The Scola Trade Revisited

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

With today's events (Butler waived, Washington signed), that trade essentially ended up being Scola's rights for the money to sign Udoka and Washington.

Anyone want to still whine like a little girl about it?

[coopdogg3]

Don't forget about the 2nd round pick.

[AFBlue]

As of now, the Spurs gave up their only two low post threats outside of Duncan for cap space. Now that cap space has turned into two players, but neither Scola or those two players have proven a thing.

I think I'll wait to see how Udoka and Washington fit before revisiting the trade...

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Don't forget about the 2nd round pick.

I haven't, but 2009 is a little ways off. Mark that one down as TBD.

Even if they do nothing with it though, who is upset about getting Udoka and Washington for Scola?

[T Park]

I think I'll wait to see how Udoka and Washington fit

Uh, I'd say they are fitting fantasticly.

Washington is the first training camp invitee I know of that the Spurs have "created" room for.


Nice post aggie :tu

[AFBlue]

Even if they do nothing with it though, who is upset about getting Udoka and Washington for Scola?

Depends what Udoka and Washington mean to this team.

If they don't pan out, then it was a shit trade.

If they do, then maybe it wasn't bad, but you still have to weigh it against how Scola does....

[Phenomanul]

Hindsight

Spurs front office did not know that:

A) Beno would break a finger and,
B) That Jaque Vaughn would start the season on the injured list.
C) That Darius Washington, a last minute invitee, would impress everyone and make the team to fill a glaring need.
D) That Marcus Williams would fall short of NBA readiness.
E) Bonner's beard would make him a better player.
F) That Ime Udoka would gel with the team immediately.

The only things that they did factor, was that:

A) Spannoulis was going to return to Greece
B) Butler's discipline had a reason for being questioned.

Besides, the verdict is not completely out on this one... so don't act as if it is. i.e. we don't know where Scola's potential will take him.

All one can say is that the Spurs' FO played their cards with an element of risk... and that so far it seems as though the trade was not as unilateral as it was once thought to be.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Depends what Udoka and Washington mean to this team.

If they don't pan out, then it was a shit trade.

If they do, then maybe it wasn't bad, but you still have to weigh it against how Scola does....

As long as Bonner is making Scola his bitch, I could give a damn how Scola is doing.

[ChumpDumper]

Since when does this team need a low post threat? Big guys not named Duncan basically need to get out of the scorers' respective ways.

[Mr. Body]

Hindsight

Spurs front office did not know that:

A) Beno would break a finger and,
B) Jaque Vaughn would start the season on the injured list.
C) That Darius Washington, a last minute invitee, would impress everyone and make the team to fill a glaring need.
D) That Marcus Williams would fall short of NBA readiness.
E) Bonner's beard would make him a better player.

The only things that they did factor, was that:

A) Spannoulis was going to return to Greece
B) Butler's discipline had a reason for being questioned.

Besides, the verdict is not completely out on this one... so don't act as if it is. i.e. we don't know where Scola's potential will take him.

Pretty much. The question posed is a strawman argument. Given what they knew at the time about the future (nothing), the trade was ridiculous. That they've managed to get two promising players is great, but had nothing to do with whether, at the time, it was a good trade.

[T Park]

If they do, then maybe it wasn't bad, but you still have to weigh it against how Scola does....

Not really seeing as Scola didn't fit a need.

The Spurs are loaded at forward with Splitter, Mahinmi, Duncan, Oberto as it is.

[T Park]

The trade was made, to create money for Udoka.

?!?! Hello?!?!

[coopdogg3]

While I don't think Washington has anything to do with the trade, I do think the Spurs FO wanting to sign Ime was part of the reason for dumping Butler, and acquiring cash.

I see it as Ime and a 2nd rounder for Scola and Butler. Which still looks like a bad trade. But with Butler being cut, it does make it seem better. Spurs probably knew that Butler was crap, so I think it's fair to say that trade isn't as bad as it first seemed. We still need to see how Scola and Ime do though to determine for sure.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Since when does this team need a low post threat? Big guys not named Duncan basically need to get out of the scorers' respective ways.

Not to mention the fact someone's on shaky ground when they argue that Butler is a low post threat.

Can anyone see the Spurs running the offense through Butler in the WCF against Phoenix or Dallas in the WCF?

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Pretty much. The question posed is a strawman argument. Given what they knew at the time about the future (nothing), the trade was ridiculous. That they've managed to get two promising players is great, but had nothing to do with whether, at the time, it was a good trade.

It's not a straw man. By trading away Scola and Butler they created the flexibility needed to sign a Bowen replacement (Udoka), and also ended up with a roster spot open at the end of the bench that they could fill with someone who actually fills a need.

[timvp]

I don't get how Washington got added to the mix. Washington replaced the second round pick, which the Spurs had before and after the Scola trade.

[E20]

I think the big deal about this Scola deal was that Scola was Argentine and with the sucess of players from Argentina it was considered a bad move. I would have still liked him on the team I guess, but with or without him the Spurs were still gonna be contenders. So all these little offseason happenings that people are blowing there chodes for are pretty asinine.

[Bruno]

What will really make the Scola trade a good or a bad trade is what will Scola do in nba and it's too soon to say if he will succeed or not.

However, Butler waived, Mahinmi and Udoka looking good are factors that make the Scola trade better (or less worst).

[Amuseddaysleeper]

who would you rather have, Scola or Udoka?

[vander]

I keep reading that Scola is better than Oberto in just about every way. would you trade Oberto for washington and Oduka?

[SenorSpur]

I keep reading that Scola is better than Oberto in just about every way. would you trade Oberto for washington and Oduka?

Someone needs to tell me how Scola is better than Oberto. Yeah, I've been hearing all along that Scola was the 2nd best player on the Argentine Olympic team. I've not seen as much of Scola as I have Oberto, yet their games look awfully similar to me.

[Kori Ellis]

I don't get how Washington got added to the mix. Washington replaced the second round pick, which the Spurs had before and after the Scola trade.

I don't get it either :lol

Washington replaces Williams. He didn't replace anyone that was traded in the Scola trade and he wasn't signed with any cap room or anything. He's just a player on an unguaranteed contract :lol

Basically Butler and James White! were replaced with Mahinmi and Udoka.

Scola and Butler were still just traded for nothing. But it accomplished two things - got rid of two players they didn't want (creating open roster spots) and saved some money for the ownership group (though it didn't create cap room). I don't care much, but it is what it is.

[Obstructed_View]

If it didn't create cap room, then it saved the Spurs double Butler's salary plus whatever they aren't paying to Spanoulis. I'd wager that savings was a factor in deciding to eat a bad draft pick rather than try to stick it out and let Darius go.

[T Park]

Basically Butler and James White! were replaced with Mahinmi and Udoka.

I can live with that.

In two years that trade may prove to be a steal.

[timvp]

I'd wager that savings was a factor in deciding to eat a bad draft pick rather than try to stick it out and let Darius go.There was no money consideration in the Williams or Washington decision. They were both on unguaranteed contracts for the same amount.

[Bruno]

There was no money consideration in the Williams or Washington decision. They were both on unguaranteed contracts for the same amount.

Washington is more expensive than Williams as long as Spurs are above the tax. Washington cost is $1.2M and Williams cost was $850K.

[Obstructed_View]

There was no money consideration in the Williams or Washington decision. They were both on unguaranteed contracts for the same amount.
Sorry, that's not what I meant. The money savings gave them some latitude to decide that they didn't have to try to get value for the Marcus pick by keeping him and trying to force him to devlop, which most of us agreed was a possibility.

That second round pick is a resource, with value, regardless of the salary of the player selected. In retrospect for instance, the Spurs could have packaged that pick with Beno for a trade exception or a future second rounder and still ended up with Washington, right? There's some serious value in not having wasted that resource. I'm not second guessing the decision, but it doesn't take too many of those coupled with crippling luxury taxes to put pressure on a guy's job.

Having to take a bath on a draft pick looks really bad when you are cash strapped; but much less so when you've managed to save yourself some money on a previous trade.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Washington is more expensive than Williams as long as Spurs are above the tax. Washington cost is $1.2M and Williams cost was $850K.

Well, they could have cut both...

[wildbill2u]

With today's events (Butler waived, Washington signed), that trade essentially ended up being Scola's rights for the money to sign Udoka and Washington.

Anyone want to still whine like a little girl about it?
Do the Spurs still have the rights to Spanoulis if he decides to come back to the NBA.?

[Kori Ellis]

Washington is more expensive than Williams as long as Spurs are above the tax. Washington cost is $1.2M and Williams cost was $850K.

Washington is considered a rookie - first year player - same as Williams ($427K). The cost is the same. If you are doubling it for luxury tax purposes, they each would cost the Spurs ~$850K.

[SequSpur]

Championships aren't won in the preseason. Get back to me next summer and we'll see what these yardbirds do.

[Bruno]

Washington is considered a rookie - first year player - same as Williams ($427K). The cost is the same. If you are doubling it for luxury tax purposes, they each would cost the Spurs ~$850K.

http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#16


When determining the amount of tax a team owes, the league uses its team salary (see question number 14) on the date of their last regular season game (i.e., if a player is traded before the end of the season, then none of his salary is taxed), with the following adjustments:
[...]
* For players who signed as free agents (i.e., not draft picks), and make less than the two-year minimum salary, the minimum salary for a two-year veteran is used in place of their actual salary.


Washington salary is $427K but he costs $771K (the two year veteran salary) against the Luxury Tax. It makes about $1.2M.
Spurs have chosen Washington even if he was more expensive than Williams.
Of course, all of this will be moot if Spurs dump Beno somewhere and go under the tax.

[spurscenter]

Hindsight

Spurs front office did not know that:

A) Beno would break a finger and,
B) That Jaque Vaughn would start the season on the injured list.
C) That Darius Washington, a last minute invitee, would impress everyone and make the team to fill a glaring need.
D) That Marcus Williams would fall short of NBA readiness.
E) Bonner's beard would make him a better player.
F) That Ime Udoka would gel with the team immediately.

The only things that they did factor, was that:

A) Spannoulis was going to return to Greece
B) Butler's discipline had a reason for being questioned.

Besides, the verdict is not completely out on this one... so don't act as if it is. i.e. we don't know where Scola's potential will take him.

All one can say is that the Spurs' FO played their cards with an element of risk... and that so far it seems as though the trade was not as unilateral as it was once thought to be.

well said

[WalterBenitez]

Hey people, the trade was made, we have to live with that; Spurs' oranizations had made many good calls in the past... the only questionable for me is Barbosa to Suns.

I'd love to see Luis in Spurs' roster but at the end he wasn't an option for this team, live with that and pray for the kid, plain and simple.

Strategy sometime isn't obvious, and pop ugly face is good in that.

[smeagol]

The Scola trade will be fully judged by tghe end of the 2008/9 season.

As timvp said, if people judged Oberto for what he did in his first season with the SPurs, his ass would be some place else by now. Nocioni's fist season was not that impressive either and now he has signed a juicy contract and is weel beloved by the Bulls fans.

[Kill_Bill_Pana]

Spurs still want Spanoulis.

[Mr.Bottomtooth]

Pfft.

[SpursDynasty]

I look at it this way: The Rockets at best are a #5 or #6 seed. If Scola is THAT good, the most he'll do is bring them up to a #4 seed, they'll be out in the first or second round...no big deal.

[Mr.Bottomtooth]

I look at it this way: The Rockets at best are a #5 or #6 seed. If Scola is THAT good, the most he'll do is bring them up to a #4 seed, they'll be out in the first or second round...no big deal.

[ChumpDumper]

Hadn't seen this before. Consider the source, blah, blah:


Over the summer the Kings held critical trade negotiations with the Cavaliers involving Mike Bibby, who came within a fraction of joining LeBron James in a three-way with the Spurs, who would've provided Cleveland with Luis Scola, yet another valued member of Argentina's 2004 Olympic gold medal team. Drew Gooden, Damon Jones, Ira Newble would've gone to Sacramento and Jackie Butler.

At the last moment, Scola was traded to Houston, prompting Sacramento to back off Bibby. Despite his obvious superior skill level and heightened serrated edge, management moved the 26-year-old rookie macho forward ($2.91M/$3.1M/$3.28M) with Butler ($2.35M) to the division rival Rockets.

Was it simply business to save a million? Was it an exhibition of supreme confidence by Gregg Popovich and R.C. Buford that their returning players needed no help to defend the franchise's third title? Or was it a demonstration of ultimate arrogance?

More likely it was all of the above with a dose of shrewdness added for good measure.

"The reason Luis isn't here," maintains someone on the scene, "is because Pop was worried he has to play with the ball too much, that he isn't specialized enough to play alongside Tim (Duncan). Recent success proves complementary players make more sense. But we all know Luis is better than any forward we have on our roster."

http://www.nypost.com/seven/10282007/sports/stick__move.htm?page=2

I don't remember if Cleveland's old exception was large enough to match Butler's deal, but it's pretty clear the Spurs were done with him. That would've been a coup for Ferry.

[StoneCutter]

I agree with those that said it's way to early to tell.

Having said that...speculation is part of the fun of the pre-season, so here's my two cents. Scola looks to be a good fit in Adelman's motion offense. He and Yao are both pretty good passers for big men. Personally I prefer 7 foot centers to play with their back to the basket, but that's just me. Defensively though, I would worry more about the Rockets if they had signed someone like a Charles Oakley. I am picturing Parker driving past Francis and then Scola for an easy score. One of Yao's bigger problems (other then injury) has been getting into foul trouble. Scola doesn't help with that.


It will be interesting to see what happens.

[LEONARD]

I look at it this way: The Rockets at best are a #5 or #6 seed. If Scola is THAT good, the most he'll do is bring them up to a #4 seed, they'll be out in the first or second round...no big deal.

You haven't had Houston higher than the 8th seed so far....

[diego]

Hadn't seen this before. Consider the source, blah, blah:



http://www.nypost.com/seven/10282007/sports/stick__move.htm?page=2

I don't remember if Cleveland's old exception was large enough to match Butler's deal, but it's pretty clear the Spurs were done with him. That would've been a coup for Ferry.

i had heard of the 3 way deal between cavs kings and spurs, but i never heard what the spurs would have purportedly gotten back. it seems between getting nothing from 1 team vs getting nothing from 2 teams there isnt much difference.

[ChumpDumper]

I assume we would've just gotten the trade exception and maybe a scrub.

[hsxvvd]

So now it's Scola, Butler & Beno

for

Udoka & Washington,

Surely that's a win.