Friday, May 15th, 2009...8:43 am
Offseason Breakdown: Should the Spurs Trade Manu Ginobili?
In his final interview of the season, Gregg Popovich talked about hard offseasons. This offseason, he suggested, would be difficult because the team will say goodbye to some of its role players. Telling the Robert Horrys of the world that it’s time to part is never easy. But then Pop said something else that struck me as telling. He said there would come a time when the Spurs would have to replace a star with a star. He was quick to add that the time had not yet come, but gave an impression that it was not too far off.
As Spurs fans, this is something for which we have to prepare.
Looking at the Big 3, one would assume Tim Duncan will retire a Spur. He’s part of the fabric-he is the franchise. Tim Duncan is one of the most untouchable players in the league. So when the Spurs arrive at the point of a star for a star, it’s beyond doubtful that they wave goodbye to Duncan. His contract is locked up through 2012, and he’s safe.
At 26, Tony Parker is close to his prime. I think he’s the second best point guard in the league, just behind Chris Paul. If you’re going by All-NBA votes, Parker certainly belongs in that conversation. Relative to talent, he has a good contract that only pays 13 million in its final year (2011). The Spurs really would have to receive a can’t refuse offer to trade Parker. An elite point guard, in a point guard dominated league, that is a 3-time NBA champion and former Finals MVP. And 26. And he has a good contract. Whatever price you name is too low.
That leaves us with Manu Ginobili. When healthy, he’s one the best 10 players in the league. His incredibly affordable contract is set to expire after next season. He’ll be 32 in July. He has an insatiable lust to play for his country, which is admirable and unfortunate. But that lust walks hand in hand with qualities that make him more valuable than other stars-the man is an absolute winner. Euroleague title? Yes. Olympic gold? Yes. NBA Championship? Three. Whatever it is that Chauncey Billups brought to the Nuggets, Manu Ginobili has in spades.
But it’s obvious to me that if the Spurs have to let go of a star, he is the most likely candidate. This isn’t to say that the Spurs will seek to trade Ginobili. I don’t think they should or will. Pop is correct to say the time to exchange a star for a star is not yet. But next summer I expect Manu Ginobili to receive the same treatment Tony Parker did in 2003. Remember that? The Spurs had just beat the Nets in the Finals, Parker’s team had bested Jason Kidd’s team, and the Spurs still put Parker on ice and chased after Kidd in free agency. Well, next summer the Spurs will approach Ginobili in the same way while they make an offer to the star who could replace him-Dwayne Wade seems like an impossibility, but Joe Johnson, Chris Bosh or even Dirk Nowitzki are within the pale. And after the Spurs make an offer to a player of that caliber, they’ll have to throw some money at Tiago Splitter. You see all that much ballyhooed cap space evaporating?
But if they can’t land a star, they’ll extend Ginobili. At least, that’s how I think things will shake out.
It’s in the Spurs best interest to give the Big 3 at least one more season together. Trading Manu Ginobili is an unthinkable proposition for the Spurs, in part because they’re in a great position by simply allowing his contract to expire. And, of course, he’s Manu Ginobili. The time is not yet.
Obviously, the landscape changes dramatically if the Spurs take on someone else’s cap dump this summer, but we’ll cross that bridge if we come to it. But despite all this, I suspect there will be Ginobili chatter behind the scenes. Why? While I don’t think the Spurs have any interest in trading Manu Ginobili, I think they’ll receive more calls about his availability than ever before. This might seem counter-intuitive given his recent injuries, but if you’re an opposing GM you know:
- the Spurs need to reload, and their assets are limited
- if healthy, Manu Ginobili can lead a team to glory
- he is only due to make 11 million next season
- his contract is expiring, so the risk is minimal
- even if he doesn’t return to form, his bird rights and a scaled back contract offer give any team an insanely good 6th man going forward
The problem for other GMs is that the Spurs aren’t stupid, and you can’t get Manu Ginobili through some ill-conceived salary dump. The Spurs are smart not to return calls, but even if they did pick up the phone, the initial offer would have to be strong in order to keep San Antonio on the line. Say it with me, “He’s Manu Ginobili.”
And here’s the thing: you can comb through every roster in the league, and you’ll be hard pressed to find a deal that gives enough value or makes enough long term sense for San Antonio. It’s too difficult to trade a star without losing your hat.
But I did look. And I looked. And I looked some more. I looked at every roster in the league for an offer that might make the Spurs think. I came up with three. Three offers that I’m nearly certain the Spurs would reject, but that would nevertheless cause them to hold the line for a few minutes.
- Manu Ginobili and Fabricio Oberto for Raymond Felton, Gerald Wallace and Alexis Ajinca
- Manu Ginobili and Fabricio Oberto for Ben Gordon and Tyrus Thomas
- Manu Ginobili and Fabricio Oberto for Tayshaun Prince and Amir Johnson
You can see why those teams might call and pester San Antonio.
Not only could Charlotte use a star to market to fans, but they could use Ginobili’s expiring contract. He’d make the team better, he’d help their pocketbook, and he’d free up 2010 cash. Win, win, win. Moreover, it’s doubtful they can resign Felton. So in reality that’s Wallace and Ajinca for Manu. Yes, please.
Ben Gordon came up big for the Bulls in the playoffs, but he wants a little more money than he’s worth, and more money than the Bulls can pay without damaging their cap situation. Getting Ginobili, to pair with Rose, Deng, Noah and Salmons would be a coup. It would put them in a better position to trade Hinrich. And, of course, it would give greater flexibility next summer when Ginobili and Brad Miller’s contracts expire. If you can’t resign Gordon, Manu Ginobili for Ty Thomas is an easy choice.
The Detroit trade is a little more dicey. Could the Pistons play Hamilton at small forward? In the long run, I don’t think it matters. Prince and Hamilton are part of the old face, and Joe Dumars is currently giving the team a facelift. I’m not sure that either player is in Detroit’s long term plans. What matters is that Manu Ginobili is the anti-Iverson. If he plays for your team, it gets better. But even more importantly, landing Manu Ginobili would reduce Detroit’s cap by 11 million in 2010, bringing it down to around 20 million. I’m not even sure if that’s legal. And they’d still have Rodney Stuckey and Rip Hamilton. Hello rebuild. With that kind of flexibility, the Pistons could resign Ginobili and two All-Stars in 201o to pair with Rodney Stuckey. In other words, they could become serious contenders in the space of one humid Midwestern afternoon.
Let me reduce this down to a fine point: is there a more attractive expiring contract in the entire league than Manu Ginobili? R.C. Buford’s phone is ringing.
Most of our readers can see why these scenarios would bring pause prior to dismissal. But I think dismissal is the right choice. Gerald Wallace is half the player of Ginobili and twice as injury prone; it’s doubtful that Ben Gordon is “a Spur” in terms of team culture (and would the Spurs be willing to give up their 2010 cap space for him?); as good as Tayshaun Prince is, he and Amir Johnson do not add up to Ginobili in terms of talent, and you lose your 2010 cap space. No thanks.
Ultimately, it’s too difficult to replace Manu Ginobili in a trade. The Spurs’ best move is, just as Pop indicated, to wait until the time is right. So, if you’re one of those fans who are thinking about a star for a star rebuild, you’ll have to wait patiently at least one more season. The Spurs best chance at competing for a title is to wait until next summer or by blowing up their 2010 strategy and trading for another star to pair with Duncan-Parker-Ginobili.
56 Comments
May 15th, 2009 at 9:04 am
Great writing. The Spurs should wait, until Manu’s contract runs out. The Spurs owe it to him. He has done so much for the Spurs. Manu is a winner and a fighter. All-star, world champion, he also got robbed of the Finals MVP in the Finals against Detroit. He’s the X factor.
However if a Joe Johnson wanted to come to San Antonio in 2010. It would be tempting to let Manu go. But something tells me, that Manu will sign for less in 2010. And allow the Spurs to sign another star. Sure NBA players want money.
But Manu has, a lot already. Endorsements. But Manu is that kind of guy, selfless. That is what the Spurs are all about. This maybe wishful thinking.
But you never know. That would be a loaded team.
May 15th, 2009 at 9:07 am
The Spurs are at a weird point. Change is in the air, and it’s not. Manu signing for less in 2010 would elevate him to saint status.
May 15th, 2009 at 9:43 am
No doubt, but its exciting to think about it. I feel the Spurs will make the right moves. The Spurs are far from done. They are only in transition.
May 15th, 2009 at 9:58 am
Just out of curiosity, would you look harder at the trade if Pistons threw in Rip and we had to add Mason and Bowen?
May 15th, 2009 at 9:58 am
I have a feeling Manu will sign for less when he is a free agent in 2010.
He realizes he got injured the last two post-seasons that might have cost the Spurs another championship or two. And Pop will kindly remind Manu about the decision to play on a bad ankle at the Olympics and how it cost the Spurs the following season.
In the end, Manu will re-sign for the mid-level salary exception and the Spurs will reload and have a shot at a couple more championships before Timmy and Manu retire with the Spurs.
May 15th, 2009 at 10:08 am
Guys and gals,
Just a few minutes after posting this, I realized my Hamilton contract numbers were inaccurate. He signed an extension last summer. I’ve made the correction to the post-it doesn’t change the substance of my argument, but I wanted to bring the correction to your attention nonetheless.
May 15th, 2009 at 10:22 am
i just want Manu to retire with the Spurs
May 15th, 2009 at 10:28 am
I agree that Duncan is likely to retire a Spur. And I agree that Manu will fetch offers, but that the Spurs will quickly decline those offers (for the reasons mentioned above). Not to change the subject of the post, but I think the issue of trading Parker warrants a little further discussion. A former college teammate of mine (who played point guard, for whatever that’s worth) is adamant that the Spurs can’t win a championship with Parker as the leading scorer. It’s not that my friend doesn’t like Parker, but rather because he thinks that no team can win if its PG is scoring all the points.
So I consulted http://www.databasebasketball.com to see if the stats jived with my friend’s assertion…. and guess what? It turns out that over the past 25 years, the PG has been the leading scorer (regular season) of the eventual NBA champions only twice: Isiah in ‘89-90 and Magic in ‘86-87. Of note: Isiah averaged 9.4 APG that season, while Magic averaged 12.2 APG and shot better than 52% from the field.
So it looks like you could say that my friend is on to something. While Parker is undoubtedly a great player, that same greatness MAY also hinder the Spurs’ chances of winning a championship. There is logic for this. PGs should facilitate the offense; a team whose PG is its leading scorer is perhaps over-relying on that PG to handle too much of the offense load (score AND facilitate for others). That can result in too many other players being stagnant on offense. Or maybe the PG HAS to be the leading scorer because the other players are already too stagnant. Perhaps it’s a chicken/egg problem.
IF you buy this, then you’d be more amenable to the idea of trading Parker — say for a good facilitating PG (Steve Blake and Raymond Felton come to mind) AND a young star SG or SF to handle more of the scoring load.
After all of that, I’ll say a few things in Parker’s defense: he’s the Spurs leading scorer because other teams can’t stop him from getting to the rim. It’s hard to hold that against him. He was the only PG other than Chris Paul to shoot over 50% FG this year. As I already mentioned, Magic shot over 52% in ‘86-87 — so maybe there should be an exception to my friend’s theory if the PG is shooting better than 50%. And it’s certainly not the case that Tony’s just jacking up shots (which COULD be said about Isiah in ‘89-90, because he shot a respectable, but not great 43.8%).
I look forward to others’ thoughts.
May 15th, 2009 at 10:56 am
No GM in the league will take a chance on Manu the way he was this season.
May 15th, 2009 at 11:00 am
Jaceman,
I don’t know. It’s an interesting thought experiment. Good response.
May 15th, 2009 at 11:07 am
I just hope Manu eventually retires with the Spurs. All this trade talk worries me. Though I do remember reading on his website that he intended to play for five or six more years, that could be good, bad or inaccurate. Either way I don’t see Manu leaving to take more money at this stage from another team, since he’s aways been underpaid anyway. Why would it happen now or in a year is the question. I doubt the Spurs are eager to git rid of him.
May 15th, 2009 at 11:12 am
Great post, guys!
One other point regarding TrueFan’s case that Tony isn’t as solid a rebuilding piece as some suggest: as Bill Simmons and Kobe have both suggested, an NBA player’s chronological age is less important than his mileage. With all of the deep play-off runs starting his rookie year combined with his summer play with the French national team, Tony has more mileage on him than any other 26 year-old in the league. If the Simmons/Kobe estimation that 1,000 games is the point at which a player’s age and wear-and-tear start to catch up with them, consider that Tony has already played 612 regular season games alone. I don’t know how many play-off games he’s played on top of that off the top of my head. Ignoring those extra games, he’s got about 3+ seasons, including the expected deep playoff runs, left before the mileage starts to catch up with him. That, of course, assumes that PGs age at the same pace as players like Kobe, Timmy, and KG. You also have to consider that Tony’s dominance is predicated on his speed. He’s worked on the other parts of his game, but he simply doesn’t have the size to age well at his position ala Billups or Kidd. I don’t know what this says about what the Spurs’ rebuilding strategy will or should be, but it’s something to consider.
As a second note, I agree with the other deals posted above but would add one other possible trade scenario that the Spurs would at least have to consider:
Ginobili/Oberto/Bowen for Redd/Mbah a Moute/Stoudamire
I’m not saying either side would offer this, but they would at least have to consider it. Redd isn’t a typical Spurs kind of player, but Luc could certainly be an heir apparent to Bowen. Milwaukee would get the partially guaranteed deals of Oberto & Bowen and would get a Skiles-type player with serious moxi on both ends of the floor. If Ginobili’s health doesn’t hold up, it lets Milwaukee shed even more salary next year without losing face. The extra space this year might also allow them to keep both Villanueava and Sessions.
May 15th, 2009 at 11:21 am
You went there. I can’t even pretend to be objective about this, so I’ll just say this was a great post, despite the heresy.
However, I quote: “He has an insatiable lust to play for his country, which is admirable and unfortunate.”
I disagree. I think that lust, as you call it, has been sated. He has stated once and again in interviews to local media that last year’s Olympic games constituted his final stint with the national team. He might change his mind in the future, but knowing him, I sincerely doubt it.
What does that do to his trade value? I don’t know, because honestly I don’t even want to consider a trade. For what it’s worth, Manu’s going to focus on the NBA.
May 15th, 2009 at 11:37 am
As always this made for good reading, but I am in denial.
I hope Manu gets healthy quick. I just cannot imagine him in another uniform.
May 15th, 2009 at 12:24 pm
As unreasonable as it may sound, I’ve been lobbying for an all Argentine 2nd squad. Let’s assume Oberto can still play, and we can’t reasonably get Scola. Then: Delfino, Ginobili, Herrmann, Nocioni, and Oberto. Instant chemistry! Though if I could swap Nocioni for Scola that would be awesome too.
May 15th, 2009 at 12:42 pm
Addendum to my Tony comment above: the Spurs have played 122 playoff games since Tony arrived, so he’s played something on the order of about 730 NBA games for his career.
May 15th, 2009 at 1:06 pm
If Manu enters next season fully healthy than we are a deadly team again and there’s no reason to trade him. If he isn’t 100% than he won’t pass any team’s physicals making him untradeable anyways.
May 15th, 2009 at 1:34 pm
I think you confuse Manu’s worth as a player (his achievements, qualities on the court, etc.) and Manu’s worth as a trade asset. The first is formidable, as we know, the second is almost nil - basically limited to his expiring contract (which is nice but not incredibly nice). Otherwise his trade value is ZERO because no GM in his right mind would ever sign Manu right now (after the 07-08 season was a different story). But this season he got injured, then injured, then injured some more, and there’s no semblance of light at the end of this tunnel. At this point his ankles are made of glass (or even crystal) and it’s just too much of a risk.
The real question is: what can you get for a $10 million expiring contract?
Re: Parker, and as much as I hate to say it, he’s probably the prime trade target right now - not paid a ton of money yet ($11 mil per year from memory), definitely knocking at the door of the superstars room (needs another year to confirm this), young, and a proven winner with an impressive resume. That’s the kind of asset you can try to sell to another franchise for a great deal (e.g. a slightly older and more expensive superstar forward/center, e.g. Dirk, Yao…).
May 15th, 2009 at 4:13 pm
The idea that Manu Ginobili could be traded just sours my stomach. Off-hand, I can’t think of another NBA player the Spurs could acquire that could deliver the same “chutzpah” that Manu does.
There’s just this, I dunno, irreplaceable “thing” Manu Ginobili has that makes him who he is. I can’t properly put it into context; though I’m sure a more polished and seasoned sportswriter could.
I mean, there are games where Manu Ginobili will shoot 1-7 from the arc and rack up six turnovers in the first-half. Then, in the final six minutes of the fourth, Manu does that “Manu Ginobili-thing” he almost always seems to do.
Y’know? He’ll hit the game-tying or go-ahead 3-pointer with seconds left on the clock. Or he’ll somehow be there to steal an in-bounds pass as if he were lying in wait behind the scorer’s table. It can be at the AT&T center, on the road, in Game 7 or Regular Season Game #42, but Manu Ginobili will somehow always pull something off. It’s just what he does. And what I love most about it is the way he makes it seem so effortless. It’s as if he planned it all ahead of time, and his early-game miscues were just another part of the script.
Manu will play out the final year of his current contract as a Spur. What happens beyond that, will no doubt hinder on how 2009-10 plays out.
May 15th, 2009 at 4:24 pm
f the Simmons/Kobe estimation that 1,000 games is the point at which a player’s age and wear-and-tear start to catch up with them,
joe…….Simmons theory talks about how big men such as KG and Duncan peak at 1000 games. Mostly because of their height…so this doesnt apply to parker.
May 15th, 2009 at 6:41 pm
Juan, I wish that were true, but I don’t think that’s correct about the Simmons/Kobe 1,000 game point. If you click the following link to a Simmons article from last Oct. 2008 and check out the paragraph on Kobe (item #6), you’ll see what I mean.
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/081024
Simmons has commented on how Kobe is surprisingly bucking that trend with ~1,100 games on his odometer (which he attributes to his phenomenal conditioning regimen) and on how he thought the Ray Allen trade was awful at the time because of his odometer and surgery history. I’m not saying that Simmons’ idea is anything more than a casual observation or anything to panic about at the moment even if it were an undeniable fact, but it is something to think about, especially given Tony’s size and reliance on speed.
I will say, however, that he should age better than most quick guards because his tear-drop allows him to penetrate for easy baskets without taking heavy contact on every play (unlike Dwayne Wade). And, of course, he’s a phenomenal player right now and should be for at least a few years. My point, simply, is that we can’t let our selves be fooled by his chronological age into assuming that he automatically will be able to carry a team for another 6 - 8 years. I’m not sure that anyone on the current roster is truly a player that you can rebuild around on a 5-year time-scale.
May 16th, 2009 at 2:58 pm
The Spurs biggest need is some athletes beyond the big 2, or big 3, whatever it happens to be (will Manu ever be the same?)
They were out-quicked by Jose Juan Barea, for God’s sake. At one point they were starting Roger Mason, Mike Finley, and Matt Bonner in a playoff game — that’s just not going to cut it on defense.
I understand the big 3 model has worked well for the Spurs, but you can’t just surround them with nothing but either 1) unathletic shooters 2) or defensive specialists with limited offensive skills. Look at the Nuggets’ success right now — they have 5 long, athletic, explosive, in-their-prime players, and that athleticism would have exposed San Antonio, even with Ginobili playing, I believe.
May 16th, 2009 at 5:42 pm
A few years back pop once said that Manu was one of the players he would never put up as a trade bait , I hope and pray that he still feels this way.let’s jus bring in tiago or let’s see what we have with ian.we jus need some one to complete the twin towers connection again, if we find him than I feel sorry for the rest of the NBA teams especially the los angelas losers,Dallas wavrecks.the spursdynasty will rise again!!!
May 16th, 2009 at 8:40 pm
I feel dirty just reading this column!
May 17th, 2009 at 3:12 pm
Well said. It especially doesn’t make sense now since his trade value might be lowered by his latest stint of injuries. Every coach and GM knows what he can bring, though, and a healthy 09-10 season will prove he’s still a top-10 player in the league.
May 17th, 2009 at 10:10 pm
[...] Timothy Varner of 48 Minutes of Hell discussed a few Manu Ginobili trade possibilities, including one with the Pistons. Manu Ginobili and Fabricio Oberto for Tayshaun Prince and Amir Johnson [...]
May 18th, 2009 at 1:30 am
i love manu but his too injury prone…and pop is right when the time is right…but why not lets pray for him to be healthy this season so that they may become a contender again for the title…and if i wer a gm why not a durant-ginobili trade but for now lets pray that next year manu will be healthy…and the spurs will have the perfect rotation already…
May 18th, 2009 at 5:41 am
The three examples for the trade doesn’t get any close to what they can get for Manu… It was a little bit upsetting reading those examples…
Is there anyway the Kings may be interested in dumping Nocioni’s HORRIBLE contract for Oberto/Bowen/Mason or similar instead?
May 18th, 2009 at 7:44 am
In a perfect world, Manu would be the most valuable trade asset, but thats not the case anymore. He would have been a great trade candidate last year. This year he is just injured, old, and past his “Simmons Mileage Log.” I doubt you get many trade partners who can give you enough to make in a worthwhile trade. I agree that you have the chance to resign Manu next year at less than what he currently makes.
And it looks like there a few more fans on the “should be trade Tony??” bandwagon.
May 18th, 2009 at 2:23 pm
Tim Duncan has been the face of the Spurs; a lot emotionally tied to him. But, if the Spurs want to improve as a team, suited for Tony as the PG, then they must put emotions aside and think rationally. The best asset they have is Tim Duncan. They can get most in return for him. They should trade him, because as Tony and Manu are currently constituted, Duncan cannot carry them over the hump by himself (like he did in the past). So, get the most while you can, for Duncan. Raise his jersey to the rafters before he leaves and all; but let him go and win another championship.
I suggest: Duncan & change for Pau Gasol and Odom. Spurs become an athletic team; Lakers get the “fundamental” guy they need to help Kobe, and teach Bynum. Both do well. Yes, the Lakers may seem to have a better deal, but they could leave the Spurs as the leading team once Kobe/Duncan duo slows down, or retires. Lakers can then go and sign Sheed as Duncan/Bynum’s backup.
All in an ideal world.
May 18th, 2009 at 3:21 pm
Rodrigo,
Many people on here think that I expect way too much for Manu. You think that I’m underselling him. That makes me think that my evaluation is about right. But, in the interest in fairness, what do you think his trade value is, and why?
Regarding Nocioni: I’d rather have Mason Jr.
May 18th, 2009 at 6:08 pm
TV: A healthy Manu Ginobili could easily be the missing component for a championship contender squad. Having said that, a team on the process of becoming such thing with bigger holes or without a couple of star players won’t trade valuable assets for him. There could be just 5, 6 teams that may do a push for him if we take into account what I previously said, but as you wrote what he brings to the table cannot be replaced and I do think you did a good job making that clear.
However; I think it’s a waste of time even trying to figure out what they may get for him when such thing won’t happen. Eventually if he doesn’t sign an extension he’ll go somewhere else, but a trade?
On Nocioni again, If the Kings are interested in a salary dump ONLY maybe Mason wouldn’t be required.
May 18th, 2009 at 7:09 pm
Hey, if the Lakers can’t take home the title this year, maybe Kobe opts out and signs with us over the summer on a one-year deal for the mid-level so he can throw his hat into the 2010 free agency bonanza. No need to trade anyone then, right?
I’m mostly kidding, but if Phil decides his health issues are too big to put up with through another grueling NBA season, I wouldn’t be surprised if Kobe opts out and explores his options. He’s smart enough to know that you need an elite coach to win a title, and I don’t think any coaches that are projected to be available for LA this summer really fit that description. On second thought, maybe we should put his agent on speed dial just in case.
May 18th, 2009 at 8:32 pm
To Trade Duncan: Why would we trade Duncan so he can win another championship? The Spurs organization and fans want him to win another - With the Spurs.
Duncan and change for Gasol and Odom would be almost as big a rip off as Kwame for Gasol. Odom has shown time and time again he can’t handle the pressure, even being third wheel to Kobe+Gasol has proved to be too much for him. He’s one of the guys who’s always had “potential” but if you never develop that potential than you are just an average player.
Gasol, while an all-star type player is soft, no way he could play Spurs defense. Also he’s only had one really good playoff game that I can remember, and the was game 7 against a Houston team with no Yao/Dikembe.
Basically, you sound like a Lakers’ fan who wants another superb deal.
May 19th, 2009 at 3:41 am
This has crossed the mind of every Spurs fan at least once. You know, in our less lucid moments.
May 19th, 2009 at 7:20 pm
Spurs should not never entertain idea of trading Manu. I agree he has made some poor decisions (2006 vs Mavs and yielding to countrymen’s pressure), but when on the court he is worth the investment. Sentiment alone won’t keep him in silver & black, but i hope management also understands that production team gets from him is a bargain (as opposed to T-Mac, Vince Carter, Jason Richardson, Redd, etc.)
what i would like to see…
1) young swingman to learn system and take over Manu’s starting job in 3-4 yrs. i would love Marco Bellinelli but am unsure of what it would cost. seems like he is riding the pine in Golden State and he could replace Finley in the lineup this offseason. what about JJ Redick? has playoff performance driven up his below bargain asking price? dang.
2) young, defensive-minded big man. what’s the deal with Tiago Splitter? is it this summer or next? i hope we don’t lose him as we did Scola. Tiago can replace either Oberto, Kurt Thomas or Gooden. Splitter is the in-house/low cost answer. if we want to try and package Oberto, Thomas and Bonner plus draft picks for either Camby or Tyson Chandler (although trading away picks is not my preference- paid two 1st rounders for Thomas, really?)
3) now for the athletic guard-forward we need to attack the rim.
Rudy Fernandez, although undersized would be ideal. he has same tenacity as Manu and played clutch in the playoffs. would Blazers be interested in Roger Mason Jr. for him?
Trevor Ariza? probably will ask (and get) full mid-level exception, nevermind.
Matt Barnes?
Shawn Marion? let’s say he realizes he won’t get 10+ million in free agency. would he be willing to take 5-8 for one year and then hope to get payday? if so, he would be perfect at defending Dirk, running the lanes, and hitting 3s…. just as long as he knows his place- 4th in the pecking order.
May 20th, 2009 at 4:04 am
Pablo,
1) Marco Belinelli is not very good. In terms of wings, and just to put things in perspective, Ime Udoka is a much better player.
2) Splitter could come over next summer, but there are no guarantees.
3) Fernandez is a good player, but would cost a lot in a trade. It would take more than Roger Mason Jr. The Spurs would, at most, have 5.7 to sign a free agent. Here’s the deal with Marion, though. His production has gone way down. He’s not a great half court player. He’s relatively old. And he’d want more than he’s worth. But having said that, and I mean this, he’d be a good get with the right contract.
4) Ariza: not much of a shooter or ballhandler. I’m not sure he’d work for San Antonio.
May 20th, 2009 at 10:57 am
Just was reading the transcript from Bill Simmon’s chat and somebody brought up what he’d do if he were GM of the Spurs. I don’t like it, but thought it was again, something interesting to discuss.
Bill Simmons: I would trade Parker right now for multiple pieces. I think they need to start the rebuilding process a little while keeping the Duncan/Manu foundation. For instance, a deal that makes sense to me is Parker to the Wolves for Randy Foye, the No. 6 pick and expiring contracts. Something like that. And if you’re the Wolves, you’d do a deal like that because that gives you a foundation of Jefferson, Love and Parker… you need 3 building blocks to contend and those are 3 good ones. Reminds me of the Ray Allen/Boston trade a little.
May 20th, 2009 at 12:20 pm
That Simmons trade is not a good one. I go by the old adage that one 15 million a year star and two minimum salary players are better than three six million a year players.
We have three studs, Tony, Timmy, and Manu. We simply need to upgrade our role players. However if we upgrade our role players, but sacrifice one of our stars to do it, we aren’t getting ahead.
Also, there’s a reason why Simmons is still a sports writer and not a GM, despite wanting to become one (from what I gather - he might just be joking around).
I put Simmons right up there with Hollinger - Everything they say needs to be taken with a grain of salt.
It was awesome last year when Manu was on Hollingers all decline team than won the sixth man of the year award.
May 20th, 2009 at 12:26 pm
I love Simmons’ analysis, and I agree that it would probably be a good idea to trade into the top 20 of the draft to start rebuilding if possible, but his trade proposals are often terrible. For one of the top 5 or so guards in the game, we get Foye (a guy who didn’t do much even on an awful team desperate for backcourt help), a so-so pick in a crappy draft, and more cap space???
Without giving up anyone from our core, I think that we could buy a pick (maybe Minnesota’s #18, Atlanta’s #19, or New Orleans’ #21) just by sending out our partially guaranteed deals and taking back bad contracts that expire next summer (Mark Madsen and/or Brian Cardinal from Minny, Speedy Claxton from ATL, and Antonio Daniels or Rasual Butler from NO). Depending on how things go, that could help us fill a need at back-up PG with a guy like Ty Lawson, Nick Calathes, or Darren Collison or at SF if a guy like James Johnson or Austin Daye slips.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:52 pm
It’s a bad draft to trade up, but that might mean there are unusual opportunities for team’s like San Antonio.
I really, really like Simmons and Hollinger. The grain of salt thing might be true, but they’re both smart about what it is that they do. But in this case, I think Simmons is really underselling Parker. If Parker were dealt, the team to trade him to would not be Minnesota. It would be either NY or Portland or Detroit. Maybe Golden State.
What you say about buying a pick is true, but, again, it’s a bad draft to move up. And I suspect the Spurs would not like to add too much guaranteed payroll.
May 21st, 2009 at 10:30 am
Should have traded Oberto to the Rockets and kept Scolia! We wouldn’t be talking about Spurs talent getting older!
May 21st, 2009 at 10:38 am
Rick,
Your question might be the most common complaint amongst Spurs fans. The Scola thing was a big mistake, but it was mostly cap-related. The short answer is to say that the Spurs needed to move Jackie Butler’s contract and Scola was the sugar coat to his hard pill. In hindsight, they should have found some other way to get under the tax, including letting either Bonner or Oberto walk. Water under the bridge.
May 21st, 2009 at 11:05 am
Tim,
I agree about Simmons & Hollinger — I love their stuff. In their own ways, they both bring a very unique and well-informed approach to their analysis, and I always read their stuff when I have a chance. That said, every writer brings their own perspective and background to each piece they write that leads to some natural strengths and weaknesses. I don’t think that Simmons’ strength is proposing trades, but otherwise, I love his stuff.
About this year’s draft, I think you have to put the criticism of this year’s talent in perspective. If you’re a franchise that needs another superstar, this year is a terrible draft. If you just need a decent rotation player, it’s not such a bad year to have a mid- or late-round pick. How good you think this draft is really depends on your franchise’s need. Take the much acclaimed 2003 draft, for example. That was a great year to have a 1 - 9 pick. However, look at who went between picks 9 & 27 — only one player has a career scoring average over 10PPG. Now look at the ‘terrible’ 2001 Kwame Brown draft. There were almost no superstars in the 1st round, but in picks 9 - 27, you had Joe Johnson, Richard Jefferson, Zach Randolph, Gerald Wallace, and Troy Murphy, not to mention Tony at #28 and Agent Zero at #31. Those are pretty good rotation players at those picks in the draft.
Obviously, these kinds of things are a judgment call about the relative risk/benefit ratio, but I think the guys that might be available in the mid-round picks I mentioned above are definitely worth the gamble. An extra ~$1.5 million in guaranteed contracts for 2010 isn’t a big hit to our cap space.
Another way to look at it: what veteran that might be available this summer could help us so much more than the draft picks that might be available at the slots I mentioned that they would be a better investment of that money? The only FA that I see on the list this year who might sign for about the same amount as a mid-1st round pick would cost and who would fit a need for us is Grant Hill — he’d be a substantial upgrade over Finley at the 3 on the defensive side, he could handle some spot point duty, and he might take a 1-year deal if he thought it would get him a ring. Other than that, why wouldn’t we take a chance on Ty Lawson, Eric Maynor, or James Johnson and try to develop a second unit that can run to give us another look on offense when the big 3 rest? Especially if we could get a speedy PG, that might allow us to go very small for stretches when we need a shot in the arm on offense and move Tony over to the 2. We had a lot of success playing a controlled running game in 2003 & 2005 that Avery copied and used to take Dallas to the Finals in 2006; I don’t see why that couldn’t work for us again.
May 21st, 2009 at 11:26 am
[...] the Bulls are trying to move Tyrus Thomas. Last week, I suggested the Bulls could make a play for Manu Ginobili by offering Gordon and Thomas. It was pure conjecture, and I didn’t like the imagined deal, but it seems worth [...]
May 21st, 2009 at 12:28 pm
Joe,
Lots of good stuff in your comment. I agree with most of it. But I think young players take time to develop. The Spurs need to strike a balance. There are few players I expect the Spurs to draft this year that will actually help them next season. It just isn’t likely. I hope it happens, but the odds are not in their favor. The players that are in their current range whom I like are a year or two away, and I’m an optimist.
May 22nd, 2009 at 7:52 am
Simmons is my favorite writer. His trades may make sense with regards to financial or position situation, but he’s not a Spurs fan. It’s easy to to make an objective trade from L.A. But there are so many more things involved in trading Manu or Tony other than just money. I promise you that the Front Office knows how important each guy is to the community at large. How many sponsors might you lose if Manu is traded from the latino-rich SA area? Would season ticket sales be affected if Tony is traded for Foye? Could there be an all out riot if either is traded away? All I’m saying is that it’s way too easy to propose a trade without really understanding how much that player means to a community.
The Spurs have always been known as the team that does the Right Thing. They are the model franchise in all aspects, and for this reason, they will never trade Duncan. He made them into the 3rd greatest franchise of all time and they know he deserves to retire with grace and class as a Spur.
May 22nd, 2009 at 8:37 am
You make a good point. But winning is most important to fan support. That supersedes all other concerns.
May 22nd, 2009 at 4:56 pm
BLASPHEMY. The big three’s compatabilty and chemistry is what won championships. You cannot just replace one and expect the same results that took years to build and execute. It would take someone whose pure skill outweighs that chemistry, and if it comes to that we become just like the other teams in the league. By the way the skill required to overcome the chemistry I just mentioned would take no one short of LeBron, Kobe, or Dwayne. Don’t see us making that anytime soon. We must keep the core components to win another championship. And those are Pop, Tony, Tim, and MANU. Break that up, and we are not the Spurs we have become.
May 23rd, 2009 at 7:46 am
Trade Parker. Keep Ginobli.
Look Parker doesn’t play D. Yes he’s great on offense, but he’s not a traditional point guard which the spurs of the future need.
Trade Parker and Bowen to the Griz for Mike Conley, D. Milicic and picks #2 and #27.
Then trade pick #2 (if Griffin is picked first) to Kings for picks #4 and #23.
Draft Harden for Sg, Daye or Casspi for SF, and Lawal for toughness at PF. With second round picks draft foreigners who will develop overseas.
These way we’ll have young players with talent and still have a chance at a big name free agent in 2010.
May 26th, 2009 at 6:46 pm
let the big three play until they are done- 2yrs, then with parker left-go get AMARE or some other high price talent to be parker’s new sidekick.
May 27th, 2009 at 11:40 am
It’s crazy to think Ginobli is done. As long as he’s given time to heal and his minutes during the regular season are severely limited, Ginobli will be great in the playoffs. Maybe increase his minutes the last 10 games of the season, but that’s all he needs. So if he’s going to be traded, it can’t be for chump change.
How about… Ginobli and the Red Rocket to Bulls for Hinrich, Tyrus Thomas (if they really have given up on the kid) and picks #16 and #26. Maybe give them a second rounder to even things out.
Hinrich would be great as a backup point PG/starting SG and Thomas would fit in smoothly as a starting SF/backup PF.
Look I don’t think the window has closed for another championship (despite previous post for change). So if Ginobli is traded, we need return value.
June 4th, 2009 at 7:17 am
[...] few weeks ago I tackled the subject of whether or not the Spurs should consider trading Manu Ginobili. In that post I said that there was no reason to suspect that they would, and that they [...]
June 15th, 2009 at 8:18 pm
[...] Kyle, author of an excellent Wizards blog called Truth About It, responds to the Manu to D.C. talk with a three-way trade suggestion. He sees a deal that would bring Gerald Wallace, Andray Blatche and the 5th pick to San Antonio. I appreciate his effort, but I see a trade that would bring a player three times as injury prone-and owed more money-back to San Antonio. No thanks. In terms of trade suggestions, Kyle has done a good job here. But I’m increasingly of the position that trading Ginobili doesn’t make sense. [...]
June 15th, 2009 at 11:36 pm
I keep hearing everyone say Manu will sign for less, but how about Timmy restructuring his contract???? I think if he were to do something like that it would help the spurs. I know he is the best power-forward to ever play the game, but what has he sacrificed? I think Manu has at least 3 to 4 more great years ahead of him and no one will deny he is a special player. He has already showed he is dedicated to this team at a discount price. Everytime Timmy shows up they throw cash his way. It time for him to step up and show he is dedicated to this team and restructure his contract for the better of the team. Just like Troy Aikman did for the Cowboys back in the day……
June 16th, 2009 at 6:11 am
Ruben,
Two things. 1) You can’t restructure under the CBA and 2) Timmy took a huge pay cut on his contract extension that kicks in next summer. He’s been there, done that.
Leave a Reply