Right. I can't see the Spurs trading Tony though, if only because he's a franchise icon. All signs point to the Spurs salary dumping Danny Green as their next big move.
Atlanta took Splitter for basically nothing but he was not hurt at that point. We would likely have to give assets to trade Tony because he isn't able to pass a physical right now and won't be ready for the opener. It's just a salary dump.
It's ideal but not very plausible IMO.
Assuming Paul takes full max, which may not be the case if he wants to win and field a compe ive team.
And none of the players they're talking about are indispensable. I'd trade Danny in a heartbeat and let Patty/Simmons walk.
So what do they have to give up to get someone to do that?
$10M in cap savings this year is a much bigger deal than a $5M hit will be in the next couple of years. I could see them giving up assets to get out of $15.5M in cap space, but the stretch option sure does make that harder to swallow.
What sign much less "all signs?"
Not sure how reliable this is, but posting for what it's worth. Source is a Facebook page called San Antonio Spurs Talk.
Word is [Gasol's] going to take the 15 million he would make next year and spread it over the next three years. So about 5 mill per year
Isn't trading Danny much more likely? He's a much better value for teams looking to acquire talent.
Sure, but even having to give up a pick to trade TP (the team getting him won't care about his injury since they will likely have cap room they are just sitting on anyways) is better than stretching him.
We see these moves all the time where teams use their space to get picks by taking on bad deals/helping teams shed salary.
That late first is typically purchased for cash for about 3M. SA would essentially be selling it for 10M + more flexibility.
Then you are completely against the cap with no starter at the 2 or 5 and no big man depth. The room cap exception is garbage.
IOW a late first is not worth eating that.
That is just a wildly innefficent way to do this.
You can pay Pau 8M, let Lee (who could re-sign for min later), Manu (who could re-sign for min later), Mills & Dedmon go and trade TP and have all the money you need for CP3 + get to keep Simmons and Danny.
Gasol and Lee opting out. Reports of a strong mutual interest between Spurs and CP3. And the difficulty of dumping Parker unless we attach the 29th pick, not to mention, the uproar that would be caused by dumping a franchise PG. I could be wrong, of course. I just don't see the Spurs operating that way.
Dumping Green then to make a run at CP3 is the most logical move to make.
Trust me, teams do this types of deals. If SA wanted to move TP the 29th pick IMO would be more than enough. The team getting him would like have a salary floor they need to hit anyways so they are paying that money regardless and they are getting a first round pick.
What does stretching in regards to the player being able to play do? Can TP still play for the Spurs or any other team that season? How does that work?
The only benefit of the stretch provision is that no other team is required to say "yes" to make it happen. IMO, the 29th pick to a team like say BKY would be more than enough to dump TP if SA were so inclined.
BKY has 30M in cap space, will attract no major FA and has a salary floor to hit.
They could talk to him with the Clippers permission. If LAC feels pretty sure that Paul is going to exercise his ETO, they might let someone like the Spurs talk to him early with the understanding that they throw them a second rounder or something. Get something out of it, anyway.
Right now, my biggest argument against the Spurs getting CP3 is Jerry West. I could write a page about why, but you know. I guarantee you he's selling Paul on how great it's going to be there.
Double the number of years left on the deal and add 1. He has 1 year left so its stretched over 3 years. Just prorate it ie $5.16m per year.
This likely stems from Paul Garcia's cap video where he makes the assumptions (8M over 2 years or 5M over 3 = to Pau's money now) for the sake of exploring SA's cap situation.
They found Simmons in the D-League, Patty for the min, Lee for the vet min, Dedmon with the room exception.
This front office is nails at finding undervalued talent and the staff is masterful at getting the most out of them.
I'm not worried about the Spurs filling out their roster with guys who can be successful. Bigger roles for Murray, Forbes (if retained) and Bertans should be expected regardless. Add guys like Hanga, vets that play for min to get rings, etc.
I don't trust you. If you would like to give examples of teams doing it in the past but I am not just going to assume you are correct.
I agree - I'm saying Im pretty sure we would know if SA had permission to talk to CP before FA. It is so highly unlikely I'm not really willing to entertain it
Say we dump Green and renounce all our free agents. Then use the max to sign Chris Paul. Wouldn't we then be able to bring back Gasol for the mini-MLE and fill the hole at SG with ring-chasing veterans at minimum contracts?
You don't have to trust me. You are just foolish and stubborn not to. Especially when I gave you a very specific example of a team that would have incentive (and why they have incentive) to do it.
Look up previous trades if you want.
Oh, I think it's enough for Brooklyn. I think it's too steep for the Spurs, when they could stretch. Obviously you don't see it that way, but it makes me queasy giving up first round picks to dump an extra $5m.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote