yoff Buzz: Spurs aim to bring back Duncan, Leonard; pursue Aldridge Ken Berger / NBA

[TD 21]

I think this is where we fundamentally disagree on Green. The reason I would consider letting Green go is because he doesn't do anything to make up for the decline in production from Manu and Parker, he is just a better, more experienced version of the same player from 2012. As Manu retires and Parker ages, we need more and Green won't be able to give us that. Who he is right now is who he will always be, and that's not a bad player by any stretch, but is it enough over the next 4 years? If we're going to have Aldridge/Kawhi/Parker over the next 4-5 years, we can't just be thinking about what's best for us next season, we need a more long term plan.

Again I agree about Carroll, Beverley etc... that's why we need to identify those players who have the ability but haven't showcased it yet for whatever reason. Clearly it's easier said than done otherwise everyone would be doing it, but the Front Office have a great track record in this regard. Someone like Jamaal Franklin or Adonis Thomas could be that guy, honestly I have no idea, but I'm certain there's one out there.

No matter his decline, Parker is going to remain and provide at least some play making, Leonard is going to continue to take on more of a featured role and obviously Aldridge immediately would, if he's signed. Clearly, they'll need to replace Ginobili's role. It could be a combination of Anderson/Joseph, it could be them taking a flier on Shved, or in a year circling back to Turner (they could probably only afford him if Aldridge doesn't sign). Also keep in mind, they won't need as much play making as Ginobili has provided in recent years with more legitimate featured scorers.

Green is valuable irrespective of their declines. In fact, he just had his best season in spite of it.

It's much more difficult to find than you realize. Only in the past few months has Carroll went from a guy who could make threes to a legitimate three point shooter. Even now, he's not the feared shooter Green is. Franklin can't shoot threes. It's possible he could be the SG version of Carroll in two years, but this is a team trying to remain contenders in the interim; they can't be taking massive risks like that.

[Chinook]

I think this is where we fundamentally disagree on Green. The reason I would consider letting Green go is because he doesn't do anything to make up for the decline in production from Manu and Parker, he is just a better, more experienced version of the same player from 2012. As Manu retires and Parker ages, we need more and Green won't be able to give us that. Who he is right now is who he will always be, and that's not a bad player by any stretch, but is it enough over the next 4 years? If we're going to have Aldridge/Kawhi/Parker over the next 4-5 years, we can't just be thinking about what's best for us next season, we need a more long term plan.

Again I agree about Carroll, Beverley etc... that's why we need to identify those players who have the ability but haven't showcased it yet for whatever reason. Clearly it's easier said than done otherwise everyone would be doing it, but the Front Office have a great track record in this regard. Someone like Jamaal Franklin or Adonis Thomas could be that guy, honestly I have no idea, but I'm certain there's one out there.

If the Spurs were confident that they had the next Green, that would be one thing. It would be an easy decision to let him go. But Danny has been a solid player for four years, and there hasn't been another Green in the league in that whole time. The closest thing has been Carrol, who is older than Danny and just as expensive. Anderson and RHJ might be able to do that, but they could also join the list of forgettable wings that people thought were sure-fire three-and-D players. I agree with TD21 completely that the league's perception of those players has shifted over the last few years. The goal used to be to find guys you could park in the corner who weren't liabilities. But perhaps because of Green's 2013 Finals, people realized that three-and-D guys can become a real weapon for a team.

Can Danny do more to make up for the decline of the other guards while not playing outside of himself? Yes. The Spurs can run an offense that generators looks for him off screens. Korver is a more dynamic off-ball player than Danny, but not by so much that Green can't run some of those plays. Also, as Parker becomes less of a playmaker, Kawhi will become more of one. There's still more room for Green to grow as a compliment to Leonard's post game. And none of what you say about Green's relative value plays into the Spurs' plan to build their roster. If they let go of Green for Aldridge, they are left with no defender and shooter at the two. It wouldn't make Parker able to be a facilitator again. It wouldn't make Ginobili young again. It would just leave a hole on the team that took the Spurs years to fill last time.

[apalisoc_9]

3 and D players really are the blood modern NBA teams.

Danny Green is one of the best in the league if not the best.

Simple logix says it would be stupid to let go of him unless you're getting a superstar in return.

If I had to choose between Aldridge and Green..I'd take Green and wait for another year If I must IMO.

[Richie]

Parker is going to remain, Leonard is going to continue to take on more of a featured role and obviously Aldridge immediately would, if he's signed. Clearly, they'll need to replace Ginobili's role. It could be a combination of Anderson/Joseph, it could be them taking a flier on Shved, or in a year circling back to Turner (not a fan, but they were rumored interested at the '14 trade deadline and they could only afford him if they don't sign Aldridge), etc. Also keep in mind, they won't need as much play making as Ginobili has provided in recent years with more legitimate featured scorers.

Green is valuable irrespective of their declines. In fact, he just had his best season in spite of it.

It's much more difficult to find than you realize. Only in the past few months has Carroll went from a guy who could make threes to a legitimate three point shooter. Even now, he's not the feared shooter Green is. Franklin can't shoot threes. It's possible he could be the SG version of Carroll in two years, but this is a team trying to remain contenders in the interim; they can't be taking massive risks like that.

You're right, it's a risk. I'm not saying we should keep Diaw and Splitter over Green, I'm just saying it's something to think about. If I'm honest I'd probably rather keep Green and dump one of the other two as we know what we're getting with Green and with Diaws mentality and Splitters health there are question marks over the others. I actually though Diaw regressed a lot this year and if he doesn't regain his shooting he will be a liability, although he'd likely cost a 1st rounder to get rid of.

[Mugen]

If you let Danny go, then you basically are saying the Spurs aren't winning a le for the next 2-3 years. Without Danny, you no longer have the perimeter D to hang with OKC, Golden State or even the Clippers.

With Parker, you already have one of the worst defensive players in the league and is only going to get worse. You need as many two way players as possible to make up for his shortcomings. Letting Danny go is an admission by the FO that they no longer want to pay for a contending team, plain n simple.

[james evans]

If you let Danny go, then you basically are saying the Spurs aren't winning a le for the next 2-3 years. Without Danny, you no longer have the perimeter D to hang with OKC, Golden State or even the Clippers.

With Parker, you already have one of the worst defensive players in the league and is only going to get worse. You need as many two way players as possible to make up for his shortcomings. Letting Danny go is an admission by the FO that they no longer want to pay for a contending team, plain n simple.

parker's not one of the worst defensive players in teh league, he IS the worst.

[DPG21920]

Soooooooo, remember when many of us were pretty upset at Manu's last contract? I wonder how upset people are going to be if he decides to come back, takes some money and that makes the difference in landing Aldridge or landing Aldridge and letting go of Danny Green....

[Richie]

I wonder if the Hawks would accept Tiago + #26 for #15? They need more size and he's already shown to be a great fit in the Hawks/Spurs system. They could absorb him in to their cap space and still bring back everybody. With Antic/Millsap/Horford all able to hit 3's he'd be able to play with any of them. Would then give us room to sign a max guy and bring back Green.

[hooperflash]

[Mnky]

Once more. Never implied there's nothing special about them that led to their development. That's you trying to create an argument because you simply "disagree" with my premise that they're replaceable. To point out your lack of argument, I'll refer to your first sentence of the second paragraph, " no the spurs didn't make them good players ". (Even though green couldn't stay in the league) and then refer you to "that a player has developed." This implies they got better, and you said they're arguably the best at what they do in the league today which they obviously weren't when they came to the Spurs.

"To believe they"'ll instantly find someone who can play those roles again."

Development, which is what I've referenced as your rebuttal shows, is not instant and to further reference, green took a long journey to where he is now. So did splitter. If the spurs can take those guys with average to good ability and make them the "best in the league" at what they do, I'm confident in the front offices ability to do it again. Seems logical.

Guess I'm just not into the cliffdiving this forums known for.

Chinook

[tholdren]

If you let Danny go, then you basically are saying the Spurs aren't winning a le for the next 2-3 years. Without Danny, you no longer have the perimeter D to hang with OKC, Golden State or even the Clippers.

With Parker, you already have one of the worst defensive players in the league and is only going to get worse. You need as many two way players as possible to make up for his shortcomings. Letting Danny go is an admission by the FO that they no longer want to pay for a contending team, plain n simple.

what the are you talking about? Danny played like all but 1.4 games of the series, and his defense, was less than desirable until the final game. He sulked, pouted and acted like a . More importantly his defense wasnt even good enough to "hang" with LA, this year, so why would he get better, or grow a bigger pair next year? He wont. This is why you sign him and trade him at max value like SA should have done with Splitter, and possibly parker.

[Chinook]

Once more. Never implied there's nothing special about them that led to their development. That's you trying to create an argument because you simply "disagree" with my premise that they're replaceable. To point out your lack of argument, I'll refer to your first sentence of the second paragraph, " no the spurs didn't make them good players ". (Even though green couldn't stay in the league) and then refer you to "that a player has developed." This implies they got better, and you said they're arguably the best at what they do in the league today which they obviously weren't when they came to the Spurs.

Your point isn't being misunderstood, bro. You're saying that the Spurs made Green and Splitter into the players they are today, and that they can do it again with other players. But the argument is flawed in two ways. One, the fact that Green and Splitter are better players now than they were four years ago doesn't mean the Spurs "made them." Splitter for sure was a star-level player in Europe prior to coming over. Green shot 42 percent from three his senior year in college, and when he played in the d-league, he averaged 20/7/3 as Jeremy Lin's running mate for RGV. His big jump into relevance came after the lockout (when he clearly wasn't being developed by the Spurs), when he had a really good training camp and shined in mop-up duty. As I said before, if anything, Danny flashed a lot more than the Spurs eventually got from him, as he seemed much more capable of handling the ball and was better at finishing above the rim.

Both were good players before becoming Spurs. They got better, but so has every other member of the team. Leonard's probably grown the most, but it would be absurd to assert that he is replaceable because of that. You may say, "Of course not, but Leonard is a star while Green and Splitter are role-players." And that's where the idea that Green and Splitter are among the best in the league at what they do comes in. It simply isn't a good bet to think that the team will find someone else who can even eventually do what Danny and Tiago do. The Spurs tried for years to find players to fill those roles. Danny wasn't the first d-leaguer the team tried to "develop". There's a list of unimpressive names that have come through the roster as 10-days or min guys. The Spurs spent million of dollars and multiple first-rounders to try to find a big to put next to Tim before Tiago came over.

Splitter and Green are not replaceable because they are elite performers in roles that are hard to fill. That's really the alpha and omega of the topic. It's foolish for the Spurs to plan on replacing them for cheap, even if they are willing to wait a few years for the new guys to "develop". There's too much evidence to suggest that that Spurs are simply not particularly adept at finding talent at those positions to suggest that that's a plausible direction for them to go. For every Green and Splitter there's a dozen or more Jefferses, Temples, Gees and Mahinmi's.

[Malik Hairston]

I wonder if the Hawks would accept Tiago + #26 for #15? They need more size and he's already shown to be a great fit in the Hawks/Spurs system. They could absorb him in to their cap space and still bring back everybody. With Antic/Millsap/Horford all able to hit 3's he'd be able to play with any of them. Would then give us room to sign a max guy and bring back Green.

I actually thought about this during the Spurs-Hawks game where the Spurs blew them out in February or March IIRC..the Hawks feed(Wilkins and the other guy) was actually discussing having a player like Splitter and how his size would benefit the Hawks, during that game..obviously it doesn't mean anything that their announcers discussed it, but there's the Hawks-Spurs connection, of course..

Splitter is underappreciated by most Spurs fans, his value is evident, but I'd probably do, but only if it guarantees Aldridge..

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

Spurstalk have always been very wary of letting players go in order to replace them with someone else. Endless examples of arguing over how irreplaceable guys like Roger Mason and others were.

If the Spurs could facilitate getting an all star level player in Aldridge, they'd happily get rid of any role player, no matter how highly qualified they are and think about fits and needs later. They went all-in for Gasol last summer when it was clear he was a poor fit, but they won't turn down the chance to increase the talent. It's just difficult to pull off.

[Richie]

I actually thought about this during the Spurs-Hawks game where the Spurs blew them out in February or March IIRC..the Hawks feed(Wilkins and the other guy) was actually discussing having a player like Splitter and how his size would benefit the Hawks, during that game..obviously it doesn't mean anything that their announcers discussed it, but there's the Hawks-Spurs connection, of course..

Splitter is underappreciated by most Spurs fans, his value is evident, but I'd probably do, but only if it guarantees Aldridge..

Having watched them struggle against Mozgov and Thompson, I think he's exactly what they need. Move Horford back to his natural position at the 4 and bring Millsap off the bench, a Horford/Splitter duo would turn them in to a much, much better rebounding team.

It's obviously a risk but if we can get up to #15, I think it's one worth taking, I love Bobby Portis at that spot. Even if we strike out on Aldridge or Gasol it's worth it so we can keep the rest of the team in tact IMO.

[Sean Cagney]

Having watched them struggle against Mozgov and Thompson, I think he's exactly what they need. Move Horford back to his natural position at the 4 and bring Millsap off the bench, a Horford/Splitter duo would turn them in to a much, much better rebounding team.

It's obviously a risk but if we can get up to #15, I think it's one worth taking, I love Bobby Portis at that spot. Even if we strike out on Aldridge or Gasol it's worth it so we can keep the rest of the team in tact IMO.

Look I agree with you but this is not even a proposed trade of reality at this point so its pointless lol... I would do it though hypothetically. I wish every
good trade we dreamed of or thought of was legit.

[TD 21]

You're right, it's a risk. I'm not saying we should keep Diaw and Splitter over Green, I'm just saying it's something to think about. If I'm honest I'd probably rather keep Green and dump one of the other two as we know what we're getting with Green and with Diaws mentality and Splitters health there are question marks over the others. I actually though Diaw regressed a lot this year and if he doesn't regain his shooting he will be a liability, although he'd likely cost a 1st rounder to get rid of.

There's nothing to think about. You don't prioritize fourth big over second wing.

Diaw wouldn't cost a 1st to get rid of. They could easily move him, though it is tough to nail down what his value would be. For all the obvious reasons, they wouldn't get the return for him that they would for Splitter, but I'm confident they could get something decent.

[Mnky]

Chinook

Good stuff