As we all wait impatiently to see if the Spurs will make a move before the trade deadline, there is the ever lingering duality of sports to consider: what makes sense on the court, and what makes sense for the pocketbook. While we all know the Spurs have chosen to go "all-in" this year and likely next year, paying a significant amount of luxury tax for the first time, this doesn't mean that they're willing to pay huge amounts for 2012, 2013, or 2014.
While the Spurs always have the option to trade away one of their current/future core players (at this point likely considered TD, TP, Manu, RJ, McDyess, Hill, and Blair, with the fans focusing on possibly trading RJ), most of the trade talk involves the Spurs trading the other 7 players on the team (Mason, Finley, Bogans, Ratliff, Bonner, Mahinmi, and Hairston). These players all have varying value basketball-wise, but the thing they have in common is that they are expiring contracts. Expiring contracts are valuable to teams looking to save money, and usually they are traded for players with higher basketball value, but longer contracts.
However, will the Spurs management really be willing to take on players with longer contracts? Here's how the Spurs team is set up as it stands now:
2009-2010
Current team
$79,599,278
2010-2011
Duncan
Jefferson
Parker
McDyess
Blair
Hill
(Hairston)
Total: $56,088,011
2011-2012
Duncan
McDyess (only partially guaranteed)
Hill
Blair
Total: $28,911,082
2012-2013
Blair
Total: $1,054,000
As you can see, the Spurs have very little salary committed after 2010-11. And what else happens after 2010-11? The current Collective Bargaining Agreement ends. No one knows what the new CBA will look like, but one thing is almost certain: player salaries will go down. With talk of a more stringent salary cap being in place, and no one knowing how existing contracts will be considered under this new deal, it's very possible that big money contracts from 2011 to 2015 will be significant albatrosses in compiling any team, much less a rebuilding team.
With the fact that the Spurs are currently set up perfectly to enter a time of increased uncertainty and lower player salaries, fans definitely have to wonder a couple things: will the Spurs give up that prized position to take on bigger contracts this trade deadline? And if they do, will it be worth it for the long-term health of the franchise?
Nice thoughts and I have used this logic when saying I don't believe the Spurs make a move, or at least any relevant move. When you look at the basketball side (Pop's comments, belief in the big 3...) plus the financial side, a trade does not add up.
And you know what trade screwed that up.
I don't see them making a long-term investment either via trade or bringing in a contract that goes past 2011. Unless it was for a no brainer like Bosh.( If we traded for him and extended him).
As a side note that I couldn't really fit into the original post, this same financial thinking was probably another reason why the Spurs viewed RJ as the perfect acquisition option. While it hasn't worked out as planned on the basketball court yet, his contract fit perfectly into how they were already set up for the future. There are a number of other contracts that we've discussed on this board (Stephen Jackson, Kaman, Nocioni, etc.) that don't work as well.
Rather than financial, I look at it more from a Duncan standpoint. Duncan has a limited number of years left and there is not much chance another Duncan is on the horizon.
I think the Spurs go for a last hurrah; they can be conservative once Duncan retires.
Manu's recent comments about exploring all options this summer is also a motivating factor for the Spurs to trade him now. If not, they run the risk of losing him for nothing over the summer.
Personally, I'd be very surprised if Manu isn't moved prior to the deadline. If he isn't moved, I'd guess the Spurs are very confident in re-signing him in the summer.
But who's going to want him? It would have to be a le contender, because they would also risk him walking in the summer. However, the Spurs would want more back for Ginobili than any contender would be willing to give.
Right now, Manu's value is probably in his expiring contract rather than his skill. Teams like Washington are trying to cut costs and don't mind if he walks in the summer. The Lakers probably would like Manu but they can only return expirings to the Spurs and I don't think the Spurs want to help the Lakers.
During the summer, I think a team like Cleveland could really use a guy like Manu. They have the money to do it. Mavs would probably love to get him. Rockets would have the money as well and the need for somebody who can actually shoot.
There's also the impact LeBron would make on a currenlty non-contending team. If LeBron doesn't re-sign in Cleveland, his destination most likely would also have the money and the "contending" status for a guy like Manu.
I think there will be a lot of bidders for Manu. Everyone wants clutch.
At this point, anyone paying Manu large sums of money will be paying on reputation alone. Sadly, this version of Manu is not anything like the 05-07 version. He is still valuable on any team but doesn't have the same explosiveness that made him a dynamic and clutch.
Is there a trophy for contracts being set up perfectly?
I guess we win that prize, yay.
just another summer where we'll get our hopes up and end up with a Rodney Turiaf and a retiring Grant Hill.
All the numbers have to be weighed against one factor namely Tim Duncan's remaining years w/c coincides with any possibility of winning a 5th trophy.
hey, ronny turiaf wouldn't be a bad addition
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
