PDA

View Full Version : Salary Cap Management - Pacers vs. Spurs



JayRedd
08-12-2007, 02:39 PM
Ours:

http://www.hoopshype.com/salaries/indiana.htm

Theirs:

http://www.hoopshype.com/salaries/san_antonio.htm


Me:

:cry:


I can't recall these guys overpaying for marginal talent once in the past decade. Must be nice.

BTW, this was all prompted by a Yahoo! Sports article I just saw, which contains this, a Spreewell mention, and more on H-Town trying to move Rafer Alston. Maybe they'd take Murphy for him.


At first blush, last month's deal between the Spurs and Rockets looked like a windfall for Houston and a head-scratcher for the defending champs. The Spurs got point guard Vassilis Spanoulis, who is likely heading back to Greece after a miserable rookie year, and gave up young forward/center Jackie Butler and coveted Argentine power forward Luis Scola. Not seeing any benefit for the Spurs here? Patience.

San Antonio was not certain Scola ever would play for them because as long as power forward Tim Duncan is in town, Scola's floor time would be limited. Butler, too, was unlikely to play much. The Spurs were able to lop off Butler's $2 million from their payroll, further setting up the team for next summer, when it can extend Duncan's contract and possibly have enough left over to make an eight-figure offer to the likes of power forward Elton Brand, guard Rip Hamilton, point guard Jason Kidd, power forward Jermaine O'Neal, forward Shawn Marion or guard Gilbert Arenas. ...


http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=ifpennycanplaywhycantspr&prov=tsn&type=lgns

Trader Joe
08-12-2007, 02:43 PM
Spurs are gonna have that kind of capspace next summer? Thats incredible.

Mourning
08-12-2007, 03:20 PM
:jawdrop:

LoneGranger33
08-12-2007, 03:26 PM
If I were them, I'd target Lamar Odom and Chris Wilcox.

Hicks
08-12-2007, 03:49 PM
Very nice, and credit to their GM for picking up the guys that they do. However, it's got to be easier to do that when you're asking guys to come in "cheap" to play with Tim Duncan on a multi-title winning team.

GrangerRanger
08-12-2007, 06:03 PM
If Gilbert went there...:champagne :champions

avoidingtheclowns
08-12-2007, 07:10 PM
i doubt they'd be interested in gilbert... they'll probably be looking for a SF to replace bowen or PF/C to play along side duncan (unless they think oberto is a longterm answer). jermaine or brand would definitely fit into that category... and if JO stays fairly healthy, he'd probably be a better solution given his defensive ability and brand is going to be off a full year with surgery. they could go after shawn marion too, but shawn also said before that he'd have to think about which he'd rather do "win a championship on a team like the suns or make the first round on a team he was leading" (paraphrased) so shawn would probably be more interested in who could spot him the most cash rather than who he could get a ring with.

DisplacedKnick
08-12-2007, 07:36 PM
Ours:

http://www.hoopshype.com/salaries/indiana.htm

Theirs:

http://www.hoopshype.com/salaries/san_antonio.htm


Me:

:cry:


I can't recall these guys overpaying for marginal talent once in the past decade. Must be nice.


Malik Rose - decent player but overpaid long-term for a reserve.

However they had a solution - Isiah Thomas. We even traded what was close to an ending contract for him. I believe he STILL has 2 more years to go on his deal.

JayRedd
08-12-2007, 09:56 PM
Malik Rose - decent player but overpaid long-term for a reserve.

However they had a solution - Isiah Thomas. We even traded what was close to an ending contract for him. I believe he STILL has 2 more years to go on his deal.

My favorite thing about that Nazr Mohammed trade was what the Chuckster had to say about it: "Isiah Thomas is building a championship team...too bad it's in San Antonio."

Pacersfan46
08-12-2007, 11:51 PM
Maybe I'm missing something. 48 mil doesn't leave a lot for cap room, this year that's 5 million.

I mean, yes it's better than us by far, but I'm confused on the awe everyone seems to be in about their cap number. Even if you take out the team option for a player (2 mil) and add a couple mil for yearly cap raise ... you're talking maybe 10 mil?

Someone inform me if my math is screwy or I'm missing something ... but this isn't an insane amount in free agency, and won't net you a star.

-- Steve --

Hicks
08-13-2007, 12:04 AM
I believe the '08 cap is 55 and change, so it's actually about 7mm, for what it's worth. More importantly, I think they're in awe of the fact that the world champions are under the cap with the roster that won them the rings.

wintermute
08-13-2007, 02:32 AM
not only that, but take a look at some of the guys listed as being still on the roster -

spanoulis is likely to be bought out this year. he doesn't want to play in the nba at all, so i expect his buyout to be minimal. that's $2m off. plus beno udrih is up for a qualifying offer. if the spurs cut him, that's another $2m+ off the payroll. so that's potentially $11m in cap space - clearly they can get a difference maker with that. maybe not jermaine though unless his value has really dropped as the laker visitors like to say.

FlavaDave
08-13-2007, 09:35 AM
Come on, guys.

a) its easier to convince players to join the team on the cheap because of Duncan,

b) you don't have to have a second star to win a title with Duncan.

Now, the Spurs get a ton of credit for recognizing these facts and making shrewd moves to keep the cap healthy. They truly are doing an awesome job.

But comparing the Spurs' situation to the Pacers is crazy. If you replace Duncan with JO, I don't think the Spurs make the Finals, even in the East. If you replace JO with Duncan pre-Golden State trade, I can really see the Pacers winning a title. Yes, Duncan is that good.

d_c
08-13-2007, 06:41 PM
Very nice, and credit to their GM for picking up the guys that they do. However, it's got to be easier to do that when you're asking guys to come in "cheap" to play with Tim Duncan on a multi-title winning team.

The only guy on that team who really ran to the Spurs to play for cheap is Finley. And that's because he's still getting big checks from Mark Cuban. He wouldn't be playing for that cheap if not for that (not even for the Spurs and a shot at a title which he eventually got).

Besides that, everyone seems reasonably paid to me. Ginobili and Parker are making what players of their caliber ought to be making. They are well worth what they are getting paid, but it's not like they're getting role player money.

Guys like Horry, Barry, Elson and Jacque Vaughn are all role players getting paid role player salary, and none of them are under long term deals. None of those guys make more than the MLE, and none of them really should.

The Spurs are where they are first and foremost because of Duncan. But they found Ginobilli and Parker w/o high lottery picks (a lot of teams could have had those guys). They've managed their cap well.

The mistake contracts they did make (Nesterovic and Rose), they were able to unload.

Look what they did with Nazr Mohammed. That guy played well for them for a year. Then instead of overpaying to keep him long term, they let him walk and replaced with Elson/Oberto. They knew someone like Mohammed was replaceable, and he was.

SamBear
08-13-2007, 07:41 PM
My favorite thing about that Nazr Mohammed trade was what the Chuckster had to say about it: "Isiah Thomas is building a championship team...too bad it's in San Antonio."

:laugh: :D

DisplacedKnick
08-13-2007, 09:49 PM
My favorite thing about that Nazr Mohammed trade was what the Chuckster had to say about it: "Isiah Thomas is building a championship team...too bad it's in San Antonio."

Isiah Thomas has been responsible for more league success than any GM in History - only problem is, none of that success has been in NY.

We've already mentioned SA but that's nothing.

We'll start small - when we traded an expiring contract to Toronto for Jalen Rose. Guess what team won the Atlantic last year?

But just wait! How about those Magic - desperate to unload Stevie Franchise and, well, just how DID they come up with the money to sign Rashard Lewis straight up?

Is that all, you say? Not remotely! Let's take a gander at Houston - stuck with Mo Taylor and who was kind enough to take him off their hands?

And let's look at Chicago. At first glance losing Eddy Curry for a couple of picks might seem like a bad thing - but not when both picks are in the lottery.

And then we have the coup de gras, his crowning achievement - Isiah Thomas orchestrating the massive trade that allowed Phoenix to transform itself from a 29-game winning, maxed out capwise team into the perennial championship contender we have today.

And who says no team can win with Isiah Thomas as a GM?

SycamoreKen
08-13-2007, 10:58 PM
Not to mention the Spurs draft a guy this year that some had said would have been a lottery pick if not for his contract obligations in Splitter. Thye wait a year and get a talented piece next year.

Plus, in a deal published today, they are signing Udoka from Portland to play behind Bowen.

http://www.oregonlive.com/blazers/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/sports/1186975533299330.xml&coll=7

JayRedd
08-13-2007, 11:04 PM
Not to mention the Spurs draft a guy this year that some had said would have been a lottery pick if not for his contract obligations in Splitter. Thye wait a year and get a talented piece next year.

Plus, in a deal published today, they are signing Udoka from Portland to play behind Bowen.

http://www.oregonlive.com/blazers/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/sports/1186975533299330.xml&coll=7

Can't believe no one has signed Udoka yet. Kid can play. This front office should just relocate to the Oval Office so we can all get some benefits here.

rexnom
08-13-2007, 11:34 PM
Not to mention the Spurs draft a guy this year that some had said would have been a lottery pick if not for his contract obligations in Splitter. Thye wait a year and get a talented piece next year.

Plus, in a deal published today, they are signing Udoka from Portland to play behind Bowen.

http://www.oregonlive.com/blazers/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/sports/1186975533299330.xml&coll=7

"[Udoka] started 75 games at small forward, averaging 8.4 points, 3.7 rebounds and 1.5 assists per game, and shot 46.1 percent from the field, including 40.6 percent from three-point range."

What?! I've heard good things about him but he's actually been really, really solid. Why did we spend money on Stephen Graham and we didn't go after this guy?

Thanks to Mal's new roster section, I can see that Graham makes slightly less than Udoka will but last year, on the same Portland team, Graham posted a sweet 3.2ppg, 1.5 rebs, and 0.4 asts while shooting 42.5% from the field and 27.3% from three. He also played in a whole 14 games...Are you telling me that if we gave this guy 1.5-2mil he wouldn't have come? That's our backup SF right there...now if only we could go back in time and pick a PG and not Shawne Williams...

ChicagoJ
08-14-2007, 03:15 PM
Come on, guys.

a) its easier to convince players to join the team on the cheap because of Duncan,

b) you don't have to have a second star to win a title with Duncan.


Now I respect Duncan as much as the next guy, but on the other hand you really just need a solid post player to win a championship with the best backcourt in the NBA.

FlavaDave
08-14-2007, 03:29 PM
Now I respect Duncan as much as the next guy, but on the other hand you really just need a solid post player to win a championship with the best backcourt in the NBA.

So, Spurs win the title if you swap out Rasheed Wallace for Duncan?

ChicagoJ
08-14-2007, 07:23 PM
I think so. I love Duncan, but he's been the second or third best player on that team thier last two championships. Manu in '05, Parker this year.

Doddage
08-14-2007, 07:27 PM
Man they got Udoka, who is solid and will really benefit from Pop's system since he'll learn defense. Another case of the rich getting richer.

rexnom
08-14-2007, 07:47 PM
I think so. I love Duncan, but he's been the second or third best player on that team thier last two championships. Manu in '05, Parker this year.
You're kidding, right? Manu had huge games in 05 and Parker in 07 but at no point did they play better than TD (who was robbed of another Finals MVP). The only reason why they can operate so easily...the only reason why the lane was so open for Parker (outside of the fact that he faced Boobie Gibson in the Finals) and why Manu can get off the shots he gets off is Duncan.

I don't necessarily disagree with your assessment of the Spurs backcourt as "the best in the league." I think you can argue for a few others but the Spurs are definitely up there. However, TD's impact is far-reaching. How can you discount his contributions so much that you state he's been the "second or third best player" on the Spurs during their runs?

Hicks
08-14-2007, 08:04 PM
Duncan is the best player on the Spurs.

Anthem
08-14-2007, 08:23 PM
I agree that Duncan's the best player on the Spurs.

But they wouldn't be significantly worse with JO instead. If we had a Manu/Parker, I'd expect us to get to the Finals.

rexnom
08-14-2007, 08:26 PM
I agree that Duncan's the best player on the Spurs.

But they wouldn't be significantly worse with JO instead. If we had a Manu/Parker, I'd expect us to get to the Finals.
I think the Spurs could probably have won this year with JO, Brand, Bosh, or KG at the 4. They got very lucky in the draw (with the Mavs losing and the Cavs instead of the Pistons) and with the suspension/Nash injury in the Phoenix series. Still, Duncan makes it a lock to win the championship.

Hicks
08-14-2007, 08:30 PM
This is why I feel he's not only the best Spur, but the best PF of all time (well, in that I agree with it, not that the article is the reason I feel that way :-p ):

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/070509



My father visited me last weekend for two reasons: He wanted to see his granddaughter, and he wanted to finalize his will in case he drops in a heap after David Stern says these words: "The third pick of the 2007 draft goes to ... the Boston Celtics." At one point during Dad's visit, I was discussing possible column topics for the issue you're currently reading. Tim Duncan's name came up.

"Would you read a column about how underrated Tim Duncan is?" I asked.

Dad made a face. He played with his hair. He seemed confused. "A whole column on Tim Duncan?"

"You wouldn't read it?" I continued.

"I don't think so. I'd see the headline, skim the first two paragraphs and flip to the next article."

"Seriously? He's the best player of the past 10 years!"

"Nahhhhhhh," Dad maintained. "Nobody wants to read about Tim Duncan. He's not that interesting."

Duncan's prowess has been a sore subject with my dad and me since the 1997 lottery, when our beloved Celtics had a 36% chance to land the No. 1 pick, and San Antonio plucked it away. Helplessly, we've watched him carry the Spurs to three titles, a number that could have been five if not for Derek Fisher's miracle shot in 2004 and Manu Ginobili's stupid foul of Dirk Nowitzki last season. No Celtics fan can assess Duncan's career for more than .21 seconds without remembering he could have been ours. With the franchise facing another make-or-break Ping-Pong moment on May 22, it's safe to say that not getting Duncan set the Celtics back 10 years.

But what did we really miss besides a slew of 58-win seasons and a few titles? Well, the chance to follow the most consistent superstar in recent NBA history, for starters. Duncan's averages from his first year (21.1 ppg, 11.9 rpg, 2.7 apg, 2.5 bpg, 55% shooting, 39.1 mpg) are nearly identical to those of his just completed 10th (20.0 ppg, 10.6 rpg, 3.4 apg, 2.4 bpg, 55% shooting, 34.1 mpg). His placid demeanor hasn't changed even a little; he looks exactly the same. His trademark 15-foot banker off the glass hasn't changed. Nearly 900 regular-season and playoff games have worn down his legs a little but not much, and he's made up for the erosion with an ever-expanding hoops IQ. If there's a major difference between the 1998 Duncan and the 2007 Duncan, it's his defense. He's gotten better and better as the years have passed, not just as a help defender but as an overall communicator.

Whenever I watch the Spurs in person, that's the first thing I notice: how well they talk on defense. It's a friendly, competitive chatter, like five buddies maintaining a running dialogue at a blackjack table as they try to figure out ways to bust the dealer. Duncan is the hub of it all, the oversize big brother who looks out for everyone else. During breaks in the action, you can always count on him to throw an arm around a teammate before dispensing advice or to wave everyone over for an impromptu pep talk. He's their defensive anchor, smartest player, emotional leader, crunch-time scorer and most competitive gamer, one of those rare superstars who simply can't be measured by statistics alone. Fifty years from now, some stat geek will crunch numbers from Duncan's era and come to the conclusion that Kevin Garnett was just as good. And he'll be wrong. No NBA team that featured a healthy Duncan would have missed the playoffs for three straight years. It's an impossibility.

Now ...

I'm not a fan of the whole overrated/underrated thing. With so many TV and radio shows, columnists, bloggers and educated sports fans around, it's nearly impossible for anything to be rated improperly anymore. Everyone is constantly searching for fresh topics to dissect, so could anything slip under the radar at this point? Think back to when Duncan entered the league: The web was still rounding into shape, sportswriters weren't screaming at each other on TV, radio hosts were confined to talking about their local teams and everyone read their local columnists. That's it. Ten years later, a hyperactive sports world means that, if anything, underrated players (like Ben Wallace, for instance) quickly become overrated because everyone spends so much time discussing how underrated they are. Well, I say Tim Duncan is underrated. You know what else? He's wildly underrated.

Assuming the Spurs win the 2007 title and Duncan captures his fourth Finals MVP award (both decent bets), his first professional decade will have concluded with four rings, two regular-season MVP awards and nine first-team All-NBA nods. His best teammates have been David Robinson (who turned 33 in Duncan's rookie year), Manu Ginobili (never a top-15 player) and Tony Parker (ditto). In fact, Duncan has never played for a dominant team; the Spurs have never had quite enough talent to roll through the league. Trapped at the top of the standings, they've been forced to rely on others' failed lottery picks, foreign rookies, journeymen and head cases with baggage. Zoom through San Antonio's past 10 rosters on basketball-reference.com (http://www.basketball-reference.com/) some time. You'll be shocked. Tim Duncan has never played on a great basketball team. Not once.

So how can he remain underrated? For one thing, he's always had a little too much Pete Sampras in him. Even last month, when Joey Crawford tossed Duncan for laughing on the bench, everyone seemed most shocked that Duncan was the guy involved. It was like watching an AP history teacher flip out on an honors student who never speaks in class. Duncan certainly doesn't have Shaq's sense of humor, Kobe's singular intensity, KG's menacing demeanor, LeBron's jaw-dropping athleticism, Wade's knack for self-promotion, Nash's fan-friendly skills or even Dirk's fist pump. If there's a defining Duncan quality, it's the way he bulges his eyes in disbelief after every call that goes against him, a grating habit that was old about five years ago. The other "problem" has been his steadfast consistency. If you keep banging out great seasons with none standing out more than any other, who's going to notice?

There's a precedent for this: Once upon a time, Harrison Ford pumped out monster hits for 15 solid years before everyone suddenly noticed, "Wait a second, Harrison Ford is unquestionably the biggest movie star of his generation!" From 1977 to 1992, Ford starred in three Star Wars movies, three Indiana Jones movies, Blade Runner, Working Girl, Witness, Presumed Innocent and Patriot Games ... but it wasn't until he carried The Fugitive that everyone realized he was more bankable than Stallone, Reynolds, Eastwood, Cruise, Costner, Schwarzenegger and every other competitor from that time. As with Duncan, we didn't know much about Ford outside of his work. As with Duncan, there wasn't anything inherently interesting about him. But Ford always delivered the goods and, eventually, we appreciated him for it.

I think we'll say the same about Duncan someday. Over the past 10 years, he's been overshadowed by Kobe and Shaq, LeBron and Wade, Nash and Kidd, Nowitzki and KG, even C-Webb and Iverson ... and yet, Tim Duncan was better than all of them.
Just wait, he'll have his Fugitive moment. It's coming. Maybe even next month.

*edit* And actually, that article doesn't give his offense enough credit.

Fool
08-15-2007, 10:16 AM
This thread is weird all over.

1) Sheed doesn't count as a post player.

2) No player has been clearly better than Duncan in any Spurs championship year.

3) JO is a very significant down grade from Duncan and that's no rip on JO.

4) I had a conversation on another board about that article posted by Hicks and I stand by what I said then. Duncan isn't underated. He's commonly thought of as the best PF of all time (or a very close second). You can't be underated when thought of like that. He's under appreciated by non-Spur fans but not underated.

ChicagoJ
08-15-2007, 11:58 AM
I think Manu got robbed of the Finals MVP award in '05. Just my opinion, of course.

Yes, I believe Duncan is the best player on the Spurs roster. Regardless, there are several post players that could win a championship with a Parker-Ginobolli backcourt, and yes, there are a few backcourts that could win a championship with Duncan.

And that is why the Spurs are the champions.

bellisimo
08-15-2007, 12:08 PM
This is why I feel he's not only the best Spur, but the best PF of all time (well, in that I agree with it, not that the article is the reason I feel that way :-p ):

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/070509


But what did we really miss besides a slew of 58-win seasons and a few titles? Well, the chance to follow the most consistent superstar in recent NBA history, for starters. Duncan's averages from his first year (21.1 ppg, 11.9 rpg, 2.7 apg, 2.5 bpg, 55% shooting, 39.1 mpg) are nearly identical to those of his just completed 10th (20.0 ppg, 10.6 rpg, 3.4 apg, 2.4 bpg, 55% shooting, 34.1 mpg)


So basically he wasn't able to improve his game since he has been in the NBA? :-p

SamBear
08-17-2007, 02:02 AM
So basically he wasn't able to improve his game since he has been in the NBA? :-p

:-o


:laugh: Yeah I guess not... :D