The 4-Down Podcast, Episode 33: Timothy Varner


The NBA season’s first two weeks have been cancelled. That’s the bad news. The good news is that we have another episode of the 4-Down Podcast. Okay, that could be considered bad news also. Don’t be mean.

If and when the NBA lockout ends, the Spurs have a lot of work to do before the regular season tips off. However, they have less time to work with. To figure things out, Tim Varner joined me to talk about San Antonio’s laundry list of things to do between the settlement of the lockout and opening night.

There’s also the matter of Tim Duncan teaching the rookies the ropes of Gregg Popovich’s system, multiple amnesty provisions and which NBA teams will be best suited to a shortened, post-lockout season.

Subscribe to the 4-Down Podcast via iTunes. Or you can can keep up using the RSS feed. You can also right or control click to download the audio file (46:22, 66.8 mb) or listen below. Whatever you do, please leave us good feedback and ratings in iTunes, I hear that’s what all the cool kids are doing these days. If you have a question you want answered on the next 4-Down Podcast, email and it just might happen.

Listen here:

  • Bry

    Why would the Spurs use an amnesty on Bonner, a role-player that makes 3 million per year?! I’m still baffled by how much that guy gates scapegoated. Amnesty clauses are for overpaid, underperforming players; likely with long and expensive contracts; not for niche players that get paid two and a half million less per year than the average NBA player. Because the Spurs’ front-office has done so well, they really only have one contract that should even be considered for amnesty (RJ obviously). I think that’s a credit to Buford and co.

  • Andrew A. McNeill

    We weren’t saying they should use it on Bonner, we were saying that if there is a second amnesty provision, outside of McDyess, Matt Bonner is the only other option. Neither of us see it happening, though.

  • Bry

    What do you think the odds are of them using the amnesty on RJ? Considering they are very thin  at small forward and RJ was second on the team in MPG last season, with a decent FG percentage and mediocre defense, will they waive him? They still have to pay him that money, and doing an amnesty is a tacit admission that Buford offered a bad contract. They also couldn’t trade him for a 10 million/year player, if that ever became available and desirable. 

  • Andrew A. McNeill

    I think they’d be willing to take the risk of having thin depth at small forward to get rid of the next three years of RJ’s deal. I don’t think the front office is unwilling to admit they made a mistake by releasing Jefferson.

  • Jonathan

    Releasing RJ probably only makes sense if you look past next year.  Obviously, we don’t know yet what the new NBA is going to look like, but the Spurs are probably going to be over the cap and under the luxury tax threshold whether or not RJ is on the roster for the 2011-12 season…if it ever happens.  So, we won’t save any money by releasing him… and releasing him also won’t clear up any cap space to sign anyone else.  In 11-12. But in the last two years of his deal–when he’s making 10+ million a year–not using an amnesty clause on him, if there is one, is going to look like a bad mistake. 

    Also, I refuse to believe Buford et al. did not always know RJ’s last contract was a bad deal.  That is, I assume it was agreed to under the table before Jefferson opted out of his $15M year.  Maybe they were even looking ahead to a potential amensty clause at that time?

  • Pingback: Manu Ginobili through 66 games last season()