2020 Free Agents

[SAGirl]

How's Grant not a perfect fit? 6'8" guy with a massive 7'3" wingspan. Can play either forward position and even some center on smaller lineups. Can defend on the perimeter as well as being a rim protector. An above average 3pt shooter and can also put the ball on the floor and attack. He's exactly the type of player we are desperately lacking.

Oh, and he's 26, same age as White. He fits perfectly with the window of our young core. I would much rather pay him what we owe Murray. An astronomical better fit next to White, Keldon and Walker than Murray will ever be.

I would like to know who do you consider better fits than him.

Don't worry, RC got us Luka Samanic

[DAF86]

When we're talking about perfect fits, not the best fit right now. Grant isn't the lead-dog, first-option PF the team needs to move into contending status, nor is he the ace defender the team needs to make up for playing White, Walker and Johnson. In your mind, Johnson moves to the two and the team finds another 6-8 guy to be the SF. That SF would pretty much have to be one of those two previously mentioned archetypes. So it's basically Grant replacing Walker and the team having the same needs. According to 82games.com (which to be fair is a weird site), Grant was basically a slightly negative man defender at either forward position, and that lines up with his other impact stats being meh to poor. RPM actually had him as a solidly bad player on both sides of the ball, even with his shooting.

I like him more than his bad stats suggest I should, but I'm not giving him a huge contract nor considering him as locking down the PF position for years. They'd still have to upgrade, with that pick doing all the work in determining the team's fate, and I'm not paying a vet that much money if he's just going to replace Walker and not fill his own hole.

I said Grant is A perfecto fit, not THE most perfecto fit. The Spurs need two forwards. One 3 and D type and the other, ideally, a playmaking first option to put us back on contender status. Grant fullfills one of those roles (with the added bonus that he can also play some center).

I understand people not wanting to pay him around 16 millions per year, but my question to them is: would you rather pay Murray that? My Grant for Murray trade contemplates the idea of lessening the mistake that was giving Murray that kind of money. Sure, Grant might be a bit overpaid at that price, but it's still better to transform that contract into a 7'3" wingspan having 40% 3pt shooter, than to a 6'5" fringe rotational player, tbh.

I read Mills for Grant. I would be down with that too.

[TD 21]

Grant isn't going anywhere. The moment they acquired him it was clear they'd let Millsap go in the off season, re-sign him and promote him to starting "PF".

I'd expect the Spurs free agency to be mostly, if not entirely internal. Even if some combination of the "mid 3" is traded, they'll probably plug those holes in said trade(s).

[DAF86]

Grant isn't going anywhere. The moment they acquired him it was clear they'd let Millsap go in the off season, re-sign him and promote him to starting "PF".

I'd expect the Spurs free agency to be mostly, if not entirely internal. Even if some combination of the "mid 3" is traded, they'll probably plug those holes in said trade(s).

To me it also makes more sense for the Nuggets to let Millsap go and keep Grant. The thing that intrigues me is that the Nuggets already offered Grant an extension and he declined it. Also, the Nuggets have Porter Jr. And Bol Bol on that position for the future. After seeing Grant reject them, and seeing what they have in store, they may think: "screw it, go away if you want".

[spurspl]

To me it also makes more sense for the Nuggets to let Millsap go and keep Grant. The thing that intrigues me is that the Nuggets already offered Grant an extension and he declined it. Also, the Nuggets have Porter Jr. And Bol Bol on that position for the future. After seeing Grant reject them, and seeing what they have in store, they may think: "screw it, go away if you want".

agree, theyre stuck woth forwards and centers. theres a chance that grant will
opt out. the other guy i think will opt out and can be usefull for the spurs is andre drummond

[TD 21]

To me it also makes more sense for the Nuggets to let Millsap go and keep Grant. The thing that intrigues me is that the Nuggets already offered Grant an extension and he declined it. Also, the Nuggets have Porter Jr. And Bol Bol on that position for the future. After seeing Grant reject them, and seeing what they have in store, they may think: "screw it, go away if you want".

He declined his player option because he knows he can exceed it. They gave up their 1st, have a shot to be legit contenders next season and beyond and need him because he's the perfect fit with Jokic.

Porter Jr. will be their starting "SF" going forward and Bol will be the backup C. The only possible rotational hole is backup "PF", but Bates-Diop might be able to fill it.

[RC_Drunkford]

Grant isn't going anywhere. The moment they acquired him it was clear they'd let Millsap go in the off season, re-sign him and promote him to starting "PF".

I'd expect the Spurs free agency to be mostly, if not entirely internal. Even if some combination of the "mid 3" is traded, they'll probably plug those holes in said trade(s).

That means we will sign Millsap. He's 35, that's right around the age that Pop likes his players at

[DAF86]

He declined his player option because he knows he can exceed it. They gave up their 1st, have a shot to be legit contenders next season and beyond and need him because he's the perfect fit with Jokic.

Porter Jr. will be their starting "SF" going forward and Bol will be the backup C. The only possible rotational hole is backup "PF", but Bates-Diop might be able to fill it.

Oh, I thought he had refused an actual contract extension, my bad. Yeah, they might want to keep him then. It would be the smart thing to do.

[spurspl]

That means we will sign Millsap. He's 35, that's right around the age that Pop likes his players at

sad but true

[alpha_HaZE]

Nop, that's just the average, tbh. If I post 16 times one day and none the other, you get 8 on average. That's how math works my friend.

Dang 16 times a day, wow. I am out, just replying to you I reached my quota for a month lol

Seriously, find a hobby, go for a walk, do something productive.

Regarding your comment on 5 teams in 8 years, and Bruce Bowen, I will tell you this there is only one Bruce Bowen meaning is the exception, not the rule. If he was so good why teams were so eager to get rid of him?

Again, no surprise when you argue without common sense you post that much crap.

[Chinook]

I said Grant is A perfecto fit, not THE most perfecto fit. The Spurs need two forwards. One 3 and D type and the other, ideally, a playmaking first option to put us back on contender status. Grant fullfills one of those roles (with the added bonus that he can also play some center).

He's not a defensive forward. He's not even a good defender statistically, not impact, not one-on-one, not by metric. He's not a perfect fit at all, because you have to get someone else to be the guy you want Grant to be. I don't want to make this a semantic thing, but he doesn't check any box other than the arbitrary one you made about size, so there's nothing perfect about his fit.

I understand people not wanting to pay him around 16 millions per year, but my question to them is: would you rather pay Murray that?

Yes. And remember that I'm not a Murray stan by any means. You could sell me on a Murray/Grant deal is SA saved a lot of money by doing it. But no, I don't want Grant locked into a big deal any more than Murray. With DJM, you know there's a chance he look good again and can be traded later. For Grant, even you suggested he's at his ceiling now, so you're talking about paying him for his ideal production without much chance to get more value out of him. That's bad for a team that isn't a contender.

I read Mills for Grant. I would be down with that too.

I'm not trading anything for Grant unless he's signed cheaply, and I wouldn't pay to make it happen. It's not clear that Grant would be a long-term starter on the Spurs any more than he's been anywhere else in the league. I get that you like him and why you like him. But objectively, he's a meh player with a good body. If you're going to trade Murray, trade him for value or even to just get out of his deal. Don't trade him just to have a peaking guy who won't make the Spurs a stable playoff team but signed to the same contract.

[DAF86]

Dang 16 times a day, wow. I am out, just replying to you I reached my quota for a month lol

16 posts, you get to that in a game thread while watching a game, tbh.

Seriously, find a hobby, go for a walk, do something productive.

I work, I'm currently studying for a postgraduate degree, I play football, tennis, have barbacues with friend three times per week and I go out to the club with my girl every weekend (well, when we could ). I'm pretty happy with the life I'm living, tbh.

Posting on Spurstalk doesn't take that much time son. It's like chating with friends on WhatsApp. You just take out your cellphone anywhere and post a comment.

Regarding your comment on 5 teams in 8 years, and Bruce Bowen, I will tell you this there is only one Bruce Bowen meaning is the exception, not the rule. If he was so good why teams were so eager to get rid of him?

Again, no surprise when you argue without common sense you post that much crap.

-Lou Williams: 7 teams on 7 years.
-Chauncey Billups: 6 teams on 8 years.
-Ben Wallace: 6 teams on 7 years.
-Rasheed Wallace: 4 teams on 5 years.
-Hedo Turkoglu: 3 teams in 3 years.
-Antwan Jamison: 3 teams in 3 years.

And I can keep going. Stop embarrassing yourself and just walk away, tbh.

[R. DeMurre]

There are a few gettable guys (not free agents, not stars) that'd I'd be really happy with: Bjelica, Satoransky, Rodions Kurucs... I don't see the Spurs doing much in free agency, though I'd love to see anything that involves moving DeRozan.

[DAF86]

He's not a defensive forward. He's not even a good defender statistically, not impact, not one-on-one, not by metric. He's not a perfect fit at all, because you have to get someone else to be the guy you want Grant to be. I don't want to make this a semantic thing, but he doesn't check any box other than the arbitrary one you made about size, so there's nothing perfect about his fit.



Yes. And remember that I'm not a Murray stan by any means. You could sell me on a Murray/Grant deal is SA saved a lot of money by doing it. But no, I don't want Grant locked into a big deal any more than Murray. With DJM, you know there's a chance he look good again and can be traded later. For Grant, even you suggested he's at his ceiling now, so you're talking about paying him for his ideal production without much chance to get more value out of him. That's bad for a team that isn't a contender.



I'm not trading anything for Grant unless he's signed cheaply, and I wouldn't pay to make it happen. It's not clear that Grant would be a long-term starter on the Spurs any more than he's been anywhere else in the league. I get that you like him and why you like him. But objectively, he's a meh player with a good body. If you're going to trade Murray, trade him for value or even to just get out of his deal. Don't trade him just to have a peaking guy who won't make the Spurs a stable playoff team but signed to the same contract.

Murray is the worst prospect out of a platoon of combo guards that we have in the roster and it's the one that it's gonna get paid the most. Having already commited the mistake, I proposed an idea to lessen it (not fix it). If we already have a bunch of 6'5", 6'6" guys with similar skillsets, why not turn our worst prospect out of that bunch (and the one that is going to get paid the most) into a 26 years old, 6'8" guy with a 7'3" wingspan that shoots 40% from 3? I agree with you that Grant's defensive potential is more that (potential) than a reality so far, but he has all the tools and with a defined starting role I think he would maximize his defensive potential. If he pans out, 16 millions per year isn't that steep a price to pay for for a 40% 3 pt shooter that can defend 1 through 5, tbh. Worst case scenario, he remains a slightly above average defender that can defend multiple positions while providing shooting, size and elite athleticism. That's definitely worth more than what Murray brings to the table.

[Truth4sale$]

Honestly, the Spurs dont need a free agent just look at the (D.Caroll debacle)
They do better with developing from within.(D.White)
The Spurs need to see what they have with this young core plus the draft pick. They wont win next year with a healthy Golden State and an improving Phoenix Sun team and charging Grizzles. If the draft is to be better next year as experts say it is better to let the team develop and add a high caliber pick and then fill in with free agency. By that time the "veterans of the Spurs way" will be White and Walker Iv, Keldon and possibly Murray and maybe even Patty Mills for transition

[Chinook]

Murray is the worst prospect out of a platoon of combo guards that we have in the roster and it's the one that it's gonna get paid the most. Having already commited the mistake, I proposed an idea to lessen it (not fix it). If we already have a bunch of 6'5", 6'6" guys with similar skillsets, why not turn our worst prospect out of that bunch (and the one that is going to get paid the most) into a 26 years old, 6'8" guy with a 7'3" wingspan that shoots 40% from 3?

None of the Spurs' players have redundant skill-sets. I know you're all about height, but that doesn't mean you can look at White, Walker, Murray and Johnson and think they're the same player.

But with Murray, the best strategy is to wait on him and see if either a trade (one for actual value) comes up or if he can figure it out. I don't love his contract, but he's not on a Wiggins-level deal. I doubt PATFO are even worried about it right now. If White gets paid and Lonnie starts looking like he'll need a big extension, then the salary will start to hamper the team. But even with Murray on the books, the Spurs should have enough cap space for almost two max slots in 2021. Basically, the contract isn't so bad that literally any contract is better. Grant will not be a good contract if he has Murray's deal. He won't be a good trade asset either.

I agree with you that Grant's defensive potential is more that (potential) than a reality so far, but he has all the tools and with a defined starting role I think he would maximize his defensive potential.

I think at this point Grant's potential is shaky at best. He's been a highly regarded player on multiple teams now. I don't think he's been lacking for opportunities. He's better than Lyles has been, but Lyles is cheaper, as in bency advantage and fills a three-and-D role better than Grant has so far in his career. I wouldn't give Lyles a big deal either, but at least they have the chance to see him in a second year before they commit any more salary to him.

If he pans out, 16 millions per year isn't that steep a price to pay for for a 40% 3 pt shooter that can defend 1 through 5, tbh. Worst case scenario, he remains a slightly above average defender that can defend multiple positions while providing shooting, size and elite athleticism. That's definitely worth more than what Murray brings to the table.

$16 Million isn't a ton to pay a key starter no. But it is big enough to where the guy has to be a starter for sixth man to justify his salary. We're not just talking about $16M/1 here. A sign-and-trade necessitates at least a three-year deal, so that's about $50 Million. Yes, only that first year has to be guaranteed, but Grant likely didn't opt out just to take a one-year deal with a new club. I'm thinking at least $40 Million of that has to be locked in. So if he doesn't pan out, he's an energy big with below-average defense who plays 20 minutes off the bench while making a ton of money. So like Ian Mahinmi was his last few years. That's a definite downside, and easily worse than any realistic downside Murray would have.

[DAF86]

None of the Spurs' players have redundant skill-sets. I know you're all about height, but that doesn't mean you can look at White, Walker, Murray and Johnson and think they're the same player.

But with Murray, the best strategy is to wait on him and see if either a trade (one for actual value) comes up or if he can figure it out. I don't love his contract, but he's not on a Wiggins-level deal. I doubt PATFO are even worried about it right now. If White gets paid and Lonnie starts looking like he'll need a big extension, then the salary will start to hamper the team. But even with Murray on the books, the Spurs should have enough cap space for almost two max slots in 2021. Basically, the contract isn't so bad that literally any contract is better. Grant will not be a good contract if he has Murray's deal. He won't be a good trade asset either.



I think at this point Grant's potential is shaky at best. He's been a highly regarded player on multiple teams now. I don't think he's been lacking for opportunities. He's better than Lyles has been, but Lyles is cheaper, as in bency advantage and fills a three-and-D role better than Grant has so far in his career. I wouldn't give Lyles a big deal either, but at least they have the chance to see him in a second year before they commit any more salary to him.



$16 Million isn't a ton to pay a key starter no. But it is big enough to where the guy has to be a starter for sixth man to justify his salary. We're not just talking about $16M/1 here. A sign-and-trade necessitates at least a three-year deal, so that's about $50 Million. Yes, only that first year has to be guaranteed, but Grant likely didn't opt out just to take a one-year deal with a new club. I'm thinking at least $40 Million of that has to be locked in. So if he doesn't pan out, he's an energy big with below-average defense who plays 20 minutes off the bench while making a ton of money. So like Ian Mahinmi was his last few years. That's a definite downside, and easily worse than any realistic downside Murray would have.

To me it's simple:

Grant > Murray

PF ---> a desperately needed position
Combo guard ----> an overloaded position in the Spurs roster

Considering these things, who I would rather have for the same price? Grant without a doubt.

Apparently you think Murray is the better player. We will just have to wait and see how they both perform next season. One thing is for sure, if Murray fails, it won't be because of lack of opportunities.

[Chinook]

To me it's simple:

Grant > Murray

PF ---> a desperately needed position
Combo guard ----> an overloaded position in the Spurs roster

Considering these things, who I would rather have for the same price? Grant without a doubt.

Apparently you think Murray is the better player. We will just have to wait and see how they both perform next season. One thing is for sure, if Murray fails, it won't be because of lack of opportunities.

It's not necessarily that Murray is better than Grant. They're about equal with Murray being more effective when he's on and Grant being more consistently who he is. It's about which contract I'd rather have, and that's easily Murray for me.

[BackHome]

Like I have said over and over just move Murray to SG or make him play Danny Green role which is focus on solid defense and increase 3 point shooting. If he accepts this role I think he can be a better offensive Green since he had worked in his mid range and his 3 ball hasn’t been bad. As far as defense he is not as good as one on one defender but he is a better rebounder and can play the lanes better.

Hopefully they will release Forbes and Belli I think Mills is going to be assistant coach so I see them keeping him hopefully for cheap. It would be good time to move Rudy as his value is at an all time high right now and I think he could net us a late mid first rounder. I would entertain trades for LMA and DEROZZ but only if we get decent value back and don’t have to take back any bad money contract players.

As someone mentioned earlier maybe teams are looking at trading first picks because of weak draft and money maybe we can offer Nikola and snag a late first rounder. I would love to try and get two first round picks and grab Center Daniel Orturu.

[alpha_HaZE]

16 posts, you get to that in a game thread while watching a game, tbh.



I work, I'm currently studying for a postgraduate degree, I play football, tennis, have barbacues with friend three times per week and I go out to the club with my girl every weekend (well, when we could ). I'm pretty happy with the life I'm living, tbh.

Posting on Spurstalk doesn't take that much time son. It's like chating with friends on WhatsApp. You just take out your cellphone anywhere and post a comment.



-Lou Williams: 7 teams on 7 years.
-Chauncey Billups: 6 teams on 8 years.
-Ben Wallace: 6 teams on 7 years.
-Rasheed Wallace: 4 teams on 5 years.
-Hedo Turkoglu: 3 teams in 3 years.
-Antwan Jamison: 3 teams in 3 years.

And I can keep going. Stop embarrassing yourself and just walk away, tbh.

You are an idiot, and I will stop arguing with you after this post, you just don't get it. The 5 teams in 8 years' comment were meant for early in their career not when they are washed up. For example, Hedo you mention, teams kept him because he was good 3 years with SAC, 5 with ORL. Rasheed spent 7 years with POT. Ben the same story, if a player is good teams are not eager to trade them.

The fact that you are having BBQs and playing sports in this pandemic, confirms the idiot that you are.

[DAF86]

You are an idiot, and I will stop arguing with you after this post, you just don't get it. The 5 teams in 8 years' comment were meant for early in their career not when they are washed up. For example, Hedo you mention, teams kept him because he was good 3 years with SAC, 5 with ORL. Rasheed spent 7 years with POT. Ben the same story, if a player is good teams are not eager to trade them.

All the players I mentioned changed teams before having the best moment of their carrers, not when they were washed up. Turkoglu, for example, was from before he went to Orlando and became an all-star.

The fact that you are having BBQs and playing sports in this pandemic, confirms the idiot that you are.

Dude, I thought you were going to understand that's my regular life, not this infested year. And I'm the idiot.

[gambit1990]

Turkoglu

man, talk about a throwback.

[gambit1990]

iirc, spurs traded for turk, doug christie (who didn't suit up), and ron mercer (who asked for a trade and got it).

i honestly have no idea who the spurs traded to get them.

[LakerHater]

iirc, spurs traded for turk, doug christie (who didn't suit up), and ron mercer (who asked for a trade and got it).

i honestly have no idea who the spurs traded to get them.

During the 2003 offseason, Türkoğlu was traded to the San Antonio Spurs along with Ron Mercer in a three-team trade. The trade also sent Brad Miller to the Kings and Scot Pollard and Danny Ferry to the Pacers. Türkoğlu played one season with the Spurs