Updates: Viktor Sanikidze

[ChumpDumper]

If no better trade was available, you sign him and trade him at a later date.

And pay the luxury tax for both him and Butler. Good idea, Zeke.

Thanks for admitting that error.

Thanks for admitting that was actually the case.,

If you wouldn't have challenged my take, that would have been the end of it. The logic of "all teams do salary dumps" can't be the catchall. There are good salary dumps and there are bad salary dumps. This was a bad one.

So now it's my fault you aren't over it? Most salary dumps are bad basketball trades.

So because the trade was a salary dump I can't have an opinion on whether it was a good salary dump or a bad salary dump? I just have to accept it?

No, because that would mean you are over it.

[whottt]

Fixed.

Don't force me to bump threads about you lamenting the loss of Butler...


One of them is in the NBA..and one isn't.

[whottt]

What makes you think signing Scola was an option...

How do you know he wasn't demanding the trade and threatening to make himself unavailable to the Spurs...there was plenty of evidence that he might have been doing just that.

In that case this was the smart trade...on top of all that...the dude aint all that.



and @ you thinking his trade value would have been increased playing under Pop

Because that happens all the time.

[timvp]

And pay the luxury tax for both him and Butler. Good idea, Zeke.

Do you even know how the luxury tax works, Ghost Writer?

Thanks for admitting that was actually the case.,

Thanks for the comma.

So now it's my fault you aren't over it? Most salary dumps are bad basketball trades.

You can't admit there are bad salary dumps and there are good salary dumps? I didn't like the Malik Rose salary dump but that was a successful salary dump. The Rasho Nesterovic salary dump was a fantastic salary dump. The Jackie Butler salary dump? Not so much.

No, because that would mean you are over it.

You are obviously over it. After Scola didn't pan out you and whottt look like geniuses. Props to both of you. It's not like Scola is putting up better numbers than any bigman next to Duncan since David Robinson.

[Holt's Cat]

Fortunately the Spurs know how to consistently find talent in the draft because they are rather good at giving it away.

[timvp]

Don't force me to bump threads about you lamenting the loss of Butler...


One of them is in the NBA..and one isn't.

ROFL. If Elson didn't have a contract he'd be playing for Rotterdam Basket Racing. Elson sucked because he sucked. Butler sucked because he kinda sucked but more because he quit the game of basketball. It's pretty hard to play in the NBA if you quit playing basketball.

What makes you think signing Scola was an option...

How do you know he wasn't demanding the trade and threatening to make himself unavailable to the Spurs...there was plenty of evidence that he might have been doing just that.

Link to evidence?

In that case this was the smart trade...on top of all that...the dude aint all that.

How was it a smart trade? And you are on record as saying Scola is better than Kurt Thomas. So a player who is better than Kurt Thomas the Spurs trade for a second round pick, but Kurt Thomas himself the Spurs trade a first rounder for?

Nice logic

and @ you thinking his trade value would have been increased playing under Pop

Because that happens all the time.

Would the Rockets trade him for a second round pick right now? Yes or no?

[ChumpDumper]

Do you even know how the luxury tax works, Ghost Writer?

Yes. How can you say with confidence in July that someone would step up and take the salaries of Butler, Udrih and Scola during the season for no salary in return?

You can't admit there are bad salary dumps and there are good salary dumps? I didn't like the Malik Rose salary dump but that was a successful salary dump. The Rasho Nesterovic salary dump was a fantastic salary dump. The Jackie Butler salary dump? Not so much.

Sure, but so what? The simple truth is they are now a staple of NBA trades. Signing Scola just to hope to dump him later is a ridiculous idea on its face, so if the Spurs were going to do anything with him, that was the time to do it.

You are obviously over it. After Scola didn't pan out you and whottt look like geniuses. Props to both of you. It's not like Scola is putting up better numbers than any bigman next to Duncan since David Robinson.

I know the favorite pastime of many on this board is playing "I told you so" and "what if" with Jack, Malik, Speedy, Hedo, Rasho, etc. The latest object of that obsession is Scola. I'm not that big a fan of any of it.

He's a good basketball player. It wasn't a good basketball trade.

So what?

[whottt]

ROFL. If Elson didn't have a contract he'd be playing for Rotterdam Basket Racing. Elson sucked because he sucked. Butler sucked because he kinda sucked but more because he quit the game of basketball. It's pretty hard to play in the NBA if you quit playing basketball.


Link to evidence?

How about a link to you considering all the Scola was talking...would that do?

How was it a smart trade? And you are on record as saying Scola is better than Kurt Thomas. So a player who is better than Kurt Thomas the Spurs trade for a second round pick, but Kurt Thomas himself the Spurs trade a first rounder for?

Nice logic

I wouldn't have given up a first round and Elson for Scola either...

I say Scola is better than Thomas because he's younger...

Although I am reconsidering my Thomas position after seeing him play.

Would the Rockets trade him for a second round pick right now? Yes or no?

Hey...I could have told you that putting him in Adelman's system was going to up his value...unfortunately our head caoching spot was filled...

[The Truth #6]

Is it too much of a stretch to think we should have just signed Scola instead of Bonner? The FO was crazy if they thought they had another Horry, which is a ridiculous box to put Bonner in.

We need another low post scorer and Scola would have been a good fit.

The assumption that Scola wasn't going to fit here makes no sense. The FO was high on his basketball skills for several years and then all of a sudden he isn't a good fit. That seems like the Spurs PR and I don't know why fans accept it so easily.

Anyway, as for Viktor I don't know why they would limit his minutes to hide him. We already drafted him. What's the point of hiding him now?

[picnroll]

It's June 1st. Begin with the premise that has Holt saying "I want the payroll under the luxury tax by the trade deadline or you're all in the can". Now make your moves.

[timvp]

Yes. How can you say with confidence in July that someone would step up and take the salaries of Butler, Udrih and Scola during the season for no salary in return?

So they were going to get worse?

Sure, but so what?

So what? How is that even a retort?

Scola turned out better than you thought. "So what?" The trade was a bad trade. "So what?"

Tough to argue against that reasoning.

Signing Scola just to hope to dump him later is a ridiculous idea on its face, so if the Spurs were going to do anything with him, that was the time to do it.

How is anything ridiculous compared to the sell low technique the Spurs used. Scola was at his lowest point value wise. And the main reason for that is the Spurs f'ed around with him for so long and talked trash about him in the media for years.

In what area of trading does selling something at its lowest possible point ever make sense? The moment you sign Scola to an NBA contract his value sky rockets.

I know the favorite pastime of many on this board is playing "I told you so" and "what if" with Jack, Malik, Speedy, Hedo, Rasho, etc. The latest object of that obsession is Scola. I'm not that big a fan of any of it.

You're not a big fan of ChumpDumper pulling out the Chuck Hayes card?

He's a good basketball player. It wasn't a good basketball trade.

It wasn't a basketball trade so it can't be questioned. Got it

So what?

You got me there.

[timvp]

It's June 1st. Begin with the premise that has Holt saying "I want the payroll under the luxury tax by the trade deadline or you're all in the can". Now make your moves.

First you laugh at Holt. And then you show Holt that the Spurs have been over the luxury threshold plenty of times ... including last season. If the Thomas trade had fallen through, they probably would have been over the luxury threshold again this year.

And if the luxury threshold was such a big deal, the Spurs wouldn't have messed around and signed all those D-League scrubs and push themselves over the threshold. If the Spurs would have even cut their number of scrub signings in half, they would have been under the threshold without the Thomas trade.

[ChumpDumper]

So they were going to get worse?

Were they going to get any cheaper?

So what? How is that even a retort?

Scola turned out better than you thought. "So what?" The trade was a bad trade. "So what?"

Tough to argue against that reasoning.

When you're talking about getting rid of a player the Spurs were never going to use anyway, yes.

How is anything ridiculous compared to the sell low technique the Spurs used. Scola was at his lowest point value wise. And the main reason for that is the Spurs f'ed around with him for so long and talked trash about him in the media for years.

They had no plans to play him and this was the last chance to use his rights to get anything: in this case they got rid of Butler's salary.

What what area of trading does selling something at its lowest possible point ever make sense? The moment you sign Scola to an NBA contract his value sky rockets.

The luxury tax hit also skyrockets.

You're not a big fan of ChumpDumper pulling out the Chuck Hayes card?

Thanks for reminding us all. I'm over it and will never bring it up again.

It wasn't a basketball trade so it can't be questioned.

It wasn't a basketball trade, so chances are it isn't going to make a lot of basketball sense.

[ChumpDumper]

First you laugh at Holt. And then you show Holt that the Spurs have been over the luxury threshold plenty of times ... including last season. If the Thomas trade had fallen through, they probably would have been over the luxury threshold again this year.

And if the luxury threshold was such a big deal, the Spurs wouldn't have messed around and signed all those D-League scrubs and push themselves over the threshold. If the Spurs would have even cut their number of scrub signings in half, they would have been under the threshold without the Thomas trade.

Do you even know how the luxury tax works, Ghost Writer?



I guess we'll see if they end up under it. They still have the rest of the MLE to split between Barry and PJ Brown.

[Holt's Cat]

First you laugh at Holt. And then you show Holt that the Spurs have been over the luxury threshold plenty of times ... including last season. If the Thomas trade had fallen through, they probably would have been over the luxury threshold again this year.

And if the luxury threshold was such a big deal, the Spurs wouldn't have messed around and signed all those D-League scrubs and push themselves over the threshold. If the Spurs would have even cut their number of scrub signings in half, they would have been under the threshold without the Thomas trade.

Not to mention that the Spurs got Duncan to take $5 mil less per year on his extension past 2010.

[picnroll]

And if the luxury threshold was such a big deal, the Spurs wouldn't have messed around and signed all those D-League scrubs and push themselves over the threshold. If the Spurs would have even cut their number of scrub signings in half, they would have been under the threshold without the Thomas trade.

Maybe they knew they had a deadline trade, Thomas for Barry and Elson, sitting there when they signed those scrubs.

[timvp]

Were they going to get any cheaper?

So what?

When you're talking about getting rid of a player the Spurs were never going to use anyway, yes.

The Spurs obviously were never going to use him by trying to sign him the previous three offseasons. Good point.

They had no plans to play him and this was the last chance to use his rights to get anything: in this case they got rid of Butler's salary.

You actually believe Scola was going to sign long-term in Spain?

The luxury tax hit also skyrockets.

Not as much as Elson or Bonner.

Thanks for reminding us all. I'm over it and will never bring it up again.

You won't be able to help yourself when you see Beno get trapped in the backcourt.

It wasn't a basketball trade, so chances are it isn't going to make a lot of basketball sense.

But shouldn't it at least make financial sense? Or are salary dumps not reviewable in any context whatsoever?

[timvp]

Do you even know how the luxury tax works, Ghost Writer?

Yeah, what do you need to know, whottt?

[whottt]

Maybe they knew they had a deadline trade, Thomas for Barry and Elson, sitting there when they signed those scrubs.

That's actually a good point right there...perhaps it was an option.


Amazingly enough...teh Sonics weren't that interested in Scola...

[whottt]

Yeah, what do you need to know, whottt.

I may not ben expert on the salary cap but I am better at it than Ghost...and I've read the Coonfaq 3 times in the past week, because I am tired of asshats that don't know who good players are owning me because of the financial aspect of the game.

[timvp]

Maybe they knew they had a deadline trade, Thomas for Barry and Elson, sitting there when they signed those scrubs.

Eh, the Sonics were openly shopping him. If the Magic would have caved in, Thomas was theirs. There wasn't collusion to where the Spurs were getting Thomas no matter what.

To say the Spurs knew back in November that they'd make the Kurt Thomas trade is a stretch of epic proportions. Either that or you believe in Spurs/Sonics collusion.

[ChumpDumper]

So what?

No, they were not going to get cheaper so the Spurs pay $7 million or so in luxury tax.

The Spurs obviously were never going to use him by trying to sign him the previous three offseasons. Good point.

They wanted him before drafting Splitter. Afterwards, not so much.

You actually believe Scola was going to sign long-term in Spain?

If the Spurs were never going to sign him, why not?

Not as much as Elson or Bonner.

What does that even mean. Those players were coming back no matter what.

You won't be able to help yourself when you see Beno get trapped in the backcourt.

I don't watch Kings games.

But shouldn't it at least make financial sense? Or are salary dumps not reviewable in any context whatsoever?

It made perfect financial sense. Butler is off the books.

[timvp]

I may not ben expert on the salary cap but I am better at it than Ghost...and I've read the Coonfaq 3 times in the past week, because I am tired of asshats that don't know who good players are owning me because of the financial aspect of the game.

I wasn't talking about your knowledge of the CBA. I was making a Scola related crack.

Keep up

[whottt]

To say the Spurs knew back in November that they'd make the Kurt Thomas trade is a stretch of epic proportions.

Because Pop hates Kurt Thomas and has never once considered trading for him...a fact well known to Presti and even Carleisimo.

[picnroll]

First you laugh at Holt. And then you show Holt that the Spurs have been over the luxury threshold plenty of times ... including last season. If the Thomas trade had fallen through, they probably would have been over the luxury threshold again this year.

And if the luxury threshold was such a big deal, the Spurs wouldn't have messed around and signed all those D-League scrubs and push themselves over the threshold. If the Spurs would have even cut their number of scrub signings in half, they would have been under the threshold without the Thomas trade.

Maybe Holt has figured out that the economy is sucking ass big time and likley to get worse and those people that were buying Spurs' tickets are going to be buying a tank of gas instead, so it's time to batten down.