So WC finalist is not an elite team?Quote:
Originally Posted by G-Dawgg
Printable View
So WC finalist is not an elite team?Quote:
Originally Posted by G-Dawgg
Thanks! I wonder if they have their eye on anyone. In light of Blair's recent public airings, I'm guessing he is on thin ice until 11/1.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mel_13
I knew about the amnesty deadline, but had a momentary lapse of reason. This happens often when I consider Matt's disappearing act in the last many playoffs. Much has been said about whether Blair or Matt would be our best 5th big. Looks like Blair is more likely for the chopping block I suppose.
It looks like we might have some intriguing options for a back-up pg in Nando. Mills, or CJ. I can only hope we bring in a vet for the minimum. Again, thanks for clearing that up.....
Pro-actively shop Bonner, adding Blair as a sweetner if necessary... That's near $5 million bucks, which should be enough to land you a 4th big. But above all, it would remove Matty from Pop's reach, which arguably makes this team better when it matters.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mel_13
IMO, anyways.
The other teams have seen Matty play.Quote:
Originally Posted by ElNono
Well, other teams have seen RJ play too... and he had a much more terrible contract... I don't think Matty's contract is unmovable, considering his RS prowess... he's just not useful for playoff teams.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mel_13
All that said, I know Matty isn't going anywhere because the Spurs still consider that choker an 'asset'.
The RJ example isn't a good one for obvious reasons, but that's neither here nor there.Quote:
Originally Posted by ElNono
I don't think Matty's contract becomes movable without adding a first round pick until the trade deadline at the earliest, perhaps not until next summer. Least not in any trade that brings back a usable 4th big.
What???? I disagree. He sucks, but he's cheaper than Novak and does the same thing. Not only that, he's only guaranteed 1M next year. I can't see it taking a first rounder to dump Matt.
So in your view, there's no way OKC can be a contender?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mel_13
They already are.Quote:
Originally Posted by tesseractive
I must have misread what Mel was saying then. Oops.Quote:
Originally Posted by DPG21920
I didn't say that at all. OKC will be one of the favorites next year. Next year is the last year that Harden, Ibaka, and Maynor will be on their rookie contracts. Durant and Westbrook are already max players. The financial realities of their small market will, IMO, keep them from being perennial contenders.Quote:
Originally Posted by tesseractive
Ok, fair enough. I'm not so sure they won't find a way to continue to compete at that level, personally.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mel_13
Especially when the sign and trade restriction kicks in -- that would have killed a number of the rich-get-richer deals that happened this summer, if it had been in effect.
They may well given the pedigree of their GM.Quote:
Originally Posted by tesseractive
If they can't, then they'll serve as the textbook case of why small market teams have virtually no chance in the NBA. They had the good fortune to get a franchise player in the draft. They stayed bad long enough to get two more high lottery picks. They were well managed and used their cap space to accumulate draft picks and secure affordable role players.
That's about as good as it gets for a small market team in terms of good fortune and good management. And it may not be enough.
I don't know about that. They can either attempt to trade Perkins for nothing (aka heavily protected future 2nd) to a team with cap space or amnesty him, not qualify Maynor and let Cook walk. They can also come up with a creative ways to structure Harden's and Ibaka's contracts. The end game would leave them with four big contracts, two relatively minor contracts to the other two established players (Collison and Sefolosha) and the remainder of the roster fleshed out with players on either minimum or rookie contracts (Aldrich, Thabeet, Jackson, Jones, etc.) If they can pull that off, then they should be able to get away with the aforementioned players playing more prominent roles and perennially contending.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mel_13
Ibaka/Collison
Durant/Jones
Aldrich/Thabeet
Sefolosha/Harden
Westbrook/Jackson
Looks like a perennial contender to me. Keep in mind, they'd always have the veteran's minimum at their disposal (and because of their situation, they'll be able to lure veteran's who are worth more than the minimum). They could use a 3D SF, which would free up Jones to play PF, keep Collison as the primary backup C and just use Thabeet for the Howard's and Bynum's of the world, which is probably their plan anyway.
We'll see. I don't believe they'll be able to keep both and I'm not aware of any creative ways to structure their contracts that make it any more likely. This assumes, of course, that neither player does anything to depress his market value in the next 12 months.Quote:
Originally Posted by TD 21
No, absolutely -- OKC is a best case scenario. Which is why I asked originally -- I didn't think it made sense to leave them off a list of ongoing contenders, when I think they definitely have a shot at it. But it sounds like we don't disagree much at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mel_13
As far as the domination of the big market teams goes, I think it will be interesting to see what happens 2-3 years down the road after sign and trades come off the table and the Nets are paying $40 million a year (or whatever ungodly amount it works out to with the Luxury Tax and the repeater penalty) for Brook Lopez, and their only real options for improving are weak draft picks, the mini-MLE, minimum deals, and trading players no one wants.
The Lakers and Heat have huge advantages not only because they have a ton of money to play with, but also because they have smart front offices and elite players to build around. OKC and any comparable good young club that develops won't have the money, but if they avoid the tax, they'll have sign and trades to work with, the full MLE, etc. Those are pretty nice equalizers.
If the Spurs can get a franchise player at some point after Duncan retires -- a huge if, without a doubt -- I like our ability to build a contender once again, because we have one of the best front offices around, and if they start getting good draft picks to work with again, odds are good that they can fill out a team pretty easily.
Diaw and Kawhi take on bigger roles... Mills solidifies himself as the backup PG so Manu and Neal stay where they should... if these two things happen and end up working for the better, the gap should get bridged somewhat to OKC's level.
When I'm sad, I think about how SA has replaced RJ and Blair with Jack and Diaw at this same point last year.
By creative, I mean front load or back load. Front load would likely be the way to go here, while the Aldrich's, Jackson's and Jones' are still on their rookie contracts. They did this with Collison a few years back. Paid him the majority of his contract in his first season, before Durant's and Westbrook's extensions kicked in.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mel_13
It should be fun to watch the Spurs FO operate in the post-Duncan era. They won't be able to put together a championship team without lucking into a franchise player, but I'm sure they'll be able to build a very competitive, watchable team given some high draft picks and cap space to play with. I'll be renewing my season tickets for at least as long as the current management stays in place.Quote:
Originally Posted by tesseractive
That Collison trick won't work now. They basically paid him a huge bonus that season with last cap space they had available and then extended him at a small annual salary. They can't repeat that trick with their current cap situation. Also, although I can't find the reference, I've read that the new CBA closed that loophole.Quote:
Originally Posted by TD 21
Well, I wasn't thinking to that extent. But it's not as if you can't still heavily front or back load contracts. Look no further than the Lin, Asik and Fields offer sheets.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mel_13
Those were all Arenas Rule cases and would not apply to OKC keeping their own first round draft picks.Quote:
Originally Posted by TD 21
I still think it's doable. And if worse comes to worst, they can always trade Sefolosha's $3.9M expiring contract to a team with cap space and either get back an inexpensive salary or none at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mel_13
The point is, as long as the end game is keeping the core four intact, that combined with some intriguing prospects should keep them as perennial contenders going forward. Also, we're talking two seasons from now. The Lakers and Spurs cores will be even closer to the end and at this writing, the only potential long term competition in the West is the Clippers, who are suddenly flooded with aging and flat out old players themselves.
We'll see. By the standards of this summer's market (Hibbert, Lopez, Gordon), Ibaka and Harden are both max or near-max players. I don't believe OKC will ever have 4 max players on their roster. Time will tell.Quote:
Originally Posted by TD 21