RJ to Miami a possibility

[DPG21920]

Beas > RJ. Beas + TE >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>RJ.

[AFBlue]

The Dude does not party with RJ. He does not abide . . .

Seriously...new (a.k.a. Beasley) has come to light man!

[SpursTillTheEnd]

if tim duncan wants another ring he wont get it with rj here, yall people defending rj are dumb as talking bout he will help us get the outta here with that false hariston > rj beasley > rj

[024]

beasley blows. he has absolutely no defense and no work ethic. just take the trade exception, a future pick, and run.

[DPG21920]

Yeah, explain that to Tim Duncan and his final shot at a ring.

Yeah, RJ really helped Tim last year in his quest. I have already explained that losing RJ does nothing to really damper the Spurs chances at a le. It is marginal impact at best.

If all other off season plans went how the Spurs wanted them to, but they lost RJ, the championship course (as real as it is) would not change drastically at all.

That slight dip, if any at all, is certainly not worth RJ long-term.

[coyotes_geek]

Probably would be declined, given that he hasn't proven anything and will be lucky to get that on the open market in the 2011 summer. Spurs still have a shot at him either way if they do decline it.

I'd think you've got no choice but to exercise the option. He's only 21 and by popular opinion here only some maturity away from being a really good player. Plus if you decline the option on him he becomes an unrestricted FA and you're limited to only being able to offer him money up to what that 4th year option would have been. If you're willing to commit to him for 1 year, you may as well commit to him for 2 considering his age, potential, and the benefits of having him as a restricted free agent.

[Blackjack]

Some people around here with their reasoning for RJ are killing me. Now that he has opted, re-signing RJ is the worst case scenario because no way he signs short-term.

Now that he has opted out, Spurs absolutely cannot bring him back. Sure it sucks to have some what of a hole at SF, but it is infinitely worse having RJ for 3+ years.

Anything>>>>>>>>>>RJ Long Term.

Really? I wonder if he meant that . . .

[Cane]

If they can get an SF, it works fine.

Not if its Beasley. No one wants this guy for good reason, one of the worst basketball players in the playoffs and one of the few starting forwards that played worse than RJ in the playoffs.

[temujin]

Anyone but Jeferson.

[DPG21920]

The Dude does not party with RJ. He does not abide . . .

Seriously...new (a.k.a. Beasley) has come to light man!

[benefactor]

Not if its Beasley. No one wants this guy for good reason, one of the worst basketball players in the playoffs and one of the few starting forwards that played worse than RJ in the playoffs.

So you are saying that you would not want Mike Miller if it meant taking an expiring Beasley?

[DPG21920]

Anything.

[Cane]

So you are saying that you would not want Mike Miller if it meant taking an expiring Beasley?

That'd be awesome but I think thats daydreaming. No one wants Beasley.

[MannyIsGod]

Yeah, RJ really helped Tim last year in his quest. I have already explained that losing RJ does nothing to really damper the Spurs chances at a le. It is marginal impact at best.

Yeah no. You can explain it all you want but it doesn't make it any truer. RJ didn't play well last year and no one can deny that but that doesn't mean that he won't play better this year and improve on his corner 3s.

If all other off season plans went how the Spurs wanted them to, but they lost RJ, the championship course (as real as it is) would not change drastically at all.

That slight dip, if any at all, is certainly not worth RJ long-term.

Who cares if he's locked up long term at a reasonable contract? The Spurs are playing for a year or two at most before they're going to have to undergo some serious rebuilding and during those rebuilding years it really won't matter if RJ is on the books.

I prefer to get a TE or a better fit through a S&T but to say that you'd not notice it should the Spurs not resign RJ is foolish, IMO. Even if he just came off the bench and the Spurs started Hill Manu and Parker I believe his production is better than that of anything we'll get for the min/lle.

[ohmwrecker]

So you are saying that you would not want Mike Miller if it meant taking an expiring Beasley?

That scenario seems pretty unlikely. The TE left over after we take Beasley wouldn't be enough to get Miller or anyone else worthwhile. I don't really want Mike Miller anyway. I mean, I'll take him, but there are a few others I would rather have.

[benefactor]

That'd be awesome but I think thats daydreaming. No one wants Beasley.

It's plausible. Bruno doesn't daydream.

[benefactor]

That scenario seems pretty unlikely. The TE left over after we take Beasley wouldn't be enough to get Miller or anyone else worthwhile. I don't really want Mike Miller anyway. I mean, I'll take him, but there are a few others I would rather have.

A trade exception isn't the way to go if the trade include Beasley.

If RJ sign a contract that start at $7M, a S&T for Beasley will generate a small TE of $2M. With a $2M TE, you can get a player paid $2.1M or less. Spurs won't be able to get a quality SF with that.

There are two ways to solve that:

First, doing a three team trade:
- Heat get RJ for Beasley
- Spurs get a SF and Beasley for RJ
- 3rd team get a TE for a SF
Picks and cash should be added to this trade.
With this trade, the SF Spurs can get should be paid less than $3.8M.

Second adding players. Spurs have a lot of players with non-guaranteed contracts. Adding them to a trade could help Spurs to take additional salary. It has no drawbacks for the other teams that can waive them. Spurs could also S&T a second player like Mason or Bonner.

When you combine these two "tricks" Spurs can easily take a SF with a $6M salary even if they also had to take Beasley.

[AFBlue]

The issue with Bruno's scenario is that it likely puts the Spurs over the luxury tax threshold, if you assume they sign Splitter at MLE.

[ohmwrecker]

I said "unlikely", not impossible . . . that scenario takes a lot of pieces falling together and two teams being VERY cooperative in doing the Spurs a favor.

[MannyIsGod]

The issue with Bruno's scenario is that it likely puts the Spurs over the luxury tax threshold, if you assume they sign Splitter at MLE.

Yeah, and I honestly think the Spurs days of going over the LT are done unless they plan on letting Tony Parker walk next season or trading him at the halfway point.

[AFBlue]

Yeah, and I honestly think the Spurs days of going over the LT are done unless they plan on letting Tony Parker walk next season or trading him at the halfway point.

Agreed.

I think if the Spurs work a Jefferson sign-and-trade to the Heat it would be to take back Beasley plus TE for the difference, or just a TE for the full amount ($6-8M).

[ohmwrecker]

Agreed.

I think if the Spurs work a Jefferson sign-and-trade to the Heat it would be to take back Beasley plus TE for the difference, or just a TE for the full amount ($6-8M).

I would rather have the full TE.

[coyotes_geek]

That'd be awesome but I think thats daydreaming. No one wants Beasley.

No one wanted Beasley when Miami's criteria for giving him away involved not having to take back any salary whatsoever. Since that meant dumping him on a team who had cap room, "no one" really only meant that there weren't any teams with cap space who wanted to give up $5 million worth of cap space for the guy.

[Bruno]

If the rumor of Lebron going to NY is true, Cavs could also be a good target for a RJ S&T. If Cavs don't decide to re-build via some tanking, adding RJ would make a lot for sense for them.

[DPG21920]

Yeah no. You can explain it all you want but it doesn't make it any truer. RJ didn't play well last year and no one can deny that but that doesn't mean that he won't play better this year and improve on his corner 3s.

Why would he magically get better at things he has never been good at (except for maybe 1 statistical anomaly of a season)?

People who get better normally do so because they have the skill set that fits and need a year to learn everything to become more natural.

RJ does not have a skill set that fits the Spurs.

Who cares if he's locked up long term at a reasonable contract? The Spurs are playing for a year or two at most before they're going to have to undergo some serious rebuilding and during those rebuilding years it really won't matter if RJ is on the books.

I prefer to get a TE or a better fit through a S&T but to say that you'd not notice it should the Spurs not resign RJ is foolish, IMO. Even if he just came off the bench and the Spurs started Hill Manu and Parker I believe his production is better than that of anything we'll get for the min/lle.

I care if he is locked up long-term because for many reasons, it will hinder the rebuilding process. When you couple that with the reality that Spurs are long shots to win a le, with or without RJ, it makes no sense to lock him up long-term, just to give the team "one more shot". It will certainly matter if RJ is on the books and they are trying to rebuild.

That is not even taking into consideration that it seems to be widely known RJ does not want to play here. It seems pretty clear he wishes he was else where.

Again, I don't think losing RJ hurts the Spurs very much at all basketball impact wise and it is not at all foolish to think that. The numbers back it up. His production and impact was below average and even getting a cheap one dimensional player that has a skill set the Spurs need would be at worse equal overall impact.