Maybe it's proof positive that the Wizards don't want to give up Ariza for spare parts. They've got a say in this too.
Sure, but if that's true really the Wiz are saying they dont want to give up a 7M contract, not that they dont want to give up Ariza himself, a 3rd string SF given the current make up of their roster. A Bonner/Blair deal at least lets them keep 4M of that expiring deal, while getting an asset they value in return.
It's proof that we will never know what's actually happening.
This rumor has been out there for a week or so. The fact that no Wizard players are ever mentioned as possible trade chips makes me wonder how close these talks really are.
Also, and unrelated to the Blair acquisition, aren't we all in agreement that Neal is better than Mills and De Colo. I know he wasn't a great back up point guard, but I'm assuming most of those minutes go to Joseph. That being the case, not sure why we would let Neal sign with someone else and keep Mills and/or De Colo. Seems to me that Neal has more value for playing back, up back up point guard and back up, back up shooting guard. I guess this all depends on what exactly he is asking for to return. My guess is that number is going down given that it appears no one is really talking about acquiring him.
Hoop Czar is the perfect example of something that looks and sounds like a basketball take, but is really a bunch of ing nonsense. Kinda like taking and putting it in a Hersheys chocolate bar mold.
Its taken 18 pages for someone to actually say something here that makes sense..
Last edited by yavozerb; 07-17-2013 at 02:57 PM.
Actually it would just be the Wiz saying that they don't think Ariza for Bonner/Blair is an equitable trade for them, which it's not.
Besides, Washington already has 14 players under contract for next season. They need to be looking for trades where they can package Ariza with some other younger players and trade up in quality, not looking to take quality and trade down for multiple players.
Offseason. Gotta talk about something.Its taken 18 pages for someone to actually say something which here that makes sense..
Bingo! I wonder if offering up Diaw in place of Bonner would actually move Washington closer to deal. Though, I'm no sure the Spurs could actually lose Diaw given their current big situation and the versatility Boris brings to the table.
wordIts taken 18 pages for someone to actually say something here that makes sense..
^ nando/blair PNR =.......................
Dnt think spurs are gonna want anything wiz are offering
They did which makes it all the more astounding that some posters feel the Spurs would be willing to package one of their first rounders with Blair for an under performing backup SF.
No one thinks that. They just think that the Spurs have assets to pull off a trade. The majority of trades in the NBA involve expiring contracts and picks. So even if Blair has low value, the Spurs could acquire Ariza for him Bonner and a first. This is because Bonner and a first would likely be enough by itself if salaries matched. Blair would just be gravy.
I'll quote this post instead of the long one to answer your other question. First, the Spurs have three players in Europe who will probably come over within the next three years in Jean-Charles, Bertans and Hanga. They're not blue-chip prospects by any means, but with more seasoning, they'll provide as much return as late first-rounders usually do. If you expect the Spurs to fall off this year and miss the playoffs, any pick they give would be protected in all likelihood, so they'd get to keep it in that event.
More importantly, the Spurs aren't blowing up their team until at least Parker retires. They'll most likely try to build around Parker, Leonard and Splitter, with players like Green and Diaw (and maybe Pendergraph and Belinelli/Neal) getting re-upped. They'll still be a playoff team, and they'd have a ton of cap space to acquire players, whether through free agency or trades. Players in their mid-20s who've been professionals overseas for a view seasons will probably be more attractive to them than rookies straight out of college anyway.
I kinda agree with this. However, having assets and having assets teams want are two different things. I think the only way Bonner could be moved is by coupling him with a first rounder but I'm not sure the Spurs are willing to go that far. I guess we'll see how badly the Wizards want Blair and how far they're willing to go to get him. I'm hoping it doesn't come down to a first though.
Bonner's not that bad. We make fun of him a lot on here, but he's actually worth his contract when looking at the stats. He's definitely good enough to not hurt his stock created by his expiring contract. The biggest issue with trading him (besides Pop loving him) is that the Spurs don't want to take back a lot of long-term salary themselves. So while the team could easily trade him for a failed mid-salary player on a long-term deal like Beasley, they wouldn't want to burden themselves in the long term.
When thinking about it in the context of Blair, it's pretty much the same thing. To acquire him, the Wizards will have to give up some expiring salary. The total will probably be about $3-4 Million. They can give it up by trading one player (Vesely), multiple players (Singleton and Booker) or by trading away a player as well as taking back another (Bonner for Ariza). Financially, all three of the options have the same impact on their long-term future, since Blair's long-term salary is what they're taking on regardless. It's just a matter of what makes the most sense for them to take back from a personnel standpoint. I'm sure they'd prefer trading Vesely. They may even prefer moving Singleton and Booker (although Booker himself could work). But when looking at their small-forwards and two-guards, they really can justify keeping Ariza that much. If they want Blair, they shouldn't waste their chance to get him.
We can disagree on how valuable Ariza is to the Wizards, especially as a 3rd string SF. No big thing. Personally, I just dont think it's really a trade down for the Wiz, especially if they've indicated an interest in Blair and they can conserve 4M of the 7M of the Ariza expiring deal.
Yeah, I'm not sure why the Spurs would send THEIR 1st in a deal with the Wiz for a backup player.
This whole deal strikes me as sort of the same thing as trying to get Kirilenko from Minnesota. Blair probably wants to get signed, and Washington probably wants to sign him, but they have to do it via sign and trade. The hold up is the Spurs don't really have much interest in what the Wizards have. I wouldn't deal a first round pick for any of the small forwards on the roster, if I were the Spurs. If we are giving up a first round pick, it better be for more than Ariza. But because the Spurs aren't interested in giving up more than Blair, Bonner, Mills, and/or De Colo, there aren't many players that the Wizards have on their roster that they would want to trade for that ac ulation of end of the bench talent. And those that the Wizards would give up are basically players we don't want or need.
I'm guessing there is no trade here. Tough situation for Blair, who is searching for a home, and is going to have a hard time finding one that will get him more than a minimum contract.
In the end, Blair signs a 2-year contract with a PO in the 2nd year for the min with Washington and the Spurs stand pat per usual.
Ariza is intriguing, but I'd also take Seraphin - kid can play, just needs some proper guidance.
Expecting to see the "Bonner signs 3 year extension" thread any day now.
With a pay raise.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
