaNu4Tres]

You underestimate the on-court value of star players. You don't make that up with role-players. Amir Johnson is not going to do anything close to what LMA can do, for example. He might put up some good stats, but he won't be able to put a team on his back and score 40 points in a playoff game. That's what makes LMA a five-time All-Star and why he was such a free-agent prize. Nothing the Spurs can trade for will provide that same potential for an immediate foundation piece. Like LMA, those guys aren't on the trade market.

You're making Aldridge sound like he's a LeBron or a top tier star. On the court value isn't all the same for star players. Sure he has value, never questioned that, but scoring the way he scores (in selfish ways), doesn't command double teams. He also doesn't apply pressure at the rim -- which isn't beneficial to the players around him. He doesn't make his teammates better like other star players can. And on defense and in other faucets of the game he's about average. We just have a difference of opinion on how great he truly is. He's a great elite shooter from mid-range but he doesn't make his teammates better around him and isn't the force he should be in other faucets of the game. He's the Melo of power forwards except Melo is a more versatile scorer.

[SAGirl]

It's a nice post... it summarizes concerns expressed by others guys recently like Manu4tres, who on top of what raybies said, would have liked to have seen the Spurs go a different direction in FA to begin with, and who also have had concerns with LMA as a franchise player. No need to say more if you read the concerns Manu4tres (and others) have had with LMA.

Frankly I can see both sides of the equation. It comes down to how happy both sides of the situation are. They both profess to be happy. LMA has said the right things, Pop has talked him up as a leader but with Kawhi as the best player. LMA entered the team last season in a deferral stage and talking of having joined to support Kawhi and help him be great, and that if he had joined to be the man, he wouldn't have come. Unless it is LMA who wants to be traded, it doesnt' make sense. The team did very well last season. The OKC loss was not on LMA strictly.

I can see both sides of this argument and I am kind of torn in not having a strong opinion either way. If you choose prospects and picks, etc... that is a rebuild in the middle of Kawhi's best years which are coming right up, apparently as soon as this season. At the same time, IMO they need to do something to improve the guard situation. They have some prospects right now, but that is all they are. I could frankly see this going either way.

I think they play out this season and next offseason you see what's up. You will know who tanked or blossomed during the postseason, either have won or come close to it, and if you underachieved then you know who has to go etc. I can see the trade in the offseason. He may have just one season on his contract at that point, but that is still in a good contract and he could agree to re-sign wherever. He would still have value. There are teams that would take him. Maybe you don't get much back, but you hardly get equitable talent when trading an all-star. Maybe PATFO is not getting offers that make the trade worthwile...

[K...]

Isn't it strange that there was no lma rumor of the summer?

[SAGirl]

Isn't it strange that there was no lma rumor of the summer?The timing of the ESPN rumors started after the Zach Lowe 30 crazy predictions. It was very ill timed with the season about to start... I frankly didn't believe the trade rumors at that point, considering the roster TO and how much acclimating and adjusting Pop had to accomplish with so many new faces. Pop and the coaches have at this point designed what they want to do on both ends, counting on their personnel. Trading a foundational piece with the season about to start was senseless.... I never believed those rumors.

[playbonner15]

Let LMA walk / trade him for a decent PG. Start Dedmon. Then bring Lee / Bertans off the bench.

[sasaint]

It's a nice post... it summarizes concerns expressed by others guys recently like Manu4tres, who on top of what raybies said, would have liked to have seen the Spurs go a different direction in FA to begin with, and who also have had concerns with LMA as a franchise player. No need to say more if you read the concerns Manu4tres (and others) have had with LMA.

Frankly I can see both sides of the equation. It comes down to how happy both sides of the situation are. They both profess to be happy. LMA has said the right things, Pop has talked him up as a leader but with Kawhi as the best player. LMA entered the team last season in a deferral stage and talking of having joined to support Kawhi and help him be great, and that if he had joined to be the man, he wouldn't have come. Unless it is LMA who wants to be traded, it doesnt' make sense. The team did very well last season. The OKC loss was not on LMA strictly.

I can see both sides of this argument and I am kind of torn in not having a strong opinion either way. If you choose prospects and picks, etc... that is a rebuild in the middle of Kawhi's best years which are coming right up, apparently as soon as this season. At the same time, IMO they need to do something to improve the guard situation. They have some prospects right now, but that is all they are. I could frankly see this going either way.

I think they play out this season and next offseason you see what's up. You will know who tanked or blossomed during the postseason, either have won or come close to it, and if you underachieved then you know who has to go etc. I can see the trade in the offseason. He may have just one season on his contract at that point, but that is still in a good contract and he could agree to re-sign wherever. He would still have value. There are teams that would take him. Maybe you don't get much back, but you hardly get equitable talent when trading an all-star. Maybe PATFO is not getting offers that make the trade worthwile...

I admit I am little hurt for not getting mentioned as an opponent (along with ceperez to the LMA signing fron the get-go. :(

But on to more substantive issues: why characterize trading LMA as a "rebuild" - especially with Pau around to step right in? There have been teams that were capable of "re-booting" instead of "re-building". Is the vaunted Spurs organization that capable? At any rate, trading LMA now at the peak of his personal/contractual value would almost certainly bring very good value in return - not a rebuild at all, but a reboot. You should check out some of the scenarios Kawhistorm has suggested. (Btw, I am not trying to play semantic games with "rebuild" and "re-boot.) :toast

P.S. - I've been saying that it was Kawhi who, unfortunately, was about to become "the bridge."

[Chinook]

You're making Aldridge sound like he's a LeBron or a top tier star. On the court value isn't all the same for star players. Sure he has value, never questioned that, but scoring the way he scores (in selfish ways), doesn't command double teams. He also doesn't apply pressure at the rim -- which isn't beneficial to the players around him. He doesn't make his teammates better like other star players can. And on defense and in other faucets of the game he's about average. We just have a difference of opinion on how great he truly is. He's a great elite shooter from mid-range but he doesn't make his teammates better around him and isn't the force he should be in other faucets of the game. He's the Melo of power forwards except Melo is a more versatile scorer.

Melo would put the Spurs over Cleveland, even at the expense of LMA. Don't let the narrative get in the way of reality there. So that should help you understand why LMA isn't on the block. All he has to do is pull his head out of his ass, and he's going off for 30/15 against the best teams in the league no matter what they try to do to stop him. Amir or Cole or Miles aren't doing that. You trade LMA, you get the Thunder now. Role-players don't win you real games unless they're super role-players like Danny and Iggy, and even those guys can't do it very often. If you were talking about moving LMA for two (2013-2015) Green-level players at PG and PF, maybe there's something to talk about. But there isn't when the guys aren't going to even be better than Lee and Dedmon.

You win with stars, even if they are faded stars and still-nebulous stars. They don't have to be top-five players, but they damned-sure need to be top-20 guys or at least be able to play like that in a way that Duncan and Manu were in 2013 and 2014.

[Chinook]

I admit I am little hurt for not getting mentioned as an opponent (along with ceperez (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=13356) to the LMA signing fron the get-go. :(

But on to more substantive issues: why characterize trading LMA as a "rebuild" - especially with Pau around to step right in? There have been teams that were capable of "re-booting" instead of "re-building". Is the vaunted Spurs organization that capable? At any rate, trading LMA now at the peak of his personal/contractual value would almost certainly bring very good value in return - not a rebuild at all, but a reboot. You should check out some of the scenarios Kawhistorm has suggested. (Btw, I am not trying to play semantic games with "rebuild" and "re-boot.) :toast

Because LMA is like three times the player Pau and Pau is supposed to be a replacement for Tim. Ask the Thunder how going from two stars to one star and upgraded role-players feels.

[sasaint]

Because LMA is like three times the player Pau and Pau is supposed to be a replacement for Tim. Ask the Thunder how going from two stars to one star and upgraded role-players feels.

Man, the Thunder are the poster child for MY argument! They let Durant go for nada.

[SAGirl]

I admit I am little hurt for not getting mentioned as an opponent (along with ceperez (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=13356) to the LMA signing fron the get-go. :(

But on to more substantive issues: why characterize trading LMA as a "rebuild" - especially with Pau around to step right in? There have been teams that were capable of "re-booting" instead of "re-building". Is the vaunted Spurs organization that capable? At any rate, trading LMA now at the peak of his personal/contractual value would almost certainly bring very good value in return - not a rebuild at all, but a reboot. You should check out some of the scenarios Kawhistorm has suggested. (Btw, I am not trying to play semantic games with "rebuild" and "re-boot.) :toast

Sorry, :downspin:Manu4tres has been very vocal about the trade, and I know of you and ceperez not wanting to get LMA in the first place (Harlem, Apalisoc have been vocal about that too).. so you see there are many who didn't want LMA to begin with... but strictly championing the trade LMA cause, Manu4tres is the banner bearer. (I know there are others, but can't recall, some are not even regular posters... anyways, I'll put your name in the list lol):toast


I am just going by raybies idea... one includes a pick, that is clearly the future... a young prospect (he's not going to be KAT-level, he's going to be someone with potential and flaws too, hopefully with a high ceiling but will need time to get there) ... and a roleplayer that can play right away... That is a rebuild to me. There are no immediate stars in that package, and you have to hope either the prospect or the pick turn into a significant contributor at some point. The roleplayer is a roleplayer.... I don't see a package like that helping put the Spurs over the top this season IMO>

[sasaint]

Melo would put the Spurs over Cleveland, even at the expense of LMA. Don't let the narrative get in the way of reality there. So that should help you understand why LMA isn't on the block. All he has to do is pull his head out of his ass, and he's going off for 30/15 against the best teams in the league no matter what they try to do to stop him. Amir or Cole or Miles aren't doing that. You trade LMA, you get the Thunder now. Role-players don't win you real games unless they're super role-players like Danny and Iggy, and even those guys can't do it very often. If you were talking about moving LMA for two (2013-2015) Green-level players at PG and PF, maybe there's something to talk about. But there isn't when the guys aren't going to even be better than Lee and Dedmon.

You win with stars, even if they are faded stars and still-nebulous stars. They don't have to be top-five players, but they damned-sure need to be top-20 guys or at least be able to play like that in a way that Duncan and Manu were in 2013 and 2014.

So, are you saying the Spurs would be better off to trade LMA for Melo?

[gambit1990]

Melo would put the Spurs over Cleveland, even at the expense of LMA.
:lmao

[Chinook]

Man, the Thunder are the poster child for MY argument! They let Durant go for nada.

Nah. They have role-players galore. But they can't do it with one star. That was the end result, KD trade or.

[mo7888]

The thing about the LMA trade talk that I don't get is, why now? We match up very well against GS in the West and against Cleveland in the East, so why would we want to trade him before we let this thing play out? If we get to the end of the season and LMA is wanting out then we can revisit it this summer. I understand the argument that says he's worth less in the summer with 1 year left on his contract but (to funnel my inner Chinook here for a second) you have to consider the value of having him on the court the rest of the season..and that is a REAL value. Also, looking ahead to the summer...if he wants out and we try to accommodate him by moving him to a team he likes there may be more options than we know when we get to the draft. So, let's just be patient for now...

[Chinook]

So, are you saying the Spurs would be better off to trade LMA for Melo?

Yes, I think the Spurs with an incorporated Melo at the four would beat Cleveland. Melo's a much better player than people give him credit for.

[Chinook]

The thing about the LMA trade talk that I don't get is, why now? We match up very well against GS in the West and against Cleveland in the East, so why would we want to trade him before we let this thing play out?

There's not a logical answer to that, just a bunch of illogical ones.

[sasaint]

Sorry, :downspin:Manu4tres has been very vocal about the trade, and I know of you and ceperez not wanting to get LMA in the first place (Harlem, Apalisoc have been vocal about that too).. so you see there are many who didn't want LMA to begin with... but strictly championing the trade LMA cause, Manu4tres is the banner bearer. (I know there are others, but can't recall, some are not even regular posters... anyways, I'll put your name in the list lol):toast


I am just going by raybies idea... one includes a pick, that is clearly the future... a young prospect (he's not going to be KAT-level, he's going to be someone with potential and flaws too, hopefully with a high ceiling but will need time to get there) ... and a roleplayer that can play right away... That is a rebuild to me. There are no immediate stars in that package, and you have to hope either the prospect or the pick turn into a significant contributor at some point. The roleplayer is a roleplayer.... I don't see a package like that helping put the Spurs over the top this season IMO>

P.S. - I've been saying that it was Kawhi who, unfortunately, was about to become "the bridge."

[SAGirl]

Man, the Thunder are the poster child for MY argument! They let Durant go for nada.He was the kind of player that you risk for... (Kawhi is in that tier)... But they did trade stars like Harden and significant contributors like Ibaka...

[MaNu4Tres]

Melo would put the Spurs over Cleveland, even at the expense of LMA. Don't let the narrative get in the way of reality there. So that should help you understand why LMA isn't on the block. All he has to do is pull his head out of his ass, and he's going off for 30/15 against the best teams in the league no matter what they try to do to stop him. Amir or Cole or Miles aren't doing that. You trade LMA, you get the Thunder now. Role-players don't win you real games unless they're super role-players like Danny and Iggy, and even those guys can't do it very often. If you were talking about moving LMA for two (2013-2015) Green-level players at PG and PF, maybe there's something to talk about. But there isn't when the guys aren't going to even be better than Lee and Dedmon.

You win with stars, even if they are faded stars and still-nebulous stars. They don't have to be top-five players, but they damned-sure need to be top-20 guys or at least be able to play like that in a way that Duncan and Manu were in 2013 and 2014.

I disagree with too much of this to post. I have a few meetings to go to here soon. We'll just agree to disagree and we'll let this play out. Believe what you want in regards to him not being traded.

Another threat or creator from the perimeter player and an efficient finisher/defender at PF >> the type of offense LaMarcus brings + Parker starting.

[Chinook]

He was the kind of player that you risk for... (Kawhi is in that tier)... But they did trade stars like Harden and significant contributors like Ibaka...

And they have Adams, Sabonis and Oladipo to show for it. Shoulda just let them walk, especially considering the contracts they just gave out.

[sasaint]

Nah. They have role-players galore. But they can't do it with one star. That was the end result, KD trade or.

They received nada for Durant, himself.

[SAGirl]

P.S. - I've been saying that it was Kawhi who, unfortunately, was about to become "the bridge."They would be OKC this season .. with some guys for the future... IMO. Really what still makes me consider the trade is the fact that they need a quality guard and will have to upgrade somehow, at some point and I think if they underachieve this season it won't be on LMA, it will be the guard situation.... just IMO...

[MaNu4Tres]

If scoring is the only elite skill of your star player, you want his scoring to be a weapon to make teammates better. Aldridges' offense isn't that. Even Dirk made his teammates better because he could put pressure at the rim with his drives when faced with a hard close outs. Plus, he could extend his range from 3 point land w/ great volume to where it would make his TS% very high and valuable. Aldridge shouldn't be compared to Harden or Durant either just because they were " stars" too. You have to be able to break down the skill-sets to figure out true value instead of just looking at his All-Star appearance or sheer " points per game" and going by that.

[Chinook]

I disagree with too much of this to post. I have a few meetings to go to here soon. We'll just agree to disagree and we'll let this play out. Believe what you want in regards to him not being traded.

Another threat or creator from the perimeter player and an efficient finisher/defender at PF >> the type of offense LaMarcus brings + Parker starting.

As long as Kawhi brings his type of offense, the SL won't be free-flowing again. You aren't going to be able to make it with only one guy who is able to get his own shots. And adding like Bledsoe and Chriss instead is definitely going to lower the ceiling. That's a team that loses to the Warriors 8/10 times and never gets better. You keep the guy who can drop 26/14 on GS without it being a surprise.

You just have to get off this shtick. First it was you agreeing with Lowe at it was possible (rational and not worthy of much criticism). Then you tried to use some of the worst logic ever to justify why it should happen. Now you're onto talking about mysterious sources that give you this smug air about it happening. I don't even care if the sources are real; it's a shtick. I don't know what the next evolution of it is going to be. Maybe fake tweets?

[sasaint]

They would be OKC this season .. with some guys for the future... IMO. Really what still makes me consider the trade is the fact that they need a quality guard and will have to upgrade somehow, at some point and I think if they underachieve this season it won't be on LMA, it will be the guard situation.... just IMO...

Isn't that the point? They need guys for the immediate future, which they currently lack - as well as for the present. Question: Do you think with the Spurs' current backcourt (heck, team) that they are legit contenders this season? With Timmy's unexpectedly sudden breakdown, last season was just the beginning. If Tony doesn't even reach the level of "serviceable" this season (laying aside Manu's current level of play), the Spurs will have stayed too late at the parade. They appear to be in reactionary mode, rather than pro-active mode. That slope is starting to look pretty slippery to me.

[Chinook]

They received nada for Durant, himself.

But they would've sucked regardless right now, and they would've not been so close to a Finals trip last season. He's a terrible, terrible example. Stars will walk from time to time. You can't out predict that. But you play this GM game to compete for titles, and you don't continuously cap your ceiling just to lower your risk.

[MaNu4Tres]

As long as Kawhi brings his type of offense, the SL won't be free-flowing again. You aren't going to be able to make it with only one guy who is able to get his own shots. And adding like Bledsoe and Chriss instead is definitely going to lower the ceiling. That's a team that loses to the Warriors 8/10 times and never gets better. You keep the guy who can drop 26/14 on GS without it being a surprise.

You just have to get off this shtick. First it was you agreeing with Lowe at it was possible (rational and not worthy of much criticism). Then you tried to use some of the worst logic ever to justify why it should happen. Now you're onto talking about mysterious sources that give you this smug air about it happening. I don't even care if the sources are real; it's a shtick. I don't know what the next evolution of it is going to be. Maybe fake tweets?

No shtick at all.

No offense, but I'm good with my logic over yours and with what I was told yesterday validated a few things. That's why I addressed it again.

I just don't have time to post as much as you do. Quality is always better over quantity.

We will see what happens.

[Chinook]

If scoring is the only elite skill of your star player, you want his scoring to be a weapon to make teammates better. Aldridges' offense isn't that. Even Dirk made his teammates better because he could put pressure at the rim with his drives when faced with a hard close outs. Plus, he could extend his range from 3 point land w/ great volume to where it would make his TS% very high and valuable. Aldridge shouldn't be compared to Harden or Durant either just because they were " stars" too. You have to be able to break down the skill-sets to figure out true value instead of just looking at his All-Star appearance or sheer " points per game" and going by that.

"Even Dirk" like the dude isn't a HoFer. You want your star player to be able to score even when the other throws everything at trying to stop you. LMA has proven he can do that. More than the abstract Xs and O's that you want to talk about, you need bucket-gettters. That's it. You're not going to win a title by having nothing but super-role players, no matter how good your gameplan is. Things will break down no matter what, and you need your bucket-getters to save the day. With the 2014 Spurs, Tim, Tony and Manu were still bucket-getters, and that made the rest of it work, especially after Kawhi became his own bucket-getter. The Spurs have a severe dearth of bucket-getters now. You have Kawhi, LMA and Pau when he tries. You take out LMA for a non-bucket-getter, and you have no chance.

[sasaint]

But they would've sucked regardless right now, and they would've not been so close to a Finals trip last season. He's a terrible, terrible example. Stars will walk from time to time. You can't out predict that. But you play this GM game to compete for titles, and you don't continuously cap your ceiling just to lower your risk.

I'll just say that your crystal ball is much clearer than mine. I don't know what kind of return the Thunder might have received for Durant nor how that would have altered the team's fortunes this season or last. The indisputable fact is that they got nothing of value in return.

[Chinook]

No shtick at all.

No offense, but I'm good with my logic over yours and with what I was told yesterday validated a few things. That's why I addressed it again.

That's a shtick. Your logic is just not correct. There are too many counter examples. You can have all the confidence you want, but it won't make up for the fact that it's not a reasonable argument.

But this whole "I know something you don't know" is a shtick. You're trying to get people to ask you what you know for no reason other than to feel good about yourself. And that's whatever -- it's your life -- but it's still a shtick, especially since I don't recall you breaking things before.

[MaNu4Tres]

"Even Dirk" like the dude isn't a HoFer. You want your star player to be able to score even when the other throws everything at trying to stop you. LMA has proven he can do that. More than the abstract Xs and O's that you want to talk about, you need bucket-gettters. That's it. You're not going to win a title by having nothing but super-role players, no matter how good your gameplan is. Things will break down no matter what, and you need your bucket-getters to save the day. With the 2014 Spurs, Tim, Tony and Manu were still bucket-getters, and that made the rest of it work, especially after Kawhi became his own bucket-getter. The Spurs have a severe dearth of bucket-getters now. You have Kawhi, LMA and Pau when he tries. You take out LMA for a non-bucket-getter, and you have no chance.

And in 2014, Tim, Tony and Manu made their teammates better with the way they scored. They never isolated themselves into contested fade aways or long 2's with significant volume. It was always attacking the rim from the PnR or like Tim from catching the ball in the pocket in his rolls to the basket and either passing the ball to the weakside corner 3, getting a lay up inside or passing it off to Splitter or Diaw in the dunker spot. At times, yes Spurs would have to dump it to Tim at the end of a clock to manufacture something like the OKC game 6, but those opportunities were few and far in between everything else.

[Chinook]

I'll just say that your crystal ball is much clearer than mine. I don't know what kind of return the Thunder might have received for Durant nor how that would have altered the team's fortunes this season or last. The indisputable fact is that they got nothing of value in return.

No, it's not. That's what I'm saying. They got a deep-playoffs trip for it. They should've gotten a Finals trip for it. That is the actual value of everything GMs are trying to do. Whatever they got in a trade is supposed to work toward that end. They could've gotten all three Brooklyn picks, and that still wouldn't mean anything if those guys don't get them deep playoff runs and chances at titles.

But yeah, it's very safe to assume they weren't going to beat the Spurs had they traded Durant before the WCSF. Top-five players almost as a rule have significantly more on-court value than trades can ever realize.

[MaNu4Tres]

That's a shtick. Your logic is just not correct. There are too many counter examples. You can have all the confidence you want, but it won't make up for the fact that it's not a reasonable argument.

But this whole "I know something you don't know" is a shtick. You're trying to get people to ask you what you know for no reason other than to feel good about yourself. And that's whatever -- it's your life -- but it's still a shtick, especially since I don't recall you breaking things before.

That's your opinion, which has been absurd before and I'm sure it will again soon. I'm not breaking any news, I'm just saying what I heard makes me believe he will be traded this year. At the end of the day, Spurs won't trade him for nothing, it will have to a good deal for both sides -- which is hard to accomplish these days. So we'll see.

[Chinook]

And in 2014, Tim, Tony and Manu made their teammates better with the way they scored.

You were on ST back them, weren't you? Those later two guys were definitely catching heat from fans for their team impact back then. Manu and Tim helped their teams in the sense that they added to the score, but for Duncan it was all about how he was feeling, because he was already being left out to shoot jumpers and having issues finishing many nights. And Manu being reckless was costing the team games sometimes. When they were on, sure, they were making guys better. But they weren't doing it all the time.


At times, yes Spurs would have to dump it to Tim at the end of a clock to manufacture something like the OKC game 6, but those opportunities were few and far in between everything else.

Yes, but that was Duncan's true value on offense, that he could be a 6/10 95 percent of the time and jump to a 10/10 the rest of the time. Without that 10/10 potential, the Spurs don't win a title, game-planning be damned.

[Chinook]

That's your opinion, which has been absurd before and I'm sure it will again soon. I'm not breaking any news, I'm just saying what I heard makes me believe he will be traded this year. At the end of the day, Spurs won't trade him for nothing, it will have to a good deal for both sides -- which is hard to accomplish these days. So we'll see.

Yes, he might be traded, and if he is, you'll probably bump a whole bunch of threads. But no, it's not my opinion that trading guys years in advance has not been helpful. It is your opinion that the Spurs would be low-balled if they tried to move him next year. I'm not saying it's a myth that expiring stars are worth less. I am saying that in terms of trade value, it's just not a sound argument to make. The gap between having multiple years and having one year left is the gap between being untouchable and being movable. As far as what actually gets spent once you move them, it's pretty much the same.

[sasaint]

No, it's not. That's what I'm saying. They got a deep-playoffs trip for it. They should've gotten a Finals trip for it. That is the actual value of everything GMs are trying to do. Whatever they got in a trade is supposed to work toward that end. They could've gotten all three Brooklyn picks, and that still wouldn't mean anything if those guys don't get them deep playoff runs and chances at titles.

But yeah, it's very safe to assume they weren't going to beat the Spurs had they traded Durant before the WCSF. Top-five players almost as a rule have significantly more on-court value than trades can ever realize.

Man, are you intentionally setting up straw-men? In an earlier post you seemed to suggest that moving LMA would only net "non-bucket-getters" in return. Are you suggesting here that Durant would have necessarily netted the three Brooklyn picks? Again, your crystal ball is far clearer than mine. But I am good with that, and I freely admit mine is mostly cloudy. :lol

Bottom line is that you and I both doubt LMA will be moved in-season, and I am sure we would both be shocked at that eventuality. I just think it would be a potentially good move and you, a bad one.

[MaNu4Tres]

Yes, he might be traded, and if he is, you'll probably bump a whole bunch of threads. But no, it's not my opinion that trading guys years in advance has not been helpful. It is your opinion that the Spurs would be low-balled if they tried to move him next year. I'm not saying it's a myth that expiring stars are worth less. I am saying that in terms of trade value, it's just not a sound argument to make. The gap between having multiple years and having one year left is the gap between being untouchable and being movable. As far as what actually gets spent once you move them, it's pretty much the same.

If you were another team, would you give up significant assets or a package for a 1 yr rental or half yr rental of LaMarcus next yr?

[Bearcaught]

I don't get why these forums are filled with all this LMA trade talk nonsense. Its not going to happen- I honestly think hes not even on the market. He was a Beast in the playoffs last year and almost single handedly won us two playoff games along with Kawhi. LMA is not the problem on our team. Period. We aren't the euro ball movement crazy team like we were in 2014. Thats not coming back- and its not LMAs fault either. Kawhi gets more ISO calls than LMA by far- and hes GREAT at them. Why would we go away from our strength of our team's two best players to be some B team with some ball movement? I just dont get it- people need to think with their brains.

Our biggest fucking problem is Parker- and I really hate the parker haters who hate him for no reason- I am not one of those parker haters. I hasnt been THAT bad until this season. Honestly this season has been his worst so far that I've seen him. I mean hes REALLY bad right now... When I see him sub in im like "FUCK" because he cant defend at all and he cant score and hes not much better than patty in passing. Patty should be starting right now but I think Pop is just sticking with parker to be loyal. Honestly from the little ive seen of Nico I'd rather have tony be the 3rd string. I really liked what I saw from Nico- he can run the pick and roll- great passing- can knock down an occasional 3 and hes probably better than parker on defense too.

[mo7888]

On the issue of Low ball offers in a contract year for LMA- You would expect that if it was from a team that LMA didn't want to go to but, if he gives PATFO a list of preferred teams that he'd be willing to re-sign with then it strengthens our position and shows good will to other FA's out there because we didn't just ship him to basketball purgatory (Sacramento).

[K...]

If you were another team, would you give up significant assets or a package for a 1 yr rental or half yr rental of LaMarcus next yr?

But the contra is why would the spurs punt on Kawhi's mvp season to maximize trade value?

[Chinook]

Man, are you intentionally setting up straw-men? In an earlier post you seemed to suggest that moving LMA would only net "non-bucket-getters" in return. Are you suggesting here that Durant would have necessarily netted the three Brooklyn picks? Again, your crystal ball is far clearer than mine. But I am good with that, and I freely admit mine is mostly cloudy. :lol

Nah, what I'm saying is that even if he had gotten a tremendous haul, they still wouldn't necessarily be better, because stars are so rare and yet so foundational that they aren't replaceable through anything but dump luck. And if a team has anyone Durant's caliber, they aren't trading him for KD, as their interest would be to pair the two. Like the Pacers would probably trade anything but PG for Kawhi, because even if Kawhi is better, there was no point in making the move if you still only end up with one.


Bottom line is that you and I both doubt LMA will be moved in-season, and I am sure we would both be shocked at that eventuality. I just think it would be a potentially good move and you, a bad one.

Bad is a relative statement. I think it would be very unlikely for the Spurs to win the trade. They pick up another Kawhi and a Green-level big, and maybe there's something to it. But it's just not worth assuming.

[Chinook]

If you were another team, would you give up significant assets or a package for a 1 yr rental or half yr rental of LaMarcus next yr?

Obviously depends on the team. But if I'm like Boston? I would. I would too if I were Toronto, but I don't think they have the assets to give. If I were Philly? Hell no.

If there were a LMA-level guard I could get for SA without moving LMA and Kawhi, I'd strongly consider it, even if it took Green as part of the package, and you know that's like giving away my own brother.

[sasaint]

Nah, what I'm saying is that even if he had gotten a tremendous haul, they still wouldn't necessarily be better, because stars are so rare and yet so foundational that they aren't replaceable through anything but dump luck. And if a team has anyone Durant's caliber, they aren't trading him for KD, as their interest would be to pair the two. Like the Pacers would probably trade anything but PG for Kawhi, because even if Kawhi is better, there was no point in making the move if you still only end up with one.

In a test-tube that's all true. But there are players' attitudes/contentment levels and contractual issues that complicate the issue. For example, Kawhistorm has a scenario involving Paul Millsap, which may not be to your liking, however, it is not a big stretch to see that Millsap could be disgruntled after this last off-season and won't re-up with the Hawks. All I am saying is there are scenarios... Heck, you, yourself, apparently would view a LMA/Melo swap favorably, and I bet Phil would do that in a heartbeat.

[sasaint]

But the contra is why would the spurs punt on Kawhi's mvp season to maximize trade value?

Possibly because the Spurs' purpose is not to promote individual players' MVP candidacies, but to win championships...

[MaNu4Tres]

But the contra is why would the spurs punt on Kawhi's mvp season to maximize trade value?

I wouldnt consider it punting. Punting is trading LA for two 1st round picks with nothing to show for this yr.

What if they brought in a PG that can defend well and create, which would be a huge net postive on both ends over Parker? All while getting a PF that can defend just as well or better than LA but downside isnt an elite pick and popper or scorer?

Also, Gasol wld actually get to utilize his main value ( offense w/ ball more) as his usage wld increase now. This would help replace some O inside that Spurs wld lose.

Theyd lose LA, but theyd gain more at PG than they would lose at PF. Defending and creating from the perimeter is imo, more valuable in todays NBA than avg. D, great iso shooting from PF spot. Imo

Also, dont forget a pick too.

Its more complicated to quantify than " well we wont be bringing in a guy that made the All Star team so were punting."

[MaNu4Tres]

Obviously depends on the team. But if I'm like Boston? I would. I would too if I were Toronto, but I don't think they have the assets to give. If I were Philly? Hell no.

If there were a LMA-level guard I could get for SA without moving LMA and Kawhi, I'd strongly consider it, even if it took Green as part of the package, and you know that's like giving away my own brother.

Why would you if you were Boston? When you can just wait til the summer and sign him without giving any assets.

Thats one thing Melo and Knicks regret about not waiting a few months. He could have went to a stronger team had they all waited 6 months.

[SAGirl]

Isn't that the point? They need guys for the immediate future, which they currently lack - as well as for the present. Question: Do you think with the Spurs' current backcourt (heck, team) that they are legit contenders this season? With Timmy's unexpectedly sudden breakdown, last season was just the beginning. If Tony doesn't even reach the level of "serviceable" this season (laying aside Manu's current level of play), the Spurs will have stayed too late at the parade. They appear to be in reactionary mode, rather than pro-active mode. That slope is starting to look pretty slippery to me. That is a different subject so I will try to curb my essays and be brief: Tony and Manu are both done... c'est finit, past their expiration date. They have no business getting a lot of minutes for a true contender. Manu still competes on defense, but everything else is lacking... and we saw in the postseason that Dion Waiters ate him alive. He's 39 and shows. Tony knees don't seem a Pop schtick, he's got the mileage, and is clearly not playing well. Missing the first 2 of 6 games due to knee soreness is not a good sign.

Anyways, if they do a trade it will be to update the guard situation. I don't want to deviate this thread much, but the guard situation does put a ceiling on the team.

[sasaint]

I wouldnt consider it punting. Punting is trading LA for two 1st round picks with nothing to show for this yr.

What if they brought in a PG that can defend well and create, which would be a huge net postive on both ends over Parker? All while getting a PF that can defend just as well or better than LA but downside isnt an elite pick and popper or scorer?

Also, Gasol wld actually get to utilize his main value ( offense w/ ball more) as his usage wld increase now. This would help replace some O inside that Spurs wld lose.

Theyd lose LA, but theyd gain more at PG than they would lose at PF. Defending and creating from the perimeter is imo, more valuable in todays NBA than avg. D, great iso shooting from PF spot. Imo

Also, dont forget a pick too.

Its more complicated to quantify than " well we wont be bringing in a guy that made the All Star team so were punting."

And also don't forget that the hypothetical package you describe (PG, PF, pick) would likely not be nearly as good once this season ends. :tu

Unlike you, however, I have no inside scoop and, therefore, doubt PATFO does something so completely contrary to their historic nature.

[sasaint]

That is a different subject so I will try to curb my essays and be brief: Tony and Manu are both done... c'est finit, past their expiration date. They have no business getting a lot of minutes for a true contender. Manu still competes on defense, but everything else is lacking... and we saw in the postseason that Dion Waiters ate him alive. He's 39 and shows. Tony knees don't seem a Pop schtick, he's got the mileage, and is clearly not playing well. Missing the first 2 of 6 games due to knee soreness is not a good sign.

Anyways, if they do a trade it will be to update the guard situation. I don't want to deviate this thread much, but the guard situation does put a ceiling on the team.

No need to curb yourself with me. I'll read your essays. :tu So with your assessment you will soon agree that Kawhi is doomed to be the bridge - unless PATFO break out of their conservative mold and do something pretty radical. The development time for Murray, et al is too long for them to contribute quickly enough to save Kawhi from that fate. The answer is not to be found within the Spurs' system, so...

[Chinook]

Why would you if you were Boston? When you can just wait til the summer and sign him without giving any assets.

Because Boston can't afford to punt years away. There are multiple reasons to do the trade, but the salient one is that having LMA for a year is valuable. Even assuming he's signable the next year, you have one less year of Thomas and have an older Horford. LMA's on-court value goes down every year no matter how his contract looks, so you also have to consider that you're getting a worse player.


Thats one thing Melo and Knicks regret about not waiting a few months. He could have went to a stronger team had they all waited 6 months.

The Knicks weren't in position to make a win-now trade. They got screwed by not waiting, but they weren't doing anything regardless, because Felton, Chandler, Melo, Gallo and Mozgov isn't anything to sneeze at.

[MaNu4Tres]

Because Boston can't afford to punt years away.

1. They wouldn't be punting anything. They'd still be very competitive, a top 4 seed in the East.

2. By waiting 3-7 months, they wouldn't be "punting years away". They'd just be waiting half a year.

[weebo]

Stupid topic. LMA isn't being traded mid-season or after the season. Trading him now is like telling the rest of the team and the NBA that "we're ok with just being competitive and not really interested in winning a championship."

[raybies]

Another scenario that works is Amir Johnson, Jaylen Brown, and Marcus Smart. They would have to be desperate but I imagine they'd want no part in moving the Brooklyn first.

Smart/Patty/Nico/Parker(injured)
Green/Manu/Murray
Kawhi/Brown/Simmons
Johnson/Lee/Bertans
Pau/ Dedmon

You could trade LMA, Forbes, and Anderson.

I think this would make us a better defensive team. we could switch 1-3. Smart is a tough defender. He matched up against Lebron last night albeit some mixed results but he played him tough none the less. This trade also gives you depth for next year's team when manu inevitably retires, and Patty is as good as gone. You could compete now and still build for the future, with dat core. You take yourself out of free agency for big names but you play it safe with players with potential under contract.

Kawhitstorm has his NOLA scenario this is mine.

Thoughts? Indulge me.

[TD 21]

They first need to be absolutely certain that he wants out and will opt out and leave after year 3 before seriously engaging in trade talks. For all his flaws, he's still a top 15 (or 20 at the absolute worst) player, who's likely to age well. Suffice it to say, they're the most valuable assets and it's always highly unlikely to acquire another in a trade or get one anytime soon period.

Similar to when the Raptors traded Gay for 4 (mostly) veteran role players and immediately improved, it's possible the Spurs could do the same and only be slightly worse, but they'd lower their ceiling and eliminate any chance of beating an elite team in a series or attracting another star.

The better package would be 1 or 2 young players, that are already top 8 rotation players, with upside, that are either signed or can be to easily movable contracts, along with either a very good prospect or pick.

This is the type of team the Thunder have built. They're still a clear playoff team, have an elite player and a bunch of intriguing young players (some of which they could easily move to free up cap space if another elite player wanted to sign).

Since the next elite free agent that's open to or wants to move, can't go to the Warriors, Cavaliers or Clippers, the Spurs would figure to be a prime destination if they follow this path.

[Kawhitstorm]

If scoring is the only elite skill of your star player, you want his scoring to be a weapon to make teammates better. Aldridges' offense isn't that. Even Dirk made his teammates better because he could put pressure at the rim with his drives when faced with a hard close outs. Plus, he could extend his range from 3 point land w/ great volume to where it would make his TS% very high and valuable.

The difference b/w Dirk & Softridge besides the 3 point-line is that Dirk can score from anywhere on the floor, Softridge has a sweet-spot which is the left block. He isn't that effective from the right-block.

[Keepin' it real]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qu46svpJ5g


Ok, First off I'd like to apologize for another LMA trade thread, but I just had to get my thoughts out. I typically only write about things that sincerely interest me. So here is my science fiction like post about LMA and some thoughts and trade options.

Thoughts:
First off, watching Durant walk away for nothing should be a lesson to all decision makers. Sure on one hand you can keep it together for one last run and hope for the best, but if you fail, you risk losing a major piece for nothing. The effects of which can bring you down from a contender to a fringe playoff team like I believe OKC will ultimately become. This brings me to my first point. When you have a player that is homegrown and has those ties you can rest more peacefully at night because that's all they have known and you have a head start with relationships and favorable emotions. When we had Tim Duncan, we risked it all and banked on those relationships. And plus a guy like Duncan, you pretty much be crazy to trade. In our case, Duncan stayed and the rest was history. But Aldridge is different, he has no ties here. He signed as a free agent. He was not drafted by us. He has no fond memories of the past to fall back on when it hits the fan. Sure he talks up the organization but does it come off as insincere to anyone else but me around here. Does he really want to be here or is he here because nothing better was available. It's like being in a relationship because no-one better has arrived. You're not in love. In the end you either leave that person when you find someone else you love or you learn to love. I think the only way the latter happens is if we win the ship this year. But here's the problem. LMA's value is at it's highest right now because he has years on his deal and considering the current cap it's a bargain. So we risk a greater return for the lure of winning his affection. If we don't win, next year we'll have given teams with honest interest with assets the leverage needed to make a lesser bargain. You'd hope that a bidding war starts but then you have to take into account user preference. Where does LMA want to go. A class organization like the Spurs, can only salvage their image by appeasing his requests of location cause he's the one that has to resign. And I say salvage cause, how can a family org, that does things the right way, can't keep an FA, and that FA being the most important acquisition off the market in franchise history.

So you have to think from PATFO's perspective, is the juice worth the squeeze. Is he a player you want to risk possibly years of rebuilding for. Do you want to pay for his next max contract when it could exceed 30 mil(?Cap #s please). Is he the character that you want in the locker room or did you sign him for the same reason he signed with you. Are LMA and PATFO cuddle buddies, just not wanting to be alone and feel like someone is there. Did we sign him to remain relevant and extend the contender window or did you sign him because you believed he modeled your culture. Most know we sacrificed a lot for LMA. The built not bought moniker died. The beautiful game died. Wasn't that what are signature was?

You got to think about the future now. Right now San Antonio is a hot destination because of reputation. We are basically a living legend. The respect will never be higher imo. Pop is known as best coach in the game. The front office is seen with great regard to build contenders and a safe bet to succeed. And the organization is first class. Some believe that losing LMA would hurt our ability to sign FA's in the future but I disagree. Pop has at least four more years before he retires. He's coaching the next Olympic team for team USA. You have Kawhi as a centerpiece which is a legitimate MVP DPOY candidate but after that you have questions. Who will be the next Tony, Manu, Hill, or Kawhi. Is it Murray or Bertans? The time to build is now, because once Pop retires all bets are off. Then you hope we can hire the right minds. Will the same trust be there that is now when say an Ettore Messina is head coach and no experience is there. Is he the next Blatt. Man I hope we get Coach Bud back but I'm not gonna go on a tangent here. I'm sure we can get those C list players that can be B list players like say a Paul Millsap type. And we could probably unearth another Danny Green or Gary Neal, or maybe Jon Simmons. But we can safely assume we have a 3-4 year window before Pop is gone and how do you want to leave the franchise. Do you want to leave the franchise in rebuilding mode after a plan that was more short term than long term or do you want to already be on the rise with say a few pieces that are primed to enter their best stages of their career. Think about this cause this is what it is basically.

Some mention the Spurs conservative ways as keeping LMA but I'm here to say maybe it's more conservative to sell high and not risk losing him for nothing. IMO it's safer to start now long term wise. But could we remain competitive now. Imo we can. I actually think Pau is a better offensive player than LMA even at his age. He can post and he can pass. LMA skill set killed the beautiful game, but maybe with the right pieces you could see it come back. Maybe I need to let it go. I think if you get a big back and a young prospect and a first you do it. So now that brings me to some trade scenarios.


In my mind there's only two places and that's Boston and Phoenix.

Phoenix is the obvious one because that's what our comp was during our courtship. Maybe he really wanted to go there but he played it safe. In Phoenix or Boston he would be the first option. Maybe that's what he wants.

In Phoenix the trade scenarios would center around

Brandon Knight/ Tyson Chandler with a Middle filler like Pj Tucker a young big like Chriss or Bender and a first for LMA and pieces like Forbes and/or Anderson

I do not like this deal at all because Tyson is on decline and both lock up money for a few years. Knight is not the playmaker you want out of a point guard. He's more a shooting guard.

So this brings us to where all the rumors began and that's in Boston.

In Boston a scenario might look like this

Amir Johnson with a couple young players with upside for LMA and Anderson.

Now Danny Ainge is one of the best at extracting players on good deals. He's not going to let us do him like we did Larry Legend. So with that being said, he's not going to want to part with that first round pick if we choose a certain player.

Alex Kennedy (https://twitter.com/AlexKennedyNBA)Alex (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=18999)KennedyNBA
Yesterday, Jaylen Brown said that he met with the Celtics, Bulls, Hawks, Timberwolves, Kings, Spurs and Rockets while at the NBA Combine.

For some reason, we managed to meet with Jaylen Brown at the combine, but why? Every mock had him in the lottery so why did we meet him. What made us think we could acquire him. Perhaps this LMA story is farther along in the organization then we know. This would explain the leak from Boston's side to weaken the trade value so that way they wouldn't have to give the first and Brown. Well that's one theory imo. I'm having fun.

Also with Amir on a one year deal you retain flexibility while acquiring a solid starter that would fit with your SL. With his salary off the books you could feasibly have some room to either resign your free agents or go after someone like a Serge Ibaka. And this kid Brown is very intellectual and can ball. He has potential to be a two way player. Pair that with Kawhi and you could have the best wing play in years to come.

Edit: So would you take Amir Johnson, Jaylen Brown, and Jerebko with Brooklyn's first for LMA and Anderson for example?
Jerebko is on a one year 5 million deal. More flexibility. Jackson wouldn't work.
I would.

[raybies]

They first need to be absolutely certain that he wants out and will opt out and leave after year 3 before seriously engaging in trade talks. For all his flaws, he's still a top 15 (or 20 at the absolute worst) player, who's likely to age well. Suffice it to say, they're the most valuable assets and it's always highly unlikely to acquire another in a trade or get one anytime soon period.

Similar to when the Raptors traded Gay for 4 (mostly) veteran role players and immediately improved, it's possible the Spurs could do the same and only be slightly worse, but they'd lower their ceiling and eliminate any chance of beating an elite team in a series or attracting another star.

The better package would be 1 or 2 young players, that are already top 8 rotation players, with upside, that are either signed or can be to easily movable contracts, along with either a very good prospect or pick.

This is the type of team the Thunder have built. They're still a clear playoff team, have an elite player and a bunch of intriguing young players (some of which they could easily move to free up cap space if another elite player wanted to sign).

Since the next elite free agent that's open to or wants to move, can't go to the Warriors, Cavaliers or Clippers, the Spurs would figure to be a prime destination if they follow this path.

How can they ever be sure he wants out? Body language, or just plain ask him? Durant gave no inclination and some players do that. I imagine it'd be the same for a guy like Aldridge. He's a low key guy. Kind of a separatist from the group from what we know.

My opinion from when he was asked about the trade rumors is that he made his choice and that he's here for now. I think he wants to see if something special can happen and if not he'll decide when he gets there. But he didn't sound committal. No clichés like I want to be here the rest of my career or anything like that. He has given no hints as to what he'll do and that should be alarming. In situations like this you hope to build relationships that encourage better deals and likelihood of starting put.

Anyways, I'm concerned is all. I'm just a fan and from my perspective, I don't like the vibes. Could just be who he is but then again Pop and RC probably have a great idea where he stands. They are exceptional evaluators and though not often we have made moves when we needed to or maybe better put had to. And I'm slowly coming to but you hope to put the best contending team or there with Pop, Tony, and Manus careers coming to a close. It just leaves you at a place where you risk retooling in a few years with nothing to show.

[TD 21]

How can they ever be sure he wants out? Body language, or just plain ask him? Durant gave no inclination and some players do that. I imagine it'd be the same for a guy like Aldridge. He's a low key guy. Kind of a separatist from the group from what we know.

My opinion from when he was asked about the trade rumors is that he made his choice and that he's here for now. I think he wants to see if something special can happen and if not he'll decide when he gets there. But he didn't sound committal. No clichés like I want to be here the rest of my career or anything like that. He has given no hints as to what he'll do and that should be alarming. In situations like this you hope to build relationships that encourage better deals and likelihood of starting put.

Anyways, I'm concerned is all. I'm just a fan and from my perspective, I don't like the vibes. Could just be who he is but then again Pop and RC probably have a great idea where he stands. They are exceptional evaluators and though not often we have made moves when we needed to or maybe better put had to. And I'm slowly coming to but you hope to put the best contending team or there with Pop, Tony, and Manus careers coming to a close. It just leaves you at a place where you risk retooling in a few years with nothing to show.

Durant was an exception to the rule. Every other superstar or star in recent memory, people outside the organization knew beforehand. Given that they're around him on a day to day basis, they should know.

He probably is undecided. I believe MaNu4Tres, because he's a longtime regular with no history that I'm aware of, of making things up or attempting to draw attention. But things can change and unless he's steadfast on wanting to be traded, it's unlikely he'd make a final decision on something over a year and a half in advance.

They definitely can't afford for him to walk in '18 with nothing to show for it. Great organization/culture only goes so far and lasts so long and it's not a destination city, so being able to sell a legit chance at a championship is even more paramount. A lot can change in 2 years, in sports, but right now all they'd have as a selling point is Leonard and that's not enough.

[Cklbmk]

Amir + smart + BKN 2017 pick for Aldridge or bust

[raybies]

Durant was an exception to the rule. Every other superstar or star in recent memory, people outside the organization knew beforehand. Given that they're around him on a day to day basis, they should know.

He probably is undecided. I believe MaNu4Tres, because he's a longtime regular with no history that I'm aware of, of making things up or attempting to draw attention. But things can change and unless he's steadfast on wanting to be traded, it's unlikely he'd make a final decision on something over a year and a half in advance.

They definitely can't afford for him to walk in '18 with nothing to show for it. Great organization/culture only goes so far and lasts so long and it's not a destination city, so being able to sell a legit chance at a championship is even more paramount. A lot can change in 2 years, in sports, but right now all they'd have as a selling point is Leonard and that's not enough.

Definitely agree about KL he's or only selling piece. You hope Murray can be the next Leonard and I say that in the aspect that he develops well or even a CoJo. RC said he wanted him to be the next Kawhi and I think he meant developed into a star. But your right two years is a long way. By that time Murray could be a starter with a promising future and then you just need a two way big and that is preferably. Who knows, maybe Simmons somehow becomes an elite player and I think that means elite roleplayer. I guess you really don't have to trade him now and hope you will one to keep the gipper. Very Spursy to slow play this out at least pro long the image long enough to where you can begin to see with more clarity.

[raybies]

Amir + smart + BKN 2017 pick for Aldridge or bust

I believe it's actually 2018 for the Brooklyn pick.

[Chinook]

I believe it's actually 2018 for the Brooklyn pick.

Nah. Marks will right the ship by then. This is the year they do a Lopez trade and really tank. Next summer, it's all free agents.

[raybies]

Nah. Marks will right the ship by then. This is the year they do a Lopez trade and really tank. Next summer, it's all free agents.

Brooks should be cheap right? I wonder who'd want him. Saw the rumor a lil while ago.

[Chinook]

1. They wouldn't be punting anything. They'd still be very competitive, a top 4 seed in the East.

That's punting as much as the Spurs trading LMA would be punting. You don't pass up the chance to become a contender just because you can be a non-contender without spending value.


2. By waiting 3-7 months, they wouldn't be "punting years away". They'd just be waiting half a year.

They'd be waiting that full season. The only thing that counts is whether you have him for the playoffs. And yes, they are punting years in the sense that they are punting years of prime play for Horford and LMA and years of being on cheap deals for LMA and Thomas. Or you can call it years in that they'll have to let more people go in order to be able to afford to sign LMA outright than they would if they traded for him. Right now, the Brooklyn pick may cost them more than $10 Million in cap space. There aren't a ton of scenarios where Boston doesn't have to pay for LMA one way or the other.

[TD 21]

Definitely agree about KL he's or only selling piece. You hope Murray can be the next Leonard and I say that in the aspect that he develops well or even a CoJo. RC said he wanted him to be the next Kawhi and I think he meant developed into a star. But your right two years is a long way. By that time Murray could be a starter with a promising future and then you just need a two way big and that is preferably. Who knows, maybe Simmons somehow becomes an elite player and I think that means elite roleplayer. I guess you really don't have to trade him now and hope you will one to keep the gipper. Very Spursy to slow play this out at least pro long the image long enough to where you can begin to see with more clarity.

People who have delusions of grandeur and think 99% of the league sucks, would scoff at a Knight, Len and Bender or Chriss package. But they're not interested in a total re-build and shouldn't be, with an elite player entering his prime, who'd inevitably want out sooner or later. The first 2 are 2 potential top 6 six rotation players, that are further along and likely better than what they'd probably get picking somewhere in the middle of the 1st round. They also both flashed potential to be better than they are 2 years ago before being put into awkward situations. The last 2 are obviously unknowns and they'd probably have to believe they have star potential or close to make this move.

Get Knight and Len back on track, hope whichever of Bender or Chriss emerges as at least something close to a star and that most of Murray, Anderson, Bertans, Milutinov and the '17 1st, turn into legit rotation players and then they'd have something to sell to the next star free agent.

[TheDoctor]

793632927636520960

[MaNu4Tres]

That's punting as much as the Spurs trading LMA would be punting. '

That couldn't be more subjective. You're stretching things as you usually do and making it out to be a fact because it's your opinion. Celtics currently are a top 3 team in the East. That won't change next year w/out Aldridge if they decide to wait it out. And adding Aldridge isn't a slam dunk making them a for sure favorite over Cleveland either. It depends what they part with and we usually never find out the true potential until the season is over with. We can speculate on how much it will improve them after the deal, but we don't know the variables that the Celtics would lose.

Just like trading LA this year isn't necessarily punting. It depends what the Spurs can bring in for him and what skill sets are added and how valuable those skillsets are around the rest of the team. There's more to the equation than sheer " well Spurs lose an All-Star and don't gain an All-Star so its a net loss and Spurs are punting."

[raybies]

People who have delusions of grandeur and think 99% of the league sucks, would scoff at a Knight, Len and Bender or Chriss package. But they're not interested in a total re-build and shouldn't be, with an elite player entering his prime, who'd inevitably want out sooner or later. The first 2 are 2 potential top 6 six rotation players, that are further along and likely better than what they'd probably get picking somewhere in the middle of the 1st round. They also both flashed potential to be better than they are 2 years ago before being put into awkward situations. The last 2 are obviously unknowns and they'd probably have to believe they have star potential or close to make this move.

Get Knight and Len back on track, hope whichever of Bender or Chriss emerges as at least something close to a star and that most of Murray, Anderson, Bertans, Milutinov and the '17 1st, turn into legit rotation players and then they'd have something to sell to the next star free agent.

Just don't like Knight's contact. I guess it can be considered a good deal, but it's a four year deal. Ties up some money for some time, but I do like Len. He has steadily improved every year and should be starting.i think I'd go with Bender but Chriss has an Amare like game to him and he played with Murray. As if Murray being here had any draw to who we get but chemistry might be an added bonus.

[james evans]

If there is Spurs trade talk and Parker isn't involved, I'm not trying to hear it

[TD 21]

Just don't like Knight's contact. I guess it can be considered a good deal, but it's a four year deal. Ties up some money for some time, but I do like Len. He has steadily improved every year and should be starting.i think I'd go with Bender but Chriss has an Amare like game to him and he played with Murray. As if Murray being here had any draw to who we get but chemistry might be an added bonus.

Knight is easily movable and they'll only need significant cap space if/when a star wants to sign. Until then, it's about trying to fast track a team to get to that point.

He's ideally a 3rd guard in a 3 guard rotation, but he's good enough to start and close close games and would fill an immediate need, particularly if Leonard is going to be the lead ball handler anyway.

Len hasn't steadily improved, but still has starting potential.

I don't know who I'd prefer between Bender and Chriss yet, but the latter seems farther along and has the makings of an ideal power forward in today's game and compliment to Len.

[Austin_Toros]

MaNu4Tres - can you provide any insight into your thoughts why LMA might be traded? I'm not asking you to reveal your source, just curious for some more information.

[Chinook]

That couldn't be more subjective. You're stretching things as you usually do and making it out to be a fact because it's your opinion.

We can't all have cryptic sources giving us the 4-1-1 man.


Celtics currently are a top 3 team in the East. That won't change next year w/out Aldridge if they decide to wait it out.

But that doesn't may them a contender at all. They haven't made it out of the first round in years. They don't have a top-10 player on their roster. This is like where the Spurs can beat GS even though they aren't favorites. The Cavs have three players better than anyone the Celtics have, and even the Raptors are clearly better. Boston need top-end talent; the Spurs have top-end talent. They couldn't be any more night-and-day when it comes to where they are. So for them, closing the talent gap and becoming the clear second-best team with the ability to match up with GS and overtake Cleveland is huge, and doing that a year early is even bigger.


Just like trading LA this year isn't necessarily punting. It depends what the Spurs can bring in for him and what skill sets are added and how valuable those skillsets are around the rest of the team. There's more to the equation than sheer " well Spurs lose an All-Star and don't gain an All-Star so its a net loss and Spurs are punting."

Then toss out some deals for LMA and justify why they aren't steps back. It's not easy. TD21 is doing the best out of people here, and I imagine even he knows that it's at best a move with almost no margin of error. It's because as I said and you're getting around to saying; teams don't want to give up their core pieces in win-now trades, even if they aren't acquiring expiring players. They want to use rebuilding assets to add to their win-now core. If someone is a super efficient role-player who can get more production than LMA now, they likely are not on the market. And if they are, they are at best mid-tier options that aren't adding enough present value to warrant giving up future value.

[Spursfanfromafar]

Pointless blather. LMA is doing a good job as a secondary scorer and a frontcourt main option. He is not Duncan and no one is. There is no better pure PF than him as of now either on the league. The Spurs Achilles heel is the aged Tony Parker whose defense is pathetic and who should be a reserve now. If at all the Spurs make any changes they will do it after this season and I suspect they will move Parker for a younger replacement and will keep contending with the rest of the core.

[skulls138]

Pointless blather. LMA is doing a good job as a secondary scorer and a frontcourt main option. He is not Duncan and no one is. There is no better pure PF than him as of now either on the league. The Spurs Achilles heel is the aged Tony Parker whose defense is pathetic and who should be a reserve now. If at all the Spurs make any changes they will do it after this season and I suspect they will move Parker for a younger replacement and will keep contending with the rest of the core.How about rebounds? Hell no LMA is no Duncan, thats absolutely laughable because LMA isnt even a top 50 defensive rebounder and the Spurs are mediocre in that department. Trading him is out of the question but we sink or swim with him thats a fact.

[Mnky]

You're making Aldridge sound like he's a LeBron or a top tier star. On the court value isn't all the same for star players. Sure he has value, never questioned that, but scoring the way he scores (in selfish ways), doesn't command double teams. He also doesn't apply pressure at the rim -- which isn't beneficial to the players around him. He doesn't make his teammates better like other star players can. And on defense and in other faucets of the game he's about average. We just have a difference of opinion on how great he truly is. He's a great elite shooter from mid-range but he doesn't make his teammates better around him and isn't the force he should be in other faucets of the game. He's the Melo of power forwards except Melo is a more versatile scorer.

Im not sure what you believe is a non selfish scorer. Someone who lets his teammate hold half the ball? LMA is an elite offensive weapon when he wants to be, and there are not many who can score like him. He makes his teammates better, and is one of the better passing bigs in the game. He DOES in factcause teams to double, and apply help defense. He's one of the best rebound forwards in the game, especially on the offensive side which I would put only Thompson ahead of in that regard. He plays above average defense and in most cases than not, cancels his player out or beats him. I'm not sure what more you would want from a star player tbh. He can't be a top 5 player. Luckyily enough, We do have one of those, but that's not the case for the majority of the nba seeing how there are only 5 of them. There is only one team in the nba with two top 5 players, and theyre the favorites to win it all. He's not a melo type of player. Not even close. He has never been on a team that wasn't winning, and carried the Blazers for many years, and carried the spurs against the Thunder. If anyone else had shown up in that series, the Spurs win.

Outside of a top 10 player, who would you bring in that would be more beneficial to the spurs?

[BD24]

Ok, First off I'd like to apologize for another LMA trade thread, but I just had to get my thoughts out. I typically only write about things that sincerely interest me. So here is my science fiction like post about LMA and some thoughts and trade options.

Thoughts:
First off, watching Durant walk away for nothing should be a lesson to all decision makers. Sure on one hand you can keep it together for one last run and hope for the best, but if you fail, you risk losing a major piece for nothing. The effects of which can bring you down from a contender to a fringe playoff team like I believe OKC will ultimately become. This brings me to my first point. When you have a player that is homegrown and has those ties you can rest more peacefully at night because that's all they have known and you have a head start with relationships and favorable emotions. When we had Tim Duncan, we risked it all and banked on those relationships. And plus a guy like Duncan, you pretty much be crazy to trade. In our case, Duncan stayed and the rest was history. But Aldridge is different, he has no ties here. He signed as a free agent. He was not drafted by us. He has no fond memories of the past to fall back on when it hits the fan. Sure he talks up the organization but does it come off as insincere to anyone else but me around here. Does he really want to be here or is he here because nothing better was available. It's like being in a relationship because no-one better has arrived. You're not in love. In the end you either leave that person when you find someone else you love or you learn to love. I think the only way the latter happens is if we win the ship this year. But here's the problem. LMA's value is at it's highest right now because he has years on his deal and considering the current cap it's a bargain. So we risk a greater return for the lure of winning his affection. If we don't win, next year we'll have given teams with honest interest with assets the leverage needed to make a lesser bargain. You'd hope that a bidding war starts but then you have to take into account user preference. Where does LMA want to go. A class organization like the Spurs, can only salvage their image by appeasing his requests of location cause he's the one that has to resign. And I say salvage cause, how can a family org, that does things the right way, can't keep an FA, and that FA being the most important acquisition off the market in franchise history.

So you have to think from PATFO's perspective, is the juice worth the squeeze. Is he a player you want to risk possibly years of rebuilding for. Do you want to pay for his next max contract when it could exceed 30 mil(?Cap #s please). Is he the character that you want in the locker room or did you sign him for the same reason he signed with you. Are LMA and PATFO cuddle buddies, just not wanting to be alone and feel like someone is there. Did we sign him to remain relevant and extend the contender window or did you sign him because you believed he modeled your culture. Most know we sacrificed a lot for LMA. The built not bought moniker died. The beautiful game died. Wasn't that what are signature was?

You got to think about the future now. Right now San Antonio is a hot destination because of reputation. We are basically a living legend. The respect will never be higher imo. Pop is known as best coach in the game. The front office is seen with great regard to build contenders and a safe bet to succeed. And the organization is first class. Some believe that losing LMA would hurt our ability to sign FA's in the future but I disagree. Pop has at least four more years before he retires. He's coaching the next Olympic team for team USA. You have Kawhi as a centerpiece which is a legitimate MVP DPOY candidate but after that you have questions. Who will be the next Tony, Manu, Hill, or Kawhi. Is it Murray or Bertans? The time to build is now, because once Pop retires all bets are off. Then you hope we can hire the right minds. Will the same trust be there that is now when say an Ettore Messina is head coach and no experience is there. Is he the next Blatt. Man I hope we get Coach Bud back but I'm not gonna go on a tangent here. I'm sure we can get those C list players that can be B list players like say a Paul Millsap type. And we could probably unearth another Danny Green or Gary Neal, or maybe Jon Simmons. But we can safely assume we have a 3-4 year window before Pop is gone and how do you want to leave the franchise. Do you want to leave the franchise in rebuilding mode after a plan that was more short term than long term or do you want to already be on the rise with say a few pieces that are primed to enter their best stages of their career. Think about this cause this is what it is basically.

Some mention the Spurs conservative ways as keeping LMA but I'm here to say maybe it's more conservative to sell high and not risk losing him for nothing. IMO it's safer to start now long term wise. But could we remain competitive now. Imo we can. I actually think Pau is a better offensive player than LMA even at his age. He can post and he can pass. LMA skill set killed the beautiful game, but maybe with the right pieces you could see it come back. Maybe I need to let it go. I think if you get a big back and a young prospect and a first you do it. So now that brings me to some trade scenarios.


In my mind there's only two places and that's Boston and Phoenix.

Phoenix is the obvious one because that's what our comp was during our courtship. Maybe he really wanted to go there but he played it safe. In Phoenix or Boston he would be the first option. Maybe that's what he wants.

In Phoenix the trade scenarios would center around

Brandon Knight/ Tyson Chandler with a Middle filler like Pj Tucker a young big like Chriss or Bender and a first for LMA and pieces like Forbes and/or Anderson

I do not like this deal at all because Tyson is on decline and both lock up money for a few years. Knight is not the playmaker you want out of a point guard. He's more a shooting guard.

So this brings us to where all the rumors began and that's in Boston.

In Boston a scenario might look like this

Amir Johnson with a couple young players with upside for LMA and Anderson.

Now Danny Ainge is one of the best at extracting players on good deals. He's not going to let us do him like we did Larry Legend. So with that being said, he's not going to want to part with that first round pick if we choose a certain player.

Alex Kennedy (https://twitter.com/AlexKennedyNBA)Alex (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=18999)KennedyNBA
Yesterday, Jaylen Brown said that he met with the Celtics, Bulls, Hawks, Timberwolves, Kings, Spurs and Rockets while at the NBA Combine.

For some reason, we managed to meet with Jaylen Brown at the combine, but why? Every mock had him in the lottery so why did we meet him. What made us think we could acquire him. Perhaps this LMA story is farther along in the organization then we know. This would explain the leak from Boston's side to weaken the trade value so that way they wouldn't have to give the first and Brown. Well that's one theory imo. I'm having fun.

Also with Amir on a one year deal you retain flexibility while acquiring a solid starter that would fit with your SL. With his salary off the books you could feasibly have some room to either resign your free agents or go after someone like a Serge Ibaka. And this kid Brown is very intellectual and can ball. He has potential to be a two way player. Pair that with Kawhi and you could have the best wing play in years to come.

Edit: So would you take Amir Johnson, Jaylen Brown, and Jerebko with Brooklyn's first for LMA and Anderson for example?
Jerebko is on a one year 5 million deal. More flexibility. Jackson wouldn't work.
I would.
SAgirl, is that you?

[SAGirl]

SAgirl, is that you?

:toast lol nooooooo... Trade ideas aren't my thing TBH... I am very bad with that.

Props to raybies though.
:bobo

[raybies]

:toast lol nooooooo... Trade ideas aren't my thing TBH... I am very bad with that.

Props to raybies though.
:bobo

So at least two people think I'm your alternate. :lol guess we have a similar style

[SAGirl]

So at least two people think I'm your alternate. :lol guess we have a similar style

:lol

I am like ElNono in that I already have too many post counts to my name (in my case for my barely over a year stay in the forum) to be able to shimmy alternates... I don't troll so I don't need them... If my takes bomb, they bomb lol I will bear it and survive.
:toast

[RD2191]

It's time to make a move for Anthony Davis. Everyone but Kawhi is available.

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

I understand people going with the don't lose him for nothing talk, but even if he walks out in 2 years for nothing the team would have had 2 seasons worth of an all-star big. This IS value. You don't need to turn every player into picks and assets unless you're Morey or Hinkie.

By the same logic the Spurs should have traded Duncan around 2009 when he was on the back end of his prime before he became a tosb just to get some value. Using the player in actual games is value too and in most cases it's better value than whatever assets you could squeeze.

[Chinook]

I understand people going with the don't lose him for nothing talk, but even if he walks out in 2 years for nothing the team would have had 2 seasons worth of an all-star big. This IS value. You don't need to turn every player into picks and assets unless you're Morey or Hinkie.

By the same logic the Spurs should have traded Duncan around 2009 when he was on the back end of his prime before he became a tosb just to get some value. Using the player in actual games is value too and in most cases it's better value than whatever assets you could squeeze.

That was pretty much my point. The only value trades assets have is that they are supposed to turn into players who can get you wins. When you already have such a player, and you're in position where you can compete for a title, you have to discount any future return heavily. It's not likely that any one the Spurs trade for will be in LMA's league ever, but even if they are, it could take them so long to get there that it wasted the rest of the middle-aged roster's time.

[mo7888]

Any LMA trade with the teams being thrown around here (Suns Celts) is a step back and a punt on the season....there's no other logical way to look at it for this season. The only way they could trade him for someone and not step back would be if New Orleans decided to move AD because he makes a trade demand or something else like that involving a major talent near their prime.

[Cklbmk]

Any LMA trade with the teams being thrown around here (Suns Celts) is a step back and a punt on the season....there's no other logical way to look at it for this season. The only way they could trade him for someone and not step back would be if New Orleans decided to move AD because he makes a trade demand or something else like that involving a major talent near their prime.

marcus smart + Amir johnson + BKN 2017 pick = Better defenders for Warriors + stop gap at PF in Amir + home run swing in draft with BKN pick.

[mo7888]

That's an argument for making us better long term. It is a definite step back for this season. It's basically saying we are punting on this season in favor of a longer term approach.

[Spurs9]

Trade him for Melo

[dbreiden83080]

If you trade him you are giving up on the season. Spurs made win now moves by signing guys like Gasol. This would be 3 steps back..

[timtonymanu]

Outrebounded by Harden in a crucial play. Please trade this loser. Go back to bitching that Roy and Lillard took your cookie.

[HarlemHeat37]

:lmao how do you miss that tip?

[timtonymanu]

Misses the game tying shot. Fuck this loser.

[spursistan]

Trade fuckin Slothridge :lol..every star player who has missed the Olympics has put in work in the summer and came out firing but his soft ass..Pathetic work ethics..

[UZER]

:lol Aldridge NDN

[apalisoc_9]

Trade this soft ass nigga...

[Robz4000]

Fuck it, I'm on board. This team isn't getting past the second round regardless.

[raybies]

:lmao how do you miss that tip?

[sasaint]

Fuck it, I'm on board. This team isn't getting past the second round regardless.

PAST the second round?!?!

[Robz4000]

PAST the second round?!?!

Fuk yo grammar clown

[spursistan]

Fuck it, I'm on board. This team isn't getting past the second round regardless.
Same here..This thing just seems to have a predictable ending..

[Chinook]

McDyess would have made that tip-in.

All in all, not too bad. The Spurs really locked Houston down in the second half. Green being back definitely improves the defense. The Rockets scored 48 points in his 26 minutes. That's a pace of about 89pp48. When he was out, the Rockets scored 53 points in 22 minutes. That's a pace of 115pp/48. That's a huge difference. Once Pop figures out his bigs and everyone settles in, the Spurs will be a great defense once again. Danny needs to shoot better, though. One more three would have won it.

[spurtech09]

Well by the looks of it the Spurs are not doing anything with this team....Trade LMA.

[MaNu4Tres]

If you trade him you are giving up on the season. Spurs made win now moves by signing guys like Gasol. This would be 3 steps back..

Gasol wasnt going to move the needle.

Some of us were able to see that.

Still time to prove me and others wrong, but I hated the signing.

Value tied to his meh offense, poor defender.

[sasaint]

Fuk yo grammar clown

Grammar's got nothing to do with it. Go grab a Snickers, friend.

[timtonymanu]

If you trade him you are giving up on the season. Spurs made win now moves by signing guys like Gasol. This would be 3 steps back..

:lmao maybe if this was 3 seasons ago, current Pau Gasol isn't a "win now" pick up.

[MaNu4Tres]

I understand people going with the don't lose him for nothing talk, but even if he walks out in 2 years for nothing the team would have had 2 seasons worth of an all-star big. This IS value. You don't need to turn every player into picks and assets unless you're Morey or Hinkie.

By the same logic the Spurs should have traded Duncan around 2009 when he was on the back end of his prime before he became a tosb just to get some value. Using the player in actual games is value too and in most cases it's better value than whatever assets you could squeeze.

Some All Stars are better than others. Some All- Stars are overrated and have value tied strictly to points -- high volume or not.

He made the AllStar team, yes but he was one of the least deserving and shouldnt be viewed as an untouchable. His game lacks All Star ability in too many important areas.

A lot of his value is tied to his mid range game -- which is probably the worst kind of value you can hope for.

[Kawhitstorm]

I understand people going with the don't lose him for nothing talk, but even if he walks out in 2 years for nothing the team would have had 2 seasons worth of an all-star big.

Using the player in actual games is value too and in most cases it's better value than whatever assets you could squeeze.

By the same logic, the Warriors shouldn't have benched David Lee in favor of Draymond b/c he was an All-Star.:wakeup

Kevin Love is essentially Softridge's peer & he was getting benched in the Finals for Dick Jefferson.:lol

[dbreiden83080]

:lmao maybe if this was 3 seasons ago, current Pau Gasol isn't a "win now" pick up.

I don't think you know what a win now pick up is.. Hint: Nobody called him a franchise player..

[spursistan]

Unless they get gobsmacked by an offer from a desperate team, I still don't see PATFO making such a bold move midseason..But if you are not dumping Parker next summer, a detour from this signing becomes their only shake-up path. You would have to hope Gasol has something left in the tank to fill in LMA role with higher usage (see Miami game)..

Softridge has barely played like Top 10 PF outside the opener vs GSW..It is really both revolting and alarming how he came out for his Year 2 in the Spurs system..

[apalisoc_9]

Unless they get gobsmacked by an offer from a desperate team, I still don't see PATFO making such a bold move midseason..But if you are not dumping Parker next summer, a detour from this signing becomes their only shake-up path. You would have to hope Gasol has something left in the tank to fill in LMA role with higher usage (see Miami game)..

Softridge has barely played like Top 10 PF outside the opener vs GSW..It is really both revolting and alarming how he came out for his Year 2 in the Spurs system..

I'm telling you man..Diva tendencies. He's probably shocked and dissapointed in how he his consensly treated as a significantly inferior player than Kawhi..its getting into his head.

[coachmac87]

The rumor is real...and if Spurs continue to struggle as a teams and he does as well. Shit will hit the fan

[spursistan]

I'm telling you man..Diva tendencies. He's probably shocked and dissapointed in how he his consensly treated as a significantly inferior player than Kawhi..its getting into his head.

I'm afraid you got that early trend right :lol..

#SayNotoAldridge

[apalisoc_9]

Call it since day one...

SayNOtoAldridge

[gambit1990]

http://www.espn.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=ha9m3ty

not that it would happen but i'd pull the trigger.

-knicks get a "proven" nba all star + a young pg on cheap contract

-if bird thought kawhi + bertans for hill was a good deal... then maybe he'd see some value in parker's experience

-heat would shed goran's contract, open more cap space by trading mcroberts

would throw in draft picks to sweeten the deal(s). phil did want lma...

[CGD]

http://www.espn.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=ha9m3ty

not that it would happen but i'd pull the trigger.

-knicks get a "proven" nba all star + a young pg on cheap contract

-if bird thought kawhi + bertans for hill was a good deal... then maybe he'd see some value in parker's experience

-heat would shed goran's contract, open more cap space by trading mcroberts

would throw in draft picks to sweeten the deal(s). phil did want lma...

Only trade that makes sense to me is with Boston involving that Nets pick. Otherwise you just ride it out.

Like I said in the think tank forum a few weeks ago, something like the Nets pick, Amir's salary, and another asset like Jaylen Brown.

[baseline bum]

For some reason, we managed to meet with Jaylen Brown at the combine, but why? Every mock had him in the lottery so why did we meet him. What made us think we could acquire him. Perhaps this LMA story is farther along in the organization then we know. This would explain the leak from Boston's side to weaken the trade value so that way they wouldn't have to give the first and Brown. Well that's one theory imo. I'm having fun.

RC met with and worked out Derrick Favors in 2010 even though drafting up to get him would have cost Parker or Ginobili.

[Chinook]

RC met with and worked out Derrick Favors in 2010 even though drafting up to get him would have cost Parker or Ginobili.

And they met with Blair in 2009 before anyone knew he was going to fall.

[MaNu4Tres]

And they met with Blair in 2009 before anyone knew he was going to fall.

No matter how much you try to spin it, that's not the same. Favors was a slam dunk top 5 pick.

Teams had concerns with Blairs knees not having ACLs going into the draft. I'm sure many GMs, scouts anticipated the high probability of Blair being available in the early 2nd round.

[Chinook]

No matter how much you try to spin it, that's not the same. Favors was a slam dunk top 5 pick.

Teams had concerns with Blairs knees not having ACLs going into the draft. I'm sure many GMs, scouts anticipated the high probability of Blair being available in the early 2nd round.

They met with him BEFORE that came to light, back when he was a projected top-10 pick. They only found out about his knees during the combine physicals.

[coachmac87]

What about a trade for John Wall?

[mo7888]

http://www.espn.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=ha9m3ty

not that it would happen but i'd pull the trigger.

-knicks get a "proven" nba all star + a young pg on cheap contract

-if bird thought kawhi + bertans for hill was a good deal... then maybe he'd see some value in parker's experience

-heat would shed goran's contract, open more cap space by trading mcroberts

would throw in draft picks to sweeten the deal(s). phil did want lma...

I still don't think they trade him this season but, if that was on the table you do it in a heartbeat.

[CGD]

What about a trade for John Wall?

Absolutely

[raybies]

RC met with and worked out Derrick Favors in 2010 even though drafting up to get him would have cost Parker or Ginobili.

Maybe just a case of due diligence. But they obviously had interest and had a thought they could get him, somehow. I think he's a future star though.

[Dex]

http://www.espn.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=ha9m3ty

not that it would happen but i'd pull the trigger.

-knicks get a "proven" nba all star + a young pg on cheap contract

-if bird thought kawhi + bertans for hill was a good deal... then maybe he'd see some value in parker's experience

-heat would shed goran's contract, open more cap space by trading mcroberts

would throw in draft picks to sweeten the deal(s). phil did want lma...

Knicks aren't giving up their new franchise player. This is about as likely as the Spurs trading Kawhi.

[gambit1990]

Knicks aren't giving up their new franchise player. This is about as likely as the Spurs trading Kawhi.
i don't see it happening either.

but maybe he gets fed up with with rose, melo, the knicks' defense.

phil wanted la before. would throw in draft picks.

[cutewizard]

Why trade LMA? its the early part of the season....

give the team time to jell, tbh

[Chinook]

Why trade LMA? its the early part of the season....

give the team time to jell, tbh

Yep, everyone with the least bit of sense should think this way. Kawhi will probably be even better by then too, as may Green and Mills. I'd go all the way to the deadline with that big three. Now getting peripheral players for that group is a different matter.

[Keepin' it real]

I saw Jalen Rose say today that either LMA or Gasol will be traded this season due to being a bad fit.

[james evans]

No matter how much you try to spin it, that's not the same. Favors was a slam dunk top 5 pick.

Teams had concerns with Blairs knees not having ACLs going into the draft. I'm sure many GMs, scouts anticipated the high probability of Blair being available in the early 2nd round.
I dont understand how Blair slipped to the 2nd round and Thabeet was the 2nd pick. Blair used to abuse that boy something serious in college.

[skulls138]

Why trade LMA? its the early part of the season....

give the team time to jell, tbhBecause he only wants to shoot jumpshots and get paid.