Article: CP to the Spurs if he wants a to compete for a championship

[SAGirl]

Since he'd have to leave I believe $40M on the table, Los Angeles and surrender control to a domineering coach, as well as play off the ball more with another perimeter superstar, the only case the Spurs could make, is if they're willing to salary dump Parker (a decent asset would probably have to be included) and Gasol, thereby allowing them to retain Aldridge and sell him on a big three, while also making it more palatable to maintain reasonable depth.

Thanks for this succint summary... both Tony and Pau were the ones who came to mind. I also agree with you that joining the Spurs might not look interesting to CP3, and we still have to see if Pop is really willing to part with Tony (unlikely...) and Pau (who they have wanted for years and just convinced to join). Pau both getting benched and seeing minutes cut... I don't have a good feeling about it though.

[SAGirl]

If the Spurs were to give Paul a big contact, which I would think it would be a disaster in 3 years time, the spurs would need Gasol not to pick up his option, Manu retire, renounce Mills, and trade parker for naught, and give up on Dedmon, Simmons, Lee, and possible Gasol if he does not sign for a min.

Other words, Spurs trade Mills, Parker, Manu, Dedmon, Simmons, Lee, and possibly Gasol for Paul and bunch of minimal contract.

However if Paul wanted to take a 16 mil contact, then it would look different.

TLDR, it won't happen.

Argument can be made some guys on that list are leaving anyways (Manu I'd say is very likely to retire anyways and one of Mills/Dedmon/Lee/Simmons won't be back and maybe two... Spurs won't be able to please everyone period, and some guys may look to greener pastures anyways, in terms of roles and playing time, plus $). But I agree CP3 is unlikely, very.

[skulls138]

George Hill, it comes full circle.

[skulls138]

There's nothing wrong with building your wealth and then basically buying your ring. It's financially savvy to make hay while the sun is shining. Sometimes that means being on a team without much of a chance to win, but in the realm of money, there's a lot more to be made there than on a team like the Spurs even if you win.

When you retire, it's about the money. You can have rings, fine, Scotty was damn near bankrupt and he's got 6 rings. Not everyone can win. We about folks stacking to win a ring, then we because they won't.

Anybody that cant live comfortably for the rest of their lives with ten seasons as the lowest paid NBA player should blame no one but themselves.

As for picking a team for money instead of glory...it looks alot more fun winning than losing. I mean you have to work your ass off to...lose?

[tholdren]

http://thebiglead.com/2017/04/26/chr...antonio-spurs/

Interesting article with some truths for CP:

"Chris Paul has been one of the NBA’s premier point guards for a decade now, first in New Orleans, then in Los Angeles, but he’s never won a damn thing. Number of trips to the Conference Finals: 0. After a loss to the Jazz last night, Paul’s one loss away from being ousted in the first round for the second year in a row."

"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. That’s what staying in LA would be doing."

"So Chris Paul, who turns 32 next month, needs to opt-out of his contract this summer and sign with San Antonio Spurs. Well, if he wants to win anything, he should."

But this guys takes on the Spurs projected lineup next year with Paul was worse than anything I've ever seen on ST (and that's saying something).

"PG: Chris Paul/Tony Parker
SG: Danny Green/Kyle Anderson
SF: Kawhi Leonard/Dejounte Murray
PF: LaMarcus Aldridge/Nikola Milutinov (?)
C: Dewayne Dedmon/Pau Gasol"

He moves Anderson to the 2 and Murray to the 3!! Assumes we find enough money to hold Dedmon AND that Pau resigns to come off the bench. Then he completely leaves Bertans out of the rotation.

So if the Spurs do get Paul, what do you think the team and rotations look like next year?

so the spurs would score 50 ppg with that ?

[DMC]

Anybody that cant live comfortably for the rest of their lives with ten seasons as the lowest paid NBA player should blame no one but themselves.

You could say the same for a corporation; why should they keep trying to increase their profits? They are rich already!

There's only one winning team each year. Everyone else loses. Some teams make a habit of losing, some make it their benchmark and plenty do it intentionally so they can pile up low pay high talent players. So if you're on a team like NY that hires someone like Phil who hires Derek Fisher as a HC, never even been an assistant, then fires him and hires Kurt Rambis... you're not going to win, but you make a lot of money and you love NY. You could probably go somewhere else like SA or team up in Cleveland and probably win a ring after going through the ringer with being called a sellout, ring chaser, whatever. You'll be the 2nd option at best in either place. Why would you go? To get a ring? What's the point of winning a ring for a city you don't care about?

As for picking a team for money instead of glory...it looks alot more fun winning than losing. I mean you have to work your ass off to...lose?

Carmelo doesn't work his ass off. Kobe was off half the year or more for several years. Both make a lot of money.

If you're poised to strike, you strike. If you're just a box office draw, you draw.

[Dex]

Never guys in their prime. Always guys who've respected the spurs their whole career but looked the other way, and now...NOW...want to win a ring.

Well, we got RJ in his prime...

Oh, .

But we got LMA in his prime...

Goddamit.

Thus is the way of a contending team who typically drafts in the high 20s/50s and has spent good money on good assets to win 5 les in 20 years.

But hey...Bertans could be nearing his prime??

[Chinook]

So if the Spurs were to S&T LMA for CP3 then they would still be over the cap and Dedmon could be had possibly for the MLE?

Yes, or they could go under the cap, re-sign Dedmon for whatever, and them do the trade. Either way would work.

[DAF86]

I spent a bit of time looking for my long-ass post going over scenarios to get the Spurs sufficient cap space to sign CP3 or Lowry. Can't find it though. Maybe someone can dredge up the previous Paul thread to look for it. In the interim, the salary thread in the TT should be pretty up to date. Just knock out salaries from guys you want to trade away or let walk.



It's doable because a Paul for LMA trade doesn't require cap space. It's not a good idea, mind you, but it's doable.

TOSB Paul >>>>> Aldridge

[UZER]

RJ was a trade. LMA is already past his prime. He's still a really good player.

[DAF86]

Clippers would have LMA, Blake, and 'Dre then. Unless Blake leaves and goes to OKC

If Blake happened to want to come to S.A, then LMA would work too in an S&T

If Paul says he's leaving, Clippers don't have much of a say on the matter. They would get whatever they can. Even if it's redundant talent.

[loveforthegame]

Wrong thread.

[Chinook]

If Paul says he's leaving, Clippers don't have much of a say on the matter. They would get whatever they can. Even if it's redundant talent.

Nah, all three parties have equal standing in a S&T. The Clips don't have to take whatever from the Spurs just so Paul can go there. It's quite unlikely that Paul will go to a better team than LAC anyway.

[DAF86]

Nah, all three parties have equal standing in a S&T. The Clips don't have to take whatever from the Spurs just so Paul can go there. It's quite unlikely that Paul will go to a better team than LAC anyway.

Clippers might not trade Paul to the Spurs, but then Paul becomes a free agent and the Clippers end up with nothing in return. That's why the trading team has little say on these type of situations.