Reply With Quote
Jamison sucks now....he has an occasional good night, but he is definitely on the downside of his career. BTW, even with James, Jamison was playing like donkey feces.
Again, are you a Lakers fan in Spurs clothing? SHEESH
Jamison sucks now....he has an occasional good night, but he is definitely on the downside of his career. BTW, even with James, Jamison was playing like donkey feces.
I have heard rumors that Josh Smith may be on the trading block....what would it possibly take to get him. I love his rebounding, shot blocking, and athleticism....not to big on his shot selection though. Still, just curious what the Spurs would have to potentially offer to try and get him. I doubt we honestly have a chance in , though.
Spurs get:
Anderson Varejao
Ramon Sessions
Cavs get:
Richard Jefferson
DeJuan Blair
Antonio McDyess retirement contract
2nd round pick
We get our starting center and backup PG for the season. Cavs could do this to clear some payroll and pick up a SF they need. The only question mark is this trade leaves the Cavs without a Center and a small frontline (Hickson, Jamison, Thompson, Blair). I think the Cavs will be looking to deal a big (Varejao or Hickson) and also a PG (Davis or Sessions).
Projected Spurs roster
C: Varejao, Splitter, FA
PF: Duncan, Bonner, FA
SF: Leonard, Butler, FA
SG: Manu, Neal, Anderson
PG: Parker, Sessions, Joseph
I like that one. If Spurs could go after a Prince or Battier in free agency, Spurs will be back in business.
will at least take another 1st rounder from the Spurs. I would still do it.
question is, why do the Cavs do it? just to get a veteran SF? (who is on the downside and on a bad contract). Blair duplicates what Hickson already delivers. they want to get rid of Sessions, sure, but first they will try to move Davis. so, nice trade for the Spurs, but not really attractive for the Cavs. so, not realsitiy IMO.
I was looking at it as a salary dump and picking up a vet SF. But the salary part isn't really much. Something like this might work better for Cleveland if the Cavs were looking to unload Gibson.
http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMa...radeId=5t6xtq2
Cavs instantly free up some room with McDyess. They also get a better contract in RJ (instead of Varejao) and a scoring wing. Spurs would have to flip Sessions or Gibson though.
Excellent.
The Cavs do not do it because Andy is the only guy that can play C in their roster. And his contract is decent for a good defensive big man like him.
We should target Minny if we want a big. They have so many guys in the frontcourt that will not get minutes. They have 2 PF/SF tweeners (Beasley and Williams), Anthony Randolph, Kevin Love, Darko Milicic, Nikola Pekovic, Anthony Tolliver and Brad Miller. I think they will keep Beasley, Williams, Love and Randolph.
Darko, Pek, Tolliver and Miller would be our cheap options using Dice's expiring. Any preferences?
The problem is three of those four are C's (and plodding ones at that) and given that Buford has made it clear that they view Duncan and Splitter as their C's, there's no fit. Tolliver would be a decent fifth big, but he's not starters material and the Spurs are searching for a starting PF.
The Cavs have the cap space to go and sign a stop gap at C, such as Brown. Or they could go and trade for Biedrins or R. Lopez, or drastically overpay Jordan or Gasol and hope one of their teams doesn't match. They also have Hollins and Erden under contract, so they're not completely bare, as far as bodies go.
Yeah, but Pop gave an interview and he said he will consider moving TD to the PF position if he starts TD and Splitter. TD can still play PF offensively. Defensively, they just switch positions and Splitter guards PFs. We have done it before when we had TD and Fabs. And I think Pop doesn't want to play Bonner with Blair again and he is right of course. One of Minny's big could help the Spurs to fill this hole. Not to best option, but considering our situation and our assets, it's a good option.
Yeah, the Cavs could get a C in the offseason but they could get none. Why would they risk losing the only C in their roster to get Richard Jefferson and another PF ? And it's much easier to get a SF in the free agency than a C. They could make an offer for Tayshaun Prince, Caron Butler, Wilson Chandler, Jeff Green, Shane Battier, Wilson Chandler and Mbah a Moute, all better players than Jefferson. And they still keep Andy.
They made it clear they want a shooting four to replace McDyess. It can't just be a one dimensional type, such as Bonner, it needs to be someone who can at least hold their own defensively and on the glass. I'm not saying it's necessarily a bad option, it just doesn't sound as if it's the route they'll go.
With their cap space and willingness to spend, they could definitely get one. It just depends, if they want Chandler, Dalembert, Jordan or Gasol, it's going to take a drastic overpayment. If they want a stop gap, they could easily sign Brown or trade for R. Lopez, etc. They already have two C's under contract. Who cares if neither is close to starting caliber? The goal should be to be as bad as possible for the next few seasons, give themselves the best possible chance at high picks and form a core that can amount to something resembling decent.
What was your trade proposal with Minny?
Granted, but alot of teams will be after those guys. Butler and Green could get close to 10 million a year and I don't believe the Cavs are going to rebuild with an overpaid SF, Davis, and Varejao on their payroll. I can't really see them making a big splash on someone this offseason. I don't see them spending big until Jamison comes off in 2011. Then Davis in 2012. They have to be targeting a young budding star with their cap room.
Right now. SF is a greater need then PF/C. That's why I believe a RJ for Varejao has some worth. Its basically a wash, but the Spurs would throw in McDyess contract and maybe a first round pick instead of Blair. We can also take back the contracts of Sessions and Gibson. Cleveland gets a SF and cap relief.
If they only consider a shooting 4 that can defend and rebound i just cannot find a reasonable option in the market considering our situation and our assets. Unless the FO is considering to trade another young asset, like Anderson or Neal, we will not get this type of 4.
Exactly. That's why it's going to have to come via trade and as far as I can tell, Thomas is the best realistic option.If they only consider a shooting 4 that can defend and rebound i just cannot find a reasonable option in the market considering our situation and our assets. Unless the FO is considering to trade another young asset, like Anderson or Neal, we will not get this type of 4.
I don't think the Cavs not having a starting C at the moment would be a deal breaker. With Varejao/Erden injured, they played the bulk of last season with Hickson/Holllins at C anyway.
They'd get a potential future lottery pick, a quality, inexpensive young asset that they could flip for help on the wings, such as Rush or, if they added Gibson, potentially Mayo. It gives them options. The difference between doing this and doing what you propose is that they wouldn't add a ton of salary and they'd plug a hole even more glaring than C.
It may take the Spurs throwing in one more quality asset to close the deal, such as Anderson (the Cavs could send back a future 2nd). Then, the Spurs could sign Battier/Watson and end up with this . . .
Thomas/Bonner/Samuels
Battier/Leonard/Butler
Duncan/Splitter
Ginobili/Neal
Parker/Watson/Joseph
They could keep Green or go with a more offensive third SG to round out the roster.
I did not make one. I just said we could use Dice's expiring + something to sweeten the deal to get one of those guys.
You just gave us all the points that make this trade unreasonable. If they don't want to overpay to get one of those SF options in the free agency, why would they get Jefferson, a guy that makes 30m in the next 3 years? And if they won't make a big splash on someone in the next 2 seasons (knowing that they will suck with this lineup and they will just tank to get nice picks), why should they worry so much about their starting SF ? If the Cavs have the intention to suck, they could let anyone play in the SF position. They would not pay 30m to a SF just to suck.
If they want a good improvement in the SF position, Jefferson is not the answer.
Andy will receive 26m in the next 3 years and the last year of his contract is only partially guaranteed (4m to be exact). He makes the same amount of money of Jefferson, he has a good value around the league and he is a fan favorite. Jefferson has negative value, his contract is awful and he plays in a position much easier to find a player.
As i said in the other thread, this trade only helps the Spurs. It does not help the Cavs in any way.
It's not about Jefferson (I just added a few reasons why acquiring him wouldn't be all bad for them). It's about getting 2-3 quality young assets and despite taking an albatross, not adding a ton of payroll. If the Spurs throw in Anderson and the Cavs send back Gibson, it goes from debatable to a no brainer for them.I did not make one. I just said we could use Dice's expiring + something to sweeten the deal to get one of those guys.
You just gave us all the points that make this trade unreasonable. If they don't want to overpay to get one of those SF options in the free agency, why would they get Jefferson, a guy that makes 30m in the next 3 years? And if they won't make a big splash on someone in the next 2 seasons (knowing that they will suck with this lineup and they will just tank to get nice picks), why should they worry so much about their starting SF ? If the Cavs have the intention to suck, they could let anyone play in the SF position. They would not pay 30m to a SF just to suck.
If they want a good improvement in the SF position, Jefferson is not the answer.
Andy will receive 26m in the next 3 years and the last year of his contract is only partially guaranteed (4m to be exact). He makes the same amount of money of Jefferson, he has a good value around the league and he is a fan favorite. Jefferson has negative value, his contract is awful and he plays in a position much easier to find a player.
As i said in the other thread, this trade only helps the Spurs. It does not help the Cavs in any way.
Again, people...
Any team willing to take on RJ at this point is not a smart franchise. Would you buy a 8 year old Honda Civic w/ no A/C and the check engine light on for $30k? What makes you think any reasonable team would trade anyone worthwhile for RJ?
i think they should at least pick up the phone and see if we have anything atlanta would want in exchange for him. Sure he's a bit of a bonehead with an at ude problem but whatever. He's worth the cost of a phone call to see what they'd want
http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMa...radeId=5udvqk4
i like that. ed if i know why they reckon we'd be -10
Marcus Camby - career 10 rebounds and 2.5 blocks
Tim Duncan
Trevor Ariza- 11points 5 rebounds long body excellent defense
Manu Ginobili
Raymond Felton- 15points 8 assists 2 steals, somehow undervalued
Solid, long, defense would be night and day compared to this years team
You're the biggest joke of this thread.
Get a clue.
And you are the second biggest asshole on this forum. Pure loser
Rather be an asshole than a typical forum idiot, who has no clue about the game of basketball.
So thank you.
If we can't get rid of RJ, which i hope we still can, a good way to get RJ to stop sucking so bad would be to help him out by getting one of the best distributers the NBA has ever seen.
Tony Parker for Steve Nash. Straight up.
Why Phoenix do it: Get a younger decent PG at the start of a contract to offset Steve Nash's impending retirement in the next few years
Why San Antonio do it: They go balls out for one more ring. Nash would make Duncan's life a lot easier, Stevie would never miss an opportunity for a teammate to get an easy score, which Parker quite often does. RJ played his best ball with Jason Kidd. I'm sure he'd go back to being a respectable NBA player with Nash sending the rock his way in positions to score constantly.
Duncan and Nash have mad respect for each other and they could most likely retire together. It would not solve our deffensive issues obiously. We'd have to figure that out via free agency i suppose. But Nash sure will solve the RJ suckage and TD's ageing issues.
TD= Legend
Nash= Legend
Last edited by Russo21; 06-26-2011 at 06:33 AM.
Start the hating as
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions