Reply With Quote
In reference to the trade rumors the spurs have been in lately, what do you think are the chances Spurs make a move before or on deadline day?
If Cuban would do this trade it would be great for us either one of these guys would make a dramatic impact for our team. We need another player who can create and who can score inside or out. Blair/SJ/Neal.......just do it.............
In reference to the trade rumors the spurs have been in lately, what do you think are the chances Spurs make a move before or on deadline day?
Marc Stein @ESPNSteinLine Weekend Dime addendum: Milwaukee now in mix for Magic's JJ Re . Bucks, I'm told, assessing their ability to retain sharpshooter long term
Marc Stein @ESPNSteinLine
To meet asking price for Re -- expiring(s) and a future first-round pick -- Bucks naturally wanna know they can retain free agent-to-be
Marc Stein @ESPNSteinLine
Re did tell @RealGM this week that ORL has "become a home" & that he'd like to stay if Magic end up passing on all these calls coming in
If I were the Magic, I'd want a player like Ilyasova in return. There's not reason to take a low draft pick for him. They might even be able to get rid of a bad contract like Davis.
Maybe something like this:
http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=b87k8wl
And then the Magic can buy out Dalembert.
old news but:
Adrian Wojnarowski @WojYahooNBA Y! Sources: Phoenix Suns pursuing a deal for New York Knicks guard Iman Shumpert. http://tinyurl.com/b8tusbm
What was the last trade that happened with the Spurs where rumors of the trade leaked out a week or so in advance? Isn't it the perception that if news of a potential trade leaks, the FO walks away?
That said, it would be great to get an upgrade at backup PF/C for the price of any combination of SJ/Bonner/Blair/Mills/CoJo and maybe Neal.
If there was truth to a possible Splitter for Jefferson deal, I see a third team being involved because Splitter just makes no sense for the Jazz because of Kanter and Favors. Hypothetically, I believe Bucks make a great third party and this proposed (long shot obv) deal makes sense to me.
Bucks get: Splitter -- Bucks get back a true big man, which they lack, to team up with Sanders for the next 3-4 years; I assume they'd lock him up obviously. They also get Jackson's expiring (Bucks don't mind getting him back for 1/2 a year because of simple economics; they are trading for the expiring, not the player.)
Jazz get: Monta Ellis -- Jazz have perhaps the worst offensive back court in the league-- Monta Ellis for 2 years helps that and opens up playing time for Kanter/ Favors. They also receive Blair (provides frontcourt depth on the bench; he'd be their 4th big) and Mills (Watson and Tinsley are arguable the 2 worst point guards in the entire league that get playing time. They have been worse than terrible, tbh. Mills gives them an upgrade at the position.
Spurs get: Al Jefferson -- Spurs get the best player of the deal; A viable option Spurs could go to offensively on the block in half court sets deep in the playoffs. Could be an underrated weapon due to Duncan and Manu's age --that age and mileage effects their efficiency/execution to a degree late in games because Pop questionably gives them the same minutes they received 8 years ago (talking playoffs, not regular season). Also, I could definitely see Spurs liking the idea of having Jefferson in the fold for the next 4 years (instead of Splitter) to team with Parker whenever Tim decides to retire.
Spurs also get L.R Mbah a Moute -- a versatile defensive player that can guard 4 positions and be a reliable/affordable and versatile SF to back up Leonard for the next 2 years. He doesn't have a great 3 point shot as of now but I could see Chip playing a role in his development in that area. He'd be an important piece because of his size/defensive ability-- which helps the Spurs match up better against the NBA's crowned favorites that is the Thunder and the Heat of Miami.
Notes: Spurs could choose to go with Dunleavy (who is having a great year for being injured in recent years) instead of Moute. Why? Going with Dunleavy would still keep Spurs under the tax and would provide the Spurs with the better offensive player that can shoot the damn ball. (What would Spurs desire at the back up 3 spot? Defense or offense? And do they want to avoid tax at any cost?). The Mbah a Moute option would put the Spurs over the tax by 556k; not sure if they'd be willing to pay the tax for him.
All in all, Spurs have a tough decision. Hypothetically with this deal, Spurs are risking their chemistry defensively and offensively right now with this proposed (long shot) trade, but in the long run I believe this trade would IMO give the Spurs a higher ceiling in the playoffs this year and the next 3-4 years, tbh. Tough decision, but since I'm a person that is in love with the long run of things, I'd have to pull the trigger.
Last edited by MaNu4Tres; 02-10-2013 at 02:52 AM.
The big question mark the footspeed of big Al, he'd have to guard PFs to play with Tim and eventually even close out on shooters behind the 3 point line once in a while. It's a hard one but inside scoring and rebounding is the key vs OKC and MIA so I'd do it. He's a much better scorer than Tiago and a better rebounder, Tiago is faster on both ends but it's on D that it really makes a difference.
Al Jefferson is not a backup tbh.
I would trade SJ, Blair, Neal but that's it.
The Pistons and Wolves seem to have to many servicable Point Guards on their rosters
Pistons: Calderon, Stuckey, Bynum, Knight
Wolves: Barea, Ridnour, Rubio, Shved
Be nice to grab one of the cheaper guys (Bynum or Knight from Detroit and all the Wolves PG's are cheap though Rubio isnt going anywhere) to back Tony up. Don't see why they need 4 descent PG's on their crappy teams. Don't really know what we could offer them or what their needs are but either of those guys could help our backup PG problem, we go to when Tony goes to the bench these days.
Spurs backup PG's: DeColo, Joseph, Mills, Neal
Last edited by Russo21; 02-11-2013 at 10:12 AM.
Looks like Barbosa (knee) will be out for the year, so getting to the point where Cs will need some guard help.
Between Blair and Neal, it seems like a deal would be there between the Spurs and Celtics. Alas, they have nothing the Spurs should want. Maybe Blair/Neal for filler plus Boston's first? I'd only do that if the pick were not completely lottery protected. Anything greater than top-10 protection seems like too big of a risk. If the Celtics don't make the playoffs this season, they're probably done for a few seasons, and that could delay the pick reward for a long time (if not just negating it altogether).
I'd give them both for nothing, the pick would be a bonus but I'm not sure I see them giving up a first round pick for such a short term fix at this point where the future of the franchise is so uncertain.
I'd ask for Melo, could be nice to have two Brazilians now that we have two Aussies.
I like the Portland idea with Papanikolau as well.
Just pull the trigger on something at this point.
This is scary. I may actually agree with Paranoid Pop on a trade proposal...
Yeah, looking at our roster, I can see 3 major weak points: third big ( I like Boris, but is he a championship caliber 3ed big?), SF depth and quality (Kawhi is good, but we only have 1 other real SF - Jackson, and he's gotten quite inconsistent PER 8.3, WP48 -0.013, 3P% 25.9%), and back-up PG.
There are players in the NBA who can do both the SF and 3ed big job - for example, Kevin Durant. What is surprising though is that there are players who we might just be able to get for SJax's expiring, to do that job. I think you have hit on one of them.
Marion is playing well this season (PER 17.2, WP48 .259, 3P% 32.6%). He's getting paid $8,646,364 (and has a ETO for $9,316,796 next year). It's hard to say if he will opt-out or not - he'll be 35 next season. As a old guy and a possible rental, you might be able to get him for Sjax's expiring and a first.
Kirilenko is another one, also playing well (PER 18.2, WP48 .269, 3P% 29.4%). He's getting paid $9,779,349 (and has a player option for $10,219,420 next year). he's very likely to opt-out IMO - he'll be 32 next season and looking for a last big contract. As a rental, you might be able to get him for Sjax's expiring and a first. I personally would go as far as 2013 and 2015 firsts - I have always loved AK's game and believe he wouldn't be a difficult re-sign.
Finally, there is one other player who might be available, and could do the job - Michael Dunleavy (PER 15.3, WP48 .164, 3P% 43,8%). He's cheap - $3,750,000 and expiring (and will be 33 next year). You can't trade SJax for him. You could trade Bonner (and I would in a heartbeat...); but what's in it for Milwaukee? I wouldn't go more than a 2013 first for a rental of Dunleavy, and Milwaukee, btb, are in a playoff spot currently, unlike Dallas (hollinger predicts only a 15.9% chance of making the playoffs) and Minnesota (hollinger predicts only a 1.3% chance of making the playoffs).
That's actually a really interesting trade proposal. The Spurs would have to pay a lot for him, but I think a deal could be struck without having to move a rotation player.
Something like Jack, Neal, a first, and the rights to Hanga and/or Bertans. Maybe they'd take Richards' rights instead.
Either way, I commend you on that idea. It's refreshing to be able to agree on a trade idea.
http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine/?tradeId=bz5er6a
1 type of trade that I'd look at. As constructed above, I don't think that Jazz would do it, but the idea would be to move whatever the Celtics would give up(2nd round picks later) or could put in any of the options Bruno brought up in the Blair trade thread, as well as whatever the Magic would give up to save long term money with the Afflalo contract, and some kind of asset from us(Most likely our 2013 or 2014 pick)
Or this, with Miami and the same idea of them giving an asset for Blair
http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine/?tradeId=bfga43w
Thoughts?
Mike Dunleavy | F
Born: Sep 15, 1980
Height: 6-9 / 2.06
Weight: 230 lbs. / 104.3 kg.
Prior to NBA / Country: Duke / USA
Years Pro: 10
info
------------------------------------------------
I think that the Spurs should seriously consider Mike Dunleavy Jr. as both a trade target, as a potential cheap rental for this playoff run, and as a FA target for the summer of 2013.
Positives are that he can play 2 to 4, although typically a 3. He can shoot very well and is a good passer. As he has a strong BBall IQ, he should pick up the offense/defense scheme very quickly. I think he could have a Brent Barry level fit in the team system...
Negatives, start with he's not a major athlete, although better than some (Bonner). He's a better individual defender than Bonner, but that's not saying all that much...
He's on $3.75 million/year with the Bucks, and I think he'll get more on the open Market this summer. He's expiring and the Bucks are not going anywhere - he's available as a cheap rental in a trade. As a FA, I'm pretty sure he would be interested in a solid shot at the post-season, given how his career has bounced around crappy teams ... GSW/Post Artest Indy/Milwaukee.
As a trade proposal:
Out: Bonner, $1 Million (paid this summer, for Bonner's buyout), rights to Adam Hanga
In: Mike Dunleavy
Why for MIL: Changes an expiring into an expiring and an asset (Hanga's rights)
Why for SAS: Dunleavy is a better player than Bonner, and he might not be the total choke Bonner is (he's only played 72 minutes in the playoffs in his career, so it's hard to tell) - he's as good a shooter, a better passer, he's got far more versatility (playing 2-4, mostly 3), He can play 3 effectively, which is probably our shallowest position (Kawhi, Sjax and that it...). Eyeballs say he is as good defensively. He might even be a better rebounder - Dunleavy gets 8.8% career TR%, while Bonner get 10.8%. But Bonner plays PF, and gets better opportunities from the position, relative to Dunleavy playing mostly SF; 82Games.com shows that Dunleavy's R/48 goes up when he plays PF...
Sorry yucky trade no way do I trade for him and give up rights to Hanga.....I love the other trade with Dallas kinda makes sense for both teams at this point..
Would be ridiculous to give up Jack for Marion...a lateral move at best and you start all over with incorporating someone new. Plus Jack can already guard 4s. And Jack has more balls than anyone else come playoff time. Jack is not going to be traded unless he starts demanding an extension, which he already promised Pop not to do. No other team in the league wants him/can work with him, except maybe Boston. I think Jack realizes that by now and knows how much he loves to win at this point in his career. No losing team will want to pick him up knowing he doesn't tolerate losing and will be a headache. So, everyone kindly stop salivating over his expiring contract. It means Jack trade-wise.
No offense, but I pretty much disagree with everything in that post.
First, Marion is a better defender than Jack. He's also a player who has a history of stepping up on both ends in the playoffs. He and Stevenson were the ones who shut Lebron down in the finals a couple of years ago. The concern over disrupting chemistry is a real one, but that's about the only reason not to do this trade,
I don't think the Spurs care if Jack asks for an extension or not. If the Spurs trade him, it will be because they find good value for his contract. Pop loves Jack, but he loved Hill, too.
As far as teams taking Jack back, it's not nearly as big of a deal as you are trying to make it seem. You're right that Jack can be a headcase in a bad situation. But the receiving team could just buy him out or at worst waive him. I think Jack would accept a buyout, because as you said, he wants to play for a contender. If anything, that helps his trade value.
In short, Jack is VERY tradeable. Pop may not want to move him for sentimental reasons, and the Spurs may not find a good enough deal if they are willing to move him. But that's a completely different argument than one based on the idea that Jack's too toxic to trade.
I'd rather not give up the rights to Hanga as he's one of our few prospects who are actually progressing
If the Spurs trade Jax and the other team buys him out, can you see that hurting the Spurs if Jax signs with, say, the Thunder? Would that factor into a trade decision?
It's possible. But there's not much room for Jack on most contenders. He may back up Durant in OKC, but I don't see him getting more than 5-10 minutes. He's not getting much time in Miami with James, Battier and maybe Miller (plus, the Heat don't have the roster space). He may be attractive to the Clippers if Butler or Hill get hurt. The only possible threat that could really use him would be the Grizzlies. Jack and Prince could be a really solid rotation at the three.
As far as it affecting the Spurs' willingness to trade Jack, I think it's very possible. If the Spurs think Jack could come back and be effective on another team, then they may not want to risk sending him away, AND they may still have hope of him returning to a good form for them this season. I think those two idea are linked: If the Spurs think what they'll get back for Jack is better than whatever Jack can provide to them this season, then it would probably override their fear of Jack killing them in the playoffs.
So if Marion > Jack, then why does it matter if they face Jack in the playoffs?
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)
Posting Permissions
