Lowe Post w/ Windhorst, Arnovitz: Spurs may target George Hill and/or JJ Redick

[Mr.Bottomtooth]

http://www.espn.com/espnradio/play?id=18758031

They only touch on it for a minute before it ends but Zach Lowe and Brian Windhorst both say that the Spurs may be interested in George Hill due to the history and the idea that the team may be at the point where Tony needs a "co-starter" on the team. They also mention how Patty Mills' UFA status makes things interesting. Then Windhorst brings up JJ Redick's name as a potential Spurs target as well but doesn't expand on it.

[Sean Cagney]

I want Hill back on the team personally but what would he cost? Utah surely to throw some dough at that man after their record with him in the line up this year. He is playing great.

[BillMc]

I want Hill, Kawhi and Bertans all to play against the Pacers and be on the court at the same time, tbh.

[Mr.Bottomtooth]

I want Hill back on the team personally but what would he cost? Utah surely to throw some dough at that man after their record with him in the line up this year. He is playing great.

I think any scenario where they can get either guy is dependent on Pau Gasol opting out of his deal. If he does, then the Spurs can free up ~$22M in cap space I think. But if not, then they'll just have the MLE.

[Chinook]

I can't think of a reporter who'd have a worse pulse on the Spurs than Windhorst.

Redick is often rumored to the Spurs because of his home here in Austin, and he and Murray make an interesting backup back-court. But if you're tossing out money for a shooter, just re-sign Patty.

[Mr.Bottomtooth]

I want Hill, Kawhi and Bertans all to play against the Pacers and be on the court at the same time, tbh.

They should go all the way and bring Lorbek out of retirement for this game and this game alone.

[TXstbobcat]

I want Hill, Kawhi and Bertans all to play against the Pacers and be on the court at the same time, tbh.

Just call it the Larry Bird lineup.

[BillMc]

They should go all the way and bring Lorbek out of retirement for this game and this game alone.
:lol +1

[BillMc]

Just call it the Larry Bird lineup.
:lol

[Mr. Body]

I'd take either but think Hill would be too costly.

[NASpurs]

So you guys think Pau is going to opt out but sign for more years? 3 yrs/$30 mil?

[sasaint]

I want Hill, Kawhi and Bertans all to play against the Pacers and be on the court at the same time, tbh.

Wow, merciless! :lol

[Floyd Pacquiao]

Signing hill would stunt Murray's growth.

[apalisoc_9]

Reddick is showing his age and the spurs can probably get mills at a cheaper price.

Windhorst is really out of touch in terms of western teams.

[Ron Swanson]

I want Hill, Kawhi and Bertans all to play against the Pacers and be on the court at the same time, tbh.

This would be hilarious.

[coachmac87]

I can't think of a reporter who'd have a worse pulse on the Spurs than Windhorst.

Redick is often rumored to the Spurs because of his home here in Austin, and he and Murray make an interesting backup back-court. But if you're tossing out money for a shooter, just re-sign Patty.


Redick > Patty

[sasaint]

I can't think of a reporter who'd have a worse pulse on the Spurs than Windhorst.

Redick is often rumored to the Spurs because of his home here in Austin, and he and Murray make an interesting backup back-court. But if you're tossing out money for a shooter, just re-sign Patty.

So, if Dijon is the back-up PG, are you projecting Tony as the starter next season?

[coachmac87]

Reddick is showing his age and the spurs can probably get mills at a cheaper price.

Windhorst is really out of touch in terms of western teams.

Patty is looking for his first decent contract/starting role...Reddick maybe looking to win/compete and has made waaaaaaay more $ than Patty

[sasaint]

Patty is looking for his first decent contract/starting role...Reddick maybe looking to win/compete and has made waaaaaaay more $ than Patty

Very good points. Plus, JJ is a real SG and Patty is a short...

[dabom]

Very good points. Plus, JJ is a real SG and Patty is a short...

Patty is a PG and JJ is short for his position...

[coachmac87]

There's been mutual interest regarding Reddick and the Spurs for years. Before he got traded to Millwaukee the Spurs kicked the tires and were very interested. Reddick has always raved about the Spurs and thinks extremely highly of Pop.

[tonight...you]

I can't think of a reporter who'd have a worse pulse on the Spurs than Windhorst.

Redick is often rumored to the Spurs because of his home here in Austin, and he and Murray make an interesting backup back-court. But if you're tossing out money for a shooter, just re-sign Patty.
God, I want to move back to Austin...
I miss Thundercloud and Half Price Books so bad.

[SupremeGuy]

I want Hill, Kawhi and Bertans all to play against the Pacers and be on the court at the same time, tbh.


They should go all the way and bring Lorbek out of retirement for this game and this game alone.


Just call it the Larry Bird lineup.You fuckers :lmao

[Play Boban]

ReddickVP. The missing piece... :wow

[Chinook]

So, if Dijon is the back-up PG, are you projecting Tony as the starter next season?

Yes. Or are we still trying to argue that Murray is better than Tony? I expect him to start until his contract is up. Then Pop will try to pick the best two PGs he can.

[Chinook]

Redick > Patty

I actually don't think he is. Regardless, he makes more financial sense than Redick, because even if they get paid the same, Mills will count less against the cap. Even if they don't do a lot with their space, little things like signing their first-rounders (with Milutinov coming over) or giving rookies three-year deals are much easier with tiny bits of space.

[CGD]

I hope Mills looks for and gets his big payday. He deserves to cash in on a great run, and chance to get life altering money for his family.

I think Spurs are moving on notwithstanding the fact they can sign him via bird right. Delladova is getting about 10m a year; gotta think Patty gets more.

[CGD]

So you guys think Pau is going to opt out but sign for more years? 3 yrs/$30 mil?

I think this is in play. Kind of like when the Spurs refinanced "he who shall not be named." It also allows the Spurs to trade LMA next year and keep some veteran post production.

[cd021]

So you guys think Pau is going to opt out but sign for more years? 3 yrs/$30 mil?

I don't see that. He already said that he is planning on opting in. Even if he does a $22 million over 2 year opt out and resign, it doesn't necessarily matter all that much

Spurs do have cap space;not a lot but some, sort of. Even when assuming that Mills cap hold jumps from $6.8 to 9.86 ( saw somewhere that cap holds may jump by as much as 45%) I don't see a way that the Spurs could retain Dedmon, Mills, and go after Hill unless they move Gasol.

If the Spurs choose to let Mills walk and go after Hill, then it pretty much means that they aren't going to be able to resign Dedmon, without trading Gasol.

[apalisoc_9]

I actually don't think he is. Regardless, he makes more financial sense than Redick, because even if they get paid the same, Mills will count less against the cap. Even if they don't do a lot with their space, little things like signing their first-rounders (with Milutinov coming over) or giving rookies three-year deals are much easier with tiny bits of space.

Reddick last year is much better, but if you have watched the clippers this year he's shown signs of regression.

[cd021]

I think this is in play. Kind of like when the Spurs refinanced "he who shall not be named." It also allows the Spurs to trade LMA next year and keep some veteran post production.
If the Spurs flame out in the 2nd round or even if they make the WCF and get smashd by GSW, I don't think it's crazy that they might move LMA.

PHX makes plenty of sense. They have enough cap space to absorb his contract with the spurs not having to take a player back (Brandon Knight). They have young talent but, more importantly, they have picks.

PHX Gets:
Aldridge

Spurs Gets:
2017 2nd round pick(projected to be the 32nd pick in this years draft)2018 1st round pick(lottery protected pick; LMA, Bledsoe, and Booker should be good enough to potentially make the playoffs next season)

Spurs get $21.45 million in additional cap space in the deal; which should allow them to resign Dedmon and Mills, and/or go after Hill.
Spurs would take a step back in the short term but may be able construct a team that better fits around Kawhi's strengths (like Houston). Adding a early 2nd rounder to this years 29th pick, and potentially another 1st rounder to our own 2018 1st round pick give the Spurs four chances at finding future rotation players in the draft in this and next years draft.

[Chinook]

No offense, but fuck that trade. You move a pick to get rid of Pau (or stretch him) before you take a shit sandwich like that. And if you go after Hill, you've GOT to trade Parker. You can't tie up like $40 Million into PGs.

[CGD]

I'd rather they throw the money at a manu replacement, like Tyrke Evans. Dude will be looking to rehab his value, so maybe a make good 1-1 might help him, and line up with Spurs 2018 time Horizon.

Summer 2017:
- Manu retires
- Patty gets offer too rich and leaves
- refinance Pau
- use difference on Dedmon
- get Evans
- resign Lee
- redshirt Mulitinov in Austin

if we flop in the playoffs, explore trading LMA in fall of 2017. Unless they want to pay him, I'd start thinking about flipping Anderson for a pick of some kind.

[CGD]

Phoenix is a good trade partner, but that specific package is underwhelming. I'd want one of their young bigs in addition to picks.

[mo7888]

Phoenix is a good trade partner, but that specific package is underwhelming. I'd want one of their young bigs in addition to picks.

Yep..you have to get bender or chriss if you move lma plus a pick or two.

[sasaint]

Yes. Or are we still trying to argue that Murray is better than Tony? I expect him to start until his contract is up. Then Pop will try to pick the best two PGs he can.

Tony as our starting PG yet another year is just about the most depressing thought... I do not believe the Spurs can win a championship with Tony as the starting PG. In my mind you are suggesting that PATFO are willing to sacrifice two seasons of Kawhi's prime with no chance to win the LOB. :depressed

[Chinook]

Tony as our starting PG yet another year is just about the most depressing thought... I do not believe the Spurs can win a championship with Tony as the starting PG. In my mind you are suggesting that PATFO are willing to sacrifice two seasons of Kawhi's prime with no chance to win the LOB. :depressed

Unless Murray becomes like five times the player he currently is, the Spurs sure as hell aren't going to win with him starting. And yes, the Spurs are probably willing to "sacrifice Kawhi's prime" because they really don't have another choice. They shouldn't start Murray (barring something crazy happening with his development), and they can't afford to upgrade without gutting a chunk of their roster.

[GSH]

I think any scenario where they can get either guy is dependent on Pau Gasol opting out of his deal. If he does, then the Spurs can free up ~$22M in cap space I think. But if not, then they'll just have the MLE.

Missed the joke...


They should go all the way and bring Lorbek out of retirement for this game and this game alone.

But made a quick recovery. :lol


Not making fun of you. It was just funny when I read that first post and thought how you'd totally missed what Bill was getting at, and then you snapped to it on your own. Bringing Lorbek in for a cameo appearance was just genius.


I'm sort of puzzled how the Spurs are going to "target" Hill, since the deadline is past. Are they supposed to be targeting him for next year? I don't give a rats ass about speculation about next year's roster moves. Way too far off for that kind of talk.

[Spursfanfromafar]

I think if the Spurs are smart ...they have to move Parker next year. Its like the Bowen trade. As much as Parker has been foundational to Spurs success all these years..they need to reward Mills who addresses a need ..some teams which will take a flyer on TP - Bulls, Knicks etc.

After resigning Mills, Simmons and Dedmon...the priority would be to get a Manu replacement with whatever cap space.

[cd021]

No offense, but fuck that trade. You move a pick to get rid of Pau (or stretch him) before you take a shit sandwich like that. And if you go after Hill, you've GOT to trade Parker. You can't tie up like $40 Million into PGs.

The move would be to clear out cap space if they decide that LMA isn't working out. Unless they can swap him for rotation players fit needs and aren't overpaid, I view this is the next best option. Spurs likely aren't getting a lottery pick for him, nor are they getting an upgrade, they probably won't even get equal value in comparison to LMA at his best. Admittedly, the trade is underwhelming from a return standpoint; cap space, a 32nd pick and another pick, that would probably be in the late teens is a low return for the second best player on a team that may make the WCF and win 63 games. I don't think it's terrible, however, for a former all star player that is entering the final year of his deal and will be 32 and coming off a season where he is averaging only 17.5 ppg. If the Spurs wanted to try for Bender or Chriss; I don't know if it would be a deal breaker for Phoenix, they haven't made the playoffs in 8 years and I would assume that they're desperate to try and get back.

I've already been down the "Spurs requiring Hill" road with TD21. I came down on the side that the Spurs would try and dump Gasol not LMA, resign Mills, add Hill, and resign Dedmon to be the starting C (Mills, Hill, Anderson, Bertans, Lee as the bench) before being convinced that while it's possible, it would effectively keep Murray from getting consistent minutes to develop.

I don't believe that playing $40 million to Parker, Mills, Murray, and Hill for one season is all that big of an issue, so long as the team doesn't go in to the luxury tax to field an imbalanced roster. I don't believe that that would be an imbalanced roster. Parker is ,probably, going to make less than $10 million after next season, and that $40 million dollar figure would drop to around $35 million for 3 rotation players and a prospect for the next two or three years.

My LMA trade was more specially in response to CDG, who mentioned restructuring Gasol and moving LMA. I don't think both would happen; and I don't know how much a Gasol restructuring would help, I can't find a scenario where the Spurs could fit both Mills and Dedmon under the cap without trading Gasol for cap space, let alone going after Hill. I'm fine with Aldridge; though he can be maddeningly inconsistent and ,to a lesser extent, Gasol, though, I'd prefer he stay coming off the bench. I would hope that the Spurs can keep Mills, Dedmon, and Lee (though I'm curious to see Bertans as a full time backup PF).

[apalisoc_9]

It's stupid to make significant changes for any team that's poised to win 50+ games.

Always been my philosophy. Even if the spurs are evem bigger underdogs next year, they can't take risk that can damage their team.

They should continue paying cheap the next couple of years winning 50+ games every year until they develop the youngesters and have enough cap space to go for top 30 caliber players.

That should always be the plan.

[SAGirl]

No offense, but fuck that trade. You move a pick to get rid of Pau (or stretch him) before you take a shit sandwich like that. And if you go after Hill, you've GOT to trade Parker. You can't tie up like $40 Million into PGs.
Which is why they won't go for Hill.

Where is brooklynfan to educate me on the Spurs being active looking at trades? (Sarcasm!)

[TheGreatYacht]

A late first and a second round pick for Aldridge? That's terrible :lol

[sasaint]

Tony as our starting PG yet another year is just about the most depressing thought... I do not believe the Spurs can win a championship with Tony as the starting PG. In my mind you are suggesting that PATFO are willing to sacrifice two seasons of Kawhi's prime with no chance to win the LOB. :depressed

The difference between Tony's starting and Dijon's starting is probably a playoff seed - for a team that won't compete for a LOB in either case. But at least Dijon gets a year of running the team under his belt. Basically, you think more of Tony and less of Dijon than I do. No problem. But I think Dijon is as good now as Tony was when Pop turned the keys over to him. That worked out pretty well.

[unleashbaynes]

If it doesn't involve LeBron's nutsack, i highly doubt Windhorst knows much about it.

[sasaint]

It's stupid to make significant changes for any team that's poised to win 50+ games.

Always been my philosophy. Even if the spurs are evem bigger underdogs next year, they can't take risk that can damage their team.

They should continue paying cheap the next couple of years winning 50+ games every year until they develop the youngesters and have enough cap space to go for top 30 caliber players.

That should always be the plan.

I would not have expected that from you. Wasn't that Atlanta's philosophy?

[sasaint]

The move would be to clear out cap space if they decide that LMA isn't working out. Unless they can swap him for rotation players fit needs and aren't overpaid, I view this is the next best option. Spurs likely aren't getting a lottery pick for him, nor are they getting an upgrade, they probably won't even get equal value in comparison to LMA at his best. Admittedly, the trade is underwhelming from a return standpoint; cap space, a 32nd pick and another pick, that would probably be in the late teens is a low return for the second best player on a team that may make the WCF and win 63 games. I don't think it's terrible, however, for a former all star player that is entering the final year of his deal and will be 32 and coming off a season where he is averaging only 17.5 ppg. If the Spurs wanted to try for Bender or Chriss; I don't know if it would be a deal breaker for Phoenix, they haven't made the playoffs in 8 years and I would assume that they're desperate to try and get back.

I've already been down the "Spurs requiring Hill" road with TD21. I came down on the side that the Spurs would try and dump Gasol not LMA, resign Mills, add Hill, and resign Dedmon to be the starting C (Mills, Hill, Anderson, Bertans, Lee as the bench) before being convinced that while it's possible, it would effectively keep Murray from getting consistent minutes to develop.

I don't believe that playing $40 million to Parker, Mills, Murray, and Hill for one season is all that big of an issue, so long as the team doesn't go in to the luxury tax to field an imbalanced roster. I don't believe that that would be an imbalanced roster. Parker is ,probably, going to make less than $10 million after next season, and that $40 million dollar figure would drop to around $35 million for 3 rotation players and a prospect for the next two or three years.

My LMA trade was more specially in response to CDG, who mentioned restructuring Gasol and moving LMA. I don't think both would happen; and I don't know how much a Gasol restructuring would help, I can't find a scenario where the Spurs could fit both Mills and Dedmon under the cap without trading Gasol for cap space, let alone going after Hill. I'm fine with Aldridge; though he can be maddeningly inconsistent and ,to a lesser extent, Gasol, though, I'd prefer he stay coming off the bench. I would hope that the Spurs can keep Mills, Dedmon, and Lee (though I'm curious to see Bertans as a full time backup PF).

Some people would rather have an identified player or players in a trade. Some would rather have the cap space to use on a specific free agent, which they regard as essentially a component of the trade. I see where you are coming from, but what FA(s) do you want to use the cap space on?

What is more surprising to me is the idea that you envision Tony's being on the team beyond 2017-18.

[james evans]

Patty is a PG and JJ is short for his position...
neither one of them can play defense worth shit

[mo7888]

Unless Murray becomes like five times the player he currently is, the Spurs sure as hell aren't going to win with him starting. And yes, the Spurs are probably willing to "sacrifice Kawhi's prime" because they really don't have another choice. They shouldn't start Murray (barring something crazy happening with his development), and they can't afford to upgrade without gutting a chunk of their roster.

If they are willing to sacrifice his prime then they should trade him to Boston for a huge package of picks and young talent. I disagree with you that they will sacrifice his prime but, if you're right it would benefit the franchise to trade him.

[sasaint]

If they are willing to sacrifice his prime then they should trade him to Boston for a huge package of picks and young talent. I disagree with you that they will sacrifice his prime but, if you're right it would benefit the franchise to trade him.

My concern is that if the Spurs do not exert their best efforts to improve, then Kawhi will bolt to LA when his current contract ends.

[Old School 44]

My concern is that if the Spurs do not exert their best efforts to improve, then Kawhi will bolt to LA when his current contract ends.
The Spurs will never go "all-in" to keep or influence a player. They didn't for Duncan. They won't for Kawhi. The Spurs sell 50 win seasons and a guaranteed post season, and a winning culture/mystique that quite frankly has taken on a life of it's own. If the chips fall right for a season, they hopefully pick up a championship along the way. It's one of the reasons, the Spurs have never won back-to-back titles.

[tmtcsc]

http://www.espn.com/espnradio/play?id=18758031

They only touch on it for a minute before it ends but Zach Lowe and Brian Windhorst both say that the Spurs may be interested in George Hill due to the history and the idea that the team may be at the point where Tony needs a "co-starter" on the team. They also mention how Patty Mills' UFA status makes things interesting. Then Windhorst brings up JJ Redick's name as a potential Spurs target as well but doesn't expand on it.

You think? A year too late perhaps. Tony struggles to get by most defenders nowadays. He needs a replacement, not a "co-starter" -> whatever that means.

[Chinook]

If they are willing to sacrifice his prime then they should trade him to Boston for a huge package of picks and young talent. I disagree with you that they will sacrifice his prime but, if you're right it would benefit the franchise to trade him.


My concern is that if the Spurs do not exert their best efforts to improve, then Kawhi will bolt to LA when his current contract ends.

OMFG. First, Kawhi's already won a title with the Spurs. I doubt he gives up tens of million of bucks to go to LA for no reason. That's especially true after he said that he didn't want the team to make any moves.

Second, the Spurs are the second-best team in the league. Do you think Kawhi would rather be on a middle-seed playoff team just because it's in LA? Unless Pop becomes an idiot like Bird has been, you're not going to see him pull a George. He's already seen how the Spurs do things, and he knows that it has allowed the team to have a two-decade long period of contention. No one has a better grasp on how to be competitive than they do.

Third, shit like trading LMA for late picks and starting Murray over Parker are the farthest thing from "exerting their best efforts to improve". It's just fan service for Spurs fans that spend way too much time listening to the spew of bullshit on here about how awful the team is. You put Butler and George on the team, and they're happy as clams. This would be the best supporting cast they've ever had and likely the best performance. But once you start downgrading to Murray and whoever the hell is supposed to start at PF after trading LMA, then you'd see them complaining.

Fourth, Kawhi ain't even in his prime yet. He still has another year or two to go, as amazing as that is. Neither of these proposed moves involves them attaining anything they don't already have, so there's simply no reason to get rid of a core that is capable of winning a title for detritus. There just isn't a good enough argument that Murray will be better than Parker any time soon. He has to show a stable state a lot closer to Tony to even consider that. Right now, he can't even stay in the game during garbage time.

[mo7888]

My concern is that if the Spurs do not exert their best efforts to improve, then Kawhi will bolt to LA when his current contract ends.

I agree with that. I don't think going all in for the spurs is the same as it would be defined for the cavs or warriors though. We won't go into cap hell and give up all of our future assets for a rental or anything like that. I think we'll look at several different options in the offseason depending on how far we go in the post season. Assuming that we don't make the finals I think Patty is gone and I think gasoline will opt out and resign to a number that gives us flexibility. I also think they'll explore lma's market value as well. Lastly, I think they are pretty high on Murray's future and I expect him to get significant minutes next year much like Parker got when he 1st arrived. I also expect him to be ready to make a significant impact in spurts in the playoffs next season because of the time he will get in the regular season.

[tmtcsc]

No one is getting rid of Pau Gasol. That's ridiculous. He'll be here next year. Manu will be gone and Patty might be too. Patty is not a PG, he is a small SG and needs to have the freedom to shoot. If given the chance, he could be a 20+ ppg scorer somewhere else.

[mo7888]

OMFG. First, Kawhi's already won a title with the Spurs. I doubt he gives up tens of million of bucks to go to LA for no reason. That's especially true after he said that he didn't want the team to make any moves.

Second, the Spurs are the second-best team in the league. Do you think Kawhi would rather be on a middle-seed playoff team just because it's in LA? Unless Pop becomes an idiot like Bird has been, you're not going to see him pull a George. He's already seen how the Spurs do things, and he knows that it has allowed the team to have a two-decade long period of contention. No one has a better grasp on how to be competitive than they do.

Third, shit like trading LMA for late picks and starting Murray over Parker are the farthest thing from "exerting their best efforts to improve". It's just fan service for Spurs fans that spend way too much time listening to the spew of bullshit on here about how awful the team is. You put Butler and George on the team, and they're happy as clams. This would be the best supporting cast they've ever had and likely the best performance. But once you start downgrading to Murray and whoever the hell is supposed to start at PF after trading LMA, then you'd see them complaining.

Fourth, Kawhi ain't even in his prime yet. He still has another year or two to go, as amazing as that is. Neither of these proposed moves involves them attaining anything they don't already have, so there's simply no reason to get rid of a core that is capable of winning a title for detritus. There just isn't a good enough argument that Murray will be better than Parker any time soon. He has to show a stable state a lot closer to Tony to even consider that. Right now, he can't even stay in the game during garbage time.

You're the one that said pop was willing to sacrifice Kawhi's prime...not me... I disagree with your premise. So my saying they should trade him isn't what I think should happen it was simply the logical response to 'your' suggestion of 'sacrifice '.... and for the record..I don't think you believe pop is willing to sacrifice his prime... I think you were flippant in your response and threw out a hypothetical which I responded to.

[Chinook]

You're the one that said pop was willing to sacrifice Kawhi's prime...not me... I disagree with your premise. So my saying they should trade him isn't what I think should happen it was simply the logical response to 'your' suggestion of 'sacrifice '.... and for the record..I don't think you believe pop is willing to sacrifice his prime... I think you were flippant in your response and threw out a hypothetical which I responded to.

I quoted "sacrifice Kawhi's prime" because that was what sasaint was trying to argue. He considered starting Parker to be essentially giving up a season. In that case, yes, Pop will totally do that.

And no, the logical response is never going to be to trade Kawhi to Boston.

I didn't throw out a hypothetical. You replied to a post without caring about its context. Unless of course you understood what I meant and truly do believe in your heart of hearts that the Spurs will not start Parker next year. If that's the case, quit with the broad interpretation of the quote.

[TheGreatYacht]

If Murray is going to be the backup PG next year, it's important to have shooters around him. Reddick would be a great pickup.

[DPG21920]

TP is not going to be traded IMO. At best Spurs use what money they have next year to find a better starting PG and TP moves to the bench. Then Murray is splitting time as the 3rd PG and backup SG.

[apalisoc_9]

Chinook, can't the spurs stretch Parker and offer him a new contract?

If he wants to play till he's 40...Why not stretch him since hes never going to get traded anyway.

[bklynspursfan]

Which is why they won't go for Hill.

Where is brooklynfan to educate me on the Spurs being active looking at trades? (Sarcasm!)

Ha... Like I said, the Spurs could've been active, but they aren't moving TP. He isn't the only guy they can trade, and trading him doesn't upgrade our backcourt. That's just silly talk.

I just never got why ppl think cause they hear no Spurs rumbling that it means they aren't actively looking to improve

[bklynspursfan]

TP is not going to be traded IMO. At best Spurs use what money they have next year to find a better starting PG and TP moves to the bench. Then Murray is splitting time as the 3rd PG and backup SG.

Yup. This is the most realistic scenario , unless TP asks to be moved.

[apalisoc_9]

Stretch him for 4 years next year and then sign him for a smaller amount. 4 year stretch means only 4 million on the cap. Sign him for 3 million or something...

Or is that not allowed. He makes lots of money that way.

[poeticism707]

I actually don't think he is. Regardless, he makes more financial sense than Redick, because even if they get paid the same, Mills will count less against the cap. Even if they don't do a lot with their space, little things like signing their first-rounders (with Milutinov coming over) or giving rookies three-year deals are much easier with tiny bits of space.

This.

[mo7888]

I quoted "sacrifice Kawhi's prime" because that was what sasaint was trying to argue. He considered starting Parker to be essentially giving up a season. In that case, yes, Pop will totally do that.

And no, the logical response is never going to be to trade Kawhi to Boston.

I didn't throw out a hypothetical. You replied to a post without caring about its context. Unless of course you understood what I meant and truly do believe in your heart of hearts that the Spurs will not start Parker next year. If that's the case, quit with the broad interpretation of the quote.

Your quote "And yes, the Spurs are probably willing to "sacrrifice Kawhi's prime" because they really don't have another choice"

You provided the context quite plainly... I responded by saying I disagree with your view about what they will do and also gave an opinion about what the best course of action would be if your view is correct. The rest of what's you wrote is a simple deflection from your plain and simple statement.

I also recognized the quotes around "sacrifice " in your subsequent post by saying I didn't think.you believed it test way. The point is..I'm not saying we shouldn't trade him..I'm saying we should if one really believe we are going to sacrifice his prime.

[Chinook]

Chinook (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=37557), can't the spurs stretch Parker and offer him a new contract?

If he wants to play till he's 40...Why not stretch him since hes never going to get traded anyway.

The Spurs can stretch Parker (even though they really shouldn't stretch anyone else at this point). But it's really ambiguous as to whether they could offer him a new deal. There isn't an explicit rule against it in the old CBA, but many people think it would be disallowed by the league anyway.

[Chinook]

Your quote "And yes, the Spurs are probably willing to "sacrrifice Kawhi's prime" because they really don't have another choice"

You provided the context quite plainly... I responded by saying I disagree with your view about what they will do and also gave an opinion about what the best course of action would be if your view is correct. The rest of what's you wrote is a simple deflection from your plain and simple statement.

You don't get the context if you don't understand why "sacrifice Kawhi's prime" was in quotes. You even re-quoted it with the quotes in place. I said that because that's what the previous post said. You need to learn to fucking read before acting haughty. There's no deflection here. I always meant it as a reply to a different poster using their own words against them. That you didn't understand that is no one else's fault but yours.

[SAGirl]

The difference between Tony's starting and Dijon's starting is probably a playoff seed - for a team that won't compete for a LOB in either case. But at least Dijon gets a year of running the team under his belt. Basically, you think more of Tony and less of Dijon than I do. No problem. But I think Dijon is as good now as Tony was when Pop turned the keys over to him. That worked out pretty well.
I agree with you.
I can't have an opinion on Tony vs Dijon when they were both 20 but Tony didn't have a HoF PG at his position when he joined and Pop has said as much.

I also get the impression Chinook doesn't like Dijon that much so his opinion is going to be colored by that dislike.

[SAGirl]

I agree with that. I don't think going all in for the spurs is the same as it would be defined for the cavs or warriors though. We won't go into cap hell and give up all of our future assets for a rental or anything like that. I think we'll look at several different options in the offseason depending on how far we go in the post season. Assuming that we don't make the finals I think Patty is gone and I think gasoline will opt out and resign to a number that gives us flexibility. I also think they'll explore lma's market value as well. Lastly, I think they are pretty high on Murray's future and I expect him to get significant minutes next year much like Parker got when he 1st arrived. I also expect him to be ready to make a significant impact in spurts in the playoffs next season because of the time he will get in the regular season.
I think this is a very reasonable projection. Without seeing performance in the offseason it's tough to make a call about some spots or some guys, but I do expect Murray to be playing next season and get Pops real coaching. This time last year Simmons was getting benched too, and sent back down to the dleague. It's how Pop is with rookies etc. and he needed it. He has gotten better. Why will Murray not be the same or better considering how young he is and his work ethic. I expect Murray to start getter by rotation minutes next season.

If if he doesn't clean up his act next season that's one thing but he's very young and I do expect him to be better. Pop has expressed they are high on him and he works hard. I expect him to make progress with more experience and practice.

[DPG21920]

Spurs should not be adding any dead money. Even though SA won't have a lot of cap space next year after that they are in incredible shape with having Kawhi, LMA & Danny locked up.

[DPG21920]

Gasol is 99% opting in.

[Chinook]

I also get the impression Chinook doesn't like Dijon that much so his opinion is going to be colored by that dislike.

The fuck SAG?

[DPG21920]

^ :lol

[dabom]

The fuck SAG?

Is she implying you are biased? :lmao

[dabom]

:corn:

[palangi]

Unless Murray becomes like five times the player he currently is, the Spurs sure as hell aren't going to win with him starting. And yes, the Spurs are probably willing to "sacrifice Kawhi's prime" because they really don't have another choice. They shouldn't start Murray (barring something crazy happening with his development), and they can't afford to upgrade without gutting a chunk of their roster.

It's now official, Murray is as good as parker if not better. If Chinook stands on a table about a talent evaluation then you know it's the opposite of what he said. His evaluations are probably the worse on this site.

Stick to the finances Chinook. It's what you know.

[dabom]

It's now official, Murray is as good as parker if not better. If Chinook stands on a table about a tashkent evaluation then you know it's the opposite of what he said. His evaluations are probably the worse on this site.

Stick to the finances Chinook. It's what you know.

Murray is an unknown. He isn't gonna start over porker, and certainly won't get minutes over MVPatty. We might as well throw in the towel if he gets any significant minutes these playoffs. FACTS. :lmao

[mo7888]

You don't get the context if you don't understand why "sacrifice Kawhi's prime" was in quotes. You even re-quoted it with the quotes in place. I said that because that's what the previous post said. You need to learn to fucking read before acting haughty. There's no deflection here. I always meant it as a reply to a different poster using their own words against them. That you didn't understand that is no one else's fault but yours.

I need to read? Fuck you bitch...:lol

[SAGirl]

Spurs should not be adding any dead money. Even though SA won't have a lot of cap space next year after that they are in incredible shape with having Kawhi, LMA & Danny locked up.
They have guys to consider reupping and will have holes. It's inescapable that they will have to pay somebody(ies)

[SAGirl]

The fuck SAG?
Lol It's indeed my impression you just don't like Dijon.
Which is fine unless you were going to troll which you don't normally.
I wasn't a JSimms fan but he's improved. I think you are at that spot.

[dabom]

Lol It's indeed my impression you just don't like Dijon.
Which is fine unless you were going to troll which you don't normally.
I wasn't a JSimms fan but he's improved.

You have used that "shtick" for everyone who has disagreed with you. :lmao

[Chinook]

I need to read? Fuck you bitch...

Did you tell your teachers that in school too? Might explain some shit.

[Chinook]

Lol It's indeed my impression you just don't like Dijon.
Which is fine unless you were going to troll which you don't normally.
I wasn't a JSimms fan but he's improved. I think you are at that spot.

I don't dislike Murray. I fully expect him to get playing time in the regular rotation next season. But I am not going to want the Spurs to get rid of guys to give him time until he earns it. Right now, he keeps getting pulled in garbage time.

The team has an obligation to be as good as they can for as long as they can. They aren't going to get intentionally worse until/unless they're forced to. A team that should win in the high-50s to low-60s next season shouldn't be looking at benching their PG for a prospect and dumping their second-best player for a low-first and high-second. It's crazy that so many Spurs fan think they should.

[mo7888]

Did you tell your teachers that in school too? Might explain some shit.

I make a notation of your quotes and you conveniently omit them...but I need to read? Lol... nice troll...

[SAGirl]

I don't dislike Murray. I fully expect him to get playing time in the regular rotation next season. But I am not going to want the Spurs to get rid of guys to give him time until he earns it. Right now, he keeps getting pulled in garbage time.

The team has an obligation to be as good as they can for as long as they can. They aren't going to get intentionally worse until/unless they're forced to. A team that should win in the high-50s to low-60s next season shouldn't be looking at benching their PG for a prospect and dumping their second-best player for a low-first and high-second. It's crazy that so many Spurs fan think they should.
I expect Murray to continue to get pulled even as he's playing more minutes bc he needs the tough coaching. In fact he's just not playing enough to interpret much. Maybe I am misguided and he does bomb big time but I wouldn't be able to deduct that from a few minutes here and there. He does look like he's got a lot to learn and will get chances to earn it.

I am far from a Tony hater and it's really sad that one cannot discuss some guys without some faction or another coming in with a trolling intention (not saying that's you... we just have to look at the usual)

The team actually does look really good when Tony plays well. If he can't do what he's supposed to though, they will struggle. Spurs need to start moving on from him and already have been steering in that direction with him playing less minutes, etc. The team has won games with Murray starting against playoff teams. He's not asked to do a lot when he's with the starters bc the offense already runs through others. I definitely think Dijon can be better than Tony really soon. Maybe like sasaint I am just higher on him than you are and think less of Tony than you do but I am with Gambit in that Tony's contributions are small and can be replicated by Dijon.

Once we we step into things of this nature there's a lot of personal evaluation and subjective opinion so I don't think you are wrong to disagree or that I am right. We have different opinions.

[dabom]

I expect Murray to continue to get pulled even as he's playing more minutes bc he needs the tough coaching. In fact he's just not playing enough to interpret much. Maybe I am misguided and he does bomb big time but I wouldn't be able to deduct that from a few minutes here and there. He does look like he's got a lot to learn and will get chances to earn it.

I am far from a Tony hater and it's really sad that one cannot discuss some guys without some faction or another coming in with a trolling intention (not saying that's you... we just have to look at the usual)

The team actually does look really good when Tony plays well. If he can't do what he's supposed to though, they will struggle. Spurs need to start moving on from him and already have been steering in that direction with him playing less minutes, etc. The team has won games with Murray starting against playoff teams. He's not asked to do a lot when he's with the starters bc the offense already runs through others. I definitely think Dijon can be better than Tony really soon. Maybe like sasaint I am just higher on him than you are and think less of Tony than you do but I am with Gambit in that Tony's contributions are small and can be replicated by Dijon.

Once we we step into things of this nature there's a lot of personal evaluation and subjective opinion so I don't think you are wrong to disagree or that I am right. We have different opinions.

Lets just get this out the way. For everyone to understand. Stats should be seperated between Playoff teams and Non-Playoff teams. Kinda how Dworst was good vs regular teams but sucked ASS vs the top teams. Also the RS and Playoffs are a completely different beast. Also the further up you go, the teams are harder. So there is a lot of scenarios for players trying to make a case for themselves. The rookie hasn't proven shit on any stage of his career. I don't expect him to do that this year either. :lol

Please learn. :lol

[Chinook]

I make a notation of your quotes and you conveniently omit them...but I need to read? Lol... nice troll...

Huh? I didn't omit anything. Your "notation" came in an edit posted after I had either posted or started typing the response. It's not quoted because it wasn't there to quote originally. That happens from time to time if someone replies quickly and is at best an honestly mistake. I'm really not trying to throw shade at you or jump down your throat. I apologize if I went too far. I just think that Spurs fans are being unusually irrational about the state of the team right now and am sort of on a hair trigger about it after the shit with the deadline just passing. The Spurs are the second-best team in the league. If something happens that forces them to make changes, we can think about that in June right now, nothing interesting is really going to happen until the post-season begins.

We cool now? Neither one of us thinks the Spurs are going to tank any years of Kawhi's prime, and neither wants to trade him. I'm willing to own up to not seeing your edit so long as you understand that you did make the edit after I had already started to respond. It was just two ships passing each other in the day. I don't have any beef with you, and don't want to have any after this.

[DPG21920]

They have guys to consider reupping and will have holes. It's inescapable that they will have to pay somebody(ies)

What I meant by dead money is no stretching of anyone's contract. They don't need that dead money on the roster for 2019+ when the Spurs will be in excellent shape.

[Chinook]

What I meant by dead money is no stretching of anyone's contract. They don't need that dead money on the roster for 2019+ when the Spurs will be in excellent shape.

Yeah, Tim's and Livio's deal s are already annoying, and in 2018, they'll be even worse. Can't imagine adding like $5-11 Million more just to have money today. Totally work the pick to move whomever they need to if they're desperate for space.

[SAGirl]

What I meant by dead money is no stretching of anyone's contract. They don't need that dead money on the roster for 2019+ when the Spurs will be in excellent shape.
? Then I got lost in this plot. There are like 3 different parallel conversations in this thread.

[Chinook]

? Then I got lost in this plot. There are like 3 different parallel conversations in this thread.

DPG's dead-money comment was about people asking after the possibility of stretching Pau or Parker. It wasn't about re-signing guys this summer, though you could argue that in order to do the second thing, they might have to do the first.

[DPG21920]

Yeah, Tim's and Livio's deal s are already annoying, and in 2018, they'll be even worse. Can't imagine adding like $5-11 Million more just to have money today. Totally work the pick to move whomever they need to if they're desperate for space.

Yup. I'm of the opinion unless you think you are getting a long-term solution next year you just do what you can reasonably (maybe get PG help) without putting anything unnecessary (especially dead money) on the books. Spurs will still be a damn good team and in 2019 be in an unreal position to set the next 4-5 years up with Kawhi core.

[DPG21920]

DPG's dead-money comment was about people asking after the possibility of stretching Pau or Parker. It wasn't about re-signing guys this summer, though you could argue that in order to do the second thing, they might have to do the first.

Maybe, but not really. Spurs could just use the MLE on the best guard possible or re-sign Mills knowing he will be moved in 2019 to free up the longer term opportunity. Don't need any cap space to sign Mills.

[Chinook]

Maybe, but not really. Spurs could just use the MLE on the best guard possible or re-sign Mills knowing he will be moved in 2019 to free up the longer term opportunity. Don't need any cap space to sign Mills.

In the Think Tank, I laid out a semi-optimistic scenario for the team. You're right that they don't need cap space if they don't keep Dedmon or get him to come back for the MLE or less. However, depending on how essential they think he is, they might have to clear salary in some fashion or another to get enough room to re-up him. Roster charges and cap holds are a bitch under this new CBA, and the cap is stagnating in a way no one predicted a year ago.

[DPG21920]

In the Think Tank, I laid out a semi-optimistic scenario for the team. You're right that they don't need cap space if they don't keep Dedmon or get him to come back for the MLE or less. However, depending on how essential they think he is, they might have to clear salary in some fashion or another to get enough room to re-up him. Roster charges and cap holds are a bitch under this new CBA, and the cap is stagnating in a way no one predicted a year ago.

I had not seen that - just saw it and great work per the usual :tu

I had forgotten about Dedmon not having full Birds so I did not take that into consideration but honestly does not change my stance or calculations too much.

[SAGirl]

DPG's dead-money comment was about people asking after the possibility of stretching Pau or Parker. It wasn't about re-signing guys this summer, though you could argue that in order to do the second thing, they might have to do the first.
Thanks for the clarification. I remember now. Since the original subject was about going after Hill... guys started to inquire about stretching others.

Pau renegotiating his deal wouldn't be dead money bc he'd still be playing. He's said he's picking his option though I suppose he could be convinced. I wouldn't take that for granted though.

For the record and since the original topic was Hill. I do like him but he will get priced out of Spurs budget. Without the Spurs exploring options to trade Tony theres just no point to even look at other quality starting PG in the league. I also thought there was no chance at Conley last season for the same reason.

Anyways I tend to agree with you in that Pop sticks with Tony as the starter for the remainder of his deal for better or worse. Some fans like sasaint are alarmed by that attitude from PATFO and I share in that to some degree. Tony has become brittle and will decline more and more. However, by the time Tony's contract is up maybe Murray will be a force that's already deserving of a starting spot and that will be evident (same as Desmond quality of play speaks for itself in terms of how much he's improved from his preseason appearances). I deduce Pop is hopeful in Dijon that he can be it. If he's not, they will still need to look around at other options and will do that in due time.

[mo7888]

Huh? I didn't omit anything. Your "notation" came in an edit posted after I had either posted or started typing the response. It's not quoted because it wasn't there to quote originally. That happens from time to time if someone replies quickly and is at best an honestly mistake. I'm really not trying to throw shade at you or jump down your throat. I apologize if I went too far. I just think that Spurs fans are being unusually irrational about the state of the team right now and am sort of on a hair trigger about it after the shit with the deadline just passing. The Spurs are the second-best team in the league. If something happens that forces them to make changes, we can think about that in June right now, nothing interesting is really going to happen until the post-season begins.

We cool now? Neither one of us thinks the Spurs are going to tank any years of Kawhi's prime, and neither wants to trade him. I'm willing to own up to not seeing your edit so long as you understand that you did make the edit after I had already started to respond. It was just two ships passing each other in the day. I don't have any beef with you, and don't want to have any after this.

We're cool...I think that's fair and we generally agree on where the spurs are and on what they should do anyway. Our differences are usually based on semantics instead of substance on most things. I can certainly understand how you started writing a response before my edit showed up there...that's perfectly logical.. :toast

[palangi]

The fuck SAG?

Uh oh.....Chinook spell is coming off. He doesn't like it.

[palangi]

Murray is an unknown. He isn't gonna start over porker, and certainly won't get minutes over MVPatty. We might as well throw in the towel if he gets any significant minutes these playoffs. FACTS. :lmao

Opinion.:downspin:

[sasaint]

Thanks for the clarification. I remember now. Since the original subject was about going after Hill... guys started to inquire about stretching others.

Pau renegotiating his deal wouldn't be dead money bc he'd still be playing. He's said he's picking his option though I suppose he could be convinced. I wouldn't take that for granted though.

For the record and since the original topic was Hill. I do like him but he will get priced out of Spurs budget. Without the Spurs exploring options to trade Tony theres just no point to even look at other quality starting PG in the league. I also thought there was no chance at Conley last season for the same reason.

Anyways I tend to agree with you in that Pop sticks with Tony as the starter for the remainder of his deal for better or worse. Some fans like sasaint are alarmed by that attitude from PATFO and I share in that to some degree. Tony has become brittle and will decline more and more. However, by the time Tony's contract is up maybe Murray will be a force that's already deserving of a starting spot and that will be evident (same as Desmond quality of play speaks for itself in terms of how much he's improved from his preseason appearances). I deduce Pop is hopeful in Dijon that he can be it. If he's not, they will still need to look around at other options and will do that in due time.

I believed Pau would exercise his option before his announcement. The announcement seemed like the lock. But now I am starting to wonder what the world looks like through Pau's eyes. How many more years does he plan to play? Does he plan to retire as a Spur? It's not like he is a legend for any particular franchise where he might prefer to retire. So, if he wants to play more than just one more year, and PATFO wants him for a longer time as well, it would make great sense to come to an agreement so that he could opt out and take a reduced salary for more years for the Spurs to have some more cap space for an upgrade or two. Maybe...

As for Tony, I have never been a Tony hater. In fact, I think he would be a very good replacement for Manu on the second unit and a great insurance policy for Murray. Tony clearly has more left in the tank than Manu. But Tony is very clearly in decline, too. Just before the ASG, many posters (not including myself, btw) were expressing alarm about his very meh 3-4 game stretch. We aren't even talking about D. Tony is still able to bring it more frequently than Manu, but between his off-games and his injuries how many games out of 82 is he a PG you want starting for a team that perrennially aspires to contend for a championship?

[SAGirl]

^ Fair question... it's a development for us to watch unfold both Tony's adaptation to changing roles and others to grow as players beside him.

[YGWHI]

It's stupid to make significant changes for any team that's poised to win 50+ games.

Always been my philosophy. Even if the spurs are evem bigger underdogs next year, they can't take risk that can damage their team.

They should continue paying cheap the next couple of years winning 50+ games every year until they develop the youngesters and have enough cap space to go for top 30 caliber players.

That should always be the plan.

+50 wins but they didn't make WCF in the last two seasons.

In a perimeter oriented league dominated by young and super talented guards they won't make it with a starting PG who has been net negative in the playoffs and a PG backup who couldnt hit an ocean...Without mentioning the 39 years old guard and the other who can't drive for shit.

The Spurs really need an upgrade at PG/SG positions to get a chance...And it's gonna be very frustrating if they don't improve the roster in the summer.

[GSH]

In the Think Tank, I laid out a semi-optimistic scenario for the team. You're right that they don't need cap space if they don't keep Dedmon or get him to come back for the MLE or less. However, depending on how essential they think he is, they might have to clear salary in some fashion or another to get enough room to re-up him. Roster charges and cap holds are a bitch under this new CBA, and the cap is stagnating in a way no one predicted a year ago.


So what do you think is going to happen with guys like Darren Collison or PJ Tucker? They are both $5M guys this season, give or take. There are bunch of big name FA's that are going to suck a lot of money out of the system. Are there going to be more of those solid mid-tier guys signing for more reasonable salaries?

[OrEmuN]

I believed Pau would exercise his option before his announcement. The announcement seemed like the lock. But now I am starting to wonder what the world looks like through Pau's eyes. How many more years does he plan to play? Does he plan to retire as a Spur? It's not like he is a legend for any particular franchise where he might prefer to retire. So, if he wants to play more than just one more year, and PATFO wants him for a longer time as well, it would make great sense to come to an agreement so that he could opt out and take a reduced salary for more years for the Spurs to have some more cap space for an upgrade or two. Maybe...

As for Tony, I have never been a Tony hater. In fact, I think he would be a very good replacement for Manu on the second unit and a great insurance policy for Murray. Tony clearly has more left in the tank than Manu. But Tony is very clearly in decline, too. Just before the ASG, many posters (not including myself, btw) were expressing alarm about his very meh 3-4 game stretch. We aren't even talking about D. Tony is still able to bring it more frequently than Manu, but between his off-games and his injuries how many games out of 82 is he a PG you want starting for a team that perrennially aspires to contend for a championship?

The only thing to get Pau to opt out is to repeat the RJ deal.
More money for more years.
But I am not so sure FO can get rid of Pau like how they did.

[tbdog]

Spurs are clearly aiming for the 2018 free agency. We will have a boring off season. Perhaps a min contract pick up like Evans, similar to that of Lee is all we will get.

[DenialTwist]

Co-Starter?! Smh. The Spurs are trying to soften the blow to TP's ego. He doesn't deserve to start anymore. Any other coach would've benched him or he would've retired by now. He's washed and it makes me laugh when people get excited over "vintage Parker" every 15-20 games against weak teams. The only teams that matter are the Warriors, Rockets, Clippers, Grizzlies and Cavaliers and all of them have a younger, better pg than the Spurs currently have. If he starts next season, it will be a joke. Pop's loyalty is hurting the team.

[HarlemHeat37]

Redick is going to be 33 years old and won't get the same opportunities in the Spurs system that he does with the Clippers, tbh..his 3-point % sees a 7% decline when Chris Paul is out of the lineup, for example..

[Chinook]

So what do you think is going to happen with guys like Darren Collison or PJ Tucker? They are both $5M guys this season, give or take. There are bunch of big name FA's that are going to suck a lot of money out of the system. Are there going to be more of those solid mid-tier guys signing for more reasonable salaries?

If not this summer, the next one. I've thought for about two years now that people used the cap increases to justify some really stupid contracts. Guys like Bazemore aren't worth $70M/4 no matter what the "market" says. The Spurs let other teams fill up on empty-calorie guys like that while keeping high-value guys making contracts from the previous market. So when it comes time to use actual space, they'll find a much more friendly market.

Hopefully that shows itself this season with Dedmon being kept for a reasonable price. A guy with this hype would be getting Biyombo money just last year.

[cd021]

Some people would rather have an identified player or players in a trade. Some would rather have the cap space to use on a specific free agent, which they regard as essentially a component of the trade. I see where you are coming from, but what FA(s) do you want to use the cap space on?

What is more surprising to me is the idea that you envision Tony's being on the team beyond 2017-18.

This was a specific hypothetical trade to CDG's post. In that scenario, they'd move LMA to PHX, clearing out $21.5 million in cap space. Mills has a cheap cap hold (which may or may not increase from the current $6.8 million) allowing the Spurs to use that money to retain Mills, Dedmon, and reacquire Hill.

It's not something I am in favor of; mainly because their would be a big hole at PF and while LMA is inconsistent, he still is capable of big offensive nights and playing solid defense.

I think Parker is going to be on the team after next season, it's a matter of how much, how long, and his role on the team but I don't think he won't be a spurs then. If he still wants to play, then they'll bring him back. I think that having Parker finish his career in San Antonio (along with Manu, Duncan, and Robinson) is important to the Spurs and could be important as a pitch to key free agents down the road.

[urunobili]

Jennings just became avail...

[NASpurs]

836635762665926660

[SAGirl]

^^ Good for him.
Considering that the Spurs will have issues even re-upping their bench guys who are due to get paid, looking at free agents seems out of the question unless Spurs are going to trade some guys in big contracts.

[spursistan]

Redick is going to be 33 years old and won't get the same opportunities in the Spurs system that he does with the Clippers, tbh..his 3-point % sees a 7% decline when Chris Paul is out of the lineup, for example..:tu..Enough with +30 year-olds at the fag end of their primes.. Spurs slow roster reconstruction should be geared toward adding players that are on the same timeline with Kawhi (dudes born in early 1990s or younger)..I am not even that exited about a CP3/G.Hill even if they become available, but would take them for lack of optimal options..

[coachmac87]

Redick is going to be 33 years old and won't get the same opportunities in the Spurs system that he does with the Clippers, tbh..his 3-point % sees a 7% decline when Chris Paul is out of the lineup, for example..


To be fair I'd look at the shots Danny Green takes in our system..i dunno percentages but I'd assume more than the majority are uncontested. Redick IMO and if in our system would have a Belineli role who ran off screens and moved off the ball etc.

I really don't think its close on debating who's the better shooter when it comes to Redick or Green..

[Chinook]

To be fair I'd look at the shots Danny Green takes in our system..i dunno percentages but I'd assume more than the majority are uncontested. Redick IMO and if in our system would have a Belineli role who ran off screens and moved off the ball etc.

I really don't think its close on debating who's the better shooter when it comes to Redick or Green..

Almost certain Green would score more points on the Clips than he does now and probably on a higher percentage. I don't exactly know how well Redick would do on the looks he'd get in SA, but he'd get fewer total. I'm pretty confident in that.

[HarlemHeat37]

To be fair I'd look at the shots Danny Green takes in our system..i dunno percentages but I'd assume more than the majority are uncontested. Redick IMO and if in our system would have a Belineli role who ran off screens and moved off the ball etc.

I really don't think its close on debating who's the better shooter when it comes to Redick or Green..

Green's looks are nowhere near the quality that they used to be, which is part of the reason his %s the past 2 seasons have been significantly worse than in previous seasons(along with his shot attempts declining significantly, which kills rhythm or role certainty)..he didn't magically forget how to shoot..most of Green's open looks are off broken plays, which he sucks at, for whatever reason(he shoots better on semi-open 3s than he does on wide open broken plays, statistically)..

The system isn't the same as when Beli was with the Spurs, too..

I just wouldn't want to pay a 33-year old who doesn't play defense on a team that doesn't have any guard penetration to consistently create looks..the Clippers run a significant % of their plays through the Paul-Redick combo, which wouldn't work with the Spurs..

[SpursFan86]

http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/18789802/george-hill-utah-jazz-discussing-last-minute-contract-extension


The Utah Jazz (http://www.espn.com/nba/team/_/name/utah/utah-jazz) and point guard George Hill (http://www.espn.com/nba/player/_/id/3438/george-hill) are in active discussions on a contract extension in an attempt to strike a deal before Tuesday's 11:59 p.m. ET deadline for such deals, according to league sources.

Sources told ESPN that the sides continue to work toward an agreement in hopes of beating the league's annual deadline for what is known in the NBA as a renegotiation-and-extension. Such deals can't be struck between March 1 and June 30 of any salary-cap year.

Hill has recently declined to discuss a potential contract extension but told ESPN in November that he was "very interested" in the idea. Sources said the Jazz are determined to keep Hill for the long term even if extension terms can't be reached Tuesday and Hill decides he would rather test the open market starting July 1.

[spursistan]

836654185068150784Not happening..CIA Pop was on the phone..

[Chinook]

Utah obviously is trying to get him to take an increase this season in order to take less in following seasons. Depending on what Utah is offering, I think Hill might be making a mistake. I doubt the market is going to be as great at it was last year, at least not if he's keen on being on a legit team.

[spursistan]

think this will be boil down to Jazz (money) or Spurs (family + championship aspirations = discount) in the summer..

[gambit1990]

was really curious as to what kind of money hill's extension was gonna be worth.

[Chinook]

think this will be boil down to Jazz (money) or Spurs (family + championship aspirations = discount) in the summer..

Probably won't. Can't imagine the Spurs giving away that many players.

[Seventyniner]

think this will be boil down to Jazz (money) or Spurs (family + championship aspirations = discount) in the summer..

It would have to be a semi-leap of faith on Hill's part, the Spurs can't talk to him right now.

[spursistan]

Probably won't. Can't imagine the Spurs giving away that many players.*dreaming* Can we get Phil Jackson taking on a Parker expiring contract this summer?For the first time PATFO has to take on the Parker question.. Manu would have likely be retired, so can't see a more opportune and logical timing to move on completely from the Big 3 era..

[gambit1990]

For the first time PATFO has to take on the Parker question.. Manu would have likely be retired, so can't see a more opportune and logical timing to move on completely from the Big 3 era..
i was wondering about this too lately, if the spurs would actually move tony.

[SAGirl]

think this will be boil down to Jazz (money) or Spurs (family + championship aspirations = discount) in the summer..
I wish... I am depressed Dedmon seems like a long shot. :lol

[SpursFan86]

Sorry, but I just can't see PATFO trading or getting rid of Tony. Doesn't matter how shitty he is :lol I'd love to be proven wrong though...that contract is killing us.

[SAGirl]

*dreaming* Can we get Phil Jackson taking on a Parker expiring contract this summer?For the first time PATFO has to take on the Parker question.. Manu would have likely be retired, so can't see a more opportune and logical timing to move on completely from the Big 3 era..
Not going to happen. You better hope Pop retires. :lol

Frankly probably watching Murray develop, along with Davis, Kyle and whomever they bring is going to be your joy next season I hope.

I am pessimistic about offseason additions unless they involve two types of players:
1. draft picks/undrafted FA (more Anderson/Simmons, Bertans/Murray/Forbes like additions. For example, maybe they bring up Milutinov and draft a wing to develop or something of that nature).
2. vets that are ringchasing/win now mode, like DWest, Lee, etc.

Dedmon, Mills and Simmons are due a raise so right now just keeping their guys is probably the goal and challenge. At least this is my impression.

[bklynspursfan]

*dreaming* Can we get Phil Jackson taking on a Parker expiring contract this summer?For the first time PATFO has to take on the Parker question.. Manu would have likely be retired, so can't see a more opportune and logical timing to move on completely from the Big 3 era..

It's not the first time they're taking on the Parker question. He was in *some* rumors years back. (back when he had much better trade value) People just have to come to the realization that despite what they think of him now, he has earned the right to retire a Spur. It's really that simple. Same with Manu... If Parker decides to play past his current contract, there is no doubt about it he will take significantly less than he is now. I'm glad he and Manu got a nice pay day tbh. We still have a formidable team despite that, which is a credit to PATFO

[TheGreatYacht]

George Hill turns 31 in a couple of months.... no thanks :lol

TOSB 30yr+ old Hill and Green backcourt :vomit:

[cd98]

Hill will stay w Jazz.

[gambit1990]

so if patty walks the spurs are hoping redick takes what they offered mills?

jj is currently making $7.3 mil. i would imagine he wants to make at least $10 to $12 a year. the same with patty.

i've never been a green hater but it would be nice to have a consistent 3 point shooter in the SL.