LJ,
I don't think it's that he's not serviceable, or that he's not in the top half of centers in the league.
I think it's a byproduct of the fact that teams are historically hesitant to help out reigning champions in the trade department, and with the Spurs front office success others around the league are probably sitting there thinking "if the Spurs don't want this guy anymore, how good can he really be?"
You've also got the whole animosity thing about the Spurs doing well in the draft thing going on, where teams are probably somewhat bitter towards them and unwilling to help out.
I think the Spurs are just going to have to wait it out for now. I really think the best situation is going to come about as the season progresses and some marginal playoff contending team realizes it's in dire need of a big man, or has some player in the last year of their deal who has become disenchanted with one of the non-contending franchises that also happens to be in need of a center, something along those lines.
Then the Spurs will make their move.
Why help out the champs? It's fairly obvious the Spurs want Nazr instead of Rasho long term. Rasho's contract does reduce the amount of the lux tax distribution the Spurs are eligible for so he will cost them roughly double if they opt to go over the lux tax threshold to retain Nazr. The Spurs might be closer to making Rasho an amnesty casualty than we think.
Why trade for a player who might be waived? Why help the champs retain the center they prefer?
Considering contract, potential and basketball skills, I would say he's not top 25. I'll make a list if you disagree.
I don't know if I buy that. The Spurs were given Hedo Turkoglu after their last championship for the rotting corpse of Danny Ferry. The Pistons were given Carlos Arroyo for nothing. The Lakers and Bulls teams made trades every year to improve.I think it's a byproduct of the fact that teams are historically hesitant to help out reigning champions in the trade department
That theory doesn't fly.
Again, teams will do trades if they think it will improve their team. If there was a team who was interested in Rasho, they wouldn't NOT pull the trigger because they are jealous of the Spurs. That doesn't make any sense and has no historical precedence.You've also got the whole animosity thing about the Spurs doing well in the draft thing going on, where teams are probably somewhat bitter towards them and unwilling to help out.
I think the Spurs are waiting to find a deal in which they can just give him away. If a team offers an expiring contract for Rasho, the Spurs would pull the trigger. Even if a player has two years left on the deal (a la Steve Smith when the Spurs got him), I think the Spurs do it.I think the Spurs are just going to have to wait it out for now. I really think the best situation is going to come about as the season progresses and some marginal playoff contending team realizes it's in dire need of a big man, or has some player in the last year of their deal who has become disenchanted with one of the non-contending franchises that also happens to be in need of a center, something along those lines.
Then the Spurs will make their move.
Dallas turning down Rasho for TAW is a sign that other teams were paying attention and want no part of Rasho, IMO.
It wasn't the rotting corpse of Ferry, it was for the non-guaranteed final year of his contract.The Spurs were given Hedo Turkoglu after their last championship for the rotting corpse of Danny Ferry. The Pistons were given Carlos Arroyo for nothing. The Lakers and Bulls teams made trades every year to improve.
That theory doesn't fly.
Arroyo? Remind me how much he contributed to the Pistons this year.
There's a difference between those two guys and helping SA free room when you know they're trying to make a move to lock up Nazr long term and have another solid player in Scola waiting in the wings.
I think the big thing here is the combination of getting rid of Rasho, and the Spurs getting what they want in return - either a long three or cap relief to free up cash to extend Nazr.
I suspect we won't really see talks heat up again until closer to the Aug. 15 amnesty deadline, and then again as the free agent pool dries up and a few teams out there are still looking for big men (read, New Orleans, Atlanta, etc.).
Timvp beat me to this one and I totally agree. You might say possible contenders don't want to help the Spurs in the trade department but any team will pull the trigger on a deal that will help their team. This especially goes with the cellar dwellers that want to win a few more games to show improvement and fringe teams trying to make a move to get into the playoffs.
Even playoff teams will cut a deal with the Spurs if it moves them closer to where they want to be, whether to get an edge over a division rival or help them in their conference playoffs. Because realistically only 3-4 teams have championship potential, not everyone has championship aspirations. Some teams just want to get to the playoffs or advance another round and if dealing with the defending champ gets you there, you do it.
If I'm Dallas, I do the Rasho deal. They get a decent defensive bigman in exchange for a player that hasn't even suited up in two years and has never played more than 61 in a season. Even better yet, it may weaken the Spurs in a playoff run whether it be that Oberto doesn't work out or we need a big guy to match up with someone like Yao in an early round. Maybe Yao gets Nazr in foul trouble or posts him up too easily and Oberto isn't (possibly) strong enough or tall enough to be effective defensively/offensively against him. With the Spurs possibly knocked out of the playoffs early, it gives Dallas a better chance to advance.
And what if Nazr has a breakout season and the Spurs decide they don't want to play his pricetag? Suddenly a perceived strength for the Spurs turns into a liability. Again, Dallas may gain advantage by dealing with the Spurs. This looks like a gamble that could easily go the Mavs way and it's disturbing that they didn't accept.
I don't think we'd be shopping Rasho if we didn't already have some idea of what Nazr was going to cost us for the next 6 years.And what if Nazr has a breakout season and the Spurs decide they don't want to play his pricetag?
another thread where aggie is making wayyyyy too much sense.
Huh? How would they have an idea? If they had an amount that he would agree to, then they'd probably extend him right now. Nazr could sucks this season and not be worth more than $3M/year and if he performs well, he could easily demand $8-9M or more on the open market.
Rasho's contract is NOT that bloated, by NBA standards.
I still think the Spurs should just roll with Rasho/Nazr/Oberto for 2005/2006, and wait until next summer to make a decision.
I like Nazr, but, he has a ton of "bad contract" potential.
As a fan, I'm focused on a 4th NBA championship. The air is getting thinner, season by season.
Am I the only one who remembers how well Rasho was playing right after we got Nazr and up to when he twisted his ankle? Maybe I'm wrong?
The Spurs have decided that they want Nazr and do not feel like paying $60 mil over the next 4 years to keep Radoslav around. He's much more likely to be an amnesty clause casualty than this forum originally anticipated. This also explains why the Spurs are being so miserly with Devin Brown.
Ditto. This has been my position all along.
Nazr's agent will have a huge bargaining position if the Spurs trade Rasho this summer. No matter whether Oberto starts and Nazr backs him up, and no matter Nazr's numbers are 9pts/5rbs next year as a backup, I am pretty sure he will still receive a good offer from some team.
Rasho, despite all his shortcomings, is a very nice insurance to have in case Nazr bolts next summer.
Most insightful thought!
Trading/Dumping Rasho, in and of its self, probably inflates Nazr's value by $10-20M at the bargaining table.
Nazr's value will be determined by what other teams offer. The Spurs always let their free agents go look to see what they can get. Based off of that, the Spurs make their offer.
Well, I guess I am figuring (whether it's the right thing to do or not) that they wouldn't be shopping Rasho without an extension all but finalized for Nazr.Huh? How would they have an idea?
If they didn't, that would be pretty stupid to do (unless they are planning on keeping Nazr next summer regardless). They would have his (Nazr's) Bird Rights and the right of first refusal.
*shrugs*
Last edited by Aggie Hoopsfan; 08-04-2005 at 09:32 PM.
Yes, BUT, in a world without Rasho, the Spurs would probably offer Nazr more money (say $15M more), unless Oberto blows up.
Then again, I'm not all that sold on the need for traditional position fillers.
Unathletic 7-footers are not ALL that desirable in the ever-evolving NBA. This includes Rasho AND Nazr.
What's left on Rasho's contract? 4 years at about 28 M? I'll take that over Nazr @ 6 years at (SAY) 55M.
Rasho's not perfect, but he might represent the best option available to the Spurs.
Rasho didn't step it up. Nazr is going to have to sep it up. So far neither has proven to be the answer. Last year the two best big men on the floor at cunch time were Duncan and a now 34 y.o., $2-3 million a year Horry. I wouldn't lay significant money on Nazr until he proved he was worth having on the floor at the end of the fourth.
The Spurs seem set on moving Rasho because otherwise they'll be losing dollar for dollar in lux tax distributions the amount of the raise that Nazr's next contract would provide him.
But yeah, it's a bit of a gamble to give up Radoslav now with Nazr not under contract past next season. Hopefully Oberto is that good so as to mitigate the potential loss of Nazr.
i'm with grjr, we were rolling along damn well before rasho and tim both got hurt. should be an interesting battle for the center spot this year. i appreciate what nazr brought after rash got hurt, but let's not blow our wads too early. he could very easily revert.
Nazr's camp would be wise to not sign an extension right now. Technically we only saw the partial Nazr. Slowed by a groin injury, minimal practices to learn the system, playing with unfamiliar teammates and not completely knowing his role.
If he accepts an extension now it's because the Spurs are willing to give him a contract based on his potential, not what he's already done in our system. Otherwise Nazr should come in healthy, go through the whole training camp, learn the system and his teammates and maximize his performance.
If he's successful, which you would imagine he'd be better after truly being "processed" by the system, then his value to the Spurs and in the open market rises.
True. I'm not a big fan of Rasho but imo keeping him is a better option. He matched up well against Shaq in '04 playoffs and is an underrated defender. May be his defense is decent because of Spurs' system. It's not like he doesn't fit into our system.
What if Nazr bolts? You'll end up having just oberto - not a good scenario.
I don't see spurs trading him away unless they improve in '5' position or get an expiring contract to re-sign Nazr or get a young,quality 3.
I think it's clear that the Spurs think Rasho is a bust. To say his contract is not bad is ridiculous, we are trying to unload him for NOTHING and we can't. What else could the answer be?
Signing Oberto, a guy with passion for the game, a hustler further proves it more. it's almost like the opposite of Rasho's staid personality, negative intangibles and shrinking from a fight.
IMO spurs will wait it out, hopefully there is no other time when Rasho's trade value is worse than now: he didn't play in the playoffs, reports are speculating about using the amnesty on him (never happen) and words gotten out the spurs want to dump him.
If it doesn't, happen next year is when palms will start getting sweaty and we'll have to part with assets like picks and beno...
Someone posted that the max available for NASR's contract extension was 5 years for about 42,000,000--which would be at the $8,000,000 figure you mention. If true, and we're not able to sign him to the extension, then He and his agent must feel like his market value is more in the 9-10,000,000 range (or higher) if he plays out his contract and has a good season.
Does anyone have a list of the top 14 contracts for centers in the league? It might give us some perspective on the market value of both our centers and the other centers around the league.
I seem to remember the Spurs registering their most impressive regular-season wins right after Rasho sprained his ankle the first time -- @Phoenix and the 31-point win @Sacramento.
The concern back then was not that the Spurs would hit a losing streak, but ratehr that Rasho's absence might increase the wear and tear on Tim. He did eventually go down, but I don't think "wear and tear" is the reason he landed on some Laker's ankle.
In retrospect, Rasho was so ineffectual that the Spurs could play TMass heavy minutes without a noticeable dropoff in production on either end. If anything, TMass improved the frontcourt play, though he was foul-prone.
I think I was one of the ones who got wrapped up in the "intangibles" and "positional defense" and "knowledge of the system" that Rasho allegedly was providing. That was imaginary. In retrospect, the Spurs could stick a 37-year-old scrub in his spot and see an improvement in the position.
So all this talk about how much Pop loves Rasho and how the Spurs were only starting Nazr in order not to mess up rotations was probably a smokescreen in order not to crush Rasho, who is a nice guy after all.
I think I outsmarted myself. Rasho is a 7-footer who gets 5 points and 3 rebounds for $7 million a year. Wipe all the cobwebs and smokescreens away and what you have is Jack Haley or Felton Spencer with a contract that only Isiah Thomas can love. In other words, he is a complete bust.
I have to bow before the likes of Stephen A. Smith on this one. This is one that Pop blew.
What the does "serviceable" mean anyway? Are you using it as in Patrick Ewing being serviceable to the girls in the backroom of the Gold Club in Atlanta?
Or are you saying that there is some possible way to improve Rasho's 'game'?
Seriously, I've never seen that word applied to a human being until the debate about whether to trade Rasho arose.
What is a serviceable player?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
