Reply With Quote
Top tier players will sign extension before 2010 to get max offer and then asked for trade if their team sucks subsequently.
I hate to be a wet blanket to the free agent talk but after looking at salaries and re-reading quotes from earlier in the year, it's pretty obvious that the Spurs are looking at the summer of 2010 to be the time that they will totally retool. If you remember correctly, the reason Tim Duncan took less money on his extension was due to the fact that the Spurs showed him that the team could bring in another big piece in the summer of 2010 if he agreed to the lower contract.
In the summer of 2010, the Spurs will only have Tim Duncan and Tony Parker under contract. Ian Mahinmi would also be under contract if the Spurs pick up his team option, as would whoever the Spurs draft this year in the first round (assuming it's a domestic player, of course). All told, the Spurs are looking at something around $20-25 million in cap room. Even after giving Ginobili a new contract, there'd be enough money to snag a star.
To stay the course with the 2010 plan, the Spurs would have to offer free agents one-year or two-year contracts. By offering two-year contracts, that'd take the Spurs out of the running for almost every desirable free agent. Even mid-tier free agents like Kelenna Azubuike and Carlos Delfino will be able to get more than the two-year contract the Spurs would offer.
Now the question is whether you as a Spurs fan think that the risk is worth the reward. I'm not solid in whether I believe that the Spurs should stay strong with their 2010 plan or scrap it and do everything they can to improve for next season.
The front office has a tough decision. Do you stay the course and try to improve where you can while you wait for the big payoff in 2010 ... which could conceivably keep the window open a few extra years if the right piece is added? Or do you see the 2008 demise as a sign that the next two seasons would be lost if you don't move as aggressively as possible with no regard to the 2010 plan? (And if you want to go the aggressive route, what do you tell Duncan? He would have basically given up money for no reason)
Top tier players will sign extension before 2010 to get max offer and then asked for trade if their team sucks subsequently.
Don't know. Two years of short term, low dollar FAs might not cut it. By 2010, how good will Gino and Duncan be? The spurs might need a star player to be the top dog by then if they can wait.
I just wonder if the FO would commit big dollars to some top tier FA from outside the organization.
Hope they have this stuff squared away at that time.
Do some more Adidas promotions?(And if you want to go the aggressive route, what do you tell Duncan? He would have basically given up money for no reason
I'd have to agree, this does seem to be the plan. I'd prefer they stick to this that panic and throw out the baby with the bathwater.
We might just have to deal with another year of being old, it's not like we are that far off with what we have, and a good run we might still get lucky and then still be in a position to 'snag a star' in 2010.
Tank the next two years, use the #1 draft picks on Ricky Rubio and God Shamgod II and then sign some hotshot in 2010. It's a plan.
No, 2010 is a pipedream. You have to sign players for longer.
So basically we're ed and finished.
You stick to the plan, because without it the balance of the next decade is lost to mediocrity.
In terms of contracts, I think the Spurs will build in player options after two years making the guys they sign this summer restrictive free agents in 2010. Next summer they'll sign a vet or two on one year deals. So, if they're going to be aggressive in getting younger and more athletic, now is the time.
Players like Kelenna Azubuike or Trevor Ariza could easily outplay their next contract, so an early opt out is in their best interest.
The 2010 Plan remains in tact.
You give them 3 year contracts with a team option for the 3rd year, and if everything goes south, you pick up the option and start long term talks. I think you have to roll the dice at this point. Signing exception players isn't going to get it done. The Spurs WILL need that next franchise player, and if you have the chance to do it without waiting for the inevitable post-Duncan crash and burn, you do it.
Forget the plan and try to get the players to win now. You can always shed salary with trades later if you want to go after a top free agent in 2010. You stick with that plan and you will be wasting two more years of Duncan's prime.
Stick to it....within reason.
The Spurs shouldn't go out and offer full MLE deals for 3 to 5yrs just to get a leg up on the compe ion for next year.
At the same time, they shouldn't be re-upping old role players for one or two years just to grasp onto the hope that they'll be able to land Chris Bosh or Dwyane Wade in 2010.
If they look hard enough, there are a few players out there that can be decent contributors to the team, are younger/more athletic, and should not be expecting big multi-year deals.
Guys like....Diop, Najera, R. Davis, Mo Evans, Pietrus...
Bottom Line: I think there's a way for the Spurs to stay compe ive, get younger/more athletic, and not ruin any plan to get a major contributor or two in 2010.
Everything the Spurs have done recently points to the 2010 plan. Even the players they were rumored to be interested in, all of those players' contract expired before the summer of 2010. The only way the Spurs change their course is because of what happened in the playoffs ... which is definitely possible.
If the Spurs decide to keep rolling with the 2010 plan, I see their roster next year being:
C Fabricio Oberto
PF Tim Duncan
SF Bruce Bowen
SG Manu Ginobili
PG Tony Parker
C Kurt Thomas (re-signed to two-year ~$5-8M contract)
PF Matt Bonner
SF Ime Udoka
SG OPEN
PG OPEN
SG Brent Barry (assuming he'll be back)
C/PF Ian Mahinmi
IR OPEN
IR OPEN
IR Jacque Vaughn
The Spurs would fill that backup point guard spot either via the draft or with a free agent. The Spurs would then look to snag a younger swingman with a two-year MLE deal worth ~$12M. The team would also be in the market for a player who is getting salary dumped ... a la Kyle Korver last season.
Not exactly a sexy offseason but it fits with the 2010 plan and would at least keep the team compe ive.
Is that good enough? That's the question.
Bottom Line: I think there's a way for the Spurs to stay compe ive, get younger/more athletic, and not ruin any plan to get a major contributor or two in 2010.[/QUOTE]
Exactly. They've already thought this through, I'm sure. The question of the day is who do you sign/draft within this scheme to help overcome the Lakers? That's their organizing question.
Looks better than what they had this year, but the compe ion is likely to get a little stiffer.
Splitter will be a FA in 2010. Hopefully by then, he will be willing to come to the NBA. If he does, he would be stuck in a rookie contract, and so his pricetag would be small.
However, I firmly believe that Splitter will never play in the NBA.
1) Let Finley and Horry walk
2) Sign Ricky Davis to a two-year deal with a team option in year 3
3) Draft g/f
4) Re-up Kurt Thomas
5) Pick up PG via Summer League or Training Camp or D-League
That's sounds about right, but I'm optimistic they can do a little better than what you propose. If Splitter has signed with Tau, they should trade him, either in a package that will land a good salary dump (read: Mike Miller) or for draft picks. Splitter is the sweetener needed to rid the Spurs of Bonner.
And beside, it's sexy enough to get me into bed. The Spurs need one or two competent defenders that have fresh legs and can give them 15 pts per game. And, hopefully, are decent three point shooter. They can win a le with that sort of team. The Lakers are good, but they're not an impossible solve.
I'm curious, if the Spurs can move Bonner without taking salary back, where does that put them in terms of the cap?
The team that everyone is ready to blow up is one or two days off before the western finals start of being in the Finals.
The Future Is Now.
Too much can happen between now and 2010 and most high-priced FA stay with their own teams. (SA has never been a Mecca for those types anyway.)
These long range schemes rarely work out and the opportunity costs in the meantime can be disastrous.
Whose talking about a blow up? We're talking about plugging in the holes left by retiring players and, possibly, making a trade at the margins. My guess is that management expected next year to feature two or three young players, ile or not.
He's just ranting...it'll pass.
Franchises are built on "long range schemes," and they fall apart for lack of one. Cap management is a big part of winning.
had manu played 15 minutes instead of what he played in game one against lakers
they would be playing boston
game one they gave away
just like suns did against spurs in game one and never recovered
Manu playing hurt just exposed how old and slow the rest of the supporting cast was. Spurs had no answers when Manu couldn't get his game going, and they didn't get clutch play from two of their clutchest players...Horry and Finley.
You can say the Spurs were two days or a game-one win away from being in Boston all you want....but it doesn't change the fact that the rest of the NBA will get better next year and the Spurs can't afford to stand pat and re-up all of their 30+ year old veterans.
No one is saying "take a hacksaw" to the team, but there definitely is room to get younger and more athletic.
Keep Kurt Thomas and Brent Barry, let Fin and Horry walk...it's a happy medium.
BTW, you could replace Ricky Davis with any number of free agents...
Pietrus, Delfino, Najera....
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
