Holting Pattern Extended

[timvp]

What are the positives for holding onto the money until next offseason? Is that even possible?

Next year it would be a lot easier to get Brand and there will be other intriguing players out there (KG).

I would also think that a plus would be that if a team tries to "steal" Manu, the Spurs would be able to protect themselves. It would suck if a team pulled a Denver/Arenas and the Spurs lost him.

But I'm not sure how much cap space they can save 'til next year. Jack would be on the books and possibly Claxton. In addition, no additional moves could be made this year beyond one-year contracts.

?

Help.

[Marcus Bryant]

The thing to remember is that the cap will likely increase at a lower rate than the payroll for existing contracts will. And yes, any players signed this summer would count against the cap as well.

I'd be inclined to oppose waiting if a great player is available. If not then adding someone decent for a reasonable contract to replace DRob in the lineup wouldn't be a bad idea. If the Spurs are that concerned about Ginobili then they could preserve enough flexibility to offer him a decent contract in 04.

[IcemanCometh]

it could easily blow up in our faces

[Marcus Bryant]

Sorry, I had to do this:




Suck it Ghost

[KoriEllis]

I don't get how this would work. We only have five players under contract right now. How would it benefit us to fill out the roster with scrubs?

If we did that, then the Spurs would suck ... how alluring would that be?

Pop and co will find a way to keep Manu. The Spurs need to spend their $15M on the best available players that fit into the Spurs system.

Holting pattern is over.

[MannyIsGod]

Yeah, a bunch of one year contracts could end up screwing us in the end.

Besides, I don't think Jax is looking for a one year deal.

I think worst case scenario (which isn't that bad at all) we bring in Jkidd.

[Ghost Writer]

Winning the le this year makes it okay to think about extending the Holting Pattern. Thing is, I would exhaust all possibilities of adding a superstar big man now first before packing it in for another year.

[Solid D]

Building a dynasty during a Holting Pattern, rocks!

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Well, here's what I would do, in my amateur opinion:

1. Offer Jermaine.
2. If no O'Neal, offer Brand a one year max deal
3. If he takes it, great. If Clips match, then go to step 4.
4. Call up Gary Payton and either Karl Malone or PJ Brown. Tell them we have 15 million, and are willing to split on them for one year deals. In the case of GP or Karl, come on down and get a ring. PJ, might have to think about a longer deal, but I'm not really too keen on that.
5. Get SJax re-signed, Speedy, Willis, and Kerr too.

Given the scenario of taking Kidd or biting the bullet for another year, I wait. That's assuming we've made a one year contract offer to Brand and the Clips matched, which I think would give us the inside track next year.

The Ginobili nightmare is all too real and imminent in my mind, and lots of folks seem to be brushing this issue to the side when discussing the outlook of this summer and next. The guy is the key to our future, as much so as I would venture Kidd is.

He's younger, hungrier, headier, better offensive game for what the Spurs want to do, he's got a whole country behind him and is rapidly becoming an icon for all Spanish speaking NBA fans, the list goes on and on. The kid will make the Spurs a lot of money, and help us win rings in the process.

Kidd has already shown that he can no longer keep up with smaller, quicker guards, and something that seems to be lost on everyone is this:

The Spurs showed how to beat a Jason Kidd run system in the playoffs this year. Teams will have watched the Finals over and over, and that NJ fast break that made him so appealing is going to get shut down. You can bank on it, unless NJ finds some great shooters and a new half court O.

That's the other thing that turns me off on Kidd, we've shown how to negate his transition game, and couple that with his lack of shooting skills and deteriorating defensive game, and the thought of having over 1/3 of our cap tied up on him for the next 6 years makes me wanna puke.

AHF

[Admiral]

Great post, Aggie. I totally agree with your proposed priority list.

Thankfully, it doesn't have Kidd on it. We can do better, guys.

[timvp]

Good post AHF.

I'm not going to totally dismiss Kidd, but I like your ideas.

I still think there is a way to get Brand out of LAC. They obviously aren't going to try to sign him and I think that Sterling is bluffing about matching any offer.

It would take major balls by both Brand and the Spurs, but I think they can get it done.

[Ghost Writer]

We couldn't get Tyrone Nesby from the Clips in a similar spot, yet we're supposed to get Elton Brand?

I don't think so.

[Archie]

It's one thing matching a $2.5 mil per offer sheet for 3 years and quite another matching a $10 mil per for 3 years one or whatever.

[timvp]

If the Spurs offer Brand the MAX, I don't think Sterling will match it.

Everyone always talks about how the Clippers have to reach the NBA salary minimum, but Sterling isn't going to want to be paying the high dollar amounts at the end of the contract. He's in the NBA for profit, not winning.

It would take a lot of balls by both sides, but I think Brand could be walking thru the door if they play their cards right.

[adidas11]

I disagree TimVP. I think Brand is a lock to stay in LA, and that Sterling has made his mind as to which players he wants to build the team around (Brand and Odom). I think Sterling WILL match any offer that Brand gets from other teams.

And great post AHF. Especially the points about Jason Kidd.

[Archie]

I believe the offer sheet has to be for 3 years, not 1 like AHF thinks.

No way GP takes a one year deal. Ditto for PJ Brown.

In addition AHF's knock on Kidd is that NJ won't do anything until they get a low post game. That is, of course, except for getting to the NBA Finals two seasons in a row. And of course I think the Spurs just might be able to find one of those low post games...

[Archie]

Right. Donald Sterling is going to pay someone the max for 3 seasons. Right.

[timvp]

Sterling has made his mind as to which players he wants to build the team around

Since when has Sterling cared about his team? He doesn't care about W's and L's. He cares about the G's.

Like always, he'll probably let his FA's walk and then stock his team with rookie contracts.

[Ghost Writer]

I think Sterling will match the offer for Brand as I did almost 3 years ago when we began discussing the summer 2003.

Why?

He has to pay one of those free agent stars the max in order to make minimum payroll.

Miller to Utah. Odom to wherever talented ballas with weed problems go. Brand re-signed for the max.

Next.

[Archie]

Right. He's had the minimum payroll problem you've just discovered before. He'll never give any player $30+ mil over 3 seasons. Never.

[timvp]

Offer him the 6-year $$BIGNUMBER and Sterling will faint.

He isn't going to want to be paying any player $12M+ in 2008.

[picnroll]

Sterling can always do a sign and trade for Brand and/or Odom for a guy/s with contracts expiring in a couple of years, fulfill his salary commitments, not tie himself to longterm contracts, and maybe even pick up a draft pick or two.

[Ghost Writer]

I'd like to see Sterling fufill those salary requirements without doling out a max contract to one of those star free agents.

Why would the Clips have done the deal to get Brand if they had no intention of re-signing him? Wouldn't it have been cheaper to keep the high schoolers?

[Archie]

Moving into new arena, generate buzz, still gets to pay rookie salaries.

[Ghost Writer]

I still think Sterling will pay Brand the max. I feel like even he doesn't have the b@lls to let 3-4 top quality free agents walk, especially since everyone knows what a terrible cheapskate owner he is.