I was thinking about this after seeing the thread in the NBA forum about ranking the top shooting guards. Green fits the Spurs so flawlessly and was wondering who you guys thought would make the Spurs better if acquired FOR Danny Green.
Klay Thompson for instance is a better scorer, but is that really needed on the Spurs from that position? What you gain in scoring you still lose in defense (although Klay is a solid defender, he can't take guys like Paul or Curry off their game the way Green does).
Dwyane Wade is amazing when healthy, but we'd lose all sorts of spacing by having a guard without a 3 point shot playing besides Tony... things like that got me thinking. So I just wanna get some reactions on which 2 guards would improve us.
Wade is old and past his prime - future is not up. DG is ideal for what the spurs want, but don't look at numbers only. Dion Waiters has the numbers but not the at ude and the 'fit' into the team. This latter aspect is important to the team performance.
beal, thompson, but realistically, a lot of SF's could come over here and play SG.. or we could slide kawhi to SG.
Thompson might be the best spot up SG in the league ... he would be a beast in SA because of the open looks the system creates ... an he plays good defense as well
Danny Green was third among SG in Real Plus Minus.
Can't trade for #1, Manu Ginobili.
Didn't sign #2 the aging free agent Vince Carter.
24 SG were better on offense.
1 (Tony Allen) was better on defense.
/thread
Beal is so damn overrated it's not even funny. He's young and has potential to improve, sure, but some people act like he was already great/very good last year, and he really wasn't. I would definitely take Green over Beal if we're just looking at this season.
Thompson is an interesting one. He's much better at shooting off the dribble and has a better mid-range game than Green, but although he's a good defender, he's still noticeably worse than Green in that aspect. I'd honestly lean towards Green personally.
I don't think people realize how good Korver is. If we could've gotten him instead of Belinelli...wow. I probably wouldn't take Korver over Green, but Korver is closer than people might think. He's elite in every aspect of shooting. Mid-range, 3-point, spot-up, coming off screens, pull-up jumpers...he has it all. He's also an underrated defender. Look at his shooting splits last year:
3-10 feet out: 50%
10-16 feet out: 48.9%
16 feet-3 point line: 45.7%
3-pointers: 47.2%
That's ing absurd...especially considering he's not strictly a spot-up shooter. Let's look at Thompson's numbers:
3-10 feet out: 37.8%
10-16 feet out: 37.6%
16 feet-3 point line: 44.9%
3-pointers: 41.7%
Obviously part of that has to do with Thompson having much higher volume than Korver, but still. The point is that people don't realize just how crazy Korver is offensively. Makes me mad knowing we were close to getting him until his wife said she's rather stay in ATL.
And FWIW, Korver was 5th among SGs in RPM. Dude is really underrated.
Monta Ellis?
Lance Stephenson, if he is sane ?
Is Danny the best defensive SG currently in the NBA?
A recap on 2013-2014 NBA defensive 1st team and 2nd team.
1st team: Noah, Paul George, CP3, Iguodala and Ibaka
2nd team: LBJ, Patrick Beverly, Jimmy Butler, Roy Hibbert and Kawhi
no SG in either team??
I'd probably say Tony Allen is a little better. But Green is miles and miles better offensively.Is Danny the best defensive SG currently in the NBA?
And I'd take Green over Ellis/Stephenson for our team. Between Parker/Manu/Duncan/Kawhi, we really don't need someone who's going to be handling the ball a lot like Ellis or Stephenson. Neither of them are as good of shooters or defenders as Green.
James Harden
Kobe
Monta Ellis
Joe Johnson
Lance Stephenson
Klay Thompson
Demare DeRozan
+ some player who can play SG like Battum, Iguodala, Dragic, etc...
A lot of these players are definitely better than Danny as an individual. But they won't and don't fit in with Spurs.
Probably only Batum, Klay Thompson and Iguodala will complement with the Spurs.
Oh yeah lol, I forgot about Tony Allen.
I thought he had fallen off a cliff since the last couple of years but his defensive play during the OKC series really surprised me.
Disagree that they don't fit with the Spurs, all of those players listed COULD fit with the Spurs if they were willing to take a role with less ball handling. Just because a player is a ball dominant guard on another team doesn't mean they couldn't play a Green role on the Spurs, it's just that many probably wouldn't want to.
Also, the two wing positions are almost interchangeable these days, many many small forwards could play the 2.
Kobe ? JJ ? really ?
with green current salary ? definitely !Kobe ? JJ ? really ?
in what op part we are talking about with equal salary ?
Then you have the fact Spurs don't need extra offense, they are doing just fine with actual roster. In that I don't see what would bring kobe or JJ offense boost especially with low % vs. what we would lose on the D end. You add the fact we have no idea what is left in kobe's tank and JJ is already 33.
It depends on Parker's level of play. If he's still MVParker, then Danny fits the SL like a glove, and no SG in the league would do a better job. If Parker is indeed falling off, it would be nice for someone with a little more play-making to get into the starting lineup, like a Batum or Beal. Though any really strong offensive SG may take away touches from Leonard, so there's a good chance the Spurs would not improve that much over just letting Kawhi get more run.
What do you guys think Green is worth $$$ wise, what kind of money you guys think he can command out there? I'm sure his price has increased a few mill since his last contract.
Anywhere from $5-8 Million APY. The low end is if he leaves to join a(nother) contender for the full MLE (like the Cavs). The high end is if he goes to a bad team with cap space (like the Knicks). If he stays with the Spurs, he'll get something in between those depending on what the team's plans are with the money. I think he'd take a little less so that the FO could bring in some good free agents, but not just for the heck of it.
I'm more curious about the length of his deal, though. He's young enough to get a four- or even five-year deal. But does the team want to commit passed 2017 (when Splitter and Mills come off the books) or 2018 (when Parker and Diaw come off the books)? It's possible the team doesn't see him as someone to keep past this current Spurs' era (meaning the next few years even if Tim retires). So they may not be able to come to an agreement with Danny in that regard.
Good take. I think they'll go 5 years with both Danny and Kawhi, with Danny getting something like the MLE from the previous CBA. Say, 5yrs/30M.
Sounds about right. The thing about giving Green a long-term deal is that it avoids the summer of 2017 for both parties. For the Spurs, it means they have their starting wings already locked up when a bunch of players may be getting overpaid due to the ballooning cap. For Green, he avoids being a free agent in a potential lock-out year. If the Spurs feel like Danny can be their full starting two-guard (meaning that they don't have a starting-quality SG on their bench to sub Danny out for), they'll probably go for five years. Danny's game looks like it will age well.
One draw-back for Green is that if he gets a five-year deal, it will probably be his last lucrative contract. He'd be 33 when the contract ended, and would probably be looking at room-exception level deals until he retired. If he takes a short deal, he would be 30 or 31 at the end of the contract, and he could probably still get full-MLE money. The Spurs may need to boost the APY up a little to make both sides happy. Something like a $34M/5 deal works well for both sides, and it allows the Spurs to use cap space next off-season.
Agreed on the money. I'd be shocked if he doesn't re-sign with the Spurs, though.
As far as the length, I'd be surprised if he get's five. Five is rare and is generally reserved for foundational pieces. I don't think they'll care much about the fact that he could remain for a season past this current era, nor should they. He'll only be 31, probably making $6-7M (which is fine now and will only look better with where the cap is projected to be by then) and expiring, plus he'll be one of the most experienced, accomplished role players in the league. In other words, he shouldn't be difficult to move at all.
So you're thinking a four-year deal somewhere between $24-28 Million? Sounds very possible as well. I think we'll see more five-year deals in the upcoming off-seasons because teams will want to lock in talent as cheaply as possible ahead of 2017. As I said in another post, Green should still be a pretty good player in five years (probably better than he is now). I think the team will hand him a five-year deal no problem if they land a star free agent who projects to keep them contenders for the foreseeable future. But if Duncan reups, I think they'll hesitate on paying Green in 2017 and beyond (only Parker and Anderson are under contract at that point). Who knows, though? The Spurs would probably re-sign everyone to give Tim the best chance of winning, even with an uncertain future looming.
I don't think Green's going to leave next off-season. But I could see some scenarios where that may happen. If the Spurs only value Green at around the MLE, then a Cleveland offer could be tempting. Danny would start there next to his friend on a stacked roster that is desperate for his particular skill-set. That's pretty much a dream job. Or the Knicks might go hard at him for a big deal, since they also need his skill-set. Green would get to go back home and get semi-star treatment under the biggest spotlights while getting a mess of money. Danny already has a ring, so that may be really appealing to him. Even so, having Phil Jackson in charge of the team may encourage him even if he still values winning so much.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
