Reply With Quote
Only reason I can think of to stretch is to have room below the tax this year to use the rest of the MLE. But is that worth sacrificing the next two years to the tune of $7-$8mm each year?
this forum
We must get rid of him!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
thanks for the memories LMA
Only reason I can think of to stretch is to have room below the tax this year to use the rest of the MLE. But is that worth sacrificing the next two years to the tune of $7-$8mm each year?
I wish we were able to reward our only Big Free Agent signing with a championship. 2015-16 team was really really good. Overshadowed by Warriors record breaking 73 win season, the Spurs were a monster that year. But Duncans knees giving out on him killed that team. Otherwise thats a championship team.
The following year was a great team as well. Getting better as the season went on. We had the Warriors number but of course it was not meant to be.
Outside of that, i feel fine with LMA's tenure with the Spurs. I wish him the best and hopefully we can get something in return that works for the spurs.
I never quite understood D West he praised the organization while here and then I got the impression he was unhappy afterwards- don't remember the details or even if it was true
As far as the other disgruntled individuals...
Simmons, De Colo, Dedmon, Blair- I think only Dedmon had even a semi- productive career after leaving and is not currently playing at age 30
With all the Spurs tried to help them
The only amount to be stretched is the amount of remaining salary. I thought I read somewhere that he would be owed $8.5 million at the trade deadline. So if they were to stretch it would only be between 2 and 3 million per year. But really, there is no one that they will want to sign to an MLE type contract anyway. If you are going to buy him out then just bite the bullet.
It depends on the money recouped from the buyout. The concensus seems to be that with our room under the tax, we would have enough to sign a prorated first year minimum contract at or around the time of the trade deadline or buyout deadline. If we have more, we can sign someone with maybe more experience. The minimum money jumps sharply after the rookie season.
Stretching seems like a bad option. Why screw up future years? I’m just happy we are moving on from him this year and not re-signing him.
West was bitter about losing to the Thunder. That's really what it was about. He took less money to sign with the Spurs but failed hence him bolting and then signing with the Warriors for cheap.
In order to be stretched it would have had to happen by September 1st. (in a normal year this is before the season so while the date may have been moved back I bet it was still before the season.) He would not be able to be stretched.
The buyout can be an amount agreed by LMA and the Spurs. If a player really wants out it is usually less then if they team wants to get rid of him. since this is "mutual" I would think it would be on the higher end of his contract. A lot of the buyouts have where if he signs a new contract that the Spurs get half of whatever he signs for towards the amount he is owed by them. Them waiting till after the trade deadline does not really effect how much they would owe Aldridge.
Disagree. There is no such thing as good will. You can certainly harm yourself if you act really poorly but you can’t buy goodwill.
Spurs need assets more than anything else - money talks and they will have a healthy amount of that to convince guys.
I would be trying to work out a deal with Cleveland. I wouldn't mind taking back Kevin Love's contract for 2 years if it means I get a potentially high lottery pick in return. Also, LMA likely wouldn't be stuck in Cleveland. Since his contract is expiring, they very well could buy him out and he would be free to go where he wants.
Why would you even want to stretch him? Say he’s owed $12M. He agrees to a hypothetical buyout of $9M. You’ve already baked a cost of $12M into your cap for the year. Just pay him the damn $9M, and be done with it. No point in carrying more dead money into more future years.
Well it would be great to get something in return, but March 25th is just around the corner. I hope LMA goes to the Lakers or somewhere where he can win a championship.
Good luck to him!
FTL.
I agree you would not but some were asking if you could. I was answering their question saying you could not. Since we are under the cap and hopefully will get some savings from LMA there is no reason to stretch him.
We’re under the tax, but not under the cap.
LMA does not want to go to a team unless he starts and they are in the playoff hunt. All the fools out there that think they can get LMA on the buyout and see him back up Embid, Ayton or some other big is fantasy land.
You are just speculating. I’m sure he is okay with coming off the bench for a potential contender, most of whom have nothing to offer us via trade so they are hoping for a buyout. If the Lakers want me off the bench and Phoenix offers me a starting role, as LMA i’m going to the Lakers. I doubt he accepts a trade to a bottom feeder that guarantees a starting role. This is why there is virtually no value to extract from his fat ass other than saving a few million on a buyout and putting an end to his Spurs legacy, or lack-thereof, which we should all be thankful is over.
For me, I would try to deal with Cleveland for Love's contract and their lottery pick this year.
I have a bad feeling he just gets bought out
does any one know what kind of hit the spurs cap will take if they wind up having to buy out LMA's contract?
17 days after Blake Griffin and the Pistons agree to part ways, they agree to a buyout
The following day (18th day) they complete a buyout
Keep in mind, Blake Griffin was 10x more difficult to find a trade partner with.
None. Buying a player out means you pay less than his full salary for him to be free. Say his remaining salary is $12M, and you negotiate a buyout of $10M (all numbers are strictly examples), you now have $2M more under the tax.
I feel the spurs would take a bad contract ONLY if it is attached to a player they plan to pursue in the off season. I feel confident they will pursue Collins and Laurie. If Atlanta tells them we will give you collins in a trade now for LMA but Bogdan is not working out so you got to take his 4 year 72 million dollar contract the spurs would do that because it means they get a player that they covet in Collins. If it's not a player that they covet, then no, they won't take that bad contract, because they specifically set their cap situation up for lma, demar, rudy, and patty to all expire at the same time WHILE still having young guys on rookie deals. They spent years setting up all this soon to be capspace they are not going to sacrifice some just to make lma happy in a trade or for a player they don't see a future in.
I feel the same way about Lonnie. Spurs would much prefer to keep him but with the addition of Vassel if it takes Lonnie to get a deal done to get a player that they want then I feel like he will be out of here. He has been sort of the jerked around odd man out player for the last two seasons and between all our guards he is not entrenched into any specific role.
Well the original cir stance was that he contract just ended in the off season and we never would have gotten anything for him.
The spurs are looking for very specific players in a trade and it is very unlikely that lma gets them those very specific players because he does not fit with the teams they have those specific players the spurs want.
A buyout wouldn’t be the worst thing in the world. If structured properly I’d almost rather do that than get stuck with another team’s garbage.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
