General 2013 Free Agency Discussion

[Chinook]

I`d go after Gerald Henderson. He could be avaible for part of MLE.

Sure, but I'm talking about bigs here.

[TD 21]

I agree that the Spurs could really use some athleticism. We've talked at length in this thread about athletic threes, but are there any fours out there that you like on the free-agent or potential trade market? With Leonard, Green and Ginobili almost guaranteed to soak up most of the wing minutes, there's only so much impact an athletic wing can have. I agree about having Ginobili insurance, but I'd still prioritize a big other that.

An athletic SF that's big enough to serve as a small ball PF (like D. Wright) is preferable. But yeah, when Ginobili's healthy, the vast majority of the wing minutes are going to Leonard, Green and him.

As far as athletic PF's go (that they could afford), free agents: B. Wright, Clark, Hickson, trade bait: Udoh, D. Williams, Vesely, amnesty candidate: T. Thomas.

Despite how bad he's been the past few years, T. Thomas is the most intriguing of the bunch, but he's so far gone that I don't even think they'd bother at this point. D. Williams, as we discussed ad nauseam months ago, is intriguing and B. Wright and Clark are mildly intriguing.

[Spursfanfromafar]

Martell Webster makes a lot of sense. For one, he is still young (just 26), is a very good three point shooter (41+% this year), and is versatile on offense and a decent defender, who can also learn in Pop's system. He carried the Wizards through a miserable phase this year and they are keen on re-upping him... but with the Wizards' guaranteed losing culture next season, it should not be difficult to pry Webster from them.

[jyra]

Maybe he is still an option for the offseason.

[jesterbobman]

General question: How well does Matt Bonner have to play to be kept around? Because if he plays similar to how he has so far, he's worth his money, but that makes it hard to sign another top line big.

I know he's not an option if he's amnestied, but what about if he's bought out?

[Chinook]

General question: How well does Matt Bonner have to play to be kept around? Because if he plays similar to how he has so far, he's worth his money, but that makes it hard to sign another top line big.

I know he's not an option if he's amnestied, but what about if he's bought out?

The Spurs could re-sign him once he clears waivers, if that's what you're asking. But they'd probably have to give him the same amout of money and probably one a long-term deal. I'm thinking they keep him. He's earned it so far, and if he keeps up this quality of play, he's as helpful as pretty much anyone the Spurs could get, especially if they still want to keep Diaw.

[Bruno]

If Spurs are doing well as a team in these playoffs and if players like Bonner and Joseph keep looking good, an option for Spurs would be to keep Bonner and to be careful with long term money by, for example, only signing Ginobili and Splitter to multiyear contracts. By doing that, Spurs will have a lot of cap space for the 2014 summer.

Bottom line, is that it's too soon to really have a clear battle plan on what Spurs should do in FA because it will highly depend on Spurs performances both individually and collectively in these playoffs.

[Bruno]

Well, with Spurs reaching the finals, it could trigger a quiet offseason for them.

I could imagine the following one:
- Diaw pick his option.
- Mills may or may not pick his option but I think he will.
- Spurs keep Bonner.
- At #28, Spurs draft Jackie Carmichael.
- At #58, Spurs draft and stash a player.
- Splitter and Ginobili are re-signed.
- Blair, McGrady and Neal aren't re-signed.
- Spurs sign Casspi.
- If Mills opt out, Spurs sign a cheap guard that is a good scorer/shooter for depth purpose.

[Richie]

The only thing that would change anything is how Bonner has played in the playoffs. He played good post defence against both Memphis and Lakers. If we keep him, our cap space goes down to MLE levels and is much less enticing to free agents.

Even if we win, I'd still waive him and try to get more front line help, but that's just me.

[Chinook]

Well, with Spurs reaching the finals, it could trigger a quiet offseason for them.

I could imagine the following one:
- Diaw pick his option.
- Mills may or may not pick his option but I think he will.
- Spurs keep Bonner.
- At #28, Spurs draft Jackie Carmichael.
- At #58, Spurs draft and stash a player.
- Splitter and Ginobili are re-signed.
- Blair, McGrady and Neal aren't re-signed.
- Spurs sign Casspi.
- If Mills opt out, Spurs sign a cheap guard that is a good scorer/shooter for depth purpose.

No Bertans?

I definitely want the Spurs to continue their youth movement, so I'd like to see at least two rookies come over the spend the year in Austin. We can talk about championship windows all we want, but the Spurs ceiling has risen to this point in large part because of the success for the Spurs' draft picks and developed players. If Casspi can reach new heights here, great, but otherwise, I wouldn't be against either keeping McGrady or letting a rookie back up Leonard.

I'm not a huge fan of Carmichael, and I'd rather get a player with more upside as the sixth big. I'd like to stash the pick if such a big can't be acquired. It will be interesting to see how the Spurs handle their bigs, as Baynes will probably warrant some playing time next season.

[Bruno]

No Bertans?

I'm not sure what is the best to with Bertans but, with his team being qualified for next season Euroleague, the best option might be to let him one more year in Europe. He is for sure a talented player but he is still very young and has a lot of work to do on his body.

[Spursfanfromafar]

Some report in a paper suggested that Pierce was in line for a cut from the Celtics. He is one target that the Spurs could go after, if available in a cheap deal. On paper, a perfect fit for both parties. With the Spurs releasing Neal and McGrady, Pierce could be a good SF backup fit in a six man wing featuring Parker, Green, Leonard, Joseph, Manu, Pierce.

[Anonymous Cowherd]

for me, assuming Diaw stays, Splitter stays, we keep Bonner OR bring over Bertans, and our draft strategy is best available as per usual, then a second string SF is the clear priority for free agency. Plenty of options; AlFarouq Aminu, Mike Dunleavy, Corey Brewer, Dorrell Wright, Omri Casspi. Sure I'm missing some decent possibilities out.

[Chinook]

I just don't know why the Celtics wouldn't amnesty Pierce.

[Mel_13]

I just don't know why the Celtics wouldn't amnesty Pierce.

His contract becomes fully guaranteed on June 30th. They have to trade him or buy him out before that date. Otherwise, he gets all 15 million.

[Chinook]

His contract becomes fully guaranteed on June 30th. They have to trade him or buy him out before that date. Otherwise, he gets all 15 million.

They should Bonner him (by that, I mean offer to guarantee him more money if he pushes his guarantee date back so they can amnesty him), then. He gets more money, and it's extremely unlikely someone would claim him.

EDIT: Thanks for the clarification, though.

[Mel_13]

They should Bonner him (by that, I mean offer to guarantee him more money if he pushes his guarantee date back so they can amnesty him), then. He gets more money, and it's extremely unlikely someone would claim him.

EDIT: Thanks for the clarification, though.

They could do that, but it seems to me that if they're going to part company that Pierce is much more valuable as a trade piece than an amnesty or buyout candidate.

[Chinook]

They could do that, but it seems to me that if they're going to part company that Pierce is much more valuable as a trade piece than an amnesty or buyout candidate.

Sure, but I mean as opposed to just waiving him.

Also, they could negotiate a date-change while still trying to trade him. The change wouldn't affect any other teams (expect making them pay a little more money), so it'd pretty much be contingent on them not trading him.

[lmbebo]

Wrong forum, but can't create a thread. Rockets looking to salary dump Thomas Robinson. Should spurs look into acquiring and developing him?

The Rockets have made clear to multiple rival teams that they plan to accept the best offer to move Robinson and eliminate his $3.52 million salary for the 2013-14 season.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/nba--houston-rockets-trying-to-trade-thomas-robinson-to-free-up-cap-space-for-run-at-dwight-howard-215915027.html

[Chinook]

Wrong forum, but can't create a thread. Rockets looking to salary dump Thomas Robinson. Should spurs look into acquiring and developing him?

The Rockets have made clear to multiple rival teams that they plan to accept the best offer to move Robinson and eliminate his $3.52 million salary for the 2013-14 season.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/nba--houston-rockets-trying-to-trade-thomas-robinson-to-free-up-cap-space-for-run-at-dwight-howard-215915027.html

I imagine you've found the Robinson thread already, but don't forget there's a trade thread here, too.

[lmbebo]

I imagine you've found the Robinson thread already, but don't forget there's a trade thread here, too.

Hi

As soon as I tried to start the thread, I saw it pushed to the top. I think I posted in it. Then found another thread in the main forum.

Thanks though

[Captivus]

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1...e-agency-rules

Idiots' Guide to the New NBA Free Agency Rules


The NFL has a real salary cap. A "hard" cap. Teams are simply not allowed to spend one dollar above a certain payroll total.
It's very simple.
The NBA doesn't operate that way. It has a "soft" cap—which makes everything confusing.
But the new collective bargaining agreement, signed to end the lockout in December 2011, has moved the league closer towards what will be a hard cap in practical terms for most teams most of the time. This fact has affected offseason player movement last summer, but now that all of the new CBA's provisions have kicked in, the transition is complete.
The league has entered its new salary cap era, and teams with high payrolls now face severe restrictions on the ways they can acquire new players. This isn't your father's CBA, and the effects of the "harder" cap will be seen across the free-agent market.
First, some history.
Bruce Bennett/Getty Images

The Salary Cap
In the past, the NBA's structure has meant that the salary cap was a cap in name only. Through trades and various payroll exceptions, teams have been able to (and almost all did) go above the cap regularly. It is a reality that has allowed even wild-spending teams to be at least small players in the free-agent market.
Under the old CBA, there were some (small) penalties for spending above the cap level. But they were minimal, and most teams operated most seasons in excess of that level. In practice, teams seemed to view the structure more as if there were benefits for being under the cap than there were drawbacks for going over.
There were two limitations of note for going above the cap:

• Teams below the cap could spend up the cap level on any free agents they want; teams above the cap were limited to acquiring free agents through the "mid level" and "biannual" exceptions (which have allowed teams to sign player to salaries starting around roughly around $6 million and $2 million in recent seasons).

• Teams below the cap were able to engage in trades for high-salaried players without sending back players making equivalent salaries. Teams above the cap must match salaries in trades. An example of how this can benefit an under-the-cap team: Midway through the 2011-12 season, the Indiana Pacers were able to trade merely a second-round pick to the Toronto Raptors for Leandro Barbosa, who made roughly $8 million. An over-the-cap team would have had to send back a player (or players) who made around $8 million.

Given the difficulty it takes to hire 15 quality guys to play professional basketball for under $58 million (the cap level in recent years), the mid-level exception has been the method most good teams have relied on to acquire new talent. The other has been sign-and-trade deals, in which over-the-cap teams could get another team to sign a free agent and then send him their way. (This is how the Los Angeles Lakers acquired Steve Nash last summer).
Neither is as good as being below the cap.
But since it is nearly impossible to both win games and stay under the cap, most teams trying to win games always lived above the cap unless they were specifically shedding enough salary to get under the cap for luring a big-name free agent. In a typical season, however, only around five teams—if that—would be far enough below the salary cap each summer to be in a position to sign major free agents.
Kevork Djansezian/Getty Images

The Luxury Tax
Above the salary cap is the luxury tax threshold.
This is a payroll level (around $70 million) that, once a team passes, requires it to kick back money to the league. The theory is that teams spending above the luxury tax level are being reckless (and may be over-leveraging their big-market advantage), so they have to pay a fee for doing so. Those dollars are then piled up by the league, which distributes payments at the end of the season, through revenue sharing, to the more fiscally responsible teams.
That extra cost—a minor annoyance to teams like the Lakers and New York Knicks—was the only penalty for spending mass sums on payroll, however.
Whether it spent $71 million or $171 million (a hypothetical payroll level that no team has ever come close to hitting), the team still retained all the privileges of every other team over the cap. No matter how much a team spent, it never lost the ability to keep acquiring players by using salary cap exceptions (mid-level and biannual) or conducting sign-and-trade deals.
That has changed. In a big way.
Enter "The Apron."

The Apron
Now, above the luxury tax is a spending category that severely restricts a team's ability to acquire new players.
This "apron" kicks in at $4 million above the luxury tax level.
Teams that operate below the apron retain all the player-acquisition rights of any franchise that is over the cap. But teams over the apron forfeit several of the most tried-and-true ways teams have used to improve:

• They cannot engage in sign-and-trade deals.

• They cannot use the biannual exception (which has allowed teams to sign a player with a first-year salary around $2 million in recent years).

• They can still use the mid-level exception, but it becomes a "mini mid-level exception." The tool that once allowed over-the-cap teams to sign players to a league-average salary (around $5 million in recent years) now becomes much less enticing (falling to around $3 million).

The intent was clear: The NBA no longer wants teams that spend wildly to continue improving.
The league didn't ins ute a hard cap. It just ins uted a "cross this line and you're pretty screwed" threshold. By limiting the ways a team can improve once it passes the apron (in addition to making the luxury tax payments much more expensive), the new CBA forces teams to be more fiscally responsible—or else be stuck with the same roster they have right now.
The Brooklyn Nets are the most obvious case study.
Wanting to make a big splash when it arrived in Brooklyn, the team spent wildly, giving a max contract to Deron Williams, trading for Joe Johnson and his huge salary and handing out Monopoly money paydays to Brook Lopez and Kris Humphries.
But now the team has a bloated payroll that might not even allow it to retain Andray Blatche in the offseason, let alone find anyone else willing to take the tiny contracts they are able to offer (via the mini mid-level exception and veteran minimum deals).
For a franchise that just lost in the first round of the playoffs to a Chicago Bulls team without Derrick Rose and with the flu, the new realities of the CBA and the apron are about to throw a wet blanket on the spending fest that took place before the team relocated.

The Mid-Level Exception
The new CBA also tinkered with the mid-level exception for all teams above the cap. In the past, teams could offer free agents a five-year deal starting at the league average salary (which was nearly $6 million in 2010-11).
Now, teams below the apron can only offer a four-year deal starting with a first-year salary around $5 million, according to Larry Coon of ESPN. As noted above, teams above the apron can only offer the mini mid-level, which is for just $3 million, but also can only run a maximum of three years.
This duration restriction is just one more way that teams above the apron suffer a compe ive disadvantage in the free-agent market.

The Room Exception
The so-called "room exception" is new in the current CBA. The rationale for including it follows the same logic as the rest of the new provisions: Encourage teams to spend less.
In the past, teams that were, for example, one dollar over the salary cap were awarded the right to use the mid-level exception to sign a player to a deal with a starting salary around $5 million.
But a team that was frugal but only able to get, say, $1 million below the cap was out of luck. It wasn't permitted to use the mid-level that the $1-over-the-cap team could use. So that was a bummer because there is no way to sign a quality player for $1 million.
Some benefit for being thrifty.
The league, with controlling salary costs in mind, naturally wants teams to not spend on salary where possible, so the room exception was created to reward teams that are just a little bit under the cap.
Now, those teams can offer a contract with a starting salary of up to $2.5 million even if that would take them over the cap.
Sam Greenwood/Getty Images

The Amnesty Provision
The new CBA included what essentially is a salary cap "get out of jail free card." Each team was allowed to make one mistake contract disappear permanently off its books.
The ramifications for this on the free agency market are two-fold:

• It has introduced new free agents to the market. Half the teams have already used their amnesty, and the number of players eligible to be amnestied is dwindling. So the provision's effect on free agency will be marginal this offseason compared to years past, but there still may be an extra player or two out there.

• Any team that uses the provision may become a bigger player in the market. To use a wild hypothetical example: The Lakers could amnesty Kobe Bryant and not re-sign Dwight Howard. This would improbably put them under the salary cap and allow them to go after players who they otherwise would not have been in the market for.

As far as the amnesty process goes, the player still receives the full amount left of the contract that he is owed; the total simply no longer counts against his team's salary cap/luxury tax/apron status.
Amnestying a player is the same as waiving him, and other teams are allowed to make bids for his services. Teams can bid any sum up to the player's full previous salary. The team that makes the winning bid then pays the player that total while the original team makes up the difference so that the player gets the full salary he had negotiated for years ago.
There are two other main restrictions:

• The player's contract must have been signed under the old CBA; anyone signed (to an original deal or a contract extension) after the end of the lockout is not eligible.

• The contract must have been signed by the team that amnesties the player; a team cannot trade for a player on a "legacy" contract and then amnesty him.

Here is a full list of the players who have been amnestied so far, according to Larry Coon's Salary Cap FAQ:

• Brooklyn Nets: Travis Outlaw
• Cleveland Cavaliers: Baron Davis
• Dallas Mavericks: Brendan Haywood
• Denver Nuggets: Chris Andersen
• Golden State Warriors: Charlie Bell
• Houston Rockets: Luis Scola
• Indiana Pacers: James Posey
• Los Angeles Clippers: Ryan Gomes
• Minnesota Timberwolves: Darko Milicic
• New York Knicks: Chauncey Billups
• Orlando Magic: Gilbert Arenas
• Philadelphia 76ers: Elton Brand
• Phoenix Suns: Josh Childress
• Portland Trail Blazers: Brandon Roy
• Washington Wizards: Andray Blatche

Recently, Kevin Pelton of ESPN tweeted that there are roughly "44 players in the league left still eligible for the amnesty provision."
Bryant is one. It seems hard to believe—impossible, really—that the Lakers would make such a drastic move to save money.
But Bryant is trying to recover from a devastating injury and is on the books for more than $30 million next year, according to ShamSports—a sum that will cost the team at least twice that total in real dollars (presuming they re-sign Dwight Howard) due to the luxury tax.
Mike Miller is another player who could be on the amnesty block.
The Miami Heat are facing a huge tax bill of their own, and Miller has been hobbled by injuries and age. If the team doesn't think he can contribute next season, they can amnesty him and save some $20 million over the next two years in real dollars.
The new CBA has changed the league drastically. Free-spending ways now severely impede a team's ability to improve. The NBA has come closer to having a hard cap.
The structure remains dizzyingly complicated, however, so fans hoping their teams can sign a new player this summer shouldn't feel bad if they are confused. A lot of league executives still seem to be.
The biggest takeaway is that spending too much restricts movement.
How much?
Well, the Nets have gotten to the point where they are probably hoping that the Heat amnesty Mike Miller so that they can offer him a mini mid-level exception.
That bad.
Spend responsibly, my friends.
Note: Unless otherwise sourced, the information used in this post was gathered by reviewing league sources as well as reading the work of and having conversations with Larry Coon of ESPN and Hoopsworld.

[Bruno]

One of the key for Spurs off-season, is whether or not there is a player who will command more than the MLE that they could realistically get.

A list of non-PG potential free agents worth more than the MLE:
Josh Smith
Gerald Henderson (RFA)
OJ Mayo (PO)
Andre Iguodala (PO)
David West
Dwight Howard
Monta Ellis (PO)
JJ Re
Nikola Pekovic (RFA)
Andrei Kirilenko (PO)
JR Smith (PO)
Kevin Martin
Andrew Bynum
Tyreke Evans (RFA)
Al Jefferson
Paul Millsap

It might be sounds like a big list but a lot of these players surely won't be in play:
- Some won't be interested in joining Spurs like Dwight Howard or Andrew Bynum.
- Some are poor fit with Spurs game like Josh Smith, OJ Mayo, Monta Ellis, JR Smith...
- Some will likely re-sign with their team like David West or Kirilenko.
- RFAs like Pekovic or Evans will be harder to get because of their restricted status.

At the end, realistic targets could be reduced to an handful of players: JJ Re , Kevin Martin, Al Jefferson, Paul Millsap...

[Anonymous Cowherd]

erm, Big Al, YES PLEASE. not so much the rest.

[ABC]

At the end, realistic targets could be reduced to an handful of players: JJ Re , Kevin Martin, Al Jefferson, Paul Millsap...

I think you've said you like the idea of the Spurs signing Al Jefferson before. If the Spurs resign Splitter and sign Jefferson, what would you envision the bigs' rotation looking like? A lot of people think having Jefferson and Duncan on the court wouldn't work defensively and the 10+ million that Jefferson will get would be a lot to pay for him to just get the backup center minutes.

Can the Spurs get away with 10 or 15 minutes of Jefferson and Duncan on the court together? Or, if the Spurs don't resign Splitter, do you think Duncan and Jefferson could work for much longer stretches?