Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 244
  1. #51
    Believe.
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Post Count
    19,014
    It’s not that Aldridge is bad he’s good however, when you have the youth in the wings and la being 35 it would be smart to package him
    He's empty stats. He can get you 10 rebs a game because he's on the low block during fts and he can score 20 by hitting 16 foot fadeaways. He gets you 0 rings being the man because he's soft.

  2. #52
    You Are Not Worthy ZeusWillJudge's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Post Count
    4,903
    So? If you are rebuilding, what does it matter having a bad contract for a year or two when you aren’t a free agency player anyways? Smart teams do that all the time and pays off big time; they have salary cap space they know they aren’t using and they absorb bad deals for draft picks.

    It’s legit great GM’ing to do that.

    How do you get to the point that you can afford to absorb contracts? You do it by casting off highly-paid players, and running with whatever you can cobble together. You may not call that a "tank" but it amounts to the same thing.

    In that situation, taking on a couple of really bad contracts has two benefits. You get to bank draft picks, in exchange for taking them on... AND you get your own good draft picks, because your team stays ty. And THAT is legit great GM'ing.

    I really don't understand why you're talking about that scenario, when the Spurs are in salary cap . Yeah, they're going to get out of it soon, but only if they don't it up by buying half-assed high-priced players (Think Pau Gasol - not the same thing as taking on contracts for future picks.) And even at that, it's two more seasons before they get out of cap jail. Then at least a couple more to do anything with the resulting cap space. Even longer if they decide to do what you're talking about. That's starting to look sort of long term to me.

  3. #53
    The Timeless One Leetonidas's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Post Count
    28,301
    Lol when spurs are 15 games under .500 in February maybe they'll finally realize this roster sucks. Probably not though

  4. #54
    R.C. Drunkford TimDunkem's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    13,924
    ^Speaking of first round picks: Matisse Thybulle is killing the Nuggets right now. Would he even be playing right now if the Spurs chose him over Puka?

  5. #55
    The Great Eight Ocotillo's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Post Count
    3,904
    Why you want a poor man's LaMarcus when LaMarcus isn't that good?
    Within my post, my suggestion was to be part of a three team trade with Love going elsewhere. I would not target Love for our team.

  6. #56
    Veteran JeffDuncan's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Post Count
    3,016
    In this scenario - SA is either missing the playoffs with DeRozan, or barely eeking in and getting bounced in the first round and then DeRozan walks for nothing.
    Ok, you're sure DDR won't exercise his player option. Why are you sure of that?

    So lets say you don’t trade and let DeRozan walk, ...
    There isn't any "let." DDR has a player option.

    But ok, the Spurs don't trade him, and....

    you’d be in the exact same position as if you made the deal with the bad contract in it, ...
    OK, if you trade DDR and his bad contract for another bad player, with a bad contract, that would be the same. And we're missing the playoffs for this?

    but no pick ...
    The Spurs will have a draft pick, actually two, whether they miss the playoffs or not. But you want a lottery pick?

    Basically, you want to miss the playoffs to get a lottery pick?

    And apparently you want to trade DDR in some way to get another 1st round pick. Is that what you have in mind?

    Do you want to trade DDR, and also miss the playoffs, to get two high 1st round picks? Is that the objective?

    ...(because whether or not a bad contract is on the books, you aren’t using the money on another player anyways and aren’t a playoff team anyways)
    Hm? If another contract is on the books, then yes, you are using money on that player.

    It is when a contract is not on the books that you are not using money on a player.

    So the cost would be instead of having DeRozan opt out and his money off the books completely, ...
    That is not a cost. A cost is when you do pay a player.

    If DDR does not exercise his option the cost associated with him disappears.

    ...you would have player “X” with his fully guaranteed deal next season and a first round pick.
    So, you'd have the Spurs trade DDR for Ferd Stumbleflop if the deal nets a first round pick.

    And you'd have the Spurs miss the playoffs for that.

    I wonder if you fully appreciate the value of cap space. At the time of the Morris fiasco, if the Spurs had had enough cap space they could have made their same offer to Morris without losing Bertans.

  7. #57
    Veteran r0drig0lac's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Post Count
    14,479
    ^Speaking of first round picks: Matisse Thybulle is killing the Nuggets right now. Would he even be playing right now if the Spurs chose him over Puka?
    no way

  8. #58
    Believe. Larry O's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Post Count
    600
    SIGH.... as much as us Spurs fans would like to see a trade or two to either make Improvements now or for the future with 1st round picks, I'm sorry to bust bubbles, but I just don't see PATFO pulling the trigger right now to pull a blockbuster trade or even a minor trade... well, perhaps at least for now, in my opinion. I think that the organization still wants to be compe ive this season, and will use this much needed 5 day break to work on their defense and chemistry, among other things. Hopefully for DDR, he can continue to work on his 3 point shooting, and perhaps LW4 can work more on his game, too. I'm sure that the coaching staff is hoping that this break to practice, will help this team to get their act together and transform what they practiced into game time situations, especially their defense. This team is about 3 wins away from the 8th spot in the WC. I'm sure that Pop and the coaching staff are hoping that this will be the turning point in this season to get this team going. BUT if this team continues to struggle through February, and have not cracked somewhere in the top eight spot, and with no hope in making the playoffs, then perhaps they may look into the possibility of making trades, in my opinion. In the game against the Kings, the Spurs played better defense and had some stops. DJ's minutes restrictions seem to be lifted now, so that's going to help the team's defense, etc, going forward. I also think that White can use the time off to heal up a bit as well. We'll see, starting this Thursday night and going forward, if this time off will be the catalyst to turn this team around or just blow it up down the road at some point.

  9. #59
    Veteran GAustex's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Post Count
    5,567
    Why cannot Spurs rookies play with freedom and elan like Matisse Thybulle?
    Did Pop really pass on Matisse Thybulle?

  10. #60
    The Dude minds DPG21920's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Post Count
    76,187
    How do you get to the point that you can afford to absorb contracts? You do it by casting off highly-paid players, and running with whatever you can cobble together. You may not call that a "tank" but it amounts to the same thing.

    In that situation, taking on a couple of really bad contracts has two benefits. You get to bank draft picks, in exchange for taking them on... AND you get your own good draft picks, because your team stays ty. And THAT is legit great GM'ing.

    I really don't understand why you're talking about that scenario, when the Spurs are in salary cap . Yeah, they're going to get out of it soon, but only if they don't it up by buying half-assed high-priced players (Think Pau Gasol - not the same thing as taking on contracts for future picks.) And even at that, it's two more seasons before they get out of cap jail. Then at least a couple more to do anything with the resulting cap space. Even longer if they decide to do what you're talking about. That's starting to look sort of long term to me.
    Because trading DeRozan functional expiring and LMA functional expiring can net you 2 1sts in addition to your own for deals that are only 1 year guaranteed past theirs.

    So you don’t need cap space. You need the ability and willingness to absorb deals longer than you send out. Trading Derozan and Lma does that. Then in a year, you also have cap space.

    So I am not saying take on any contract; and with LMA/DeRozan value I dont think that would even be a consideration. Taking on deals that are fully guaranteed next year though? Should be on the table if it nets you what you want (picks)
    Last edited by DPG21920; 12-10-2019 at 11:09 PM.

  11. #61
    The Dude minds DPG21920's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Post Count
    76,187
    They don't have to decide to build around DeRozan or blow it up. They can (and are planning to) play DeRozan to stay compe ive while growing their young guys. In that vein, yes, it's important that they are close to the seventh seed. It's completely unimportant that they are close to 13th. They aren't trying to avoid the worst record in the league -- they are trying to get a top-eight record in the conference.

    They can afford to lose DeRozan for nothing. People keep acting like you sign or trade for players to keep indefinitely. But that's not the case. They made that trade specifically to remain a playoff team for two years. If they were so desperate to keep him, they'd've caved on an extension. Guys can walk. It's okay. The most valuable piece to Spurs' future is likely going to be the team's natural picks after bottoming out. Seriously acting like the team NEEDS to get say, Aaron Gordon rather than nothing is just bizarre. As I've said, I'm not against getting value for anyone on the roster. But worse role-players who are "better fits" with the inconsistent and underperforming guards on the team. Just get whatever draft or prospect capital you can and more one. If the guards pick it up, sign the role-playing forwards next year (there will be a number on the market). If they continue to disappoint, you get a higher pick and a clearer roster to rebuild.

    Would I rather them make no moves? No. I think they should do something. They should consolidate the expirings on the roster into a legit rotation player. But I also think they are a better team than last season and will see the most improvement just by playing better. This is one of Pop's worst coaching jobs due in large part to missing the summer. If they can get on the same page, they'll make the playoffs. That's important to the team, especially more so than a middling role-player or even getting a high pick a year or so earlier than they're scheduled to.
    Seen you say this before and yeah don’t agree. Great franchises do view it the optimal way. They see players as assets and don’t let them go for nothing just because they fulfilled their contract. That’s sub optimal poor GM’img.

    Also, everything I said is assuming they don’t change course and get a lot better (60% win percentage or more). I don’t think they turn it around and therefore they would not be paying DeRozan to be compe ive since they aren’t compe ive. I don’t care how close you are to the playoffs if you have a losing record or even .500 you aren’t compe ive. Getting to the 8th seed isnt the goal; fielding a compe ive team is. Lucking into the playoffs, IMO, with a bad team is not the goal. Two very different things and evaluations.

    Making the PO with a roster you don’t believe in and won’t keep together (hence no extension) isn’t worth not getting an asset. I agree they don’t want to extend him which is the center of my point; if you don’t believe in him enough to win now and make moves for that but also don’t believe in him enough for the future with an extension THAT is a the tell-tale sign to move him. While SA getting lottery picks on their own for bottoming out is the most valuable that is absolutely no excuse in this scenario to not collect other bullets.

    I’ve already clarified some assumptions with my thinking; that 1) they have no interest in trading youth/picks to win now, 2) they have no interest in extending DeRozan no matter what and most importantly 3) they aren’t going to start winning a lot more games than they have.

    Under that context, it would be bad GM’ing to not get something and I’m ok giving it another 6 weeks to find out too and see if something drastic changes in their play.
    Last edited by DPG21920; 12-10-2019 at 11:16 PM.

  12. #62
    Veteran tbdog's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Post Count
    4,650
    Next free agency is the weakest in years, and DD is probably the best player in that free agency market. I am sure he will get enough $ out East if he tests free agency. And the Hawks are my bet for a big contract as he would fit well Trey. I am sure the Spurs don't want to lose DD for zilch, because we would not get under the cap enough to sign a difference maker. Besides, Gay, LMA, Mills are expire the season after. It would make too much sense for the Spurs to convince DD to opt in. But I can't see DD doing that.

  13. #63
    Veteran tbdog's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Post Count
    4,650
    Because trading DeRozan functional expiring and LMA functional expiring can net you 2 1sts in addition to your own for deals that are only 1 year guaranteed past theirs.

    So you don’t need cap space. You need the ability and willingness to absorb deals longer than you send out. Trading Derozan and Lma does that. Then in a year, you also have cap space.

    So I am not saying take on any contract; and with LMA/DeRozan value I dont think that would even be a consideration. Taking on deals that are fully guaranteed next year though? Should be on the table if it nets you what you want (picks)
    LMA money is guaranteed next season.

  14. #64
    The Dude minds DPG21920's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Post Count
    76,187
    LMA money is guaranteed next season.
    That is not confirmed..

  15. #65
    Machacarredes Chinook's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Post Count
    30,959
    Great franchises do view it my way.
    They clearly don't. Houston thinks of it that way, maybe Boston. I can't think of another good team that considers players assets. Don't confuse being wiling to move on from guys like GS did with Iggy and Livingston with them considering them assets. If anything, they overpaid them because they didn't care about their value. Honestly, I think you need to take a step back. You've been acting abnormal all year, and saying something like this just highlights it. Even if PATFO is now a bad front office, they certainly haven't always been, and they've never behaved in the way you think "Great Franchises" should.

    Making the PO with a roster you don’t believe in and won’t keep together (hence no extension) isn’t worth not getting an asset.
    How can you say that when they... did whatever to LMA's deal and gave Gay all that money? They may not think it's their new five-year core, but they clearly don't seem keen to move on. YOU don't believe in it, but they seem to at least believe they've assembled talent. It's really not a good argument to point to the DeRozan extension as some gate-keeper to their belief. You don't have to think a guy is a max player to want him to stay (hence Murray), and there's no nearing timetable on a deal.

    Regardless, making the playoffs is worth it to a lot of teams. Clubs like Minny and Orlando struggle to do so despite numerous GMs and high picks. You can value what you want, but you should be able to see that other folks might value other things. There's nothing objectively right about your point of view on when to tank.

  16. #66
    The Dude minds DPG21920's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Post Count
    76,187
    Ok, you're sure DDR won't exercise his player option. Why are you sure of that?
    I am absolutely making a guess, but the fact he can get a long term deal for sure while it being a weak FA class leads me to believe he is gone. Plus, if SA isn’t willing to extend him now, I can see him wanting out.



    There isn't any "let." DDR has a player option.
    Obviously “let” in the sense of not trading him now and putting it in his hands whether or not you have another opportunity to trade him.


    But ok, the Spurs don't trade him, and....



    OK, if you trade DDR and his bad contract for another bad player, with a bad contract, that would be the same. And we're missing the playoffs for this?
    You are missing the playoffs anyways as things stand...if the trade deadline approaches and nothing changes in that regard? Why would you think it would change later with no changes to the team?



    [quote[The Spurs will have a draft pick, actually two, whether they miss the playoffs or not. But you want a lottery pick?

    Basically, you want to miss the playoffs to get a lottery pick?[/quote]

    Again, SA is already missing the playoffs as things stand. If in 6 weeks things still look the same? You would not only get your own lottery pick but additional assets (picks) whether you agree on their value or not. It’s either or: Miss the PO and no extra chances in the draft or miss the PO and extra chances in the draft.

    And apparently you want to trade DDR in some way to get another 1st round pick. Is that what you have in mind?
    Yes. Any deal for DDR would include a first round pick coming to SA.

    Do you want to trade DDR, and also miss the playoffs, to get two high 1st round picks? Is that the objective?
    The objective is to maximize ROI. If you are missing the PO anyways or even if you can make the playoffs but have a losing record or even .500, I’d rather have multiple picks instead of that. Yes.





    [quote]Hm? If another contract is on the books, then yes, you are using money on that player.

    It is when a contract is not on the books that you are not using money on a player.[/quot]

    No, money has to be spent any ways. Its not like a team if they wanted could only field league min players and just pocket the profit. You know you are going to not sign anyone in free agency so in that regard you aren’t using any real money that you need.



    That is not a cost. A cost is when you do pay a player.

    If DDR does not exercise his option the cost associated with him disappears.



    So, you'd have the Spurs trade DDR for Ferd Stumbleflop if the deal nets a first round pick.

    And you'd have the Spurs miss the playoffs for that.

    I wonder if you fully appreciate the value of cap space. At the time of the Morris fiasco, if the Spurs had had enough cap space they could have made their same offer to Morris without losing Bertans.
    Cap space matters mostly when you are a winning team and trying to sign free agents - SA would not be in this position in this scenario so no, I don’t value cap space next year.

    Beyond that, I value it for either signing players to be a playoff team again or taking on more bad contracts to get more picks.

  17. #67
    The Dude minds DPG21920's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Post Count
    76,187
    They clearly don't. Houston thinks of it that way, maybe Boston. I can't think of another good team that considers players assets. Don't confuse being wiling to move on from guys like GS did with Iggy and Livingston with them considering them assets. If anything, they overpaid them because they didn't care about their value. Honestly, I think you need to take a step back. You've been acting abnormal all year, and saying something like this just highlights it. Even if PATFO is now a bad front office, they certainly haven't always been, and they've never behaved in the way you think "Great Franchises" should.
    I never said SA was always a bad franchise. But franchises is their position? Yeah, they do act rationally and like the players are assets. Especially when the players aren’t players you aren’t willing to over pay to keep. So how the Spurs behaved when they had TD/TP/Manu and were contenders is totally different than how they need to operate today.

    They’ve been a bad FO for the past few years and that is all that matters going forward now. Not the past where they had franchise anchors that they no longer possess.



    How can you say that when they... did whatever to LMA's deal and gave Gay all that money? They may not think it's their new five-year core, but they clearly don't seem keen to move on. YOU don't believe in it, but they seem to at least believe they've assembled talent. It's really not a good argument to point to the DeRozan extension as some gate-keeper to their belief. You don't have to think a guy is a max player to want him to stay (hence Murray), and there's no nearing timetable on a deal.

    Regardless, making the playoffs is worth it to a lot of teams. Clubs like Minny and Orlando struggle to do so despite numerous GMs and high picks. You can value what you want, but you should be able to see that other folks might value other things. There's nothing objectively right about your point of view on when to tank.
    I think SA *thought they were doing that, but that goes back to their evaluation of talent and their performance if they thought this team was legit enough to compete. I would say the fact that they didn’t get aggressive in the draft or free agency and offer up any youth or future picks is a great indicator they didn’t believe coupled with the fact they seem to have no interest in extending DeRozan.

    They did that stuff (Gay, LMA) to hedge and hope for the best; that is not a sign of their realistic plan nor is it something that should cement them in the face of what appears to be overwhelming evidence (bounced in first round, losing record, nothing added in off season and one of the worst most unsustainable defenses in the nba).

    There is also a massive difference in Murray (still young with untapped potential) and DeRozan (career worth of data with no inkling of an extension on the horizon). You know this.

    Making the playoffs is valuable to a lot of teams; SA is one of them. However, that is an arbitrary measuring stick considering you might make the playoffs at .500 which is an unacceptable record for now and future plans for a team trying to win.

    I never said tank now or else! I said if things continue down this path where they are a sub 500 team (or even 500) that regardless of making the playoffs or not you have to move on.

    I don’t think that is subjective; if SA truly morphs the next 6 weeks and plays legit winning ball? Sure. Forget this. I don’t think they will.

  18. #68
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Post Count
    1,971
    ^Speaking of first round picks: Matisse Thybulle is killing the Nuggets right now. Would he even be playing right now if the Spurs chose him over Puka?
    No, pop knows best, and he would be in Austin for the next 3 years.

  19. #69
    The Dude minds DPG21920's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Post Count
    76,187
    They clearly don't. Houston thinks of it that way, maybe Boston. I can't think of another good team that considers players assets. Don't confuse being wiling to move on from guys like GS did with Iggy and Livingston with them considering them assets. If anything, they overpaid them because they didn't care about their value. Honestly, I think you need to take a step back. You've been acting abnormal all year, and saying something like this just highlights it. Even if PATFO is now a bad front office, they certainly haven't always been, and they've never behaved in the way you think "Great Franchises" should.



    How can you say that when they... did whatever to LMA's deal and gave Gay all that money? They may not think it's their new five-year core, but they clearly don't seem keen to move on. YOU don't believe in it, but they seem to at least believe they've assembled talent. It's really not a good argument to point to the DeRozan extension as some gate-keeper to their belief. You don't have to think a guy is a max player to want him to stay (hence Murray), and there's no nearing timetable on a deal.

    Regardless, making the playoffs is worth it to a lot of teams. Clubs like Minny and Orlando struggle to do so despite numerous GMs and high picks. You can value what you want, but you should be able to see that other folks might value other things. There's nothing objectively right about your point of view on when to tank.
    Also, context matters. I thought most would understand without me needing to explain that I meant if SA continued on this path that started the season.

    If they were playing well, on pace for 50 wins (or close) I would be totally fine. Heck, I was the one that coined “win building” on here and marveled at how SA did that.

    So when I say “great franchises do that” I’m not meaning HOU. Im meaning that when the time is right and you aren’t a contender with a legit core and you don’t have a Duncan, that yeah, you need to treat players like assets especially when the alternative is getting into the playoffs with 42 wins...

  20. #70
    Believe. MultiTroll's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Post Count
    22,664
    A rebuild that could have gone right is Boston. They could have parted with Flat Earther and their juicy picks for Kawhi and I think the Spurs would have gone for it. Instead Ainge held on too long and got zippo for Irving. For that matter got nothing for Horford. Yet here they are at 17-5.

    I think some of you are downplaying what good young players we could get with picks. All while possibly even playing better. See above Celtics before you keep spouting about how we are destined to be a losing team without Defrozen and Stat Padder LMA.

  21. #71
    Believe. Down Under's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Post Count
    1,069
    Is the team actually worse if they traded Aldridge for filler & a 1st? If Poeltl starts, you have a rim runner to collapse defenses & allows the young talent & DD more touches & space. Additionally, you're now starting a Centre who can anchor a defense.

  22. #72
    Veteran tbdog's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Post Count
    4,650
    A rebuild that could have gone right is Boston. They could have parted with Flat Earther and their juicy picks for Kawhi and I think the Spurs would have gone for it. Instead Ainge held on too long and got zippo for Irving. For that matter got nothing for Horford. Yet here they are at 17-5.

    I think some of you are downplaying what good young players we could get with picks. All while possibly even playing better. See above Celtics before you keep spouting about how we are destined to be a losing team without Defrozen and Stat Padder LMA.
    Celtics benefited by securing one of the most lopsided lengthy trades in the NBA. They got like 4 lottery picks, Brown, Tatum, Smart, and used one for two years of Irving. Obviously losijg Hayward game one hurt their chances. But Ainge not getting Kawai was his short fall. They would be champs right now.

  23. #73
    Veteran JeffDuncan's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Post Count
    3,016
    I am absolutely making a guess, but the fact he can get a long term deal for sure while it being a weak FA class leads me to believe he is gone. Plus, if SA isn’t willing to extend him now, I can see him wanting out.
    What is the magic, in your mind, of a "long term deal?" Why must it be "long term" in particular?

    Then, do you really think DDR would walk away from $27.7 million for no other reason than the Spurs declining to give him more? Do you truly believe that? Nobody would do that.

    You are missing the playoffs anyways as things stand...if the trade deadline approaches and nothing changes in that regard? Why would you think it would change later with no changes to the team?
    Are you advocating making the playoffs, or not?

    Or, if you're asking my position, it is certainly better to make the playoffs than not, because of the additional income, to both businesses and the community. Businesses, and communities, rely on income for their prosperity. The Spurs do not exist in isolation.

    Maybe the Spurs, as they stand, will make the playoffs. Maybe not.

    Who do you see in this year's draft class who'd be worth missing the playoffs to draft?

    No, money has to be spent any ways. Its not like a team if they wanted could only field league min players and just pocket the profit. ...
    Under the CBA, the team minimum salary is 90% of the salary cap. The salary cap this season is $109 million. So, the minimum team salary, this season, is $98 million (rounded.)

    The cap is, as you may know, a so-called soft cap. It is typically exceeded, because of this-or-that. The only team actually under the cap, now, is Atlanta, with a current payroll of $108 million. All the other teams are over.

    The Spurs payroll this season is currently $124 million (rounded.) The Spurs are $15 million over the salary cap, and $26 million over the minimum team payroll.

    And for that we're getting Forbes, Beli, Mills, DDR, etc., and a losing record, so far.

    But anyway, it is certainly possible to carry some cap space. $11 million could be carried directly, this season, without even going into cap exceptions.

    You know you are going to not sign anyone in free agency ...
    The Spurs sign free agents every year, but only cheap ones, because the team wastes its money by overpaying inferior players.

    Again, the Spurs are currently $26 million above the minimum team payroll, and for what?

    The Raptors, the Fakers, Dallas, and the Celtics all have a lower team payroll than the Spurs.

    Cap space matters mostly when you are a winning team and trying to sign free agents - SA would not be in this position in this scenario so no, I don’t value cap space next year.
    Cap space always matters.

    But about next year, the NBA has projected a salary cap of $116 million next season, and the Spurs currently have player salary commitments for next season of $117 million. The legal minimum team payroll will be $104 mil.

    Mucus Morris orally agreed to accept a two-year $20 million deal with the Spurs, presumably $10 million a year. The Spurs had to give up Bertans to scrounge the money, because of their fiscal irresponsibility, in my opinion. Speaking of free agents.

    Beyond that, I value it for either signing players to be a playoff team again or taking on more bad contracts to get more picks.
    Why are you insistent on a bad contract? What's wrong with a good one?

  24. #74
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Post Count
    7,839
    To someone’s earlier point that Spurs should essential ride it out.

    I agree that it would be “off brand” for the Spurs to now start viewing their players as assets in the way that a HOU and BOS does, but it is also GM malpractice NOT to consider ways to improve the roster including but not limited to moving LMA or DDR. We need look no further than the Bertans debacle— spurs were clearly moving a beloved player to improve the roster. And, for where the team is now more so than in the past that involves looking at the long ball.

    I would say really the big two competing interests at play are — putting butts in seats/playoff gate today v making moves now to ensure you have a product that will put butts in seats in the near future.
    Last edited by CGD; 12-11-2019 at 09:55 AM.

  25. #75
    Believe.
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Post Count
    656
    Is it possible that White/Lonnie/Murray pick up some of the slack and the defense improves more than the offense suffers? I don’t know..it’s a question of what the stats say vs reality and application of those stats.
    I like white but there is indication that he can constantly score, same with Walker. You need someone that score inside and a 3 and D player and a stretch 4 ain't going to be able to do it.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •