Daye is a crap Boner replacement. He can sometimes make a 3 but can't even pretend to have a game inside the arc or act like he plays any sort of defense. I'd rather keep Boner for another year, then bring over one of our stashes from Europe or whatever. Deal with it then.
1000% concur. I'd rather bring back Bonner for 2 years than have 1 year of Austin Daye. Bonner definitely isn't a major piece. But as a 5th Big hes always read to suit up and play hard. Plus he'll be just as cheap and obviously knows the system. And I think Matt Bonner needs a 3rd ring!
Not that it's a significant difference, but he's about 400k more expensive, actually, I think. 1.0 vs 1.4, and they have already guaranteed Daye. So, they would have to pay Bonner 1.4, and Daye 1.0. If they sign someone else, and sign Bonner, and release Daye, it will cost them 2.4 million, no?
BTW, I would like to keep both if Daye does well this summer, but obviously I think he's considerably more skilled than you two.
If you sign Bonner to a minimum contract the league will pay about 500k of his salary. By my rough math about 533k actually.
Heres an interesting scenario that I think might happen. What if the Spurs don't sign Bonner and keep him somewhere in the front office and allow Cotton to make the team. Once Mills returns they waive Cotton and send him to Austin and THEN sign Bonner for the remainder of the season. Frankly, something under the table like this might actually be a realistic plot we'd see them do.
I was not aware of league contributions. Thanks.
That is an interesting plot. It would definitely solve a lot of issues. Barring any rules against such practices. Historical comparisons? It really does bring the whole team back in tact + Anderson, adds a PG for the time needed, and then we only need to consider trades and releases if we sign someone to the MLE or BAE. Can't be legal!
This is only in regards to veterans minimum players.
If you omit the front office job then it is absolutely legal. It's that front office position that makes it questionable. Might be fine. Might not. I definitely wouldn't know what the fine print says exactly.
Still, he can stand on the sidelines and be ready to play. How many free agents are unsigned every year? Just b/c some other team might give him a viable offer doesn't mean he'd have to accept! Some team could (very foolishly) offer him the max and it would be entirely legal for him to stand pat waiting on that minimum offer mid-season from the Spurs.
Yes, but I am wondering about the legality of paying him to be a sixteenth man in a suit, as an assistant. I could see where they could have some rule against that, say no coaches being able to play in the same season after being a coach. It could be a way of cir venting cap rules, roster limits (in this case), etc. It happens so rarely, maybe, I could also see them not caring to put a rule in against it, or the PA arguing to allow it as it gives older veterans more employment options. Who knows.
Bonner's role up until the playoffs was as the 5th or 6th big playing spot minutes. While I think you're overstating Bonner's contribution, I could honestly care less if Daye is a downgrade in that role. It makes a marginal difference. I would also argue that no one, including the Spurs, really knows what Daye could realistically contribute if given more opportunity. That's why they brought him back imo; to continue evaluating him based on some intriguing early returns in his half-season stint.
He played 14 games (the last three or so coming off a slight injury and illness), if you can count some of them. Some were for 1-3 minutes. 17% of a season if you don't count playoff games, even less of a season if you do. He has hardly gotten a fair shake, here, yet, like in Toronto and Memphis, really. And Detroit he was pretty good early on until the team imploded. He got no training camp here, obviously, either. And, even in this short time, as you mentioned, they see something worth evaluating a little further. Good on him.
I agree, the only requirement for Bonner's position is to pose a credible threat from the 3 point line. Daye has already proven that he can be deadly from there.
In terms of defense, the way the Spurs play defense, they never jump, so Daye's length would prove to be more of a challenge.
Given the small sample size when he was healthy, he indeed played remarkably well.
What is it really about Austin Daye that a lot of folks dislike? I don't get it, there been a ton of players that got a lot of hype.... Gist, Hairston, Eddie Curry, James White, .... that never made it with the Spurs. Now we have this player that exploded with 6 threes in a game and was re-signed by the Spurs, yet we have all this hate. I don't get it!
Not sharing your level of optimism is not the same thing as hate. There's nothing resembling hate for Daye on this page.
I would classify ranking Bonner ahead of Daye as hate.
That's your extreme optimism about Daye talking.
We're arguing semantics, but if this doesn't count as message board hate, our definitions are too far apart to come to a resolution:
"Daye is a crap..."
Of course this is a person that refers to Bonner as "Boner" and Spurs as "Spurms" so you may dismiss his opinion automatically, which I would understand. Beavis and Butthead had some great takes, but you had to listen a long, long time for them to get to one.
There are undoubtedly some examples like that to be found. My response was to a particular poster and what he said on this page and in other places in reference to Daye. Ranking Bonner ahead of Daye does not make one a Daye-hater.
No problem, you said this page, and that was from this page. So, Perez could have been lumping them together.
This basically guarantees what we've already known...Cotton by no means has a guaranteed roster spot this season.
I had high hopes for Daye when he shot the lights out with all those 3s in his first game. As I recall, after that he couldn't buy a basket at the Farmers Market for the rest of the season. So I'm not on his bandwagon at this point.
Still, his length gives him some rebounding ability and he may yet show some consistent shooting skills. And I remember how long it took for a lot of competent rotation players to really 'get it' and begin to get some minutes here. (Barry, Mills, Green, etc.). So lets see what he has in SL and ultimately the coaches will decide if he has the right stuff to be a Spur.
Yeah, when you are shooting 75-100% from 3, you're bound to cool off. But, most importantly, his shot is pure lookng and he ended shooting over 40% from 3 for his time with The Spurs. 41%, I believe. I am not so sure Danny, Matty, and Belli have shooting percentages as high as they do on another team. Shooters seem to prosper here.
Didn't he hurt his back soon after that Philadelphia game? I thought there was a mention of it somewhere.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote