Woj: Free agent forward Dante Cunningham has agreed to a deal with the Spurs [Archive] - Page 2

TimDunkem

07-17-2018, 12:58 PM

Also :lol at Kyle not flourishing because he's barely gotten PT relative to others.

For once, it wasn't because Pop was being stubborn. This time it was because Kyle Fathead No Balls To Shoot Anderson fucking sucks and always took a step back just when you thought he was making strides. He had his minutes taken from others because he either wasn't good, or playing aggresively. It's his fault and no one else's.

SAGirl

07-17-2018, 01:00 PM

TimDunkem

07-17-2018, 01:00 PM

Kyle was asked to create, be a corner shooter, cutter, and mark the best wings, while being the backup sf/pf and starting sf/pf. If anything, he didn't have a clear role to be consistent. A lot has to do with the injuries last season. Kyle and Patty were asked to do things they probably shouldn't be doing.

So, basically - after finally recieving his golden opportunity as a pass first forward and "versatile" offensive player - he couldn't remain consistent at anything and, after 4 years, still refused to shoot the ball? Yeah. He sucks.

SAGirl

07-17-2018, 01:00 PM

MVPCues

07-17-2018, 01:00 PM

Disagree. I don't think we saw enough of that enough to be strongly opinionated anyways. Kyle barely played rotation minutes 2 years ago and last season Kawhi was injured. They may have had more opportunities 3 seasons ago, when it was barely Kyle's second season in the league and the first time he really got playing time and he was still in the bench most of his minutes and struggling to be consistent but in terms of his prior playing time his second season, it was limited. I don't think you can harbor a strong opinion on it either way bc limited samples and opportunities. It's moot anyways.

Edit: I just checked in basketball reference and Kawhi/Kyle together were a positive for the team since 2015-16. It's obviously limited samples each year that register between 250-300 minutes tops and last season barely 44 minutes but in limited samples the indication is to the contrary. The team was winning games when they shared the court most of the time.

How many players paired up with Kawhi were not a positive? How did Kawhi and Kyle together compare to other positive combinations? That is what matters. "The team was winning games when they shared the court most of the time" means nothing since the Spurs were winning games most of the time period.

TimDunkem

07-17-2018, 01:02 PM

^still doesn't prove your opinion. There were negative pairings with Leonard in that time frame still. Kyle wasn't one. Still it was limited opportunities as I said. And the point is moot bc it cannot be decided on the future anyways.

As for ernest787. Am I bothering you? :lol

Kyle is not a good fit on this team, nor is he a good offensive player. Period. This team won despite having his worthless ass on the roster.

SAGirl

07-17-2018, 01:03 PM

So, basically - after finally recieving his golden opportunity as a pass first forward and "versatile" offensive player - he couldn't remain consistent at anything and, after 4 years, still refused to shoot the ball? Yeah. He sucks.
He was fine last season. Is he a go-to offensive player that's going to replace an MVP in Kawhi? No. But there's very few guys that can give you that and unfortunately some like Derozan can give you scoring but not everything else that makes Kawhi an MVP if he's healthy. Is Dante Cunningham going to give you this things? Nope.

The team is screwed it Kawhi gets traded which is why they don't want to trade him.It's pretty simple.

SAGirl

07-17-2018, 01:04 PM

How many players paired up with Kawhi were not a positive? How did Kawhi and Kyle together compare to other positive combinations? That is what matters. "The team was winning games when they shared the court most of the time" means nothing since the Spurs were winning games most of the time period.
There were some. You can look it up in basketball reference. Some were not as big a positive as one would have thought either.

SAGirl

07-17-2018, 01:05 PM

Kyle is not a good fit on this team, nor is he a good offensive player. Period. This team won despite having his worthless ass on the roster.
:lol

TimDunkem

07-17-2018, 01:06 PM

He was fine last season. Is he a go-to offensive player that's going to replace an MVP in Kawhi? No. But there's very few guys that can give you that and unfortunately some like Derozan can give you scoring but not everything else that makes Kawhi an MVP if he's healthy. Is Dante Cunningham going to give you this things? Nope.

The team is screwed it Kawhi gets traded which is why they don't want to trade him.It's pretty simple.

Yeah, but there are plenty of players that at least have the balls to shot the rock. Kyle isn't one of them, unfortunately.

SAGirl

07-17-2018, 01:08 PM

Yeah, but there are plenty of players that at least have the balls to shot the rock. Kyle isn't one of them, unfortunately.
Your dislike for him is noted Tim. Hopefully you don't have to watch 2000 minutes of Dante in his place next season...

tbdog

07-17-2018, 01:10 PM

So, basically - after finally recieving his golden opportunity as a pass first forward and "versatile" offensive player - he couldn't remain consistent at anything and, after 4 years, still refused to shoot the ball? Yeah. He sucks.

I am happy to concede that his a poor to average shooter. I felt that his shooting will get better as his career progresses as he does not require athleticism to get a shot off. If he could shoot at above average, he would have been offered far more and become one of the better 3&D guys out there. Last season the team lacked serious amounts of shooting. Green regressed to an above shooter. Danny's minutes dropped ever so slightly despite having a huge gap in wing minutes available since Leonard wasn't on the court. Hence why Forbes took minutes from players that deserved more. There is a reason why Patty played 33mins per game in the Playoffs. Spurs needed scorers. Guys like Kyle benefit when around them they have good scorers because he never has to have his number called to produce positiveness on the court.

TimDunkem

07-17-2018, 01:10 PM

Your dislike for him is noted Tim. Hopefully you don't have to watch 2000 minutes of Dante in his place next season...

At least there won't be anyone telling us that Dante doesn't suck. Best part of it is that we only have to deal with his suckage for one season instead of four.

TimDunkem

07-17-2018, 01:11 PM

I am happy to concede that his a poor to average shooter. I felt that his shooting will get better as his career progresses as he does not require athleticism to get a shot off. If he could shoot at above average, he would have been offered far more and become one of the better 3&D guys out there. Last season the team lacked serious amounts of shooting. Green regressed to an above shooter. Danny's minutes dropped ever so slightly despite having a huge gap in wing minutes available since Leonard wasn't on the court. Hence why Forbes took minutes from players that deserved more. There is a reason why Patty played 33mins per game in the Playoffs. Spurs needed scorers. Guys like Kyle benefit when around them they have good scorers because he never has to have his number called to produce positiveness on the court.

That's fine. He's a niche player, but let's not pretend that he isn't a below average talent.

RD2191

07-17-2018, 01:11 PM

If Kyle were any good he'd still be a Spur, it's that simple.

tbdog

07-17-2018, 01:13 PM

That's fine. He's a niche player, but let's not pretend that he isn't a below average talent.

He is a good defender. That already makes him above the average talent. Above average talent gets you the full MLE. Which he got.

TimDunkem

07-17-2018, 01:14 PM

If Kyle were any good he'd still be a Spur, it's that simple.

This. The Spurs obviously loved Fathead too. You have to be really fucking shit and about to be overpaid for the Spurs to open the door for you and let you go. :lol

MVPCues

07-17-2018, 01:15 PM

There were some. You can look it up in basketball reference. Some were not as big a positive as one would have thought either.

No thanks. Since you used that for your argument, I think you should be the one to provide that information to add credence to your argument given the inherent flaw of what you said without comparisons.

TimDunkem

07-17-2018, 01:16 PM

He is a good defender. That already makes him above the average talent. Above average talent gets you the full MLE. Which he got.

Getting a steal here and there after getting blown by isn't being a great defender. He played angles well but he couldn't stop anyone. Also, let's not talk about the contract he got because we can go on all day about players who recieved way more than they deserved. A big contract is not indicative of talent in every case.

cd98

07-17-2018, 01:21 PM

Getting a steal here and there after getting blown by isn't being a great defender. He played angles well but he couldn't stop anyone. Also, let's not talk about the contract he got because we can go on all day about players who recieved way more than they deserved. A big contract is not indicative of talent in every case.

Naw, Anderson didn't get blown by and he was a good one on one defender. That's why he got signed to a big contract. He's not an elite talent, but he's a good NBA player that can be a starter or a key guy off the bench for a good team. Offensively, yes, he's challenged and that's why no one guards him outside the three point line. If he could shoot 3s at a 40% clip, the Spurs would have gladly matched. He's better than what we have on the roster at SF outside of Kawhi, but his price tag was too high, so now we have what we have. He wasn't going to be the difference between 50 wins or not, but he could make a difference in a series in the playoffs depending on who we play.

Plus, he's still developing. He could be a 40% shooter in two years. Spurs just didn't want to take that risk at his price tag.

TimDunkem

07-17-2018, 01:23 PM

Did he really just say Anderson never got blown by? :lmao

TimDunkem

07-17-2018, 01:24 PM

Naw, Anderson didn't get blown by and he was a good one on one defender. That's why he got signed to a big contract. He's not an elite talent, but he's a good NBA player that can be a starter or a key guy off the bench for a good team. Offensively, yes, he's challenged and that's why no one guards him outside the three point line. If he could shoot 3s at a 40% clip, the Spurs would have gladly matched. He's better than what we have on the roster at SF outside of Kawhi, but his price tag was too high, so now we have what we have. He wasn't going to be the difference between 50 wins or not, but he could make a difference in a series in the playoffs depending on who we play.

Plus, he's still developing. He could be a 40% shooter in two years. Spurs just didn't want to take that risk at his price tag.

What team would he make a difference in a series against?

TheGreatYacht

07-17-2018, 01:29 PM

Fathead never got blown by and is a great one on one defender? Jesus Christ.

SAGirl

07-17-2018, 01:44 PM

No thanks. Since you used that for your argument, I think you should be the one to provide that information to add credence to your argument given the inherent flaw of what you said without comparisons.
I am in a tablet. It's easy to look for it. More difficult to be linking the stuff. I wouldn't have said it if it weren't true. Might post it later but there's really not much of a point to these discussions tbh. The guy is gone so /shrug.

Actually, Kawhi might be gone too, though I hope not... And I have believed he will not be traded.

Chinook

07-17-2018, 01:53 PM

Doesn't support your point IMO.

No, but it does refute your point that the Spurs winning games with Leonard and Anderson means Anderson himself played well. A much stronger point would have been Kyle's and Leonard's 20.8 net rating in 2016-2017, which was highest for both players. That would (with your caveats noted) imply that Leonard and Anderson made each other better. I wouldn't disagree with that and wanted Kyle back as you seem to be forgetting. But Kyle last year was not as good as Leonard, and especially offensively, he didn't want to be that guy enough even without Kawhi. I think we can agree on that. SA with Leonard this year is much better than they were last year without him, including the talent drop from Anderson to the others. Anderson was worth quite a bit to me, and I was really confident SA would quickly match an MLE deal when it was offered. Them giving Bertans almost as much and Forbes anything at all just highlights that. I still think the team will be just fine without him, though.

Mugen

07-17-2018, 01:57 PM

:lol Is this thread already longer than the "Thank you TP" thread?

MVPCues

07-17-2018, 02:08 PM

I am in a tablet. It's easy to look for it. More difficult to be linking the stuff. I wouldn't have said it if it weren't true. Might post it later but there's really not much of a point to these discussions tbh. The guy is gone so /shrug.

Actually, Kawhi might be gone too, though I hope not... And I have believed he will not be traded.

Yeah, fair enough. The logic flaw just struck me. I think you know I'm not a Kyle hater, but hope doesn't spring eternal with me. He had plenty of chances. Solid and very versatile player who needed to develop a shot so he could be more of a threat. He didn't do that. Matching his offer was sort of 50/50 with me.

cd98

07-17-2018, 02:23 PM

What team would he make a difference in a series against?

He has shown he can guard Harden effectively. He has also shown that he can use his length to guard multiple positions, so when the Spurs play a team, like GSW, he is valuable because he can switch. In fact, the trend to move to long players is one the Spurs have been doing for the last several years because length in wingspan and height in positionless basketball make switching much easier and also allows the Spurs to take advantage of switches on offense.

Replacing him with a vet minimum is a downgrade, even if Anderson isn't a superstar. I would have loved to see a defensive line up that included Kawhi, Anderson, Murray, and LMA. We didn't have that in 2017 because Murray and Anderson were not good enough yet.

gambit1990

07-17-2018, 02:26 PM

:lol Is this thread already longer than the "Thank you TP" thread?
:lol

gambit1990

07-17-2018, 02:34 PM

better than signing rodney stuckey at least...

ernest787

07-17-2018, 04:23 PM

did someone just seriously try to say Fathead is an asset against the Dubs?!?!?!?

TimDunkem

07-17-2018, 04:24 PM

did someone just seriously try to say Fathead is an asset against the Dubs?!?!?!?

I mean...What do you say to that? It's just pure rubbish.

cd021

07-17-2018, 06:11 PM

Honestly you're probably right. I'd rather give him the rest of the MLE so we have him under 4 years of a low cost contract. Start developing him sooner too.

But I don't think PATFO will do that.

Agreed. I think PATFO used the rest of the MLE on Cunningham, so it is probably not possible. But if they used the mini MLE instead, then they could offer Metu a 3 or 4 year deal for dirt cheap.

LittleCriminal

07-17-2018, 06:15 PM

Okie dokie. They had Kawhi last year too, yet Kyle flourished.

After 4 years, 8pts 5reb in 30 minutes of action is not flourishing..
Quit with this nonsense in which you speak.

LittleCriminal

07-17-2018, 06:17 PM

did someone just seriously try to say Fathead is an asset against the Dubs?!?!?!?

Who speaks such nonsense?
Only a player fan would even think to say that.. Not an actual spur fan.
Was it dpg?? Sahurl? Another troll?

SAGirl

07-17-2018, 06:50 PM

No, but it does refute your point that the Spurs winning games with Leonard and Anderson means Anderson himself played well. A much stronger point would have been Kyle's and Leonard's 20.8 net rating in 2016-2017, which was highest for both players. That would (with your caveats noted) imply that Leonard and Anderson made each other better. I wouldn't disagree with that and wanted Kyle back as you seem to be forgetting. But Kyle last year was not as good as Leonard, and especially offensively, he didn't want to be that guy enough even without Kawhi. I think we can agree on that. SA with Leonard this year is much better than they were last year without him, including the talent drop from Anderson to the others. Anderson was worth quite a bit to me, and I was really confident SA would quickly match an MLE deal when it was offered. Them giving Bertans almost as much and Forbes anything at all just highlights that. I still think the team will be just fine without him, though.
If they have Kawhi they will be fine. Would have been fine last season too had he come back after ASB. Without Kawhi it's anyone's guess how this goes.

I never compared KA to Kiwi. Very few guys can really give you all Kawhi gives you if healthy and committed. He's a legit MVP and those guys are pretty unique.

FWIW, I expect improvements from the guards. I like both Dijon and Derrick and think/hope Murray will be better offensively and White will be helpful right away when given opportunities. That alone will make the team better.

Fusternino

07-17-2018, 07:26 PM

Agreed. I think PATFO used the rest of the MLE on Cunningham, so it is probably not possible. But if they used the mini MLE instead, then they could offer Metu a 3 or 4 year deal for dirt cheap.

Yeah, I saw that. What are the rules for the mini-MLE? Can the last two years be team options just like with a first round pick?

Seventyniner

07-17-2018, 09:01 PM

did someone just seriously try to say Fathead is an asset against the Dubs?!?!?!?

They would be right if they did.

sasaint

07-17-2018, 09:05 PM

Did he really just say Anderson never got blown by? :lmao

I was skimming and missed the "by." Had me feeling sorry for Kyle.

cd021

07-18-2018, 02:15 AM

Yeah, I saw that. What are the rules for the mini-MLE? Can the last two years be team options just like with a first round pick?

The Spurs can't sign Metu with the MMLE, I think, but could with the regular MLE. I was talking about Cunningham and whether the Spurs gave him a 1 year deal using the MMLE. I think It is a max of two years, unless I am confusing it with another exception.

I was hoping Metu would sign a four year deal, similar to Isaac Bonga's- which starts out at only $1 million

TheCerebral1

07-18-2018, 07:31 AM

Scrub bench player. That's all. He has no value at 31. He'll be waived by November 1st.

jyra

07-28-2018, 10:49 AM

So multiple sites now have his salary listed as $2,487,000 and Belinelli's contract taking up the rest of the MLE.

I really want to know why he wasn't signed to a minimum deal. I would have meant only about 300k less for Cunningham while allowing the remaining MLE to be used for signing a rookie like Metu/Blossomgame to a non minimum deal like mentioned above or to get a buyout guy later in the season if they didn't want to use it now. On top of that the team also could have saved around $1M in paid salary, explanation courtesy of Chinook:

One-year vet-min deals only count as second-year min deals. The player gets paid for their tenure, but the difference is covered by the league as opposed to the team. That's why 1-and-1 deals for players like Manu are kind of stupid unless that player retires, because they just cost the team money for no reason.

The second year minimum for this season is $1,512,601. To expand a little on that here is also the corresponding excerpt from the cbafaq:

When a player has been in the NBA for three or more seasons, and is playing under a one-year, 10-day or Rest-of-Season contract at the minimum salary, the league reimburses the team for part of his salary -- any amount above the minimum salary for a two-year veteran. For example, the minimum salary for a two-year veteran in 2017-18 is $1,471,382, so for a ten-year veteran, with a minimum salary of $2,328,652, the league would reimburse the team $857,270. Only the two-year minimum salary is included in the team salary, not the player's full salary. They do this so teams won't shy away from signing older veterans simply because they are more expensive than younger veterans.

Seems like a waste to not take advantage of this opportunity.

Chinook

07-28-2018, 11:14 AM

So multiple sites now have his salary listed as $2,487,000 and Belinelli's contract taking up the rest of the MLE.

I really want to know why he wasn't signed to a minimum deal. I would have meant only about 300k less for Cunningham while allowing the remaining MLE to be used for signing a rookie like Metu/Blossomgame to a non minimum deal like mentioned above or to get a buyout guy later in the season if they didn't want to use it now. On top of that the team also could have saved around $1M in paid salary, explanation courtesy of Chinook:

The second year minimum for this season is $1,512,601. To expand a little on that here is also the corresponding excerpt from the cbafaq:

Seems like a waste to not take advantage of this opportunity.

I'm not sure those sites are correct. But even if they are, $300k is not nothing, especially to a player like Cun, and it could have been the difference in him signing with SA over a competitor. If I were looking for a job, and one company offered like 14 percent more, I'd definitely go into it with them as the "team" to beat.

I completely agree that from the Spurs' perspective, it would have been nice to save that cap space. But if Cunningham is supposed to be part of the rotation this year, then it's not a bad price to pay. I'd still prefer that they used the LLE rather than the MLE to make this happen, though, because the latter could be used to sign a guy for three or four years.

Dverde

09-28-2018, 12:56 PM

Getting a good vibe from him so far. DeMar name dropped him the other day as an important roster guy.

ceperez

09-28-2018, 02:51 PM

Getting a good vibe from him so far. DeMar name dropped him the other day as an important roster guy.

Maybe! He's got size 6'8" and can hit the three. Did he not play with DeMar in Toronto?

Chinook

09-29-2018, 12:30 PM

I have unjustifiably high hopes for him too. TD21 said Cun was a guy expecting to get a solid rotation spot. I disagree, but I do think he can earn one pretty easily if he embraces the tone-setting role. With LMA being quiet, DeRozan being new and Murray being green, there's no one really projecting the hard-nosed edge I think the team will need to take the next step. Cunningham seems like he can do it. Bertans might follow. The team doesn't have an ace defender anymore, but they do have the physical talent.

weeks

09-30-2018, 06:57 AM

Cun

no. never this

pad300

09-30-2018, 10:08 AM

Cun no. never this

We used to have a LDN, could his replacement be a Cunny?

CGD

09-30-2018, 11:49 AM

We used to have a LDN, could his replacement be a Cunny?

Here we go...

cjw

10-23-2018, 12:32 AM

He’s not at all useful offensively, but his rebounding (12!), decent defense and six fouls tipped the balance tonight.

Until Metu is ready, which won’t be this year, or if Huestis gets healthy and is playable, he’s the only stopgap from having zero depth behind Gay to guard the wing.

gospursgojas

10-23-2018, 12:34 AM

Props. Did as best he could on lebron and used up gouls as he should.

12 boards doe

Chinook

10-23-2018, 12:40 AM

The Spurs used to be a team where you needed to be a specialist in something to play. Their talent level has fallen to the point where hustle players can get minutes. You see it a lot with lottery teams or lower-level playoff teams. Cun can do enough things other players on the team can't to have use. That's more an indictment of the roster than it is a credit to Dante.