i was thinking the same thing. if no better options present themselves, bring back finley (steve smith) and add a young athletic project as well.
Well, I just heard about it today. Either way, good news.
Is that what your horoscope said...
No.
Today is the 29th of February, a day that only happens every four years.
Seems to me like they should be special.
The last Feb 29th was great for me. It was on that day that I met Manu for the first time and, while in line for that, I met one of my best friends.
Welcome back Brent. We're glad to have you back.
All of these are good and plausible suggestions, but Bruno is alluding to a very good point...
When you combine a FAs likely contract demand with their talent, are you going to get a better deal than Finley?
Some suggested FAs should be ruled out because they're too far-fetched, like Corey Maggette (sorry SenorSpur!), while others are also unlikely because of their "restricted" status (i.e. Navarro, Delfino, 2004 1st rounders).
After those considerations you're essentially left with:
Mickael Pietrus
James Jones
Jarvis Hayes
Gerald Green
I guess the question then becomes, will any of those above individuals be willing to take a two-year deal, or a three-year deal with the third year as a team option? And, while they may be younger, are they really an upgrade over Finley talent-wise?
That's obviously what the Spurs FO will be looking at this Summer, but here would be my guess....
Spurs hold off on any FA that may have an "impact" to the roster next year, and instead opt to get younger on the wing with a draft choice or with someone currently in the system (i.e. Williams).
Of the other two veterans with expiring contracts, I see one staying on (Kurt Thomas) and one moving on (Damon Stoudamire). There is another opportunity to inject some fresh, young talent.
I hear what Bruno is saying but I do think there are better options than Finley. James Jones is a better option and is unrestricted, as you know. I'm sure you'll agree that we should exhast those options before falling back on Finley.
It's nice to know that our frontline is basically set between now and 2010, though. Udoka will be valuable rotation guy next season. There are servicable options to plug holes. The problem is that the Lakers are very good, and I'm not sure we can compete with them next season if we're merely plugging holes. We can win this year, but we will need to inject the team with a fresh legs for next season if we want to compete for a le then.
Looking at it, I don't think we spread our money around; the roster will not have that many spots needing filling.
Roster (Currently signed for 08/09, total of 15 spots)
Bigs (5) - Bonner, Oberto, Duncan, Mahinmi, Splitter*
* Almost certain to come on a rookie contract
Wings (4) - Manu, Bowen, Udoka, Barry
Point (2) - Tony, Vaughn
We need a big, 2 wings, and a pg to fill out the roster.
The big will need to be an experienced veteran, as we are already carrying 2 near-rookies (Mahinmi, Splitter). Conveniently, we have Kurt Thomas's bird rights. I expect him to be signed for 2 years, at something around 8 million (4/year). This money would be bird right money, and wouldn't come out of our exceptions.
The PG I expect to be another veteran. Pop loves him a reliable veteran, and chews up rookie PGs. So no point in bringing one in. I wouldn't be surprised to see Stoudamire back, or maybe Cassell for the LLE.
We need 2 wing players...I expect us to draft a wing in the 1st round. There are several who are expected to be drafted 25-30. From DraftExpress, picks 25-29, Tyler Smith (SF, 6'7"), Bill Walker (SF, 6'6"), Sam Young (SF/PF, 6'6"), Brandon Rush (SG/SF 6'7"), Shan Foster (SG 6'6")...That leaves us with 1 spot to fill, and the entire MLE... Not to mention 2 second round picks. I could see us drafting Shawn James or Marcus Dove as a project and keeping them around...
I will say that I can't see Finley back. Senor Spur is right that we need to inject some youth at the wing positions. Given Barry has already jumped into a spot on next season's roster, I think he's moving on (or retiring).
Great summary, pad300.
Wow, that was a good day for you, Angel.Today is the 29th of February, a day that only happens every four years.
Seems to me like they should be special.
The last Feb 29th was great for me. It was on that day that I met Manu for the first time and, while in line for that, I met one of my best friends.
Personally, I can't remember what happened on any previous leap day...
When I see unavailable players, I think that :
- The best ones who will ask for more than a 2 years contract aren't good enough eating 2010 cap space.
- The ones able to accept a 2 years contract aren't as good as an old Finley.
Saying that, I understand people that disagrees with this. As suggested by some people, Spurs could do something more creative like a trade or could have still targeted an unknown diamond in the draft.
Finley will be 35 years old with a lot of mileage. He is still scoring 10ppg in 27mpg but he could decide to retire this summer. If he retires, all this discussion will be moot. It's also possible that Barry retire even if he is still under contract.
The "what I would do, if I were GM" discussion is interesting but it's more interesting to know what Spurs FO would do.
If Finley has a decent end of season and doesn't want to retire, do you see Pop saying him "We don't need you because we want to go younger and you can sign elsewhere" ?
At this point, I know Corey Maggette is a pipe dream. In my original post, I did indicate that he'll be far too expensive for the Spurs. I've just had him on my personal wishlist since last year.
Given Pop's soft spot for the 30-something year-old veteran, I can't see him turning Finley away. However, if he can get a free-agent swingman that has equal or better skills, he is compelled to go after him. The foremost objective for Pop and R.C. is to improve the team every year and keep it in championship contention.
One interesting point to the Finley debate is that the exhoribant salary that he's getting from the Mavs will be coming to an end. Thus, he will be an UFA at the end of the season. Therefore, how much will be looking for next season? It's quite possible he may price himself out of the Spurs range anyway.
If Finley was about money then he would have taken the other offers on the table over the Spurs a few years ago. He won't be getting MLE offers from teams if he continues to play and the Spurs don't want him.
And Cuban will be paying Finley until he's 40 because of the deferred payment clause in his contract when he was waived. Finley will be getting $5 million a year from Cuban long after he retires.
What would you guys think about Josh Childress? He's not the Bowen-replacement that we've been looking for - but I'm beginning to think there is no Bowen replacement.
7. Josh Childress, Hawks -- Childress doesn't get nearly the respect or hype of many of his teammates in Atlanta, but he's been a devastatingly effective sixth man and seems expendable given all of Atlanta's wing talent. He probably can't get more than a midlevel deal on this market, but he'd be a bargain at that price.
http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/insid...Agents--071127
2004-05 .470 .823 13.6 8.1 2.5 54.3 15.1 10.6 15.1 11.8 15.22
2005-06 .552 .766 13.2 6.9 2.3 62.6 15.9 12.3 13.1 10.3 15.83
2006-07 .504 .795 14.1 6.7 2.5 58.6 15.5 9.8 14.7 10.1 16.24
2007-08 .589 .839 16.2 6.6 1.9 65.9 11.6 12.0 15.1 9.5 18.11
2007-08 (projected) .510 .780 14.5 6.5 2.8 59.7 16.42 10.7 15.18 9.91 16.60
2006-07 season: One of the game's most underrated players, Childress missed 27 games with injuries and predictably failed to maintain the crazy 55.2 percent shooting mark of a season earlier. However, his game developed enough in other areas that he still showed a gentle improvement in PER. Although used as a sub he was effectively a starter, averaging 36.9 minutes a game and often entering just a few minutes into the contest.
While his percentages weren't quite as high, Childress remained one of the rare perimeter players who can make an impact without needing the ball. He ranked seventh among small forwards in true shooting percentage and 10th in free throw attempts per field goal attempt, allowing him to score at a decent clip despite taking relatively few shots. Childress also cut down his turnovers from a season earlier, putting him ahead of the league average for his position.
Scouting report: A solid two-way player, Childress is an athletic wing who is a strong finisher around the basket and an outstanding offensive rebounder. He also draws fouls at a high rate and converts from the charity stripe, which is what helps keep his TS% so high.
He's a good ball handler and can get to the basket against slower players, but opponents lay off him because they don't respect his jumper, and that limits his opportunities. Childress didn't shoot the J often last season, and when he did it wasn't pretty. He made 33.8 percent from downtown and just 30.4 percent of his long 2-pointers. He shoots a flick shot from under his chin a la Shawn Marion, but without as much arc or accuracy.
At 6-8, Childress' size makes him a good defender against bigger wing players and an excellent roamer in zones, although he can be outmuscled by wide bodies in post-ups. He was often used as a stopper but isn't quite in that caliber in terms of his lateral movement.
2007-08 outlook: Childress is due for an extension this fall and should get a fairly sizable reward for his production the past few seasons, though it's likely his low national exposure will work against him. Similar players have been rewarded with five-year deals in the $40-50 million range, but one wonders if he'll get much above $30 million because of his relative anonymity.
Nonetheless, if you're looking for a Sixth Man Award candidate, you might want to stop here for a minute. Childress played huge minutes as a reserve last season and is likely to do so again, and he's been one of the most productive subs in basketball the past two seasons. And while Manu Ginobili and Leandro Barbosa are the clear front-runners, they might end up starting by year-end. Additionally the Hawks should be a lot better this season, and surprise teams tend to be massively overrepresented in individual award votes.
I'm not saying to go to Vegas and plunk down $100 on him winning it, but crazier things have happened.
Of course, he might work his way in as a starter himself. Certainly there was no reason to have him playing behind Marvin Williams other than that the Hawks seemed to like using him off the pine.
Most similar at age: Sean Elliott
http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/playe...?playerId=2373
Don't know how well Childress would work into the "2010 Plan", but he could be a good player for the MLE. Our resident Atlanta Hawk expert, Chump, might know how he's playing this year. LOL.
barry will play the three point specialist that horry is playing
bonner will take horry's minutes though
They are signing that "never been" Giracheck (or however you spell it) as a consolation prize.
Just like if you cannot have Tim Duncan they went after Shaq - I like Kerr but he is really on the hotspot as a GM right now.
I know, and I share your opinion on this guy. There were so many naysayers that thought Maggette would be a chemistry problem when the Spurs were rumored to go after him last year offering BENO and Brent....rediculous.
I would LOVE to somehow get Maggette on this team and IMO, he is a guy that you bust 2010 for in some way if need be.
But as you indictated, it's such a longshot I'm guessing it never happens.
There were actually two interested teams in the Brent Barry hunt -- as much as we love Bones, not sure we can call it a full-fledged sweepstakes -- that could have claimed Barry off waivers.
Neither Phoenix nor Golden State had anywhere close to the requisite salary-cap room to absorb Barry's $5.5 million salary, but both teams possess a sizable trade exception that, according to league rules, could have been used to snag Barry before he had the right to choose his next stop after clearing waivers.
The Suns, though, are more than $3.5 million into luxury-tax territory already. Had they used their $8.1 million trade exception created last summer when Kurt Thomas was dealt to Seattle, Barry would have cost them nearly $8 million for the rest of the season in salary and tax payments. Although Barry had less than half of his salary remaining with all teams at or close to the 60-game mark, Phoenix would have been required to pay the full $5.5 million in luxury tax on Barry at season's end.
So as much as it would have loved to have him, Phoenix naturally preferred to let Barry clear waivers and then try to convince him not to return to the Spurs. Yet once Barry decided against a switch to the desert, I'd still say it makes more sense for the Suns to settle for Philadelphia's freshly waived Gordan Giricek as a minimum-salaried addition as opposed to bringing Barry in on a high-dollar waiver claim.
Golden State, meanwhile, quietly chased Barry (and his Bay Area ties) hard and still has a $9,999,999 trade exception from its Jason Richardson trade with Charlotte on draft night. The Warriors, furthermore, are some $8.3 million under the luxury-tax threshold, meaning that they could have claimed Barry off waivers with no tax liability.
Yet it appears that the Warriors preferred to hold onto the trade exception -- which doesn't expire until four days after this June's draft -- to save it for something bigger. Which is likewise hard to argue given that many more player-acquisition possibilities present themselves closer to the draft.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Once Barry cleared waivers, Dallas had the most to offer financially. That's because the Mavs declined to spend their $5.2 million mid-level exception last summer and still had more than $3.7 million of that amount to offer to the various buyout recipients like Barry and Sam Cassell, even though all leftover mid-level exceptions get reduced by $31,506 per day starting Jan. 10.
But NBA front-office sources say that Dallas, like Phoenix, was not prepared to make a major cash expenditure on a player who might or might not make a significant stretch-run impact.
With the Mavs believing all along that Barry was headed back to San Antonio, sources say Dallas offered him $1.5 million for the rest of this season and $1.5 million next season.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/dailyd...dime-080301-02
Josh Childress: there was a report earlier this year that the Spurs took a run at him. He wouldn't be a bad fit, and take a run at him in a sign and trade situation with a team option after year 2. Perhaps, Bonner and Oberto for Childress, or something like that. He's in a weird spot because the Hawks are overloaded at wing and their ownership is crazy. Maybe Atlanta simply wouldn't match.
Maggette is not a bad option, but out of our price range.
From what I've read, Artest will be seeking a multi-year MLE. If we can build in a team option in after two seasons, I'd go for that in a heart beat. His outside stroke is shaky and he's insane, but he can ball. I'm increasingly of the opinion that winning anda healthy team culture could hold him in check.
I agree.
Plus getting Finley for a couple more years at the Vet Min will probably be the way the Spurs go, if he will accept that.
I think he would in order to stay with the Spurs, the team that got him a championship and maybe two by the time it matters most.
Thinking this is the most probably conclusion, still I think the Spurs bring in some younger talent if they can draft them for the developmental league.
Not so sure about Artest. IMHO the only thing that will help that guy is consistant Meds, not winning and a healthy culture.
And if I'm right about that, those same Meds would mess with his game.
He may be a bench player, but make no mistake about it....he is every bit as important to the success of that team as Williams or even Smith, who start for the Hawks.
I would expect the Hawks to offer a contract greater than the MLE ($6-7M/yr). Or they could just go the easy route and wait for some team to offer him the MLE, then match....which they'd do.
They've still got Williams and Horford on a rookie scale for a few more years, so no decision needs to be made in regards to them for now. And Bibby will be their point guard for at least one more season before they have to decide whether to cut bait with him.
Bottom Line: There's no advantage to letting J-Chill go, so the Hawks will retain him.
One quick note on this....the ownership situation has cleared up for now, so I wouldn't foresee any problems with the Hawks making long-term extensions to their players.
Case in point: Assuming the last two years and $30M of a Bibby contract....never woulda happened if the ownership was still in flux.
Last edited by AFBlue; 03-01-2008 at 04:21 PM.
One more note....
The Hawks are not overloaded at wing because they choose to play Williams/Smith at PF and Horford/Pachulia at C.
In a more traditional lineup, I guess you could say that statement was true...but for the Hawks purposes it's not.
this has always been my concern with chill. poor perimeter shooting combined with poor foot speed to cover the faster wing players and poor size to cover the bigger wings. hes a good player, and i wouldnt hate having him. just not sure id want to give him 3+ years at the full MLE. theres a couple of players whose skill set i value more.
plus theres the whole "no way the hawks let him walk" issue. chill wont be changing teams unless its in a trade, and the hawks are getting value back.
For the moment, the 2010 plan is Spurs having $25M in cap space with Duncan, Parker, Splitter, Mahinmi and Spurs' 2008 first round pick.
Spurs could have a little more cap space by giving up on Splitter, Mahinmi or the 2008 first round pick. If they give up on all three, spurs will have $27M in cap space.
$25M is a lot of money to spend.
If Spurs sign a player to a reasonable contract past 2010, it won't mean the end of the 2010 plan. However, I don't see them eating that $3M or $4M of that cap space for some mediocre role players in the James Jones mold.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
