Because 90 percent of ST posters want those players gone.
I asked if there has been any indication that Nocioni is on the block.
I can safely assume the answer is no.
Now, is there any real indication that Bonner and Finley and Mason and Williams are on the block?
Finley+Bonner to OKC for Nick Collison and then pick up FA Bruce Bowen why: another solid big.. i personally am not sold on bonner,mahinmi and ratliff is just a fill in vet i believe....
and say what you want and i love his game in the SL but blair is still just a rookie.. i really think we need more help inside still IMO
our lineup:
Tony / Hill / Williams?
Mason / Manu / Hairston
RJ / Bowen / Haislip
Duncan / Blair / Ratliff
Dyess/ Collison / Mahinmi
why do people keep thinking that Haislip is a 3?
No indication that Nocioni is on the block.
No credible source to indicate that Bonner/ Finley are on the block. .
Although it does make sense for the Spurs to look for a 2 for 1 deal ( considering their signings of bigs ( McDyess, Ratliff, Haislip, drafting of Blair) would make anyone believe Spurs have to be testing the trade waters with Bonner and ? If that wasn't the case then why would they go out and sign these bigs?
At the same time : Bonner/ Mason/ Finley are the only real trading pieces the Spurs have to deal with.
They can always trade Manu.
We should start a thread to see what he could get.
Thats what ive heard/seen is he likes to play more around the perimeter.... and lets hope so because if we start putting him down low against the NBA bigs its bonner all over again with his skinny weak frame...
And I'm pretty sure 90 percent of the posts would have the Spurs ending up with D Wade or D Howard.
You made your point, dip .
Stop spamming.
That would be a brilliant move. there would be no shots for him.
How can Duncan, Parker, Ginobili, Jefferson, and Jackson share the ball?
With that being said, I'd absolutely love to have Jackson back.
sjax
Nocioni seems to be the kind of asset that is sat upon until the deadline to see what the best deal would be.
Besides that, his contract actually decreases the next two seasons. That might help the cap schemes of Sacramento or another team.
I agree. Same goes with Hornets and Posey, Charlotte and Bell, Battier and Houston.
If those teams are out of contention come February I can see either team parting with those players. ( Which most likely will be Charlotte and then maybe Houston then NO).
Granted that a trade like Bonner/Finley for Nocioni may be nothing more than a pipe dream, you have to remember that a trade does not always mean talent for talent. There are lots of other reasons trades go down. Money, roster spots, etc. Look at the Jefferson trade...that was talent for cap space.
The Kings could very well do that trade if money is the driving force. They're definitely rebuilding and Nocioni is not what he once was.
No really? If they wanted a guy back for their future, as well as a cap dump, then Mason would be the best way to attain a player of Nocioni's caliber due to them being able to have Mason's bird rights and possibly resigning him.
Opposed to getting Michael Finley who would simply retire the following year.
That could be the case with Mason, but what if the Kings don't care about equal value in return? Hence the Milwaukee trade where we could have very well given the Bucks a player for their future (such as Hill or Mason), but they just wanted expiring contracts. What if the Kings want the same and decide to just take their chances in the summer of 2010? Bonner/Finley for Nocioni isn't that unrealistic if the Kings take that approach. They're not winning for a while so I doubt equal value would be their number one priority. Plus, lots of teams are stupid and incapable of making long term plans.
If that's the case. But it's most likely not, considering his salary declines the next two years from a pedestrian 7.5 million this next year.
Also you have to consider that they will have over 20 million in cap space to use next year already. 6.85 million in 2010 is a bargain for a player of Nocioni's caliber. Therefore a simple salary dump wouldn't make the most sense.
Good points. I guess you can never have too much cap room though (especially for next summer). It seems like that's all New York is focused on right now. It just depends on what direction Sacramento is trying to go and what kind of value they place on Nocioni. I don't see him making much noise with a bottom feeder team like the Kings, but I think his value would go up immensely in San Antonio because of the system and surrounding players. I agree with you though that throwing in a decent player like Hill or Mason would be necessary to push this deal through. I wouldn't be surprised if we could get him for less though. , I never thought the Spurs were capable of stealing a player like RJ in the manner that they did.
As I stated on the other similar thread, getting a big contract like S Jax means no more Manu. That being said, I think Manu will need to resign for reasonable $ or we can't keep him. If Manu is playing well, our best bet is to extend him for a reasonable price if possible. That could be a multi-year declining $ deal, lots of possibilities, but the price needs to be South of $10 million per for Manu, and even that likely means big luxury tax in 2010.
Final comment: the S Jax contract is really not that bad (4 years $34 million), having both him and Manu from 2010 on would probably work, but RJ at $15 million in 2010, not sure what the workaround is for that. RJ's hefty 2010 salary seems like it will be an issue for us.
This is the icing on the cake move. SJax essentially plays the same position as Anthony Randolph who is the real deal and Stephen Curry who may be also a stud. Jackson's contract is $7.65 million next year w/ 3 additional years. He knows the Spurs system, can play either the 2 or 3, is a good defender w/ length. A wing rotation of RJ, Manu, SJax and Mason might be the best in the NBA. Even if you have to include Mason in the deal that's still really, really good.
Jackson is also the guy Don Nelson really likes. Maggette is the guy GS would love to get rid of. Not Jackson.
I would rather keep Mason, but wouldn't mind Noc or Posey. If we had to give up Mason to get Jackson what do people think about trying to get Belinelli included?
Because he is.
At the very least he can be considered a hybrid 3/4. He will proably be used most when other teams play small and Duncan shifts to the 5. At that point Hailslip would be playing the 4 but his opponent would probably be a hybrid 3/4 like himself. An obvious example would be someone like Lamar Odom who plays the 4 but has the skill set of a 3. In fact, Odom has the exact same measurables as Hailslip (6.10 230).
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
