Salary Cap Mid-Season Write-Up: NBA

I have no idea why everybody is so fixated on Hill coming back to the Spurs. First issue: $$$. Second issue: he doesn't fit.

Murray seems to the future. Clearly PATFO still trusts Parker. The transition will be smooth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpursIndonesia

It was Speedy Claxton man, i still vividly remember those days. :)

I really like Hill, but i honestly think he is a luxury that we don't necessarily need, especially with Dijon developing curve as of late.

---

My bad - The Little general was on the first championship roster. It was, indeed, Speedy Claxton bailing out Tony in the 02-03 championship run. Thanks for the kind correction! Until I checked the roster, I had forgotten that Beno was also on that roster. I really liked him in the 04-05 run and thought he had better potential than Tony until Lindsay Hunter ate him alive in the finals. The next season he started out injured (physically as well as his pride!) and never got out of Pop's doghouse.

Dijon's time is sooner... or not with the Spurs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by will_spurs

I have no idea why everybody is so fixated on Hill coming back to the Spurs. First issue: $$$. Second issue: he doesn't fit.

Murray seems to the future. Clearly PATFO still trusts Parker. The transition will be smooth.

---

Smooth or bumpy the transition will be between Tony and Murray. The Spurs don't need an interim PG. That would only muddy the water and mess up the timing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sasaint

Smooth or bumpy the transition will be between Tony and Murray. The Spurs don't need an interim PG. That would only muddy the water and mess up the timing.

---

Pop still wanted to sign that PG from bklyn that's now a Milwaukee coach and was the Mavs PG in 2011.. damn mental fart I forget his name and he placed Tony under a living hell of screaming and coaching as far as guys here tell it. Basically he did go with Tiny but it was a huge challenge that Pop wanted to get a more vet PG to spare him time to develop... Still the same old Pop he now has that vet PG in the roster in Tony.

I also think Dijons the future and Pop is going to feel like he has the luxury of bringing him along. Team doesn't need Hill...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SAGirl

Pop still wanted to sign that PG from bklyn that's now a Milwaukee coach and was the Mavs PG in 2011.. damn mental fart I forget his name and he placed Tony under a living hell of screaming and coaching as far as guys here tell it. Basically he did go with Tiny but it was a huge challenge that Pop wanted to get a more vet PG to spare him time to develop... Still the same old Pop he now has that vet PG in the roster in Tony.

I also think Dijons the future and Pop is going to feel like he has the luxury of bringing him along. Team doesn't need Hill...

---

Jason Kidd...

He wanted him to play with Tony, felt like that would be a great guy to learn from. Which makes sense. It def helps to have respectable vets, especially playing such a key position

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SAGirl

Pop still wanted to sign that PG from bklyn that's now a Milwaukee coach and was the Mavs PG in 2011.. damn mental fart I forget his name and he placed Tony under a living hell of screaming and coaching as far as guys here tell it. Basically he did go with Tiny but it was a huge challenge that Pop wanted to get a more vet PG to spare him time to develop... Still the same old Pop he now has that vet PG in the roster in Tony.

I also think Dijons the future and Pop is going to feel like he has the luxury of bringing him along. Team doesn't need Hill...

---

Jason Kidd? 2011? You mean 2003? Sorry, I misunderstood your post. Kidd was, indeed the Mavs PG in 2011. The Spurs courted him heavily in 2003.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sasaint

I won't speculate on his offers or salary, but I expect the Spurs to bring back Simmons - most especially if he continues to develop. I think the Spurs are counting on that and plan for Simmons to replace Manu on the second unit.

---

It's not that I don't think they'll have interest, it's just that they don't have much financial flexibility and he's the most easily replaceable free agent. There's enough overlap between him and Murray, that it wouldn't make sense to pay him something approaching a mid level salary, especially if Mills is re-signed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pad300

I wouldn't put my money on Mills not taking an offer. IIRC He's made noises about being a starter. Which he will not do here unless Murray's development fails... Not getting to be a starter and significantly less pay; suggests to me that he won't turn down an offer that gives him both.

I agree the bench is going to be an issue, but guess what, the salary cap can squeeze a team. If Patty leaves, we can likely afford one mid-high level player, be it Dedmon, Tyreke, or whomever. After that we are going to be fishing with exceptions, pretty small ones. Also, regarding Rim protection, do you remember some of the dark years from 08-11, some the "big" men that were helping TD? In 10/11 in order of minutes played (and more than 300 minutes) TD, Blair, Bonner, McDyess, Splitter. In 09/10 TD, McDyess, Blair, Bonner. In 08/09 TD, Bonner, Kurt Thomas, Oberto, Gooden. I'm not so sure that Pop values rim protection as much as you do...

---

He might. All I'm saying is, this situation is eerily similar to Green's, who many also doubted would be re-signed. He was asked about starting and gave a cliché answer. What was he going to say, no? It could affect his market value and give off the perception that he lacks ambition. Like Green, I think he feels somewhat indebted to the organization and knows he's got it good here.

Limited financial flexibility or not, the pieces still have to fit.

Yeah and since then they've made height and length a priority again. I don't see them going back to what passes for their version of the "dark ages".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sasaint

Smooth or bumpy the transition will be between Tony and Murray. The Spurs don't need an interim PG. That would only muddy the water and mess up the timing.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SAGirl

Pop still wanted to sign that PG from bklyn that's now a Milwaukee coach and was the Mavs PG in 2011.. damn mental fart I forget his name and he placed Tony under a living hell of screaming and coaching as far as guys here tell it. Basically he did go with Tiny but it was a huge challenge that Pop wanted to get a more vet PG to spare him time to develop... Still the same old Pop he now has that vet PG in the roster in Tony.

I also think Dijons the future and Pop is going to feel like he has the luxury of bringing him along. Team doesn't need Hill...

---

These. And it wouldn't surprise me if Patty (who has gone on record as saying he'd like to be a starter) sees the writing on the wall.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TD 21

It's not that I don't think they'll have interest, it's just that they don't have much financial flexibility and he's the most easily replaceable free agent. There's enough overlap between him and Murray, that it wouldn't make sense to pay him something approaching a mid level salary, especially if Mills is re-signed.

He might. All I'm saying is, this situation is eerily similar to Green's, who many also doubted would be re-signed. He was asked about starting and gave a cliché answer. What was he going to say, no? It could affect his market value and give off the perception that he lacks ambition. Like Green, I think he feels somewhat indebted to the organization and knows he's got it good here.

Limited financial flexibility or not, the pieces still have to fit.

Yeah and since then they've made height and length a priority again. I don't see them going back to what passes for their version of the "dark ages".

---

Simmons and Murray do have some overlapping skills, but I think they are slated for very different duty. Murray is slated for starting PG, Simmons to replace Manu. As things currently stand, I expect Patty to be too pricey, so Simmons will be a second priority behind Deadman.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sasaint

Simmons and Murray do have some overlapping skills, but I think they are slated for very different duty. Murray is slated for starting PG, Simmons to replace Manu. As things currently stand, I expect Patty to be too pricey, so Simmons will be a second priority behind Deadman.

---

On offense Manu plays more as the backup PG and Mills is the short SG.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BillMc

These. And it wouldn't surprise me if Patty (who has gone on record as saying he'd like to be a starter) sees the writing on the wall.

---

You are right, Patty sees the writing on the wall. Patty is getting squeezed in two directions. As a PG, Tony and Dijon are doing the squeezing. As a 3-point shooter, Bertans is the primary squeezer. Patty's niche is definitely shrinking. Plus, he will get paid pretty well by somebody. I love Patty, but my opinion has done a 180 in the last few weeks. I think he is gone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by picnroll

On offense Manu plays more as the backup PG and Mills is the short SG.

---

Anymore, Manu and Patty are more of a two-headed PG/SG beast.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sasaint

Simmons and Murray do have some overlapping skills, but I think they are slated for very different duty. Murray is slated for starting PG, Simmons to replace Manu. As things currently stand, I expect Patty to be too pricey, so Simmons will be a second priority behind Deadman.

---

Murray is potentially slated for starting PG, but not next season and probably not for a few, which means if they commit long term to Simmons, they'd be playing plenty together. Given what he's likely to command and with bigger fish to fry, I think the overlap will come into play.

If things work out Murray or Parker will be the starting PG and the other the backup, particularly if Manu is gone.
This means no room for Mills. He likely won't be retained, other greater needs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TD 21

Murray is potentially slated for starting PG, but not next season and probably not for a few, which means if they commit long term to Simmons, they'd be playing plenty together. Given what he's likely to command and with bigger fish to fry, I think the overlap will come into play.

---

I believe Pop will turn the keys over to Murray sooner than you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by picnroll

If things work out Murray or Parker will be the starting PG and the other the backup, particularly if Manu is gone.
This means no room for Mills. He likely won't be retained, other greater needs.

---

Exactly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sasaint

I believe Pop will turn the keys over to Murray sooner than you.

---

Obviously, it depends on how rapid his development is, but it also depends on how long Parker plays (I know what he said, but I don't think he can physically hold up another 4+ years) and more or less maintains his current level and whether Mills is retained, because a Parker-Mills back court isn't feasible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TD 21

Obviously, it depends on how rapid his development is, but it also depends on how long Parker plays (I know what he said, but I don't think he can physically hold up another 4+ years) and more or less maintains his current level and whether Mills is retained, because a Parker-Mills back court isn't feasible.

---

I expect Mills will be gone. Parker is no longer capable of being a full-time starter for a team that aspires to be a real contender. That will be truer next year.

The elephant in the room for the Spurs salary/talent-wise is that they have largely struck out on draft picks for several years. There best pick had to be used to get Kawhi. Their next best pick, Cojo, was lost without compensation. There have otherwise been a parade of Mahinmi, LJC, Anderson, Multinovs. Hopefully Murray stops that trend.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by picnroll

The elephant in the room for the Spurs salary/talent-wise is that they have largely struck out on draft picks for several years. There best pick had to be used to get Kawhi. Their next best pick, Cojo, was lost without compensation. There have otherwise been a parade of Mahinmi, LJC, Anderson, Multinovs. Hopefully Murray stops that trend.

---

I believe he will, and the Spurs are banking on it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sasaint

I expect Mills will be gone. Parker is no longer capable of being a full-time starter for a team that aspires to be a real contender. That will be truer next year.

---

I know, but he might not be and if he isn't, that's going to factor into Murray's timeline to start.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TD 21

I know, but he might not be and if he isn't, that's going to factor into Murray's timeline to start.

---

I believe Mills is gone. However, if he isn't, I expect Murray's presence to have more impact on Mills' playing time than vice versa - including Murray's timeline to start. For a team that aspires to be a real contender, Mills is no more a starter than Tony. Tony and/or Mills will serve as Dijon's safety net.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sasaint

I believe Mills is gone. However, if he isn't, I expect Murray's presence to have more impact on Mills' playing time than vice versa - including Murray's timeline to start. For a team that aspires to be a real contender, Mills is no more a starter than Tony. Tony and/or Mills will serve as Dijon's safety net.

---

I'm not saying Mills will start, I'm saying they won't go with a Parker-Mills backup back court. So if Mills is re-signed, that probably pushes back the timeline for Murray to become a starter.

Starting is largely irrelevant. He can get 20-24 mpg backing up Green, running the offense on the 2nd unit and potentially finishing some close games.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TD 21

I'm not saying Mills will start, I'm saying they won't go with a Parker-Mills backup back court. So if Mills is re-signed, that probably pushes back the timeline for Murray to become a starter.

Starting is largely irrelevant. He can get 20-24 mpg backing up Green, running the offense on the 2nd unit and potentially finishing some close games.

---

Read my comments to BillMc above about Mills. You and I will just have to wait and see. I believe he is gone. I expect the backup backcourt to be Tony and JSimms before long - unless Danny and JSimms swap places - which I don't expect.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TD 21

Not a snowball's chance in hell this happens. Even if it were possible (and though it may be in a technical sense in the scenario you outlined, in a practical one, I don't think for a second that it is), they're not spending big on four guards, blocking Murray on a long term basis and going that thin at center or the big positions in general. This is an organization that still likes to play traditionally; that's why they prioritized Gasol last off season.

At this writing, this is how I think it plays out . . .

- Ginobili retires
Agreed.
- Gasol opts in

- Lee opts out and isn't re-signed (Bertans replaces him in rotation)
- Dedmon opts out and they offer something like 3/$24M; if he can do more than marginally better, he's gone
- Mills is re-signed for something like 4/$40M
- Simmons get's an offer sheet for something like 3/$21M and they don't match (Anderson replaces him in rotation)

---

I don't disagree with most of what you said. I also think that that lineup would be pretty damned good, far better than PATFO could've expected after losing Duncan and ,possibly, Manu. It's a win now move, GSW may be worse next season if Iggy and Livingston are poached on short term high $ deals. Murray's play of late has made me start to reconsider my belief that he needs another year before he can be a top 10 rotation player. Signing Hill would block Murray from being able to consistently getting minutes, you're right. Unless The Spurs think Parker's going to retire in the next year or two, then this somewhat unlikely to happen.

Quote:

---

Ginobili retires

---

I would hope he does, but his playmaking is still valuable. He can still be an effective player and the bench won't be the same without him but if it' not for the room exception or vet min, i'm not all that interested in him.

Quote:

---

Gasol opts in

---

Agreed. $16.1 is a lot of money to turn down for a player entering his age 37 season, unless he agrees to a two year deal with less money per and more money over two years with the Spurs or another team (i.e 2 years, $22-24 million)

Quote:

---

Lee opts out and isn't re-signed (Bertans replaces him in rotation)

---

Sure, I could see him returning too but Bertans appears ready to be a rotation player. I really like Lee's fit with the team but if Dedmon and Gasol are both back and Bertans is ready to contribute as a rotation player then that's a pretty crowded front court.

Quote:

---

Dedmon opts out and they offer something like 3/$24M; if he can do more than marginally better, he's gone

---

We seem to be thinking about the level of money ($8 Million per ) but over different years. I was thinking a 4 year deal with, maybe, a player opt out after 3, where he can potentially sign another deal at 30 years old. I think he still has room for growth as a player and could and should see an increased role next season ,hopefully, with the Spurs.

Quote:

---

Mills is re-signed for something like 4/$40M

---

Again, same area code in terms of money. I could see a team going as high as 4/$52M but it would a Phily-like team (or Philly). I am high on Mills and he along with Leonard and Green have been the biggest reasons why the Spurs lead the league in 3pt shooting (though their attempts are still well below league average, despite jumping 20% from last season)

Quote:

---

Simmons get's an offer sheet for something like 3/$21M and they don't match (Anderson replaces him in rotation)

---

Hard for me to gauge his worth, that sounds about right though. I sort of like him, though I wish he was more of a 3pt threat but I wouldn't be broken up if he left, so long as Mills and Dedmon were back. Anderson is a frustrating player, who desperately needs to be able to knock down corner 3's but that probably isn't going to be a consistent part of his game, I also think he's playing out of position, he's a PF in my book, with skills of a perimeter player but he also needs the ball to be effective as an offensive player and I don't think that's ever going to happen in S.A.
[/QUOTE]