I think the Spurs are done for the offseason

I think the Spurs are pretty much done making moves. At least anything significative, salary wise.

This is the salary list for this season so far (mostly from hoopshype, please correct me if you notice anything odd):

Tim Duncan: $18,835,381
Tony Parker: $13,500,000
Manu Ginobili: $11,854,584
Richard Jefferson: $8,400,000
Antonio McDyess: $4,860,000
Matt Bonner: $3,050,000
Tiago Splitter: $3,400,000
James Anderson: $1,361,400
George Hill: $854,389
DeJuan Blair: $918,000
Malik Hairston: $854,389 (not fully guaranteed)
Alonzo Gee: $762,195 (not fully guaranteed - $854,389 count towards tax)
Garret Temple: $762,195 (not fully guaranteed - $854,389 count towards tax)
Gary Neal: $510,000 ($854,389 count towards tax)

Total: $70,451,310 (this figure is what counts towards the tax)

Now, remember that the luxury tax for 2010/2011 is $70,307,000

Jerrels is also under a $762,195 partially guaranteed contract, but I believe at this point it's inevitable that he's going to be waived.

I think the Spurs are going to really try to stay under the cap at least until training camp to see what they have, and guaranteeing some of those contracts from the kids (I believe they have until Aug 5 to do so with Temple).

There's also the incentive to stay under the luxury tax line to fetch some of that redistribution at the end of the season, which they could do even if they sign Parker to an extension.

I think every player counts at least 854k against the luxury tax though

I also I thought I read the Gary Neal contract was $3m/3 years, which would have him starting on that figure (854k) anyway

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anonymous Cowherd

I think every player counts at least 854k against the luxury tax though

I also I thought I read the Gary Neal contract was $3m/3 years, which would have him starting on that figure anyway

---

Thanks. Unfortunately, we still don't have solid numbers for Bonner either. I've seen starting as low as $2,875,000, which would make more sense than the $3m reported in ESPN. I think we're probably barely under the lux tax if you wiggle with those numbers. If we're not, I expect one of Hairston or Gee to be cut or sent to the Toros if possible (Gee specifically).

We are still short a solid seasoned defender.

I agree that there's a pretty good chance the Spurs are done for the off-season. Here is a good thread for salary figures and estimates:

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=158106

One of the key posts on this subject comes from the multi-talented Bruno, who offers up these figures:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bruno

Spurs situation regarding the luxury tax:

Players with guaranteed contracts
Duncan + Parker + Ginobili + McDyess + Blair + Hill : $50.82M
Matt Bonner: $3.05M
Tiago Splitter: $3.4M
Richard Jefferson: $8.4M
Gary Neal: $.85M (against the tax)

$66.52M for 10 players

James Anderson will likely be signed. His salary will be between $0.91M and $1.36M.

Spurs payroll will be between $67.43M and $67.88M for 11 players. Spurs are between $2.43M and $2.88M.

If Spurs want to stay below the tax:
- They won't be able to have a 15 players roster.
- They should be able to carry a 14 players roster if they are able to sign Anderson for only 100% of the rookie scale and if the players waived aren't Gee and Temple.
- They will have no problem at staying under the tax with a 13 players roster.

---

I think the Spurs probably have it worked out where they can only cut one of their non-guaranteed contracts, carry 14 players, and stay under the luxury tax.

Another key point to consider is that RC Buford said during summer league that the Spurs would likely carry 17 or 18 guys into training camp, with a few of the guys being evaluated for the Toros. Well, unless someone is unexpectedly waived in the next couple months, the Spurs already have 15. I don't see any of those 15 as just being Toros bound, though it's possible that the front office views a couple of the non-guaranteed contracts that way.

The spurs basically are trying to win by just adding their draft picks. Most of their entire team is their draft picks. No upgrades through trades or free agency like other teams do.

Tiago Splitter is better than any free agent we could have gotten for the MLE.

are there free agents who'd come here for the money we have?

we've done smarter than any side with similar financial constraints to ours, in my opinion.



also, when you've picked Manu Ginobili, Tony Parker and DeJuan Blair in the second round, you should figure playing your draft picks may be a good tactic to employ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anonymous Cowherd

Tiago Splitter is better than any free agent we could have gotten for the MLE.

are there free agents who'd come here for the money we have?

we've done smarter than any side with similar financial constraints to ours, in my opinion.



also, when you've picked Manu Ginobili, Tony Parker and DeJuan Blair in the second round, you should figure playing your draft picks may be a good tactic to employ

---

The spurs have put themselves in those financial constraints. I have been hearing the same tired excuse for the last few years.

Double post

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

I think the Spurs are pretty much done making moves. At least anything significative, salary wise.

This is the salary list for this season so far (mostly from hoopshype, please correct me if you notice anything odd):

Tim Duncan: $18,700,000
Tony Parker: $13,500,000
Manu Ginobili: $11,854,584
Richard Jefferson: $8,400,000
Antonio McDyess: $4,860,000
Matt Bonner: $3,000,000 (unconfirmed)
Tiago Splitter: $3,400,000
James Anderson: $1,361,400
George Hill: $1,157,160
DeJuan Blair: $918,000
Malik Hairston: $854,389 (not fully guaranteed)
Alonzo Gee: $762,195 (not fully guaranteed)
Garret Temple: $762,195 (not fully guaranteed)
Gary Neal: $500,000 (unconfirmed)

Total: $70,029,923

Now, remember that the luxury tax for 2010/2011 is $70,307,000

Jerrels is also under a $762,195 partially guaranteed contract, but I believe at this point it's inevitable that he's going to be waived.

I think the Spurs are going to really try to stay under the cap at least until training camp to see what they have, and guaranteeing some of those contracts from the kids (I believe they have until Aug 5 to do so with Temple).

There's also the incentive to stay under the luxury tax line to fetch some of that redistribution at the end of the season, which they could do even if they sign Parker to an extension.

---

If thats the case we are not going to the nba finals. The spurs need depth on there bench.

NBA finals??? Good one son....I needed a laugh today

:elephant

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Amarelooms

NBA finals??? Good one son....I needed a laugh today

:elephant

---

Im not your son dumbass.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rascal

The spurs basically are trying to win by just adding their draft picks. Most of their entire team is their draft picks. No upgrades through trades or free agency like other teams do.

---

Well, they had a pretty big trade that brought RJ to SA just about a year ago. Alright, he didn't bring what everyone was hoping for - doesn't change the fact that it was a comparatively big trade.
Also, Dice was a guy a number of teams wanted to have and he chose the Spurs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Amarelooms

NBA finals??? Good one son....I needed a laugh today

:elephant

---

Why is this clown still in here after this years first round talking trash?

Whats funny is the thought of your Mavs getting out of round one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Duncan2177

If thats the case we are not going to the nba finals. The spurs need depth on there bench.

---

The spurs do have some depth but have too many SG's I still beleive the spurs are a real Sf defender away from being a contender. I really didnt like the neal signing too much I rather be giving all the minutes to anderson or hairston as back up shooting guard to ,but I still beleive spurs will try to get a small foward at sometime even if it may be at the trade deadline, I don't think Gee will be good enough to back up Jefferson.

Updated the OP with latest contract info. By my calculations, Spurs are still under the lux tax threshold. We still need better info on Bonner's contract.

I think we've got one more backup SF signing in us, or MAYBE a sixth big man, but that's it.

Seriously, we don't need more depth. We need a top 8 player on the Spurs to seriously contend. Depth all the way to the 12th man is almost useless in the playoffs. I think we are just playoff fodder at this point.

Spurs might make a mid-season trade if one (or more) of Gee/Hairston/Anderson can't adequately play RJ's backup minutes. No way they are signing anyone else at this point.

Quite frankly, I think its very plausible that one of the above three will be playing so well as to be promoted to the starting lineup while Jefferson is benched.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 8FOR!3

I think we've got one more backup SF signing in us, or MAYBE a sixth big man, but that's it.

---

Maybe Shaq will sign for the minimum huh?!! Wouldn't that be cool, dude.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chieflion

Seriously, we don't need more depth. We need a top 8 player on the Spurs to seriously contend. Depth all the way to the 12th man is almost useless in the playoffs. I think we are just playoff fodder at this point.

---

Agreed. Depth isn't SA's issue - the lack of impact players is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2Cleva

Agreed. Depth isn't SA's issue - the lack of impact players is.

---

Manu and TP are still high impact players. Duncan will also still impact games, but less so over the course of the season compared to the playoffs.

The problem is not a lack of impact players, it is having enough big impact players. Having stars at pg, sg, and sf in today's game would be very hard to win it.

Spurs have 2 players who, if healthy, will play like all-stars, but they are both in the back court. TD will play well, and I expect Dblair and Splitter to play well also. If we get enough improvement from RJ, Hill, or contributions from any of the other new back court players, we have plenty of firepower.

The question is can we stop good front courts.

Lakers basically won with Kobe, Odom and Gasol; bynum was in and out of the lineup and was inconsistent.

Artest had a few good games in the playoffs, but was not a big part of the regular season success and so I would not call him an "impact" player.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2Cleva

Agreed. Depth isn't SA's issue - the lack of impact players is.

---

dammit im such a freakin homer, i got caught up in the savior coming and forgot to look at the big picture, the reason i agree is i bet tiago will play well but were expecting him to carry a heavy heavy load on his first year poor guy he had no idea pop lost his NBA genius mind and poop's his pants frequently while coaching on wine

:bking + :whine ==== :pop: :pctoss thats all folks

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spursfaninla

Manu and TP are still high impact players. Duncan will also still impact games, but less so over the course of the season compared to the playoffs.

The problem is not a lack of impact players, it is having enough big impact players. Having stars at pg, sg, and sf in today's game would be very hard to win it.

Spurs have 2 players who, if healthy, will play like all-stars, but they are both in the back court. TD will play well, and I expect Dblair and Splitter to play well also. If we get enough improvement from RJ, Hill, or contributions from any of the other new back court players, we have plenty of firepower.

The question is can we stop good front courts.

Lakers basically won with Kobe, Odom and Gasol; bynum was in and out of the lineup and was inconsistent.

Artest had a few good games in the playoffs, but was not a big part of the regular season success and so I would not call him an "impact" player.

---

LA first - Bynum was more consistent than Odom. Outside of the Phx series - LO was trash. As I pointed out in another thread, Bynum was huge in the OKC series - got hurt, and only showed glimpses the rest of the playoffs.

Disregarding Artest because of the regular season is foolish. Considering the focus on the tri, it was assumed he'd have bumps. And don't get so caught up in scoring. The defensive impact guys like Artest and Bynum had were HUGE for LA. It allows Kobe and Pau to focus on scoring.

As for SA - come playoffs those impact players weren't making the same impact. If SA's big 3 isn't better than LA's big 3 (which its not), then SA needs players 4-8 to be better than LA 4-8 (its not even close unless Splitter is a great player immediately).

Depth helps to keep the aches and pains away in the reg season but come playoffs its all about the Top 8.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anonymous Cowherd

also, when you've picked Manu Ginobili, Tony Parker and DeJuan Blair in the second round, you should figure playing your draft picks may be a good tactic to employ

---

Tony Parker was actually a late first round pick. Much like George Hill.

Now, on the other hand, Luis Scola was a 2nd rounder...


....oh, right. :depressed

Having depth will allow the Spurs Big 3 to have enough legs and have more of an impact come playoffs; and the one with the youngest legs, Tony Parker, was injured throughout the season last year and he's a nightmare match-up when healthy.

Spurs should do better next season and for the first time in a while the Spurs don't have to deal with members of their big 3 playing international basketball or worry about surgeries and recovering from that. On the other hand the Lakers have Odom playing in the summer and Kobe and Bynum will have surgeries; and thats a team that only finished 2 wins higher than the 2nd seed. On top of that the Lakers core have seen a lot of miles and little rest in recent years and they've already started to break down last regular season. Without HCA they probably won't get out of the West imo.

LA's more vulnerable than they're made out to be but obviously the team to beat out West.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cane

Having depth will allow the Spurs Big 3 to have enough legs and have more of an impact come playoffs; and the one with the youngest legs, Tony Parker, was injured throughout the season last year and he's a nightmare match-up when healthy.

Spurs should do better next season and for the first time in a while the Spurs don't have to deal with members of their big 3 playing international basketball or worry about surgeries and recovering from that. On the other hand the Lakers have Odom playing in the summer and Kobe and Bynum will have surgeries; and thats a team that only finished 2 wins higher than the 2nd seed. On top of that the Lakers core have seen a lot of miles and little rest in recent years and they've already started to break down last regular season. Without HCA they probably won't get out of the West imo.

LA's more vulnerable than they're made out to be but obviously the team to beat out West.

---

Intellectually dishonest to assume SA will benefit from rest and will be healthy and LA will be the ones worn down - especially considering SA has wore down the past couple of seasons and LA has maintained success.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2Cleva

Intellectually dishonest to assume SA will benefit from rest and will be healthy and LA will be the ones worn down - especially considering SA has wore down the past couple of seasons and LA has maintained success.

---

Considering that SA haven't logged as many miles in recent years and none of their players are playing international basketball or going through surgeries; I think its a safe bet. Lakers were already looking pretty fatigued at the end of the regular season and without HCA they won't get out of the West imo. Nothing with any of that says to me that LA will finish higher this reg season and the West is too competitive to slack off.

What the Spurs really need is for an old friend to help convince a bad team's front office to give them a top 10 player for a couple of throwaways and a guy who's topside is being a top-10 guy at his position at a woefully weak position.

But I doubt the Trade Committee would approve . . . .

The secret weapon may be the maturation of Blair's game. If he can play consistant minutes at starter value it could make a huge difference. I am looking for a double digit rebound average from him this year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cane

Considering that SA haven't logged as many miles in recent years and none of their players are playing international basketball or going through surgeries; I think its a safe bet. Lakers were already looking pretty fatigued at the end of the regular season and without HCA they won't get out of the West imo.

---

SA hasn't logged as many miles because the years prior when they made their run it wore them out. With LA only having their 6th man play, who never is consistent even at the best of times, they will be OK.

I could go deeper but I won't. Considering hoping SA's 100% and LA is broke down is SA's best shot, I understand the wishful thinking.

LA did get hurt when so many would-be blowouts was destroyed by selfish bench play. I doubt that's the case this season.

it won't be done until we all get one of these.

http://cgi.ebay.com/2-Black-Vuvuzela...35933484781830

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2Cleva

SA hasn't logged as many miles because the years prior when they made their run it wore them out.

---

Yup, thats why their depth is going to be important along with health.

Quote:

---

With LA only having their 6th man play, who never is consistent even at the best of times, they will be OK.

---

Don't be intellectually dishonest, he is inconsistent but Lamar Odom has been more important to LA's success than Bynum just through sheer minutes played. He's generally a huge match up problem as well unless you're like Amar'e and think he just gets "lucky".

Quote:

---

I could go deeper but I won't. Considering hoping SA's 100% and LA is broke down is SA's best shot, I understand the wishful thinking.

---

Its realistic to think that SA's best chances of winning is staying healthy and its realistic to think the Lakers will be slowing down as well considering their mileage and surgeries this summer and recent years.

three-point specialist(s) who has actually hit during po's, missing...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbestpro

The secret weapon may be the maturation of Blair's game. If he can play consistant minutes at starter value it could make a huge difference. I am looking for a double digit rebound average from him this year.

---

Agreed. With the exception of Splitter's successful adaptation to the NBA game, Blair's development is probably the most crucial facet of our playoff hopes.

Cane - Depth is important but SA is missing quality more than quantity. Too many one-dimensional players.

LO wasn't more important last year than Bynum - not in the playoffs nor reg season. LO still gives SA nightmares because of the Spurs lack of athleticism but LA noticed Ibaka, Millsap, and Davis outplayed him off the bench. Doesn't matter as much though with Barnes and Caracter there.

LA getting minor surgeries that they were able to play on.

SA has to pray for health - no doubt. As for LA, if you would have a team that has to deal with injuries - having guys who will play very well through it as well as a coach that won't push too hard in the regular season is paramount. If they don't have any season-ending injuries, I expect LA will be in the Finals again. They are mentally strong enough to play through the mild/medium stuff.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2Cleva

Cane - Depth is important but SA is missing quality more than quantity. Too many one-dimensional players.

---

Imo the problem with SA's past depth was that their one-dimensional depth couldn't do what they were signed to do and that was shoot the basketball. If the Spurs continue to struggle from downtown they won't win but Mason Jr. and Bogans are gone and hopefully Gary Neal and Anderson can be more consistent. Another year's experience for Jefferson, Hill, and Blair should help along with getting a competent 7-footer in Tiago.

Imo though the biggest problem in the past few seasons remains staying healthy and it seems like they'll be healthy next year since they're rested and not recovering from surgeries or extended NBA absences.

Quote:

---

LO wasn't more important last year than Bynum - not in the playoffs nor reg season. LO still gives SA nightmares because of the Spurs lack of athleticism but LA noticed Ibaka, Millsap, and Davis outplayed him off the bench. Doesn't matter as much though with Barnes and Caracter there.

---

LO's more important just through sheer minutes played especially in the past 3 seasons. When he's able to contribute, Bynum ftw though.

Quote:

---

LA getting minor surgeries that they were able to play on.

SA has to pray for health - no doubt. As for LA, if you would have a team that has to deal with injuries - having guys who will play very well through it as well as a coach that won't push too hard in the regular season is paramount. If they don't have any season-ending injuries, I expect LA will be in the Finals again. They are mentally strong enough to play through the mild/medium stuff.

---

I agree that if LA's healthy (and has HCA) then its their spot to lose in the Finals. But if they encounter health issues they'll be vulnerable. Kobe looked fatigued last year and is having I think a third surgery on the same knee, Bynum's getting surgery on his knee and doesn't ever seem to have a healthy year, and Odom's playing in the summer - stuff you don't want your 3-peat Finals core to do imo. They did get some good signings this offseason though.

not sure if Spurs are done for this summer, but I'm pretty sure that we no longer need to discuss FA signings when discussing an upgrade of the team.
(agree that it's not a matter of depth)
all those possible signings in the minimum range might be interesting when it's about young players, who might play a role in the future. but it's meaningless for the next season. and as several other people mentioned, Spurs won't go over the threshold just to have one player who would fill the 11th-14th spot in the rotation

if the Spurs want another impact player to in fact upgrade the overall quality, they can only get this player via trade. (the only realistic package I see includes Dice).
Spurs currently have a huge quality gap when looking at the 4th and 5th spot in the back court and wing. (behind Tony, Manu, Hill and RJ. some might say the gap already occurs between Hill and RJ, but anyhow). it would need to be at least a player in the quality league of Battier for example, to get a noticeable improvement.
even in a super optimistic scenario Anderson won't immediately close the quality gap. and no FA on the market will do it either. (especially not a minimum FA)

trade: as mentioned, the only player we can orchestrate a trade around without losing to much and getting back a significant salary number is Dice.
question is, would Spurs do a Dice trade this summer, when they don't know yet how fast Splitter acclimates to the NBA and if and how significant Blair has developed his game? IMO they will want a known quantity along Tim at least for the 1st half of the next season. so also no Dice trade.
bottom line: Spurs are done and all we might see is a veteran minimum signing of a wing and this won't change the teams quality a bit.

If James Anderson is signed at 120% of the rookie scale, Spurs won't be able to carry 14 players and stay bellow the tax. they will have to pick 2 players between Jerrells, Gee, Hairston and Tmeple. One can assume it will be Temple and one of Gee and Hairston.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bruno

If James Anderson is signed at 120% of the rookie scale, Spurs won't be able to carry 14 players and stay bellow the tax. they will have to pick 2 players between Jerrells, Gee, Hairston and Tmeple. One can assume it will be Temple and one of Gee and Hairston.

---

Bruno

Can we use Hairston as the backup SF and send Gee back to the Toros without having to waive him ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by elemento

Bruno

Can we use Hairston as the backup SF and send Gee back to the Toros without having to waive him ?

---

A players send to D-League still count against the cap and the tax. If Anderson has been signed for 120% and Spurs keep Temple, Spurs will have to waive one of Hairston or Gee to stay under the tax.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bruno

If James Anderson is signed at 120% of the rookie scale, Spurs won't be able to carry 14 players and stay bellow the tax. they will have to pick 2 players between Jerrells, Gee, Hairston and Tmeple. One can assume it will be Temple and one of Gee and Hairston.

---

I fetched Anderson's salary figures from Hoopshype... I don't know how accurate they are.

I'm not worried about LA. Duncan can still cancel out Gasol and I think Splitter will matchup well with Bynum. Obviously he does have the strength Bynum does, but he'll be shown to be much quicker and more talented. Kobe's prime is about to start slowly fading away like Duncan's did. Difference is, Kobe's relied a little more on his athleticism throughout his career because Duncan hasn't hardly at all and Kobe doesn't have size on his side as a 7 footer. I don't think he's going to fall off a cliff like Finley did, he's a much better player, but he'll slowly go downhill starting this year. All great players do eventually. Jefferson and Artest should cancel each other out, because Artest isn't a great scorer, but Jefferson isn't a great defensive player. He's a somewhat capable scorer, but Artest is a great defender. He will be slower this year too though, he doesn't have quite as many miles on him as Kobe, but he's getting there. A healthy Tony Parker should be in his prime this year, it could be one of the top years of his career and he should be able to absolutely CRUSH a slow, old, and worn out Derek Fisher or Steve Blake.

Updated the OP again, correcting the actual amount Neil's contract count against the tax.
That puts the Spurs $261,700 over the tax line. Unless Bonner's contract (still unconfirmed) is a little cheaper than expected, or Anderson's contract info is not quite correct, just as Bruno said, the Spurs would have to drop one of kids in order to stay under the luxury tax cap.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

I fetched Anderson's salary figures from Hoopshype... I don't know how accurate they are.

---

Hoopshype isn't accurate at all. Some of your numbers (Duncan, Hill) are wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bruno

Hoopshype isn't accurate at all. Some of your numbers (Duncan, Hill) are wrong.

---

Thanks.

Ok, updated the OP again, now with salary information from ESPN. That includes what looks to be the correct amount for Bonner's first season in his new deal. The only contract missing there was Neil's but we already know the actual terms thanks to timvp and we also know that a higher sum actually counts against the lux tax.

Spurs are $144,310 over the cap now (without counting Jerrels' $854,389), so unless Anderson's contract is not for the 120% of the rookie scale, they're going to have to lose a little weight in one of the unguaranteed contracts in order to stay below the lux tax line.

This is depressing having a team that says their goal is one thing and that truly has one goal, then watching them do nothing to realistically achieve that goal.

The expectations and emotions are high surrounding Tim's last years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chieflion

Seriously, we don't need more depth. We need a top 8 player on the Spurs to seriously contend. Depth all the way to the 12th man is almost useless in the playoffs. I think we are just playoff fodder at this point.

---

Exactly, an impact player was needed. It is Splitter, as the impact player. And I doubt he will make much more than a role player type of contribution. Not enough to put the spurs back on top.


Pretty much the same team as last year with the exception of the Splitter upgrade. Anderson won't get enough minutes to make much of a difference .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PublicOption

---

:lmao

I am cool with them making no more moves. At this point, they seemingly won't get anyone that is a difference maker, so let some things play out and lets see some of the new blood do work :wow

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PublicOption

---

CROFL :lmao

I'm cool with the roster as is, but I hope they invite some real talent to training camp to put some pressure on the "bubble" guys.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

Ok, updated the OP again, now with salary information from ESPN. That includes what looks to be the correct amount for Bonner's first season in his new deal. The only contract missing there was Neil's but we already know the actual terms thanks to timvp and we also know that a higher sum actually counts against the lux tax.

Spurs are $144,310 over the cap now (without counting Jerrels' $854,389), so unless Anderson's contract is not for the 120% of the rookie scale, they're going to have to lose a little weight in one of the unguaranteed contracts in order to stay below the lux tax line.

---

This probably means they won't sign Gist or a sixth big in general (Gist could sign with the Toros, though).

They could still keep Gee out of camp, but as the year progresses, so long as they're not decimated by injuries to their wings, they could end up waiving him at some point (they did this with Hairston two seasons ago; then signed him back a few months later, though I get the sense that if they did that with Gee, another team would claim/sign him) in order to stay under the tax.

Ultimately, Gee and Gist, if they were to make the roster, would still likely be Toros fodder.

The thing with Gee is, intriguing a project as he is, so long as Hairston established himself somewhat next season, there isn't going to be a role for Gee not just next season, but going forward either. That and not wanting to pay the tax (specifically for a player who probably doesn't have a future on the team) will probably lead to the Spurs cutting ties with him at some point next season.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 8FOR!3

I'm not worried about LA. .

---

Then your flat out crazy, and I am a Spurs fan and didn't bother reading the rest of that there. Not worried about the two time champs? Three finals in a row? That makes sense. I hate when some fans put on blinders and do this here, come on man they are the team to beat.

As far as the financial part of this thread goes, I only see 2 realistic outcomes:

1. The Spurs have committed to paying the luxury tax, which they'll indicate by signing one or two more vets, or

2. The reported numbers are off by a few hundred thousand, and the Spurs are cozily under the tax with 14 players. Most likely this means Bonner's contract is slightly lower, and/or they got Anderson to accept less than 120%, at least for year 1. I think this is the most likely scenario.

A 3rd alternative, that they'll be forced to carry only 13 players, just doesn't seem likely considering the massive number crunching that has taken place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lurker23

As far as the financial part of this thread goes, I only see 2 realistic outcomes:

1. The Spurs have committed to paying the luxury tax, which they'll indicate by signing one or two more vets, or

2. The reported numbers are off by a few hundred thousand, and the Spurs are cozily under the tax with 14 players. Most likely this means Bonner's contract is slightly lower, and/or they got Anderson to accept less than 120%, at least for year 1. I think this is the most likely scenario.

A 3rd alternative, that they'll be forced to carry only 13 players, just doesn't seem likely considering the massive number crunching that has taken place.

---

I think the Spurs will pay the tax no problem if it's for a difference maker or even for a Thomas-esque acquisition (meaning an established veteran, with a reasonable contract, that doesn't have a bunch of years left, who fills their biggest need).

But I don't think they'll pay it for Gee. Like I said, that doesn't mean he won't make the team out of camp (he probably will), but will he last the whole season if he's the difference between paying the tax or not? My guess is no.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TD 21

I think the Spurs will pay the tax no problem if it's for a difference maker or even for a Thomas-esque acquisition (meaning an established veteran, with a reasonable contract, that doesn't have a bunch of years left, who fills their biggest need).

But I don't think they'll pay it for Gee. Like I said, that doesn't mean he won't make the team out of camp (he probably will), but will he last the whole season if he's the difference between paying the tax or not? My guess is no.

---

Agreed. I don't think anyone thinks the Spurs are high enough on Gee to pay $3-5 million on him.

btw. tax. no need for nitpicking at this point in the 10K region trying to figure out if they will pay tax or not.
the crucial point will be at the end of the season and not now. there are quite a few options to bring down the payroll during the season or at deadline, if the team makes it a priority. at this point they can also go over the tax for a million or two, if they think this makes them better immediately or keeps them some talents they want to evaluate for some months.
that's why I don't think we will see decisions regarding either Gee or Hairston or Temple etc. those who will be cut are cut because the FO don't see a future for them with the Spurs.
however, I still think they will sign a veteran wing (Bogans might still be the front runner) and/or a veteran combo forward. (in the mold of Haislip). I even wouldn't rule out the signing of a true big. (like Ratliff was).

again. I think they are done when talking about the 1-8 spot of the rotation. beyond that point we will see some minor moves. (which this desperate forum will still discuss as if it was the difference between contending for the title or missing the PO)