So I don't normally make a thread to post my thoughts if they can fit into an existing topic. I think, though, that this is a good time for an exception.
A lot of posters seem to think that Dieng's signing disproved the concern that came from the Chriss trade. This is not true. Most of the "cliff-jumping" started before the news broke that Chriss' insurance payments meant he had to stay on the roster. The points in that thread up to that point about selling salary space and opportunity cost strictly for the owners' profit remain. This is actually pretty obvious when you look at the Dieng signing.
According to
timvp, the Spurs had about $1.8 Million of cap space after the trade and Aldridge buyout. Let's say for argument sake that Dieng's contract is counting for $1 Million flat. That means the team has something like $700k for the final roster spot that Reynolds is currently taking up with his 10-day. If all the Spurs do is sign 10-days and eventually a guy for the rest of the season, this is enough money. However, if the Spurs want to do a "Hinkie special" and use the MLE to sign a rookie to a long-term deal by giving that player more guaranteed money in this season so they can get multiple non-guaranteed years, they are going to have a harder time doing that. Remember that the Spurs sold $1.8 Million in salary space, not just the remain balance of his contract. If anything, it's almost worse that they sold it for almost a million bucks less than they originally were slated to get because of this waiving.
The Chriss trade was bad. Nothing, from LMA's buyout to Reynold's 10-day to landing Dieng changed that. Fans need to accept that rather than trying to find excuses for the front office. The trade at its best was the owners meddling in basketball operations for a quick buck. At its worst, it's the owners meddling for a quick buck but then relenting after the damage was done and getting back an even smaller drop in the bucket. Kudos to the Spurs for landing Dieng, and kudos to them for getting LMA to still give back three times as much as he had to (wanted the buyout to be official before mentioning that, lest we find out the amount was even smaller). Without the Chriss trade, this would've been a coup. Rather, if the Chriss trade had included draft compensation like the needed to, it would've been a mega coup.
But as constructed, the Chriss trade looks even worse than it did 24 hours ago. The Spurs damaged their compe ive position for no reason now that they aren't getting the insurance payments (though are we sure they aren't? The CBA FAQ doesn't seem to say that a player can't be waived). It's lucky that they didn't need that extra salary space to win the Dieng sweepstakes -- it certainly could've been a difference-maker to be able to give him three or four times what other teams could. We don't know if it will affect their ability to get an optimal deal with Reynolds or Renfro or anyone else -- including perhaps a young player who gets waived unexpectedly ala Jimmer Freddette back in the day. The Spurs should still be able to get their roster filled. This didn't kill them this year, but it definitely restricted the leeway they have to build the best team they can.
So PATFO and Ownership: Sure, my opinion for them is more hopeful now than it was before. They have enough sway with ownership to be able to talk them out of a bit of cash. That's seriously important when trying to evaluate the state of the Spurs as an organization. Their inability to negotiate any basketball assets is disheartening, but if they're still going to be able to convince ownership that winning games matters, we don't yet have a reason to believe that this upcoming summer will be terrible. However, that this trade ever happened means folks should still be concerned between the relationship between PATFO and this new ownership coalition. This type of trade should've never come up for a team seriously looking to win games. The liquidation efficiency for this move, even had Chriss' full insurance payout occurred, was always bad. There's no reason to believe that this was a complete one-off impulse by ownership. Liquidating assets for higher dividends is what capital firms do. They aren't interested in long-term growth. Even if the Holts believe in the Spurs as a culture and service to their fans, they will face increasing pressure from their cash-rich minority partners to make money. Without an obvious contender to market, the fastest way to increase profit is by reducing expenses. The Chriss trade is the same canary it was on Wednesday, even if the mine hasn't exploded yet.