Official 2017 Offseason Thread

[apalisoc_9]

I hate Signing a 32 year old for a super max.

Agh....

[Chinook]

I understand, I just think that's too risky and Pistons don't have enough cap space to absorb Green's salary. Think Spurs would at least have to have an inkling Paul is coming to do that. Even if he is, it would suck bad enough to trade Green, let alone have to wait a year to get a pick, but I'd rather do it that way if need be.

You know I'm a Green homer, but what's the risk? The Spurs are already considering the suboptimal thing of moving Green and keeping Parker. Doing so has no functional negative consequence. They aren't likely to beat the Warriors without a top talent, with or without Green. Instead of waiting and taking less, they can get paid for their risk and then go for Paul. Getting the 12th pick and cap space to sign a $10-Million player is hardly a waste. If they spend that money on Pau or whatever, then it might suck. But even if it's not Paul, getting someone like Hayward to take the other wing spot and a good pick is hardly a crisis situation.

[spursistan]

I understand, I just think that's too risky and Pistons don't have enough cap space to absorb Green's salary. Think Spurs would at least have to have an inkling Paul is coming to do that. Even if he is, it would suck bad enough to trade Green, let alone have to wait a year to get a pick, but I'd rather do it that way if need be.

If they move fast on him, it would seem like they have high degree of confidence they can nab Chris Paul-- if not outright commitment from him. There's no way around it..

Coercing Pau to an opt out and this Green news today point clearly to Paul as the major target..And let's be real: High profile FA meetings are mostly token; 80%-90% of the time these superstars have already made up their mind as to what their next destination is..You think Durant or Lebron were dithering between choices in 2010/2016?

[SAGirl]

Doesn't make sense to me. Unless I'm missing something, why wouldn't they offer Paul 1+1, $25M for next season, opt out, sign 4 year max at that point?

The whole point of this would be to have strongest possible team and even though Green would fetch a solid young asset, downgrading in the interim to probably Afflalo (sub par defender) or Sefolosha (sub par shooter), doesn't jive with that.

As far as the Rockets interest in Paul, not a chance he's going somewhere to be essentially a co-PG. Also, Rockets losing game 5 to Leonard (down the stretch) and Parker less Spurs, then getting blown out, at home, in game 6, again without them and season on line, had to kill perception they were at or above Spurs level, too.

Maybe they are targeting someone in the draft.... What do you think?
the last time rumors like this surfaced they were about Tony and instead G.Hill got traded instead.... but it was all about the pick.

[TD 21]

I hate Signing a 32 year old for a super max.

Agh....

Obviously, it's not ideal, but what's the alternative that gives them a better chance at another championship?

You mock the city and act like no big star would ever come, then want them to shun a possible opportunity to sign one.

Also, you're assuming Paul will fall off a cliff in the next 2 seasons, as if there's no chance of him having Stockton like longevity.

You know I'm a Green homer, but what's the risk? The Spurs are already considering the suboptimal thing of moving Green and keeping Parker. Doing so has no functional negative consequence. They aren't likely to beat the Warriors without a top talent, with or without Green. Instead of waiting and taking less, they can get paid for their risk and then go for Paul. Getting the 12th pick and cap space to sign a $10-Million player is hardly a waste. If they spend that money on Pau or whatever, then it might suck. But even if it's not Paul, getting someone like Hayward to take the other wing spot and a good pick is hardly a crisis situation.

The risk is they don't sign Paul and Green is traded for no reason.

They wouldn't get less by waiting, they'd just get a pick for '18 instead of '17. If that's the cost for making sure Paul is signing before pulling the trigger on a Green trade, so be it.

No chance Hayward would sign to be Pippen to Leonard's Jordan (in terms of function).

If they move fast on him, it would seem like they have high degree of confidence they can nab Chris Paul-- if not outright commitment from him. There's no way around it..

Coercing Pau to an opt out and this Green news today point clearly to Paul as the major target..And let's be real: High profile FA meetings are mostly token; 80%-90% of the time these superstars have already made up their mind as to what their next destination is..You think Durant or Lebron were dithering between choices in 2010/2016?

True. I don't think Spurs would be dumb enough to risk ending up with neither.

Maybe they are targeting someone in the draft.... What do you think?
the last time rumors like this surfaced they were about Tony and instead G.Hill got traded instead.... but it was all about the pick.

Maybe and that's the only way this could make sense independent of Paul.

[Chinook]

Maybe they are targeting someone in the draft.... What do you think?
the last time rumors like this surfaced they were about Tony and instead G.Hill got traded instead.... but it was all about the pick.

Kyle on the block? If Simmons were under contract still, I'd think there were something to the smokescreen argument. Though I guess they could also be talking about Green to show they're willing to not move Parker, in case they're getting bad deals for him.

[apalisoc_9]

If the spurs dont win this year or next, 28 year old kawhi will playing with ty teamates.

What a huge risk

[SAGirl]

So, we may be heading down the JSimms road.

Now that I think about it makes sense they called Hanga, are working out Dangubic and Kawhis friend from college, Jamal Franklin.

[LittleCriminal]

Quick Somebody tweet TP9 to take a paycut/retire or whatever needs to be done to free up some cap space!

[LittleCriminal]

Tp9 needs to get over himself

[Chinook]

The risk is they don't sign Paul and Green is traded for no reason.

There are more scenarios to the off-season than signing Paul. We don't even know if they are trading him for spacing. For all we know, we end up seeing these discussion lead to something for Millsap with ATL. Danny makes the Spurs better, but with an injured Parker and LMA and Gasol being inconsistent, missing Green is not the worst issue they'd be facing.

They wouldn't get less by waiting, they'd just get a pick for '18 instead of '17. If that's the cost for making sure Paul is signing before pulling the trigger on a Green trade, so be it.

They'd get a pick in 2018 with no differentiation and by a team that gets to use Green first instead of a very specific pick/player. That gap is huge. Imagine getting the Pacers pick in 2012 instead of Kawhi. Even if their pick were in the top five, it would not have been good enough.

No chance Hayward would sign to be Pippen to Leonard's Jordan (in terms of function).

I don't see why not. He'd be IT's sidekick in Boston. CP3 would be a second-fiddle to Kawhi, and he's way more arrogant than Hayward is, going off limited exposure.

[SAGirl]

This is going to be a difficult off-season, no matter what, for sure. See? This is why I'm trying to go that Zen Buddhist route...

Good route.

[Leetonidas]

Quick Somebody tweet TP9 to take a paycut/retire or whatever needs to be done to free up some cap space!

Great idea! Why hasnt anyone thought of this?? I'm sure he'll be apt to listening to random people on Twitter about his career!

[LittleCriminal]

Great idea! Why hasnt anyone thought of this?? I'm sure he'll be apt to listening to random people on Twitter about his career!

I know right.. You should totally do it.. Im sure he'll listen to you!

[SAGirl]

Kyle on the block? If Simmons were under contract still, I'd think there were something to the smokescreen argument. Though I guess they could also be talking about Green to show they're willing to not move Parker, in case they're getting bad deals for him.

It wouldn't surprise me. If he's not in the plans for their future I would rather they trade him. I think in other teams he would already be playing every night and that's really the only way he will get better from now on. He's young. Guys his age are coming into the league still and he's so clearly above dleague and summer league talent at this point. For his benefit he needs to play every night and get challenges. He has only gotten that sporadically in the Spurs.

I stated elsewhere everyone is probably game to be traded for the right target. (Except Kawhi and Pop's sons:Tony and Manu). It's hard to really discern through Pop's smokescreen... he has depressed Kyle's value benching him. That's only if it's about a target... if it's about cap... why trade him he's clearly producing above his contract value when given minutes and has such a small contract still.

[TD 21]

There are more scenarios to the off-season than signing Paul. We don't even know if they are trading him for spacing. For all we know, we end up seeing these discussion lead to something for Millsap with ATL. Danny makes the Spurs better, but with an injured Parker and LMA and Gasol being inconsistent, missing Green is not the worst issue they'd be facing.



They'd get a pick in 2018 with no differentiation and by a team that gets to use Green first instead of a very specific pick/player. That gap is huge. Imagine getting the Pacers pick in 2012 instead of Kawhi. Even if their pick were in the top five, it would not have been good enough.



I don't see why not. He'd be IT's sidekick in Boston. CP3 would be a second-fiddle to Kawhi, and he's way more arrogant than Hayward is, going off limited exposure.

Maybe, but I think as far as possible significant additions, it's Paul or Hill.

Leonard is a rare case and you can generally project what range teams will fall in a year in advance. I'm not saying it would be ideal, but I see it as the lesser of 2 evils.

Thomas is a PG though. There's significant overlap with Leonard and Hayward and it would be exacerbated by Parker's and Murray's inability to function as a SG on offense, which is the type of PG required to play with two ball dominant wings.

Paul is 5 years older than Hayward and has 8 extra seasons of having been "the man" on him too. He's at the point now where winning probably supersedes the need for that.

[TimDunkem]

I'd trade Kyle for a pick, tbh.

[DPG21920]

Moving Green makes sense, regardless, and I say that as probably his 3rd biggest apologist here, tbh..

It's evident that he isn't going to magically transform into pre-Aldridge Green in this system, especially without a competent guard creator..ironically, he would probably be the biggest beneficiary of Chris Paul joining the Spurs, though

The issue is, that losing Danny, even while adding like CP3 doesn't help overall a ton IMO. I mean its a talent upgrade, but for truly taking a step adding to core of LMA/Kawhi/Danny with a great player really amps the team up. Now? It helps for sure, but man, it really sucks.

Plus Danny has been an amazing Spurs. One of my all-time favorites for sure.

[Hoops Czar]

Exactly what I thought.
They will make a run at CP3, but if not, G..Hill and Simmons is it.

Uncertainty vs absolute in regards to Simmons. It's nice when a guy comes from nowhere and performs better than expected for less than half of the games he's played in the last two years. Sure, he had a great series vs GS (had the series of his life) but does his small sample size of production trump his sub par regular season performances? Statistically speaking, he was better in 2015-16. uva gamble to risk a 4 year contract on a player like Simmons who will have expectations placed on him for the first time in his career. Spurs would not be wise to trade away Green and replace him with Simmons.

[DPG21920]

They wouldn't be getting nothing IMO..shouldn't have trouble getting a 1st round pick or high 2nd(which is essentially nothing but still ) + losing Green makes it more likely that the Spurs retain Simmons..

I don't think the risk is that great, tbh..I'd rather get something early than wait for verbal guarantees and commitments deep into free agency..

The issue is, with Pau likely getting money, that getting a pick this year (especially near the lottery or in it) adds salary. So Pau at 8M (for example) then less Danny's 10M + the 1st round pick from the trade salary means they really don't have the salary for CP3. Even w/Pau & Danny totally off the books (assuming Pau is gone which is best case scenario) that is only 32M (and that is with having all FA renounced including Simmmons).

So now you have Mills/Dedmon/Lee/Pau/Danny/Simmons/Manu all gone and still don't have a max slot.

[RodNIc91]

Only an idiot would. Green is absolutely worth a decent pick or prospect and that's not changing with a verbal commitment from Paul. Sure, teams would know Spurs need (supposedly) to dump him at that point, but that wouldn't diminish his value. He's clearly more valuable than Splitter was.




You said nothing.

He's an in his prime (age wise, at least) 3 and D wing, with a relative bargain of a contract (granted, for only 1 more year), a championship pedigree and a penchant for raising his game in the playoffs. No matter what happens in free agency, he's fetching the same beforehand that he'd fetch a few days into it, especially considering Paul, as the premiere free agent who isn't a lock to re-sign, probably at least somewhat holds up the market.

There's literally no reason to move him beforehand and they'd be insane to do so without knowing Paul is coming.

Isn't it possible it is a smokescreen PATFO are trying to create, similarly to the George Hill situation before?

[BatManu20]

CIA Pop and RC secretly recruiting Danny's replacement

[ace3g]

[jjktkk]

Simmons would be an atrocious fit with Chris Paul, tbh..if Spurs lose Green, hopefully they can find a veteran spot-up shooter willing to chase a ring..

Vince Carter?

[BatManu20]

They will in about 24 hours.