Reply With Quote
My favorite target for Spurs after the RJ trade.
Mason and Bonner (or Finley if he opts in) works salary wise.
Spurs can also add a 2010 first round pick if it isn't enough.
Jeff Foster | C
Born: Jan 16, 1977
Height: 6-11 / 2,11
Weight: 250 lbs. / 113,4 kg.
College: Texas State
Years Pro: 9
info
Last edited by Bruno; 08-25-2012 at 02:50 PM.
My favorite target for Spurs after the RJ trade.
Mason and Bonner (or Finley if he opts in) works salary wise.
Spurs can also add a 2010 first round pick if it isn't enough.
I thought you couldn't trade consecutive first rounders?
You can't trade future consecutive first round pick. Spurs can trade their 2010 first round pick just after this year draft.
Hes an SA native, right?
Nice, didn't know that.
I would be satisified if the Spurs went after any of Foster, Collison, or Pachulia.
He would be a great pickup. Great rebounder and tough guy all around.
Would be a great pickup, what is his contract status?
2 years remaining with a salary slightly over $6M per year.
I like Foster's game, but I don't think he can give us what we need at this point..
I have liked him for a long time. It would help the Pacers in 2010 to make the deal but he is a pretty heavy rotation big for them, so I have my doubts about whether or not they would pull the trigger.
Foster would be plan C on my list...
being A) Pachulia B) Collison C) Foster D) Gortat E) Kaman F) Dice
I had a class with him at SWT..
yes!!! if only the pacers would be willing to deal him for pennies.
Ouch. That's a bit too much.
How the could you have Jeff Foster ahead of Antonio McDeyss.
China Doll, no offensive game, not a big enough guy to guard the guys like Yao and Shaq, and not nimble enough to guard guys like Gasol.
No thanks.
RJ adds enough scoring that a scoring big is a priority. now it's all about defense, shotblocking and rebounding and Foster is very good in two of this three departments.
if the Spurs can add someone like him they have an almost perfect line up, for sure the currently best 5 player line up in the league.
what I doubt is that the Pacers want to trade him. reportedly they got lots of offers for him in the last year, but never bite. and Foster himself often stated that he wants to retire with the only team he has ever played for. (and the fans love him too)
so, unless something else happens (Pacers somehow make a surprising move for a top center), I don't see him on the market.
btw. for sure SA would be the only team Foster wouldn't be totally sad to be traded to.
The longtime Pacers and fan favorite thing makes Foster less tradable.
Now, Pacers could be motivated for financial reasons. In 2010-2011, the luxury tax threshold should be lower than next year due to the economic crisis.
Pacers will have 9 players (Murphy, Granger, Dunleavy, Ford, Tinsley, Foster, Rush, Hibbert and the 13th pick of the 2009 draft) under contract for a total salary of $62M. Add to that a 2010 first round pick that should be a lottery one and you are at least at $64M with 10 players under contract.
If you take a luxury tax threshold of $68M, Pacers must fill their roster with min or LLE players. If they decide to re-sign Jarrett Jack this summer or to use the MLE on a FA, they will have to cut some cost for the 2010-2011 season.
I still would think trading Foster is only something like plan D or E to get their cap situation fixed. before they trade Foster, they will try to dump either Dunleavy, Murphy or Ford.
(best case they dump Tinsley, but as we know this is almost impossible. maybe if they add the #13 pick?)
so, if they really would listen to Foster offers, it will likely be close to training camp, when all the other plans have failed. question is, could the Spurs wait for that long to solve their big men situation?
If they are willing to dump Murphy for salary cap, jump on it. Murphy for Bonner, Mason and Finley works ($11,047,619 for Murphy in 09/10, Bonner+Mason+Finley make $9,536,500 ; it works as a trade). Murphy's been good in Indiana and his game'd fit very nicely next to Duncan. He'd be a huge upgrade over Bonner. Also, his contract expires at the same time as Jefferson's.
Duncan, Murphy, Gist, Mahinmi, and 2 Vet min level bigs (eg. Nesterovic, Ike Diogu, Shelden Williams, whomever...).
Manu, Jefferson, Bowen (resigned for the Vet min), Hairston, Williams, vet min FA
Parker, Hill, Vet min FA
Looks good to me
Last edited by pad300; 06-25-2009 at 04:28 PM.
Also, Troy Murphy has no defensive presence, no shot-blocking capability, and is probably just a better version of Bonner. No thanks.
You ain't been paying attention to Mr. Murphy. Troy Murphy's rebound rate 08/09 19.2% . Matt Bonner's rebound Rate 08/09 11.9%. Troy Murphy had the second best Defensive rating of the entire Indiana team, at 106 pts against/100 possessions (Josh McRoberts came in 1st at 105 pts, but he only played 279 minutes of mostly garbage time).
Murphy is much better than Bonner; he rebounds. He can also lead the line while Duncan is resting. He was Indiana lead big this year, and didn't look too bad doing it...
I agree, but this roster would have a combined salary above 75 mil and possibly close to 80-- do you think the organization is willing to go that high?
They are talking about spending the MLE, above and beyond the current payroll. Current Payroll (Duncan, Jefferson, Parker,Gino, Mason, Bonner, Finley, Hill, Mahinmi ) is $71,229,230. Add the MLE (5.5 Million estimated), and 3 Vet min contracts (3*825497), that is $79,205,721. My Version is $78,150,919, assuming we use just the vet min on the spots I indicated. Both could get a little cheaper, my version by carrying 1 less wing and 1 less big, the MLE version by using Gist and Hairston in place of Vet min contracts. IMO the MLE version is a much worse roster, given it only has 13 players (ie. less room to carrying prospects a la gist, hairston, etc.).
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
