Reason to trade Mahinmi?

[VI_Massive]

Can someone please explain to me the reasons to trade Ian Mahinmi? From my understanding, trading him would likely be a salary-cutting move. It would save the Spurs the rest of what he's owed this year, about 700K I think, plus the discount on the luxury tax from lowering the payroll by that much. In total it would save about 1.5 million, I think.

The possible upside though, and I think a lot of ST agrees with me, outweighs saving that comparatively small amount of money. The payroll is already 80 mill. According to what we've heard, R.C. and Pop persuaded Holt that the team needs to spend more to compete against the LAs and Bostons of the league.

Those teams, especially LA, have many talented, athletic bigs. We need similar players to keep up. They are rare, and coveted by teams who have them. It appears we may have one with Ian. As we all know, the team is getting older, especially on the front line, and needs young athletic big players. In most of the trade talks we have on this board, a young big is often at the top of the wish list. I think we'd all like someone who is a bit more experienced and plays better D than what it seems Ian has to offer, but is what we could find in the trade market going to be significantly better than Ian, more experienced in the Spurs system, any cheaper?

I know a lot of this is repe ive and well-known to those who follow the team, but I'm trying to lay out all the reasons I see to keep him vs. the minimal benefit of saving not a lot of money. I really don't see the logic. I hope this thread isn't too repe ive and I'm hoping it can focus specifically on the reasons to trade him. Can people please explain them to me?

PS: If the Spurs do trade him, this message board may burst into flames.

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

1.5 million is 1.5 million, no matter how you present it, this is lots of money and agreeing to a payroll in the range of 80 mil doesn't mean they can afford to continue throwing money left and right. Saving 1.5 mil without sacrificing an asset would probably represent a good opportunity for the Spurs.

Moreover, if Ian is traded for a TE, like NJ's, there would be an open roster spot, which could be used if certain player becomes available after the trade deadline, like we've done with Big Dog, Gooden, etc.

Mahinmi has to beat Blair for minutes in order to squeeze into the rotation, I don't think he could and Blair, obviously, has more long-term value to the Spurs, given their respective contractual situation.

[mountainballer]

1.5 million is 1.5 million, no matter how you present it, this is lots of money and agreeing to a payroll in the range of 80 mil doesn't mean they can afford to continue throwing money left and right. Saving 1.5 mil without sacrificing an asset would probably represent a good opportunity for the Spurs.

Moreover, if Ian is traded for a TE, like NJ's, there would be an open roster spot, which could be used if certain player becomes available after the trade deadline, like we've done with Big Dog, Gooden, etc.

Mahinmi has to beat Blair for minutes in order to squeeze into the rotation, I don't think he could and Blair, obviously, has more long-term value to the Spurs, given their respective contractual situation.

+1
especially agree about the roster spot. ok, this could also happen via a 2 for 1 trade, but why not be prepared as soon as possible. buy out talks heat up the last days. (even if as usual the most buy outs will happen after deadline)
whenever a bought out veteran hits the market, the Spurs will be on of the leading candidates.

[kace]

.
Mahinmi has to beat Blair for minutes in order to squeeze into the rotation, I don't think he could and Blair, obviously, has more long-term value to the Spurs, given their respective contractual situation.

OK for the money part.

but about the rotation, and without getting too hyped with mahinmi performance, i think he deserves the right to show what he can bring.

If all our bigs keep playing at their current level and Ian could be able to play like he did last game, how far do you put him in the bigs rotation behind Tim ?

It's obviously too soon to be too excited by Ian, but the kid surely deserves to play some minutes to see what we have with him.

[VI_Massive]

+1
especially agree about the roster spot. ok, this could also happen via a 2 for 1 trade, but why not be prepared as soon as possible. buy out talks heat up the last days. (even if as usual the most buy outs will happen after deadline)
whenever a bought out veteran hits the market, the Spurs will be on of the leading candidates.

Do y'all know who the likely buy out candidates are?

[yavozerb]

1.5 million is 1.5 million, no matter how you present it, this is lots of money and agreeing to a payroll in the range of 80 mil doesn't mean they can afford to continue throwing money left and right. Saving 1.5 mil without sacrificing an asset would probably represent a good opportunity for the Spurs.

Moreover, if Ian is traded for a TE, like NJ's, there would be an open roster spot, which could be used if certain player becomes available after the trade deadline, like we've done with Big Dog, Gooden, etc.

Mahinmi has to beat Blair for minutes in order to squeeze into the rotation, I don't think he could and Blair, obviously, has more long-term value to the Spurs, given their respective contractual situation.

If the spurs were trying to save $ why would the spurs trade Ian for a pick and TE only to re-sign another player for about the same or more $ to replace his roster spot. What $ would that save? If indeed they trade Ian it will be in package deal or simply to save $ and leave his roster spot empty.

[Chieflion]

Do y'all know who the likely buy out candidates are?

The Washington Wizards may have a few players, that is for sure. Players like Darko Milicic, Nate Robinson may be bought out. Reports are saying Darko and the Knicks are working on a buyout, but Darko has been shooting his mouth off that he wants to return to Europe and play ball.

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

OK for the money part.

but about the rotation, and without getting too hyped with mahinmi performance, i think he deserves the right to show what he can bring.

If all our bigs keep playing at their current level and Ian could be able to play like he did last game, how far do you put him in the bigs rotation behind Tim ?

It's obviously too soon to be too excited by Ian, but the kid surely deserves to play some minutes to see what we have with him.

Totally agree that he deserves to get some burn but after so many years with the Spurs the staff probably know everything there is to know about him. It's easy to get excited over one great performance, and kudos to him, but IMO this one game does not change the Spurs or anyone else's perception about him.

Best case scenario would be if he keeps playing this way and earns himself minutes, but the odds are against him. It'd be awesome if he has suddenly blossomed though.

[VI_Massive]

The only Mahinmi trade scenario that would not make me tear my hair out would be in a package deal for someone like Brendan Haywood or someone else very good. A salary dump would be infuriating. I still think trading him at all would be detrimental to the future of the team, but I understand how, given TD's age, we are in a "win now" mode.

[Bruno]

The problem is that Ian will be an UFA this summer and Spurs don't have bird rights on him.

Teams overpay for young athletic bigmen. For example, Ryan Hollins got $7M/3 years last summer. If Ian shows some good things, Spurs will have to spend a part of the MLE to keep him. Spurs will surely have other needs for their MLE like a SG/SF or Splitter.

Right now, Spurs are in a no-win situation with Mahinmi. He is still very green so he won't really be able to help the team short term wise. Long term wise, either he doesn't pan out and Spurs are wasting their time on him or he is good and Spurs will likely lose him this summer.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

A salary dump would be dumb, you would think the Spurs learned their lesson with Scola but then again Pop is a stubborn SOB.

Anyway, the only way the entire Spurs front office wouldn't deserve to have their heads ripped off for trading Ian is if it brought us a quality big in return, say like a Marcus Camby or someone that would fix our front court problems.

Bruno hit on the key point - he's going to cost more than he's likely worth this summer.

[VI_Massive]

The problem is that Ian will be an UFA this summer and Spurs don't have bird rights on him.

Teams overpay for young athletic bigmen. For example, Ryan Hollins got $7M/3 years last summer. If Ian shows some good things, Spurs will have to spend a part of the MLE to keep him. Spurs will surely have other needs for their MLE like a SG/SF or Splitter.

Right now, Spurs are in a no-win situation with Mahinmi. He is still very green so he won't really be able to help the team short term wise. Long term wise, either he doesn't pan out and Spurs are wasting their time on him or he is good and Spurs will likely lose him this summer.

Boy this is smart. It seems contingent on someone else being willing to overpay for Mahinmi, but that is very possible. Part of me thinks he could be helpful in the short-term, but that's almost certainly wishful thinking.

Can you explain why the Spurs don't have his Bird rights?

[Bruno]

Can you explain why the Spurs don't have his Bird rights?

http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#Q19

There is one more limit to the maximum salary that can be given using the Larry Bird exception. If the player was a first round draft pick and just completed the third year of his rookie scale contract, but his team did not exercise its option to extend the contract for the fourth season (see question number 41), then this exception cannot be used to give him a salary greater than he would have received had the team exercised their fourth year option. In other words, teams can't decline the option in order to get around the salary scale and give the player more money.

Mahinmi's option was around $1.8M.

[Fabbs]

Ian cannot be allowed to eat into Bonner or Finleys minutes.
We need both of them if we are going to amass a total of one playoff win again.

Also the money spent on Ian is money that could be used to extend Finley.

Pops knows what he is doing, he's won 4 les you know.

[VI_Massive]

http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#Q19



Mahinmi's option was around $1.8M.

So unless the team dipped into their MLE money, the max the Spurs could offer Ian would be the value of the option the team declined?

[Mark in Austin]

A salary dump would be dumb, you would think the Spurs learned their lesson with Scola but then again Pop is a stubborn SOB.

Anyway, the only way the entire Spurs front office wouldn't deserve to have their heads ripped off for trading Ian is if it brought us a quality big in return, say like a Marcus Camby or someone that would fix our front court problems.

Bruno hit on the key point - he's going to cost more than he's likely worth this summer.

I thought Pop was furious at RC for dumping Scola...

[OrEmuN]

Question: Don't we have early Bird rights for Ian?

[venitian navigator]

By not exercising his fourth year option Spurs have trasformed Mahinmi from a player developing for the team in a hidden diamond (in case they know the value and they won't play him...horrible decision for this year in case he shows signs he can help the team) or immediate trade value (expiring contract/young big).
Imho, like Bruno pointed out, if they think the guy has value for the team, not extending has been a wrong choice and and risk to put the Spurs in lose/lose situation...
If they don't play him thinking he has value, is just for giving him a contract a la Blair...but others team can bite as well (and we have to spend a big part if not all the mle on Splitter).

Not exercising the option, imho, does make sense only if they already decided that, in any case, the guy is not in the team future...and that would be a fail, considering Spurs spent a first choice for him and they developed him (at least in in nbdl) for years...

I, frankly, didn't understand the choice to not exercise the option...it was a risk worth to take, just considering he's more experienced in team's scheme's than Ratliff, Mc Dyess and Blair (and, probably, more athletic than all the trio) and that he never had a real chance to prove himself and that , in the worst case, he could have been used next year in trades, given the fact that next year would have been his last....

[VI_Massive]

Question: Don't we have early Bird rights for Ian?

I think the issue isn't the amount of time Ian's been with the team but the fact that they declined the option, like Bruno mentioned above.

[VI_Massive]

By not exercising his fourth year option Spurs have trasformed Mahinmi from a player developing for the team in a hidden diamond (in case they know the value and they won't play him...horrible decision for this year in case he shows signs he can help the team) or immediate trade value (expiring contract/young big).
Imho, like Bruno pointed out, if they think the guy has value for the team, not extending has been a wrong choice and and risk to put the Spurs in lose/lose situation...
If they don't play him thinking he has value, is just for giving him a contract a la Blair...but others team can bite as well (and we have to spend a big part if not all the mle on Splitter).

Not exercising the option, imho, does make sense only if they already decided that, in any case, the guy is not in the team future...and that would be a fail, considering Spurs spent a first choice for him and they developed him (at least in in nbdl) for years...

I, frankly, didn't understand the choice to not exercise the option...it was a risk worth to take, just considering he's more experienced in team's scheme's than Ratliff, Mc Dyess and Blair (and, probably, more athletic than all the trio) and that he never had a real chance to prove himself and that , in the worst case, he could have been used next year in trades, given the fact that next year would have been his last....

I agree, but maybe the team was reaching a saturation point as far as spending. Although the option was for next year and we have a ton of money coming off the books by then. Maybe it had something to do with how good Blair was looking at that time.

[hater]

Well with Splitter coming in. I don't see a spot for Ian. But I don't see why Pop would not play him this season and see what he got.

I expect to see more playing to Ian as long as Bonner is out

[Bruno]

So unless the team dipped into their MLE money, the max the Spurs could offer Ian would be the value of the option the team declined?

Spurs could also use the LLE on him ($2.08M) but they will need to use MLE to offer him more.

[Stump]

I was among those in favor of giving Ian the fourth year of his rookie contract. Now we're in a situation where we'll get burned if he pans out and we can't pay him enough. Bigmen with lots of potential always come at a high price no matter how much they've actually produced, and I seriously doubt $4.2M over two years would be the best offer out there if he can establish himself as a rotation player this year (understandably a big if).

If he is for real and can play at a high level in more games, I think the Spurs best option would be to go ahead and trade him while his stock is high. A successful Mahimni has no reason to stick around after the season, so why not get something in return for him? The Ian experiment ended this past summer when the front office didn't give him the last year of his contract; we SpursTalk posters just haven't realized it yet.

Best of luck to Ian whatever happens. As a Spur or otherwise.

[Ed Helicopter Jones]

Reason to trade Mahinmi?

The Rockets need a center.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

I thought Pop was furious at RC for dumping Scola...

The top man in an organization never takes the fall for bad decisions if someone else under him can be pointed to.