Reply With Quote
Damn I'm having a hard time getting this quote thing down. Pardon me. It's been happy hour since 10.00
True. Neal is still a potential trade asset, as is Blair
Damn I'm having a hard time getting this quote thing down. Pardon me. It's been happy hour since 10.00
I would sure hope that it's Bonner.
I believe that we will package de colo with either bonner or diaw for a backup 3/4 type player.
Neal has tremendously more value than Blair at this point.
Blair would be best served signing a deal with the right kind of team, even if that contract is substantially less than hes being offered elsewhere.
Blair is unrestricted, no?
He is, but he can part of a sign and trade that brings back an asset to the Spurs.
Right now, you're tagging people in posts (which is called a mention here) instead of quoting them. Under each post on the right should be three options. Click 'Reply with Quote' to quote the post you're referencing. That way, people know what you're talking about.
Neal is probably the best option from a S&T standpoint. Teams always need shooting.
So is it a given that bellis contract came from the mle and not the room exception?The timing makes me think this contract is NOT a minimum deal. Young players never sign minimum deals this early in the offseason. Unless Pendergraph is in love with Boylen and just wanted to follow him, I think the more likely scenario is the Spurs gave him the rest of the MLE.
Maybe a two year fully guaranteed minimum deal was enough ..... but any bigman who has shown a pulse gets paid more than the minimum.
So, yeah, if this is a minimum deal in which the Spurs view him as a Bonner replacement = Great move
If they gave him MLE money =
The only bad thing is that the trade exception for him will be for only half of his salary, since he'll be a BYC player. So, for example, if he gets a deal that starts at $4 Million, the Spurs get a trade exception for $2 Million. The same thing goes for Blair, although maybe not.
We were talking about S&Ts. If a team wants to sign Neal or Blair, but wants to retain full use of their cap exceptions, they can execute a S&T with the Spurs. The Spurs then sign the player using the Bird exception and get some compensation from the other team for allowing them to get the player without using any of their own exceptions. That compensation could be a player that meets the trade rules, or a TE plus a pick or a stashed former pick. Something like that.
Coming off a blown ACL, Pendergraph landed a two-year, $3 million with the Pacers. If he got the minimum with the Spurs, it'd be a pretty drastic pay cut: two years and ~$1.9 million.
Getting him for that would be really nice, obviously.
Why is it that the one player signed this offseason without anyone breaking his contract details instantly has to be a Spur?
So this is interesting. Let's asume Neal gets an offer of 4M (i think the spurs would've match it was less), and then they conduct an "empty" S&T yielding the Spurs a TE in that amount.
How does that impact the possibility of getting a player like AK?
Can I still assume that one of Belli or Pende would being singed with he room exception and the other with cap space?
No way its for the min, IMO. Everyone wanting it to be for the min is really wishfully grasping at straws. It doesn't make sense that he'd leave that money on the table at this point int he offseason. Pendergraph could get a min contract a month from now so why accept an offer for the min right now? Does he want to play for the Spurs that bad to leave a couple of mil on the table? I really really doubt that.
I can't see much of a realistic chance this is for the min.
Probably right. Only thing is he might have a super close relationship with Boylen and was willing to come here for anything.
Could you explain this? Not clear why the TE would only be for half the new contract salary.
That's what I said. Even Beli is not reported as a final number (Woj said 2 year about 6M, not details on what the Spurs will use although it could be a fluid thing).Coming off a blown ACL, Pendergraph landed a two-year, $3 million with the Pacers. If he got the minimum with the Spurs, it'd be a pretty drastic pay cut: two years and ~$1.9 million.
Getting him for that would be really nice, obviously.
Why is it that the one player signed this offseason without anyone breaking his contract details instantly has to be a Spur?
http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q87
87. What is "Base Year Compensation?" How does it affect trades?
Base Year Compensation (BYC) is mostly an artifact of previous collective bargaining agreements. Its intent was to prevent teams from signing free agents to new contracts with salaries specifically intended to help facilitate trades. BYC was triggered when a team was over the cap and re-signed a player using the Larry Bird or Early Bird exception with a raise over 20%. Once triggered, BYC temporarily lowered the player's salary for salary-matching purposes (only), and therefore reduced or eliminated teams' ability to target salaries for trade purposes.
The 2011 CBA mostly eliminated BYC -- in fact, the term "Base Year Compensation" was removed from the agreement entirely. The rules formerly known as BYC now apply under just one cir stance -- during sign-and-trade transactions (see question number 89). If a team is over the cap and re-signs its Larry Bird or Early Bird free agent with a raise greater than 20%, in order to trade the player in a sign-and-trade arrangement, then the player's outgoing salary for trade purposes is either his previous salary or 50% of his new salary, whichever is greater. The team receiving the player always uses his new salary.
For example, a player made $5 million last season, is a Larry Bird free agent, and re-signs with his previous team (which is a taxpayer and therefore well over the cap) for $10 million. The signing is part of a sign-and-trade with another team, for that team's $10 million player. Since the conditions were satisfied the player's outgoing salary for trade purposes is $5 million. This trade would not be allowed, even though the players' new salaries match, since a taxpaying team cannot trade a $5 million player for a $10 million player. The highest salary this team could acquire in a sign-and-trade arrangement is $6.35 million1.
Once a sign-and-trade is complete, the player's actual salary is included in his new team's team salary.In lieu of the previous BYC rules for ordinary trades, teams are now prohibited from trading players for three months or until January 15 (whichever is later) when the signing satisfies the BYC critieria2 (see question number 98).
The more i see this unfolding it's beginning to look like they are trying to keep their options open for as long as possible with the hopes to attain a quality player. The Marco move right around the room exception announced early. Even a Pendergraph signing... Most likely is the MLE money being split but unless the Spurs can get that "player" it looks like this is pretty much the team.
So the Spurs have gotten a SG and a insurance policy big imo. That way him and Baynes have compe ion for those 12-20 minutes. So that takes us out of the Greg Oden talks, Kenyon Martin and other big talks. Leaves us looking for a 3RD string SF and possibly a backup PG as the only realistic options considering our roster.
My guess would be Sam Young, Darren Collison if its an option any more, and waiting it out till training camp for 1.
Most likely a back up 3 if we do make a move cause we already got Nando,Mills, and Joseph fighting for the backup 1 duties.
If Pendergraph is signed with a part of the MLE, it would be weird that Spurs spend their MLE on players that doesn't fit their biggest need (a backup SF). Belinelli will be the 3rd string SG behind Green/Ginobili and Spurs had other options to play SG like De Colo. Pendergraph will be potentially the 4th string PF behind Duncan, Diaw and Bonner. Spending $5.15M on 3rd/4th stringers while you don't have a true backup SF is a strange move.
This would be an incredibly underwhelming off season. If the Spurs are using MLE, then they have no reason to amnesty Bonner. If they have no reason to amnesty Bonner, then why do you need someone like Pendergraph who has not stuck anywhere when you already have a big rotation of Tim/Tiago/Boris/Bonner/Baynes? Is the 6th big really worth part of the MLE when at the moment it looks as if he will never play?
Why bring over Baynes mid-season, give him guaranteed money, just to pull in someone who is likely not that great and is paid more money?
Also, while most think Beli is an upgrade over Neal, even that is questionable. So if this is the off season, you can not say with any sort of certainty at all that the Spurs even improved slightly at the moment.
Possible. Spurs could have an offer out to AK but don't know if he's going to accept. If he does then they can make the proper adjustments and sign Belinelli with the RE and AK and Pendergraph with cap room and if AK declines then they can just use the MLE on the above two guys.Most likely is the MLE money being split but unless the Spurs can get that "player" it looks like this is pretty much the team.
Perhaps they're thinking using Bonner/DeColo on a trade?
Why is this bad of we used the MLE on him?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
