Spurs interested in Emeka Okafor

[MR.SILVER&BLack]

at the idea of the NBA owned team helping out the Spurs.

Now maybe if it was LA...

im guessing you where not around for the chris paul to Lakers deal.

[DPG21920]

I said the same thing "worse" because of what you quoted. I just explained to you what I meant when I was using the word worse and if you don't like that, fine. I'm not going to debate with you like Chump when I took the time to clarify what I meant with my use of the word "worse" in the context of what you quoted.

Hence my entire argument that even though Okafors contract is "worse" he's easier moved than RJ. If it were with regards to value, that wouldn't make sense (which now I see why you were confused with what I said)

[DPG21920]

Then you mean, more expensive, not worse.

In the context of what Mel was saying, yes. That was not my meaning when I used the word.

[Mel_13]

I said the same thing "worse" because of what you quoted. I just explained to you what I meant when I was using the word worse and if you don't like that, fine. I'm not going to debate with you like Chump when I took the time to clarify what I meant with my use of the word "worse" in the context of what you quoted.

Hence my entire argument that even though Okafors contract is "worse" he's easier moved than RJ. If it were with regards to value, that wouldn't make sense (which now I see why you were confused with what I said)

I also have no interest in debating what you meant in various posts. Your current position makes sense, even if it contradicts an earlier position in this thread. I'm happy to accept your latest position.

[DPG21920]

Thanks!

[Shifty]

I also have no interest in debating what you meant in various posts. Your current position makes sense, even if it contradicts an earlier position in this thread. I'm happy to accept your latest position.

What a fun and confusing conversation you 2 had. I hope I don't contradict myself too.

[txstr1986]

im guessing you where not around for the chris paul to Lakers deal.

LA Clippers

[Darkwaters]

It would have been the Lakers if basically the rest of the league didn't have a fit.

[MR.SILVER&BLack]

LA Clippers

Why would clippers want Okafor when they have Jordan?

[Kindergarten Cop]

LA Clippers

Why would clippers want Okafor when they have Jordan?

Surely you know that this isn't what he/she meant, right?

[DPG21920]

So question: The amnesty of RJ for the Spurs really isn't saving them money, correct? They aren't luxury tax payers next year and they still have to pay RJ the money on his contract. The benefit is with regards to opening up cap space and if that is the case the question then becomes is paying 10M to RJ and getting no production + money to a player of the ~mid-level caliber (so let's say 14-15M total for the two) better than paying that full 14M to Okafor? In a bubble obviously because I don't see why NO would really do that (he's not bad enough to just want to save a few million a year IMO), but I just wonder why Spurs fans wouldn't want the trade if they would take RJ as the centerpiece.

[MR.SILVER&BLack]

Surely you know that this isn't what he/she meant, right?

yes. just trying to get a funny response.

[txstr1986]

yes. just trying to get a funny response.

It worked. "Not sure if serious" has to be one of the best memes.

[Pelicans78]

Okafor would be a nice contract to dump, but if not, he's a solid starter for two more seasons.

[Proxy]

Batum and Kaman seems too good to be true, even if it is within the realm of possibility money-wise. That would be a scary Spurs team.

[angelbelow]

So question: The amnesty of RJ for the Spurs really isn't saving them money, correct? They aren't luxury tax payers next year and they still have to pay RJ the money on his contract. The benefit is with regards to opening up cap space and if that is the case the question then becomes is paying 10M to RJ and getting no production + money to a player of the ~mid-level caliber (so let's say 14-15M total for the two) better than paying that full 14M to Okafor? In a bubble obviously because I don't see why NO would really do that (he's not bad enough to just want to save a few million a year IMO), but I just wonder why Spurs fans wouldn't want the trade if they would take RJ as the centerpiece.

I would like to do RJ+Filler for Emeka as well. To play devils advocate:
-Emeka is more offensively challenged then Blair. How would he look next to Duncan? I think our offense would struggle a lot with those two on the floor at the same time but I think our defense would be pretty sick.
-Emeka won't do well with Bonner because he is not a post threat nor is he a decorated passer.
-Emeka might do well with Splitter because he has a 15 footer that he can hit at a eFG% of 43%. So to be nitpicky.. he doesn't theoretically fit well with any of our bigs on offense.

Advantages:
-Known as a defender and would undoubtedly improve our defense with his rebounding and rim protection.
-We don't have to worry about what kind of contract we give to Duncan because he can expire with Emeka in 2014.
-In 2014 we would have to re-up Splitter and Parker. If Splitter proves to be a worthy "allstar" type player then we have plenty of room to resign him AND go after another allstar caliber free agent.

[Seventyniner]

Question for those of you willing to take Okafor's contract for RJ: Would you trade RJ + filler for Okafor + Ariza? That would cripple the Spurs' cap for the next two seasons (possibly pushing them into the tax depending on Duncan), but would give the team an immediate improvement.

Obviously those who wouldn't do RJ for Okafor for contract reasons wouldn't want Ariza added in. I'm just trying to find a reason for the NBA Hornets to do the deal. Dumping Okafor and Ariza for RJ clears $10.5M in cap room each of the next two seasons, and with the Pau Gasol trade, we saw that a team with new ownership coming in tends to like having a mostly clear payroll.

Edit: On second thought, though, the Spurs would have to add in Bonner, Anderson, and one or two of the cheap players (Green, Blair, Neal) to make the salaries match, so nevermind. That price isn't worth it.

[CGD]

Meh, a lot better than a lot of crack pipe dreams out there. Spurs would have to take on about 6M in additional salary over the next two years (adding the other added pieces), but I think it's worth it for a quality big man.

[DPG21920]

I would like to do RJ+Filler for Emeka as well. To play devils advocate:
-Emeka is more offensively challenged then Blair. How would he look next to Duncan? I think our offense would struggle a lot with those two on the floor at the same time but I think our defense would be pretty sick.
-Emeka won't do well with Bonner because he is not a post threat nor is he a decorated passer.
-Emeka might do well with Splitter because he has a 15 footer that he can hit at a eFG% of 43%. So to be nitpicky.. he doesn't theoretically fit well with any of our bigs on offense.

Advantages:
-Known as a defender and would undoubtedly improve our defense with his rebounding and rim protection.
-We don't have to worry about what kind of contract we give to Duncan because he can expire with Emeka in 2014.
-In 2014 we would have to re-up Splitter and Parker. If Splitter proves to be a worthy "allstar" type player then we have plenty of room to resign him AND go after another allstar caliber free agent.

He doesn't fit well on offense, but I think when you have Duncan/Parker/Manu/Green starting you have plenty of offense. Offense isn't the problem, but depth (upfront), defense and shot blocking. Spurs have seen their offense first teams flame out; we know that doesn't work. What we don't know is if a defense oriented approach with someone like Okafor will work, but IMO they have to try something because what they have does not work.

Again, this is somewhat in a bubble because I doubt NO does a RJ for Okafor swap, but if the Spurs first rounder would entice them I don't get why Spurs fans wouldn't want this because of the reasons I outlined above. Yes, you lose the ability to amnesty RJ, but for the same money essentially you get Okafor vs Nothing (RJ amnesty)+mid level player.

I also think that although you can't amnesty Okafor, you do have a pretty good likelihood of just salary dumping him which is actually a better scenario than the amnesty anyways.

[angelbelow]

He doesn't fit well on offense, but I think when you have Duncan/Parker/Manu/Green starting you have plenty of offense. Offense isn't the problem, but depth (upfront), defense and shot blocking. Spurs have seen their offense first teams flame out; we know that doesn't work. What we don't know is if a defense oriented approach with someone like Okafor will work, but IMO they have to try something because what they have does not work.

Saying that offense isn't a problem is probably going too far but I completely agree with your overall idea. Having Okafor gives an opportunity infuse a shot blocking, defensive minded big and a possible return to our elite defensive schemes. So Okafor is a cause for concern offensively but the juice is worth the squeeze at this point.

Again, this is somewhat in a bubble because I doubt NO does a RJ for Okafor swap, but if the Spurs first rounder would entice them I don't get why Spurs fans wouldn't want this because of the reasons I outlined above. Yes, you lose the ability to amnesty RJ, but for the same money essentially you get Okafor vs Nothing (RJ amnesty)+mid level player.

I also think that although you can't amnesty Okafor, you do have a pretty good likelihood of just salary dumping him which is actually a better scenario than the amnesty anyways.

If NO is willing to take James Anderson and a first pick as a deal sweetener, that would be pretty cool. Something along the lines of RJ, Anderson, and Blair would be more ideal because we can maybe keep out 1st rounder. In most scenarios, trading RJ for a big is a positive and this trade definitely fits the bill as a positive acquisition.

If Okafor's contract was beyond 2014, I might disagree about the salary dumping as I believe a bad player is always difficult to get rid of. But 2014 is the year we likely re-evaluate our roster and make significant changes so Emeka's contract wouldn't get in way of that.

[SanAntonioSpurs23]

Sorry if this has been posted before, but is Okafor injured currently? Just wondering why he isn't playing tonight?

[DPG21920]

I'm not saying Okafor = le, I'm just saying that the price the Spurs would likely pay to get him (RJ + filler) is worth it.

[DPG21920]

Sorry if this has been posted before, but is Okafor injured currently? Just wondering why he isn't playing tonight?

He is out with a knee injury but doesn't appear to be too serious.

[Pelicans78]

Hornets aren't gonna take RJ's contract for Okafor.

[venitian navigator]

Considering that Aminu has not played well till now for them, the trade that probably NO could consider is Ariza + Aminu for RJ.
The years are the same (three still for Ariza and two/three for Aminu), there are other players in the same role of Aminu that are gonna play minutes (Henry), RJ is a better offensive player than Ariza and they need offense, and in case he's not working they can amnesty him and free a 9 millions cap space.
For Spurs could work 'cause Ariza should be a better defensive player and, probably, as good or better spot up shooter than RJ but with more "balls" coming play off time...and Aminu could be developed in a small ball four (that's probably the role he was playing at college level).