timvp
06-26-2019, 05:02 PM
While there are scenarios in which the Spurs trade DeMar DeRozan (https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=280117) in order to gain added financial flexibility to spend on free agents this summer, those scenarios are unlikely. The much more reasonable outcome during the offseason involves the straightforward plan (https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=279323) previously discussed: San Antonio re-signs Rudy Gay and then spends the mid-level exception (MLE) in free agency.
The Spurs will have access to the full MLE, which will have a starting value of approximately $9.2 million. They can spend some or all of that money and can split it among multiple players if they so choose. The maximum value of an MLE contract is $39 million over four years.
In What Scenarios Would The Spurs Not Spend The MLE?
San Antonio doesn't have to spend the MLE. However, they can't carry it forward to next summer and the Spurs aren't in danger of going over the luxury tax threshold, even if a bidding war breaks out for Gay and the Spurs also use the entire MLE. Thus, other considerations would be at play if the Spurs keep their purse strings closed.
For example, if the Spurs have their eyes on possibly opening up salary cap space for max free agents next summer (that would involve trading DeRozan and declining the option on LaMarcus Aldridge), they would be reluctant to add any long-term salary to the books this offseason.
If the Spurs aren't shopping for MLE free agents right at the opening bell of free agency on June 30th, that could also point to the front office still weighing the possibilities of a DeRozan trade. As discussed, in the right circumstances, the Spurs could open up north of $30 million this summer by trading DeRozan.
The Spurs might also opt to be patient to see which free agents fall through the cracks, as is custom in the NBA. Additionally, they could keep MLE money in their back pockets in case an interesting player hits the buyout market during the regular season. Remember, last season players like Wesley Matthews, Markieff Morris and Enes Kanter became free agents around the trade deadline in February.
The Case For Limiting The MLE Spending To Two Years
While the Spurs don't have any cap room this summer, the forecast quickly changes going forward. Next summer, DeRozan has a player option and the Spurs have a team option on Aldridge. The following year, Patty Mills' contract ends and there are only rookie scale contracts left on the books.
With that flexibility in mind, the Spurs may opt to limit their MLE spending to one- or two-year contracts. Unless San Antonio can land a player they see as part of their long-term plan, does it make sense to hand out an MLE contract that spans three or four years?
Gay's contract should be -- and hopefully will be -- at most two years in length. There's a good argument to align an MLE signing to that same time frame.
The Spurs should be able to land a quality player with the two-year, $18.8 million offer they can put on the table using the MLE. Specifically, I like the idea of trying to steal a restricted free agent on a team juggling salary cap considerations with such an offer. (More on this in the next installment.)
The Case For No Limit
The best case for not putting a limit on MLE spending is simple: player quality. The Spurs can get a better player offering $39 million over four years compared to $18.8 million over two years.
Also, the long-term financial flexibility very well could be overblown. The Spurs have a few young players that they will likely want to extend or re-sign before that cap space opens up two years from now -- most notably Dejounte Murray, Derrick White, Jakob Poeltl, Bryn Forbes and Davis Bertans.
Stressing about maximizing flexibility might be a fool's errand when so much will change in the next 24 months.
What Type Of Player Should The Spurs Target?
Let's start with what the Spurs don't need. At point guard, the Spurs have a litany of options: White, Murray, Mills, Forbes and even Lonnie Walker IV, who played a majority of his minutes last year at PG. All five of those players have also played shooting guard, where there's also Belinelli -- and DeRozan can play SG as well (in fact, in a vacuum, that's still probably where he'd be best utilized).
Center has Aldridge (who will need to play more and more center as he ages) and Poeltl. A third center is a need but, barring injury, it'd be a bit role.
As anyone who has followed this team can tell you, forward is the position of need. At small forward, DeRozan is in line to take most of those minutes. He's an imperfect fit but with how the roster is constructed, it appears to be his permanent home. Behind DeRozan at small forward, options exist (Gay, Belinelli, Walker, Bertans) but none that would be considered optimally sized or skilled for the position, particularly on the defensive end.
Power forward, too, could use some reenforcing. Aldridge is there but he's more of a center in today's game. Gay and Bertans are suitable backups in a lot of matchups -- but not all. Against burly or uber athletic power forwards, San Antonio's current bench has no answer.
Factoring all that in, I see this as the order of need:
1) A long small forward who can also play power forward
2) A small forward
3) A power forward who can also play center
4) A power forward
5) A shooting guard who can be stretched to play small forward
6) A center
What Skills Should The Spurs Value The Most In Free Agency?
Shooting has to be highest on the list. Three-point shooting, specifically. Last season, it was difficult enough dealing with two non-three-point shooters in DeRozan and Aldridge. Add in a questionable shooter in Murray and perhaps a bigger role for a non-shooter in Poeltl and the Spurs, as constituted, really don't have room for another rotation player who can't hit threes.
Defense would be up there right behind shooting. The Spurs have plenty of offensive pieces; scoring is unlikely to be much of an obstacle to success (unless a further step back is taken in terms of three-point shooting ability). The holes in the roster are mostly due to defensive concerns.
Everything else takes a backseat. Sure, it'd be nice if the free agent is a good passer, for example, but it all pales in comparison to three-point shooting and defense.
How Many Minutes Are Up For Grabs?
To take a simplistic look at the situation, the Spurs have nine players who are likely to be in the rotation. If we conservatively estimate their 2019-20 minutes per game -- DeRozan 32, Aldridge 30, White 28, Murray 24, Gay 22, Forbes 22, Mills 16, Bertans 14, Poeltl 14 -- there are 38 unaccounted minutes available.
Obviously, that's not factoring minutes in for a few players who could crack the rotation (Belinelli and Walker, most notably) and those estimates are all on the low side of each player's realistic range. But I think a free agent could look at San Antonio's roster and not be completely scared off due to a perceived lack of minutes.
The Spurs will have access to the full MLE, which will have a starting value of approximately $9.2 million. They can spend some or all of that money and can split it among multiple players if they so choose. The maximum value of an MLE contract is $39 million over four years.
In What Scenarios Would The Spurs Not Spend The MLE?
San Antonio doesn't have to spend the MLE. However, they can't carry it forward to next summer and the Spurs aren't in danger of going over the luxury tax threshold, even if a bidding war breaks out for Gay and the Spurs also use the entire MLE. Thus, other considerations would be at play if the Spurs keep their purse strings closed.
For example, if the Spurs have their eyes on possibly opening up salary cap space for max free agents next summer (that would involve trading DeRozan and declining the option on LaMarcus Aldridge), they would be reluctant to add any long-term salary to the books this offseason.
If the Spurs aren't shopping for MLE free agents right at the opening bell of free agency on June 30th, that could also point to the front office still weighing the possibilities of a DeRozan trade. As discussed, in the right circumstances, the Spurs could open up north of $30 million this summer by trading DeRozan.
The Spurs might also opt to be patient to see which free agents fall through the cracks, as is custom in the NBA. Additionally, they could keep MLE money in their back pockets in case an interesting player hits the buyout market during the regular season. Remember, last season players like Wesley Matthews, Markieff Morris and Enes Kanter became free agents around the trade deadline in February.
The Case For Limiting The MLE Spending To Two Years
While the Spurs don't have any cap room this summer, the forecast quickly changes going forward. Next summer, DeRozan has a player option and the Spurs have a team option on Aldridge. The following year, Patty Mills' contract ends and there are only rookie scale contracts left on the books.
With that flexibility in mind, the Spurs may opt to limit their MLE spending to one- or two-year contracts. Unless San Antonio can land a player they see as part of their long-term plan, does it make sense to hand out an MLE contract that spans three or four years?
Gay's contract should be -- and hopefully will be -- at most two years in length. There's a good argument to align an MLE signing to that same time frame.
The Spurs should be able to land a quality player with the two-year, $18.8 million offer they can put on the table using the MLE. Specifically, I like the idea of trying to steal a restricted free agent on a team juggling salary cap considerations with such an offer. (More on this in the next installment.)
The Case For No Limit
The best case for not putting a limit on MLE spending is simple: player quality. The Spurs can get a better player offering $39 million over four years compared to $18.8 million over two years.
Also, the long-term financial flexibility very well could be overblown. The Spurs have a few young players that they will likely want to extend or re-sign before that cap space opens up two years from now -- most notably Dejounte Murray, Derrick White, Jakob Poeltl, Bryn Forbes and Davis Bertans.
Stressing about maximizing flexibility might be a fool's errand when so much will change in the next 24 months.
What Type Of Player Should The Spurs Target?
Let's start with what the Spurs don't need. At point guard, the Spurs have a litany of options: White, Murray, Mills, Forbes and even Lonnie Walker IV, who played a majority of his minutes last year at PG. All five of those players have also played shooting guard, where there's also Belinelli -- and DeRozan can play SG as well (in fact, in a vacuum, that's still probably where he'd be best utilized).
Center has Aldridge (who will need to play more and more center as he ages) and Poeltl. A third center is a need but, barring injury, it'd be a bit role.
As anyone who has followed this team can tell you, forward is the position of need. At small forward, DeRozan is in line to take most of those minutes. He's an imperfect fit but with how the roster is constructed, it appears to be his permanent home. Behind DeRozan at small forward, options exist (Gay, Belinelli, Walker, Bertans) but none that would be considered optimally sized or skilled for the position, particularly on the defensive end.
Power forward, too, could use some reenforcing. Aldridge is there but he's more of a center in today's game. Gay and Bertans are suitable backups in a lot of matchups -- but not all. Against burly or uber athletic power forwards, San Antonio's current bench has no answer.
Factoring all that in, I see this as the order of need:
1) A long small forward who can also play power forward
2) A small forward
3) A power forward who can also play center
4) A power forward
5) A shooting guard who can be stretched to play small forward
6) A center
What Skills Should The Spurs Value The Most In Free Agency?
Shooting has to be highest on the list. Three-point shooting, specifically. Last season, it was difficult enough dealing with two non-three-point shooters in DeRozan and Aldridge. Add in a questionable shooter in Murray and perhaps a bigger role for a non-shooter in Poeltl and the Spurs, as constituted, really don't have room for another rotation player who can't hit threes.
Defense would be up there right behind shooting. The Spurs have plenty of offensive pieces; scoring is unlikely to be much of an obstacle to success (unless a further step back is taken in terms of three-point shooting ability). The holes in the roster are mostly due to defensive concerns.
Everything else takes a backseat. Sure, it'd be nice if the free agent is a good passer, for example, but it all pales in comparison to three-point shooting and defense.
How Many Minutes Are Up For Grabs?
To take a simplistic look at the situation, the Spurs have nine players who are likely to be in the rotation. If we conservatively estimate their 2019-20 minutes per game -- DeRozan 32, Aldridge 30, White 28, Murray 24, Gay 22, Forbes 22, Mills 16, Bertans 14, Poeltl 14 -- there are 38 unaccounted minutes available.
Obviously, that's not factoring minutes in for a few players who could crack the rotation (Belinelli and Walker, most notably) and those estimates are all on the low side of each player's realistic range. But I think a free agent could look at San Antonio's roster and not be completely scared off due to a perceived lack of minutes.