Wednesday, February 18th, 2009...10:22 am
Trade Season Tilt-a-Whirl: Twirl No. 5
The Spurs drafted John Salmons in 2002 and immediately shipped him to Philadelphia. Marc Stein is reporting that things might come full circle:
San Antonio, meanwhile, is in the hunt as well, pursuing Salmons — with an offer of Bruce Bowen and Ime Udoka — as a far more affordable trade target for its perimeter rotation than Vince Carter. New Jersey’s Carter has tempted the small-market Spurs for days but can be absorbed by them only in a hugely expensive and complicated deal.
If this were to happen, the Spurs will have done well. Salmons is an ideal fit, with two caveats. The ideal fit part stems from his ability to score (TS% 57.3, 18 point per contest) and versatility as a defender. On his defense, John Hollinger writes:
In addition to his slashing ability, Salmons is a very good defender who can guard three positions. He’s quick and has good size at 6-7, and ranked in the top third of shooting guards in both blocks and steals per minute. The Kings often used him as the primary stopper against elite scorers, even when Ron Artest was on the court with him, and he held his own in those matchups.
Salmons can also handle the ball, which would allow San Antonio to open up their motion sets. The two caveats? Salmons doesn’t have a history as a 3 point shooter, although his numbers from this season are greatly improved over his career. The other problem is explained by Stein:
There is another complication for interested parties: Sources revealed Tuesday that Salmons has a 15 percent trade kicker in his contract that would require the team that acquires him to pay him a bonus of nearly $2 million and add that figure to its payroll. Salmons otherwise would rank as one of the league’s better bargains, earning just $5.1 million this season while averaging 18.3 points and shooting 47.2 percent from the field and 41.8 percent on 3-pointers.
This is a big deal, to my mind. The Spurs have just enough money left to accommodate the kicker, but it would exclude them from two potential moves. The first is bringing in a veteran player who was bought out, which relates to the second issue. If the Kings were to buy out Bowen, San Antonio would not have the money re-sign him. Ugh! If not for these issues, this rumor makes my heart sing louder than all but the Rasheed Wallace whispers. But you can’t have everything. If the Spurs are close to this deal, I’d expect them to try hard in moving Jacque Vaughn for a phantom conditional second rounder. At least that leaves them open to re-signing Bowen, approaching Pops Mensah-Bonsu, or pursuing some other player. Or maybe the Spurs could simply include JV into the deal, helping them offset the kicker issue.
25 Comments
February 18th, 2009 at 10:43 am
How do buyouts work? I assume they count against the salary cap or else we would buy out the rest of JVs contract ourselves, correct?
February 18th, 2009 at 11:05 am
This would be beneficial - whatever happens I just hope the Spurs don’t stand pat - we have a limited time-period to win a championship and would really struggle to win one without any additions (especially if Ginobli is anything but 100%).
February 18th, 2009 at 11:05 am
This came on the radar too, from ESPN.com
Chris Broussard: The Bucks badly want to move Richard Jefferson, and probably will.
They’re talking with Portland, which is looking for a small forward. And the Bucks are also talking with San Antonio — Jefferson would really look good in a Spurs uniform.
February 18th, 2009 at 11:13 am
The only way to make the Richard Jefferson move would be by signing and trading Robert Horry, if not, you would have to ship 4 players to get him (Bowen, Oberto, Udoka and Fin)
Doesn’t make much sense to me…
February 18th, 2009 at 11:26 am
All of this chatter is really upsetting, if we can’t add another piece, consider this odd year an even one.
February 18th, 2009 at 11:43 am
I just found this at SI.com from Chris Mannix
“I heard you on a recent radio interview. I found it interesting that you believe the Spurs will be so formidable against the Lakers this year in the playoffs. The Lakers beat the Spurs in five games without Andrew Bynum in last year’s conference finals
- Nathan, Salem, Ore.
I’m still taking the Spurs in a series against the Lakers. With a healthy Manu Ginobili, and Matt Bonner and Roger Mason Jr. stretching the floor, they are just too tough.”
Of course someone can argue the fact that Manu is no 100% but I like the odds, specially if we consider that first and second round can be passed without that much tear-and-wear (Rockets are w/o T-Mac, NOH are without Chandler, Suns are a shadow of what they were, Blazers are too young, etc etc) this is not going to be like last year where WCF came at the expense of an exhausted team and a bad ankle for manu
February 18th, 2009 at 12:47 pm
A better trade than any I’ve heard of. Thomas, Bowen, and Finley for Samuel Dalembert. Nate Robinson killed the Spurs inside and grabbed 10 rebounds!!! My wife is taller than him. Dalembert is kind of a space cadet, but rebounds well, protects the paint, and scores efficiently. He’s worn out his welcome in Philly, and this package would probably be enough. Bowen would probably get bought out too, since Iguodala plays the same position.
February 18th, 2009 at 1:15 pm
With a healthy Manu Ginobili, and Matt Bonner and Roger Mason Jr. stretching the floor, they are just too tough.”
Not to mention the first two rounds this year will be considerably easy compared to last.
February 18th, 2009 at 2:26 pm
Miller and Salmons to the Bulls for Nocioni and Gooden.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3916703
We never make big trades. There go 80% of the guys mentioned in this post and the comments.
February 18th, 2009 at 2:29 pm
The slamons deal just got smashed. Sacramento sent Him and Miller to Chicago for Nocioni and some others
February 18th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
Yahoo just reported that the Kings traded Miller and Salmons to the Bulls for Nocioni and Gooden. Guess that means we’re out of the running for Salmons.
It also was reported that Ginoboli was hurting for quite some time including before the Rodeo trip started. Maybe it’s not as bad as it seems? Here’s hoping.
February 18th, 2009 at 5:21 pm
I think it’s too bad we lost out on Salmons, though really we lost out on him a while ago when we traded his rights on draft night…
Are there any other teams that might dump a talented player into our lap? (Gerald Wallace?)
Haha, we can hope.
February 18th, 2009 at 6:05 pm
http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=c973yc
February 18th, 2009 at 11:18 pm
Jimbo, I’m starting to waffle and prefer “standing still,” because Rod Thorn is being unreasonable about Vince. A bad trade will magnify bad decisions we already have to live with-choosing Fab over Scola, getting a whopping zero NBA games out of two first round draft picks, and depending on aging players to hang with Kobe and Bynum. Our front office made good decisions recently with Hill and Mason. If we can’t upgrade to a near all-star caliber player, just keep those two.
February 19th, 2009 at 6:32 am
The Chandler deal has been rescinded, which puts the Hornets in a tough situation: either keep him (with the baggage that will come when a guy gets sent away and comes back) or deal him again (but then who would give him a positive health check since OKC didn’t?). In any case the Spurs might make a move - Presti might help, being a division rival might not.
February 19th, 2009 at 7:46 am
Good morning. TrueHoop has an interesting article on Carter:
http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-38-202/What-s-Vince-Carter-Worth-.html
Any updates in Spurs’ trade talk?
February 19th, 2009 at 10:07 am
Seems like teams are willing to move the Chandlers, Dalemberts and VCs, so a trade may happen. The 2010 expiring contracts will continue to be bait this summer, but it seems a shame to waste the Finley-Udoka-JV expiring contracts and the Horry option good only for a couple more hours.
Here’s a link to Chad Ford’s latest trade talk, if I can post it right…
http://proxy.espn.go.com/chat/chatESPN?event_id=25146
February 19th, 2009 at 10:11 am
Chad Ford’s response to the possibility of any Spurs deadline deals: “I don’t think so. But then again, they are the hardest team in the league to read. Nothing leaks out of there.”
February 19th, 2009 at 11:40 am
20 mins to go to the deadline…
nothing brewing eh?
February 19th, 2009 at 12:09 pm
The deadline has arrived and gone and the Spurs have made no deals, yet again. I sure hope I’m wrong, but I think Pop and Buford have relegated us to a second round perhaps even Western Conference Final exit this year. I just don’t get their strategy - do they honestly believe that the Spurs, presently constituted, can beat the Lakers in a playoff series?
The NBA is very simple really - either go all out for a ring or go all out with rebuilding and taking steps toward the ring - NOTHING is gained by reaching the WCF finals with an aging cast. Definitely not happy right now.
February 19th, 2009 at 12:30 pm
Jimbo, I think you understimating the current roster. It happens to me often when they lose a couple of games. However, saying they have no chance of winning the WFC is being very pessimistic. They are no favorites of course, but I believe that a healthy Spurs team can beat the Lakers even with Bynoum as long as the jumpers are falling. That is the key to the Spurs success from what I can see. The years the Spurs haven’t won it all it has been because they fall into offensive stagnation. You can bet the big 3 will produce they share of points, you can bet the defense will improve as the playoffs get near (perhaps not as good as previous seasons but…) there is one thing I believe can make a difference: this is the best offensive rotation SA has have in a while.
February 19th, 2009 at 12:30 pm
It’s not that easy to just add another all star to your roster without giving up too much in return. The Spurs don’t have any good expiring contracts because most of their players are paid based on how good they are which goes to show how smart the front office is. Adding Vince Carter but giving up 4 players to get him probably wouldn’t put the Spurs over the top. It takes time to learn their complicated defensive rotations and such. If out Big 3 is healthy then we have the best shot in the Western Conference to beat the Lakers. I guarantee you the Spurs would have made a deal if they thought it would have put them over the top this year. It’s just not as easy as it sounds.
February 19th, 2009 at 12:38 pm
I’m not suggesting that it’s easy to make a trade, Trey. My point is that I don’t think the Spurs can beat the Lakers with Bynum, plain and simple. We have become too-much of a jump shooting team and the jumpers are very unlikely to fall 4 games out of 7 especially with the Lakers having home-court advantage.
I really thought we had to roll the dice, take some risk and try and acquire Vince or a legit big (at the expense of our 2010 plans) to try and win another championship this year and next year, which we didn’t do. So sure, we we’ll make the playoffs, probably reach the WCF, and likely lose to the Lakers. That doesn’t do it for me at all. Unlike the Blazers who would be thrilled b/c of their young guns getting valuable experience, our team is anything but young.
Like I said, I hope I’m wrong, but I don’t think I am.
February 19th, 2009 at 12:41 pm
I agree with Trey’s assessment. And it generally just comes down to a cost-benefit analysis. The costs of giving up Hill and Mason weren’t worth it. Duncan was right and he restructured his contract so they can add another piece to the puzzle and I think we’ll see that in 2009 or 2010.
As for right now, I sincerely believe we can win it all this year with the pieces we have in place. It’s certainly not going to be easy, but I think we can beat any team in a seven game series. In 2005 we were close to losing to Detroit, in 2006 we were close to beating Dallas (although we would’ve had two more series) but the point is that a series, and ultimately history, can come down to a few plays, a few lucky bounces, etc. Certainly talent plays a critical role, but we have the talent to compete with the NBA’s elite.
February 19th, 2009 at 1:18 pm
Great discussion, lots of intelligent posts. Sorry to only single out Jimbo (who I agree the most with) and Juan, Trey, and NL, who are each making great points.
(((The SPuRS have nothing to prove; after 4 championships, no season in a decade will be a dissapointment for me.))))
Juan: in fact, Jimbo has a pretty fair assessment of our roster THIS YEAR-we lose double digit leads, we didn’t belong in LA, and games we win, 10 point lead, yet we need last second shots.
“we can rely on jump shots” is the favorite phrase of all the teams we’ve ever beaten in the past.
NL: Mason and Bonner are playing great, but they won’t get any better the next couple of years-perfect time to trade them.
Trey, I agree that fans have no idea what’s really possible for GMs, maybe no one wants Mason or Bonner, but Spurs had Horry to use with multiple teams seeking cap relief. Spurs have won on the cheap in the past, but if we wanted to get better this year we needed to spend. Even a small move would have been preferable to none.
Reality is SPuRS ownership doesn’t spend-they didn’t do it to keep Scola, and they won’t ever do it just to keep pace with the Lakers.
The last thing I want to sound like is Kobe Bryant, when he was cursing Bynum because he desperately wanted Jason Kidd, but in sum,
We have matchup problems vs Bynum and Kobe, and they have gone completely unaddressed.
Im not a total pessimist. Right now we can be happy that no one else in the West got any better today, either.
Leave a Reply