Reply With Quote
Fair enough. Just find a big that can shoot a freaking three and get rid of him.
That's a great solution. Trade his ass if that happens.
If we can't get anything for Splitter, we can't get anything for those bozos.
Do our rights to Spanoulis have any value? Despite all the anti-Kill Bill Pana invective on the site, he doesn't look too bad in vid clips.
I'd say that Presiti would listen to Pop about Spanoulis' true inclinations at the present time about returning to the NBA, assuming the team has actually kept in touch with him.
If we bought out his contract, we don't retain any rights. It's too bad Kill Bill has soured so many on Spanoulis, he's actually an ideal backcourt option.
Maarty Leunen, then get rid of that massive bonner contract. If that's the type of player you want. I think he's better than Bonner anyways, plus he'll be cheaper. If he's around in the later rounds that is.
I'm high on Leunen, though he's less than ideal in terms of physique and athleticism. I think he'll wind up in Europe after a cup of coffee in summer league. But taking a flyer at 57 wouldn't be awful, especially if we sent him overseas to develop and maintained his rights.
Indeed. But, Bonner isn't athletic at all. In fact, Leu is more athletic in my opinion. Bonner is very stiff whereas Leu is more fluid although not so quick. I wouldn't draft him, but if that's the type of player you want i'd draft Lue late.
I floated this in the CDR thread a couple of days ago and will tweak it here.
Seattle's ownership group is losing millions on the relocation whether they win the lawsuit or lose.
Seattle is a candidate therefore to sell their #24 pick, they still have loads more in the next couple of years. They are also candidates for a swap of the 24 for the 26 and cash.
Plus they could go for the beno trade exception just to get out from the last year of Adrian Griffen's scrub contract in a separate deal on the side.
Yes. Without a #1 next year at this point, maybe SA can buy one next year if they can get another #1 this year. Seattle may not want to get overloaded with guaranteed contracts for the lower #1s because if they have too many guys under rookie contracts they may not be able to pay them all in the long run.
Besides, I don't think they want to get too big of a payroll three years down the line. The new ownership does not appear to be one that wants to spend huge amounts of money on the roster at this point.
A swap will likely be dependent on how the draft lines up for the Spurs and where there is a specific prospect in their cross-hairs. Good potential idea. I just hope the Spurs FO are open to such ideas and not so concerned with "penny pinching" this time around.
To my knowledge, the Spurs have never drafted two prospects in the first round. Even if they do, it doesn't mean keeping them both. They can always be used a future bargaining chips.
Seattle and SA have already proven to be close so far this draft season, as with the closed door joint session with Serge Ibaka in Europe, where not even Ibaka's agents were allowed in. I expect close links between the two offices for the near future, as there will be between Cleveland and SA. This won't mean Gasol-type collusion but relations that are, at least, better than neutral -- meaning advantageous deals on a -for-tat basis.
If Seattle means to sell a draft pick, SA gets some of the first bids.
As I said in the post you quoted, trading Mahinmi makes sense if the Spurs secretly believes he's not as good as his market value indicates or if he's still two or three years away from helping an NBA team. I like Mahinmi but there's no guarantee he's the answer in terms of adding "size, talent and athleticism".
If the Spurs don't think he's the answer and can get something in a trade that could help right away, I don't see a reason why not to pull the trigger.
How desperate is Denver to dump salary?
Use a trade exception to sign and trade Horry plus cash to help buy him out (and maybe Splitter's rights) for Camby plus their 1st rounder.
God, no thank you on Camby.
my draft day deal ideas are so genius they're spreading and even breaking off to form new threads!
But back to the matter at hand . . .
I'm curious as to why the Spurs would want an additional first, considering their roster inflexibility. Not including Mahinmi they already have 9 guys for '09. With him it's 10, and either way the Spurs still have the MLE and LLE and could still re-sign Kurt Thomas.
So why bother with two firsts when it's hard to anticipate even finding time for a single first round pick? Even if they move Mahinmi to move up into the teens for the second first the same roster crunch exists. They must like a particular player a whole lot to want an extra first, for the first time in a long time it seems.
I'll go out on a limb and guess they want a higher first to draft Ajinca, and he will eventually have the same role Splitter had. Splitter is never coming, and down the road they'll still have need for another center, and Ajinca's that man. The Spurs have a good relationship with his agent, same as Mahinmi's, and Ajinca is well suited to being in the d-league for now.
I also don't anticipate the Spurs moving Mahinmi if only because he's on a very cheap contract.
Whatever makes you feel good, I guess.
-MB
Spurs might be able to pull something off for an additional first round pick... I dunno, like all of you have said, what can we offer really outside of the big 3 and Ian. Can the Spurs just buy a spot off someone or is there a limitation on that?
At this point I think it's far more likely that the Spurs trade out of the first round rather than trading up or adding another first round pick.
Still, if the Spurs traded their #26 pick for Minnesota or Portland's multiple early second round picks, it wouldn't be such a bad deal.
i'm just happy somebody read what I wrote.
I understand your point, but at what point do the Spurs make a decision on Ian? This year? Next year? You're right. There is no guarantee that he'll answer their needs. However, the kid is still developing. So it seems to me they may not know this for 1 or 2 seasons. What sense does it make to draft a young player, develop him overseas for a couple of years, bring him over to the D-League for a year, then turn him loose? If the kid can't play, OK? But will they really know that after one full season on the active roster?
At some point, the Spurs coaches need to truly invest some rotation time in some of these guys before jettisoning them away. Part of the reason the "talent cupboard" is bare is because they've got nothing tangible to show for their drafts 5 out of the last six drafts. A contending team can ill-afford to go that long without adding and developing a couple of young players from its draft. Free agents are not going to keep coming here to play for the veterans minimum. Therefore in order to develop their bench depth, it's even more critical for the FO to make sound drafting decisions and allowing them to develop.
re: trading Mahinmi to move up into the teens
Not that I want the Spurs to trade Mahinmi, but one scenario I can see is dealing Mahinmi to Cleveland for the #19.
The Cavs might want to move the pick if Rush or whoever their guy is off the board at that point and Ferry might see Mahinmi as ready to step in as an athlete to run with Lebron. Ferry was involved in scouting Mahinmi during 04/05 and very well could be the east coast executive quoted in SI as saying that Mahinmi had future all-star potential.
Maybe the best option for sas is to keep no.26 and trade to early second round with minny and portland
by using trades exceptions , future second round pick , absorbing a contract ..
So if you trade Mahinmi and with Splitter not coming, what do you do for a backup big? That's robbing Peter to pay Paul. You're simply opening up yet another hole.
Ordinarily, the best bet for selling a pick would be the Suns, but it loosk like this year they're actually planning to participate in the draft.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions