Welcome to SA, CP3

[Uriel]

All-Star point guard Chris Paul intends to give the San Antonio Spurs serious consideration in free agency this summer in the event he decides to leave the LA Clippers, according to league sources.

Sources told ESPN that Paul, for all of his undeniable fondness for Los Angeles, is intrigued by the idea of teaming up with the likes of Spurs coach Gregg Popovich and MVP top-three finalist Kawhi Leonard in his quest to achieve the deep playoff success that has eluded Paul to this point in his career.

Free agency is still a month away, but sources say the Clippers already have begun contemplating roster and organizational changes aimed at convincing Paul ‎to re-sign after he declines to exercise his player option, as expected.

Sources say the Clippers' pursuit of NBA legend Jerry West to join their front office, as ESPN reported earlier this week, is an example of a potential addition aimed at swaying Paul to stay.

The Spurs, sources say, are increasingly considered a lock to at least secure a face-to-face meeting with Paul when free agency begins July 1, despite the fact San Antonio would almost certainly have to sacrifice considerable roster depth to make him a representative contract offer.

As daunting as some of the moves are that San Antonio would have to consider to create the requisite salary-cap space to aggressively pursue Paul, one source said of the Spurs' interest in the veteran floor leader: "They love him."

http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/1...agency-sources

[Hoops Czar]

This forum is so gullible.

[sasaint]

Good points. And I have stated in several threads over the last week or so that I don't think it's a given that the Clips will give him a super-max deal. The same arguments you just posed work from that organization's perspective, too. They gotta be asking if they want to stand pat moving forward. They are asking themselves whether they want to invest like 80% of their cap in 3 guys who haven't gotten it done. So, who are their "keepers"? Let Blake go and fill-in? Let Paul go and keep Blake or just try to replace them and rebuild?

[gambit1990]

cp3 should join the spurs or get lebron to trade irving for him.

[BillMc]

This forum is so gullible.

Golly.

[gambit1990]

must suck to be a clipper fan... their splash would be to keep players they already had

and they're losing re if they keep cp3 + griffin, right?

also, just found out... they're paying jamal crawford $29 million over the next two years

[cjw]

It's complete misinformation that the difference is $50 million (actually $53mm). The non-Clippers deal would end a year earlier, meaning the difference is closer to $7 million over the first four years. In year five, add another $4 million to that but an opportunity to hit FA earlier. So $11 million over five years. Same misnomer as when Dwight was a FA.

Also, better to hit FA again at 36 than 37 (or 35 if getting an ETO ... could even at 34 with a 2+1 deal).

Yes, it's less guaranteed money if he were to suffer a career altering or ending injury. And the Spurs may not even be able to offer the full max.

[BillMc]

It's complete misinformation that the difference is $50 million (actually $53mm). The non-Clippers deal would end a year earlier, meaning the difference is closer to $7 million over the first four years. In year five, add another $4 million to that but an opportunity to hit FA earlier. So $11 million over five years. Same misnomer as when Dwight was a FA.

Also, better to hit FA again at 36 than 37 (or 35 if getting an ETO ... could even at 34 with a 2+1 deal).

Yes, it's less guaranteed money if he were to suffer a career altering or ending injury. And the Spurs may not even be able to offer the full max.

Good point. And when you compare California taxes vs no Texas taxes, what is the actual final difference in CP3"s take home income if Spurs can come up with the max?

[cjw]

Good point. And when you compare California taxes vs no Texas taxes, what is the actual final difference in CP3"s take home income if Spurs can come up with the max?

It would more than erase it if applied in a vacuum (over 10%). But don't forget players pay taxes based on where they play games throughout year (so impact is reduced by at least 50%). And with endorsements I imagine it depends on where he lives in offseason too. They have expensive tax guys who help them optimize all of it though.

If Trump has his way and eliminates state tax deductions, even bigger (not taking a stance on that, and wouldn't love it as a NYC resident paying tons of tax.

[sananspursfan21]

I don't know guys, are we still sure this is such a good idea?

[Dex]

There aren't any pieces on this roster outside of Kawhi that aren't worth losing to secure Chris Paul. That's just an obvious fact.

Personally, I don't think the Spurs brass would move Parker to make it happen. He is a foundation of the franchise (whether people want to admit it or not), and it would not be a good look to try to move or dump a guy after he goes down fighting his heart out in the Western Conference playoffs. That does make things considerably more difficult.

However...everyone else is on the table. Do you really want to keep Green, Gasol, Anderson, or even Aldridge over CP3? Mills, Dedmon, Simmons, and Lee already have a foot halfway out the door as it is. Ginobili is a mystery. He will only come back for the Spurs, but he better not be expecting another $14M.

Spurs had a good chance to ring this year, but the cards would have had to fall perfectly...and they didn't. It makes sense to me to increase the odds by getting two big gamers (and maybe a Big 3 if Aldridge doesn't get shipped), a solid cast around them (which the FO will find a way to manage), and see what Pop can do with them.

[SnakeBoy]

This forum is so gullible.

[spurs1990]

It's complete misinformation that the difference is $50 million (actually $53mm). The non-Clippers deal would end a year earlier, meaning the difference is closer to $7 million over the first four years. In year five, add another $4 million to that but an opportunity to hit FA earlier. So $11 million over five years. Same misnomer as when Dwight was a FA.

Also, better to hit FA again at 36 than 37 (or 35 if getting an ETO ... could even at 34 with a 2+1 deal).

Yes, it's less guaranteed money if he were to suffer a career altering or ending injury. And the Spurs may not even be able to offer the full max.

This really drives home some good points on why Paul is a feasible get.

I'd also like to add the already hefty coin Paul has collected so far career wise. Per basketballreference he's grossed $160m through 2017.

So he can make $200m in LA for five yrs or 150m in SA for four. And as you wrote he hits FA a year sooner so he can make up that $50m deficit, say by at least half.

So totalling up career earnings that would be $360m vs $335m. Now I'm not trying to count a man's pockets but losing out in 7% of your career earnings for a shot at winning a le (or getting to the WCF!) would probably be something to think about.

As a comparison David West did make that choice passing up $10m after $80m career earnings, 11% paycut overall. So Paul's move wouldn't be extraordinary and again his lifetime salary far surpasses all but a dozen league players. Of course the politics of him being a union head and leaving money will also come into play most likely.

I'm eager to see this play out especially with Leonard only being 26 and having 5 years of prime ball left. So even if things go south with Paul after a couple years the team can still rebound for a possibly a couple years of Leonard's late prime.

[CGD]

I bet the Clips are trying to avoid paying him the super max. CP3 camp just turning up the heat.

It would be neat the think about CP3 and Leonard together. In a year, with his length, Murray could move to the SG and Bertans could be the stretch 4 in small ball line ups. LMA at center needs to just happen.

[I. Hustle]

This really drives home some good points on why Paul is a feasible get.

I'd also like to add the already hefty coin Paul has collected so far career wise. Per basketballreference he's grossed $160m through 2017.

So he can make $200m in LA for five yrs or 150m in SA for four. And as you wrote he hits FA a year sooner so he can make up that $50m deficit, say by at least half.

So totalling up career earnings that would be $360m vs $335m. Now I'm not trying to count a man's pockets but losing out in 7% of your career earnings for a shot at winning a le (or getting to the WCF!) would probably be something to think about.

As a comparison David West did make that choice passing up $10m after $80m career earnings, 11% paycut overall. So Paul's move wouldn't be extraordinary and again his lifetime salary far surpasses all but a dozen league players. Of course the politics of him being a union head and leaving money will also come into play most likely.

I'm eager to see this play out especially with Leonard only being 26 and having 5 years of prime ball left. So even if things go south with Paul after a couple years the team can still rebound for a possibly a couple years of Leonard's late prime.

Do you think state taxes factor in as well? I mean yes we can look at it as $50 million less but there are no state taxes in Texas so does that make the hit a little more tolerable? I'll hang up and listen.

[Spurs9]

Do you think state taxes factor in as well? I mean yes we can look at it as $50 million less but there are no state taxes in Texas so does that make the hit a little more tolerable? I'll hang up and listen.

Yes state tax can have an effect as well. Also that just his NBA salary, no telling how much he earns on other endorsements with statefarm etc. The difference in money isn't going to have any effect on his life, its already a absurd amount of $.

[HarlemHeat37]

I love how fans always want to believe that athletes won't care about the extra money, simply due to the amount of money they've already generated..

[cd98]

Getting Paul means losing important cap space in 2018 to form a team that isn't good enough to beat the Warriors and will be a noose in year 4 and 5.

[yavozerb]

Getting Paul means losing important cap space in 2018 to form a team that isn't good enough to beat the Warriors and will be a noose in year 4 and 5.

Please take a look at fa's in 2018? If you think you can get Durant then you wait if not you get Paul now while you can. Nobody worth waiting on for 2018, you go for it now.

[cd98]

Please take a look at fa's in 2018? If you think you can get Durant then you wait if not you get Paul now while you can. Nobody worth waiting on for 2018, you go for it now.

I like Paul George. Kawhi and George would be a mean defensive/offensive duo against the Warriors. And Kawhi is clutch so we don't have to worry about George's chokes.

[TheGreatYacht]

Paul George isn't coming here lmfao. He's Lakers bound. Have you seen his Jimmy Kimmel interview?

The 2018 FA class is horrendous. CP3 haters can keep pretending it isn't though

[cd98]

Paul George isn't coming here lmfao. He's Lakers bound. Have you seen his Jimmy Kimmel interview?

The 2018 FA class is horrendous. CP3 haters can keep pretending it isn't though

Im not a CP3 hater. I'd love to have him on the Spurs if it wasn't for a max contract that will hurt when Kawhi is in his prime.

[TheGreatYacht]

Im not a CP3 hater. I'd love to have him on the Spurs if it wasn't for a max contract that will hurt when Kawhi is in his prime.

It's a ton of money, but if you had a choice between CP3 or Green/Gasol... It's an easy choice. Not even going to count Mills because he's a free agent and paying him the money he's going to get will end a franchise.

[yavozerb]

If the spurs think they can get cp3 they well go after him hard and make the necessary moves to get him. You build depth around stars not stars around depth. If the spurs are not able to to sign cp3 then it's because cp3 said no. You don't pass up opportunities to sign an all star caliber player, ever.

[ace3g]

The biggest advantage CP3 would bring to the Spurs is how teams would guard our PnR. CP3 is a threat from 3 (unlike TP) so teams can't always go under screens.