Reply With Quote
Does Fathead count?Expect to see a lot of Kyle at the 2 this season.. Making em a hybrid combo guard
Don't think we can even get Kendrick Porkins for FatheadDoes Fathead count?
Does Fathead count?
According to "ST Idiots" he can play the 1,2,3,4,5.
If Spurs play Fathead 15 mins a game during the playoffs. We're gonna get bounced in the second round. Wasting Duncan's last year.
If Spurs play Fathead 15 mins a game during the playoffs. We're gonna get bounced in the second round. Wasting Duncan's last year.
Dead.
Those same idiots don't even think Boban is worth 2 million/yrAccording to "ST Idiots" he can play the 1,2,3,4,5.
When the Spurs gave Jeff Ayres a 5M/2yr contract with a smaller cap lmfao
Jesus lmfaooooo
What? You don't like DWest at the 5?Those same idiots don't even think Boban is worth 2 million/yr
When the Spurs gave Jeff Ayres a 5M/2yr contract with a smaller cap lmfao
Would've worked against the small ball Warriors, butWhat? You don't like DWest at the 5?
He was the sacrificial lamb
Isn't the problem moving Boris that the other team looking to clear the $4 million have to send back a guaranteed 8 (or more, or less to save less) back to the Spurs?
Seems like a tall order for the Spurs to take back that much guaranteed for who knows how long, regardless of player.
Depends on the player/team. A team looking to move on from a player (Tyreke Evans for example) while at the same time looking to maximize cap space (plenty of teams) I think would be interested. Not a slam dunk, but the building blocks are there for the scenario.
The Spurs don't have to take back salary if the team they're trading him to has the cap space to absorb the salary. And with the upcoming increase of the cap, expect a lot more movement than usual ( a lot of teams will be having space).
Of course, but read the post I was addressing. That post was proposing that Boris had value because with his partial guarantee a team could save money on the deal.
But that only makes sense if the other team sent back salary. Because no team would trade empty cap space for Boris and then cut him, that would just mean that they added his partial guarantee for no reason and cost themselves cap room.
Happens all the time. You send a heavily protected second rounder, and the cash to cover his salary fraction.
None of that has anything to do with what I was posting about.
The scenario implied by other poster:
Team X might trade down in the draft with the Spurs (who would move up) to get Boris & his partial guarantee so that Team X could clear extra cap space. The cap room gained from cutting Boris would be the whole or majority motive for Team X (who might get the 29 also)
That can only work for Team X if they sent a big guaranteed contract to to the Spurs. Which is the the issue that could kill the deal. Who would the player be? How many years? Would it be worth it to the Spurs to give up free agency dreams to move up in the draft?
That is different than the Spurs just dumping Boris to a team that isn't going to be compe ive in free agency and just wants to meet the salary floor if they even feel it. Sure, in that scenario, cash + a 2nd might be enough to dump Boris ... but there wouldn't be a higher first rounder heading back to the Spurs.
Sign and trade maybe?
Too bad Verde played like frankly. His value is diminished and likely our best chip potentially.
I gave an example - Tyreke Evans. It's not at all "likely" but it's definitely a route to explore.
Evans only has the 16/17 left on his deal and NO is picking 6th. I can't imagine a scenario where they would ever go from 6 to 29 or without a pick just to dump one year of Tyreke Evans when they can just dump him to a team for nothing if they want. , I think the numbers work where the Spurs could send 29 for Evans straight up even if Manu and Duncan came back. Even without 29.
After looking at the cap situations and contracts for all the teams, I really only see 2 legit possibilities where a Diaw $4 million savings on a contract cutting would come into play that could get the Spurs a higher pick
1. PHX at 13. Tyson Chandler + 13 for Diaw & Mills (and maybe 29). That would save PHX $6 million for 16/17 after cutting Diaw, and another 26.5 million for 17/18 & 18/19. Phoenix has plenty of cap space already, but as a very young team, Chandler is completely unnecessary. He's old, and while maybe PHX could think he'd get them a first rounder in the future from a contender as the money owed to him shrinks, that would run the risk of him getting injured and being stuck with the deal. The also have other picks in the first to fill their team with, #s 4 & 28, plus Bogdonovic might come over from last year's first round. And the future cap room.
For the Spurs they get their pick and a proven vet with legit center size to play behind Duncan if Duncan comes back (no more Boban, bring on Milutinov), with the bonus that Aldridge really wanted to play with him, and the hope that with Duncan, the fewer minutes and wear & tear vs starters for Chandler will preserve his body some. If Duncan retires, Chandler is the starter and Boban comes back.
2. Indiana @ 20. Rodney Stuckey + 20 for Boris Diaw. This isn't huge savings for the Pacers, but they would save $3.5m for 16/17 & $7 million for 17/18 on a 30 year old terrible shooting guard (24% from three in 15/16) who was made completely unnecessary when Bird signed Monta Ellis. I don't know that they would have any particular use for the extra money saved this year, but this is basically just dumping Stuckey's money.
For the Spurs ... I guess it's all to get pick #20. I don't see any use for Stuckey at all.
That's all I can figure out for now. Any other ideas, I'm all ears.
Sorry, should have clarified - I did not mean to imply NO would give SA the pick - I was talking about the type of player (redundant, get rid of guaranteed money for more space, etc..). I used Tyreke as an example of the type of player/situation to target, but you are correct, they would not need to attach their pick to get rid of him nor would it be worth it.
Agree on Tyson Chandler (think that has actually been discussed on here) and INDY although the they probably won't ever trade with SA again
Depending on what MIL is trying to do, I could see Monroe in there as well. That is a lot of money still tied up in him if they want to move on, and while they have a lot of cap space with him, without him they have room for 2 max slots.
No worries.
You're onto the reasons I think Chandler would have to be moved with a pick rather than dumped on a team for nothing. Unlike Evans, Chandler is old, cranky and injury prone. Teams that just want to get to the salary floor don't need an extra two huge years on their books with a player who is danger to quit on a young team, be a cancer, or get hurt.
Evans a team could take on for nothing because despite the injuries, he's young, only a single year left, plus he'd come with Bird rights. He's a fit for every kind of team, young, old, contending, up & coming, rebuilding, etc.
Chandler doesn't fit with very many teams. Teams that think they're contenders might be willing to pay that much, but how many will be willing to part with their caproom and free agent goals to get a breaking down, super expensive Chandler? Maybe I could see Atlanta doing it if Horford leaves. But to take him away from the Spurs, they'd probably have to agree before free agency, and Horford might stay.
OKC has their centers. GSW have their centers. Cleveland have lots of meandering bigs and nothing as extraneous as Diaw and Mills to move. Dallas won't take him back. Houston I can't imagine taking him over Dwight. Toronto has their center. Miami has their center if they keep Whiteside, who is likely to be a better value by far for the money even at the max. Memphis has a center, issues with whether they rebuild, and not in the mood to pay a combined $33+ million for one position the next 3 years. Clippers won't have the room or extraneous pieces to move. Maybe Portland, plenty of room there.
There probably just won't be high demand for a 34 year old center who only played 25 minutes a game averaging 7 & 9 with under a block a game.
The Spurs would have to give up on Durant & Horford and the like to do it, and it's expensive, but I could see it. It would wipe out all the Spurs cap room and maybe only leave enough to sign tiny deals with Bertans or Hanga etc, while bringing back West, Duncan and Manu.
But maybe there's a special player who falls to 13 who would be worth it? If there was another Kawhi-type budding superstar he'd be worth it to me to give up on Durant and Horford fantasies.
If we are looking to move up lets do it right and get this team surrounding Kawhi and LMA. This means Duncan and Manu need to retire. And a couple others traded off.
Trade Danny Green, Boris Diaw, the rights to Deshaun Thomas, and cash to boston for picks #16, #31, #45. Boston has 8 picks and don't want to use them all. Here they get 2 guys that have played in championsips and a SG that they desperately need. Now they can use the 3rd pick on a big like bender or chriss. They still have 3, 23, 31, 51, 58. We do this to get Wayne Baldwin at 16.
Since we traded to get Baldwin, I believe it is best to get rid of Tony and let this guy take over the PG spot. So we trade tony to Philly for pick 24 and a future 2nd rounder.
I would bring West back too, but only as a PF. Don't play him with other small guys.
Draft:
16- Wayne Baldwin PG Vanderbilt 6'4"
24- Damian Jones C Vanderbilt 6'11"
29-Malachi Richardson SG Syracuse 6'6"
31- Patrick Mccaw SG UNLV 6'7"
45- Isaiah Whitehead PG Seton Hall 6'4"
Roster:
PG- Baldwin, Mills, Whitehead
SG- Richardson, Mccaw, Simmons
SF- Leonard, Anderson, Bertans
PF- LMA, West, Lalanne
C- Jones, Boban, Ndoye
Mccaw highlights
Whitehead highlights
For sure - it's always a combo of actually liking the player enough you trade for (Tyson) & there being a player you like enough when the pick is there (like Kawhi falling). Both need to be there before you pull the trigger.
I was just exploring out loud the mul ude of ways to get where you might want to go. I'm already on record preferring that SA be willing to give up their pick to obtain a guy like Tyreke. That gives you talent upgrade for next year, is very cheap overall and still allows you to hit the reset next year when you will have a ton of cap space. To me, personally, that's what I would prefer.
There are so many variables though that depending on team need, a player may cost a pick to move or be good enough to get a pick in return for solely based on that teams immediate situation. It's crazy.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
