machine20 said:

---

I think George Hill would be a better option

---

Chris Paul is the one you want if you're trying to win a ring next season. He's plug and play with this offense and defense (or just about any team, for that matter)

George Hill wants max money coming off an injury plagued season. He's good, but he's not Point God good.

That being said, I would love to see George Hill come back to SA and team up with the guy he was basically traded for, but not for 20+ million per year. He's not worth 1/5th of our salary cap every year.

I agree completely on Parker, but with his injury you can't count on him coming back to what he was. Murray is at least a year away and probably two.

Aldridge is no more than a good roll player at this point. He doesn't require a defense to adjust to him consistently. He won't post deep and make decisive moves.

In a league void of big men, I don't think he is even top 10 anymore.

We really should just talk about the series in here, that other thread is just full of ******bag panzy butthurt Rockets fans

I think, at this point, you have to assume Parker retires and operate our PG position under that assumption. He may not, in which case that's great, but even if he comes back he likely won't be able to handle starting PG duties on a team challenging for a championship. If he's able to come back, he should come back as a leader of our second unit.

So that leaves a huge question mark for starting PG. I don't think Patty is versatile enough to be a starting PG on a team trying for a championship. I don't see how it's possible to get Chris Paul without letting everyone go, and I don't think that's the answer. While I would be for letting the Pau and LA experiment end, I don't think you destroy your depth for an older PG. I'm sure there's a creative way to keep some of the guys we have and grab Paul, but he would have to turn down a lot of money and we would have to tie up a lot of money in a 32 year old PG. That said, if he's willing to come, I don't see how the front office doesn't at least try and make it work. I'm not a fan of Lowry. I don't really want a guy who has shown again and again that he struggles come playoff time.

But after all that, we still need a big. Dedmon isn't ready. Bertans isn't a true big. Lee is serviceable but not start-able, and we all are pretty much fed up with LA (and I say that as someone who has defended him for a long time) and Pau. I don't know what you do about the post on this team if, by some miracle, you grab Paul. Because that means you likely dumped LA and Pau, let Dedmon walk, and probably Simmons too. I don't think you can go small if GS keeps their super team together, because they'll play small ball better than anyone in the league. So I think Pop and co. are right to go big, but I don't know how you accomplish that if you need to pay big money to a free agent PG...and I do think we need to after what happened to TP.

The lone positive is the Spurs out rebounded GSW yet again and decisively on offensive boards. Of course that doesn't matter if you shoot 37% and allow GSW to hit half their 3's.

If we can find a decent offense, we could play with these guys.

We just need to find serviceable bigs that rebound and defend and can set screens. Splitter, Dedmon, Capella types are fine.

Kawhi can play the 4 down the stretch when needed. There are very few dominant scoring bigs anymore that can expose you for going small.

If LMA and Pau cleared the books you have $35 million to do something with.

Give CP3 $25 million per or do a sign and trade giving them LMA and or Pau in the deal if he wants more (better to get something over nothing for the Clips).

Keep Simmons and/or Green, sign Dedmon and go get Splitter for cheap. Try to get a guy like Reddick or another vet shooter to sign on for a ring chase. Bring in an international player or draft pick.

CP3, Parker, Murray
Green/Simmons, Manu (vet min)
Kawhi, Anderson
Bertans, Lee
Dedmon, Splitter

If we roll with an injured Parker and a year older LMA and Pau then next year is a wasted year of prime Kawhi.

If you put CP3 with Kawhi along with some other athleticism you can compete vs GSW.

Spurs' best case scenario:

Pau decides to opt out and leave.
Parker decides to retire
Dedmon decides to opt in and stay
Lee decides to opt in and stay
Manu decides to either retire or take Vet Min
Joel Anthony leaves

Then we have:

21.4 - LMA
18.8 - KLaw
10 - Green
3 - Dedmon
2.1 - Kyle Anderson
1.6 - Lee
1.3 - Bertrans
1.2 - Murray
1.8 - Duncan - Dead Cap
1.2 - Livio - Dead Cap
5 - Parker - Dead Cap, stretched over 3 years

67.4mm on the books. (plus 4 min salaries at ~600k as holds)
69.8.

Cap holds for free agents:
Patty Mills: 6.8mm
JSimm: 1.6mm

Assume Pop wants to resign Simmons, so add that to the cap figure, but take away a 600k hold. If Spurs have a shot at CP3, goodbye Patty.

So 70.8mm cap number.

Cap projected to be 101-103mm.

Spurs could theoretically offer CP3 a contract starting at 30mm and keep Simmons. Let Patty walk.

C - Dedmon/Lee
PF - LaMarcus Harden/Bertrans
SF - Kawhi/Anderson
SG - Green/Simmons
PG - CP3/Murray

Add in a rookie and a vet free agent and the team is set. Maybe keep Manu at Vet Min for one more run.

I like it. Sign splitter for cheap for another grinder and get a vet shooter(Reddick) and that's the best Spurs team in years.

I don't think Gasol is going to opt out though. Nobody will give him $15 million (although it is expiring). Would the clips be interested in him in a CP3 sign and trade if the alternative is nothing?

I also don't see Parker hanging it up.

I almost don't want LMA back under any circumstances, but I know that is my tsip bias speaking and know he would be much better with CP3.

Lowrie is another guy chasing a ring. I think him or Hill at $20 million is smarter than Paul at 30. Just my opinion.

GatorAg03 said:

---

I like it. Sign splitter for cheap for another grinder and get a vet shooter(Reddick) and that's the best Spurs team in years.

I don't think Gasol is going to opt out though. Nobody will give him $15 million (although it is expiring). Would the clips be interested in him in a CP3 sign and trade if the alternative is nothing?

I also don't see Parker hanging it up.

I almost don't want LMA back under any circumstances, but I know that is my tsip bias speaking and know he would be much better with CP3.

---

Imagine how frustrated CP3 would be to work hard to set up LA for an alleyoop or other easy look at the rim only to see LA spotting up 18 feet away for the fadeaway.

I agree. I think Lowry is better deal.

Lowry 2016-17 Stats: 22.4 Pts/4.8 Reb/7.0 Ast/41.2% 3-Pt
Lowry 2015-16 Stats: 21.2 Pts/4.7 Reb/6.4 Ast/38.8% 3-Pt

Paul 2016-17 Stats: 18.1 Pts/5.0 Reb/9.2 Ast/41.1% 3-Pt
Paul 2015-16 Stats: 19.5 Pts/4.2 Reb/10.0 Ast/37.1% 3-Pt

I think Lowry will get more money because Toronto will have to overpay to keep him and keep a semi-competitive team together. If you could get Kyle at 20, that is an easy decision, but I don't think he will be there for that.

No chance at a guy like Reddick if Paul takes the entire cap.

If you got George Hill, maybe you could get a guy like Reddick to go with him, but I'd rather just roll the dice with CP3/Murray/Green/Simmons at guard and hopefully Kyle develops some more or we can get an additional SF to help out with minutes there.

But I think you could run Murray 20-25mpg next year, try to keep Paul and Green at 30mpg, and Simmons at 25-30, getting some run at SF as well.

I'll be surprised if Pau opts out. Given his age and skill set, he won't be in great demand on the open market.

Parker, I don't know. I suppose it depends on how his rehab goes.

My gut tells me Manu will retire.

Quote:

---

Parker, I don't know. I suppose it depends on how his rehab goes.

---

Sports Doc I talked to after Parker tore it said Parker was done. Very hard tendon to repair surgically and hard to get his step back.

And Parker was already slowing down a bit, although he had a nice post season resurgence. Plus his game is built on speed.

He might come back, but Spurs have to upgrade the PG position regardless if they want to win big. Mills has unfortunately proven he isn't a true starting PG for a contender.

I don't watch much raptors bball but is lowry as good of a facilitator as CP3? My impression is he is more of a score first PG. An aging and injured Hill, worries me personally.

I think it is CP3 or bust/rebuild around Murray, which means wasting Kawhi's prime. Plus the Lakers are going to be in Kawhi's ear so Spurs need to stay competitive before he nears free agency in a couple years.

Get rid of LMA, Patty is expendable , retain Simmons and sermon. Pau is iffy, lee I like but will let him walk, green needs a pay cut.

How much do you think Simmons will get offered after his playoff performance? The new salary cap skews everything, but surely nobody is offering him $10 million+ right?

I think he would be worth $6-8 million to fill an athleticism void for the Spurs, especially if he works on his shot.

Any comparable players to compare him to that were recently signed?

No clue what he could get. Teams do stupid things when they strike out on the players they want. Maybe he gets lucky, but he is a 6 points 2 rebound wing that turns 28 and hit under 30% of his threes. He is playing great, but I am not sure a team is going to give him MLE money based on five games out of 90.

Pendragon12 said:

---

Chris Paul is the dream, but I just don't know how realistic a dream that is. It fees very unrealistic, but I'll continue to pretend it's possible.

---

It's not especially realistic, but it's not unthinkable.

If Chris Paul REALLY, TRULY wanted to win a championship, he would need to take a paycut, but outside of the Clippers, San Antonio is the perfect fit for him. San Antonio might be a BETTER fit. We already know what we have in the Clippers, and that is a 50 win team that can't get over the hump with who they've got. Chris Paul is not the problem on that team.

If CP3 came to San Antonio, we would have two players who could, at any point, take the reigns that night and carry us to a win. In Los Angeles, it's just him. Blake Griffin is good, but he can't take over a game the way Kawhi can. DeAndre is just an expensive version of Dwight Howard.

The only real problem, and one that I admit even the richest of the rich would have trouble overlooking, is that the best the Spurs could do is 4 years, 150ish million. The Clippers, and only the Clippers, can offer 5 years for 210 million. That's a LOT of money to turn down.

Obi Wan Ginobili said:

---

Pendragon12 said:

---

Chris Paul is the dream, but I just don't know how realistic a dream that is. It fees very unrealistic, but I'll continue to pretend it's possible.

---

It's not especially realistic, but it's not unthinkable.

If Chris Paul REALLY, TRULY wanted to win a championship, he would need to take a paycut, but outside of the Clippers, San Antonio is the perfect fit for him. San Antonio might be a BETTER fit. We already know what we have in the Clippers, and that is a 50 win team that can't get over the hump with who they've got. Chris Paul is not the problem on that team.

If CP3 came to San Antonio, we would have two players who could, at any point, take the reigns that night and carry us to a win. In Los Angeles, it's just him. Blake Griffin is good, but he can't take over a game the way Kawhi can. DeAndre is just an expensive version of Dwight Howard.

The only real problem, and one that I admit even the richest of the rich would have trouble overlooking, is that the best the Spurs could do is 4 years, 150ish million. The Clippers, and only the Clippers, can offer 5 years for 210 million. That's a LOT of money to turn down.

---

All comes down to how seriously the Point God wants to win. Chris Paul has already made 160mm in NBA salaries. The only guard who has made more than him is DWade. And none of that counts his endorsement money - Forbes says he gets about 8.5mm/year in endorsements on top of his NBA salary. So if he averaged about 6.5mm/year in endorsements since he joined the Clippers, he has topped 200mm in career earnings.

Does he want $50mm or a good shot at a Ring with the current coach that has the most rings by a long shot.

My thing is, the extra year is worth about $55 million extra over the life of the contract. While that is nothing to sneeze at, if he were to sign another contract after his 4 year deal with the Spurs, he likely would get 15-20 million in the first year of that new contract, which would make the same five year span worth closer to 170-175. That's still turning down 30-40 million over the course of 5 years, but that's realistically the price to win a championship right now, in his prime.

His legacy is dependent on him winning a title in his prime. If he takes the Clippers money, and then jumps on with Lebron and friends when they are in their late 30's, his inevitable title will be sort of meaningless playing 3rd or 4th fiddle. That's just the way I would see it. If Karl Malone won a title for the Lakers at 40 when he was barely worth throwing out there, people would remember that he didn't really earn that ring.

On the flip side, if he takes the clippers money, he can set his family up for success for generations. That's worth something.

No one thinks of Gary Payton as an NBA champion. He does have a ring thanks to DWade and Shaq, but that isn't his legacy.




Time to decide what your legacy is gonna be, Chris. Money or rings.

Obi Wan Ginobili said:

---

azulAg said:

---

Get rid of LMA, Patty is expendable , retain Simmons and sermon. Pau is iffy, lee I like but will let him walk, green needs a pay cut.

---

GM of the year, folks. Has no clue what he is talking about, but **** it, right? It's the interwebzzz.

Get rid of LMA? How? Alchemy?

Patty is expendable, eh? What if we can't land a PG? That leaves us with Murray. Only Murray. No one else.

I'm on board with retaining Simmons to be Kawhi's backup or to run with Kawhi and Green and lock down good shooting squads.

Retain Sermon.....Wish I knew who that was.

Pau is iffy in what way? It's iffy if you like him? It's iffy if he takes his option? It's iffy if he farts in the bath tub and bites at the bubbles? What in the **** does this even mean?

I'm glad you'll let Lee walk. We don't need a dependable 4/5 who eats up a ton of regular season minutes, sparing our starters from unnecessary miles when we are beating the Bobcats by 20.

Green took a pay cut to stay in San Antonio. We should be thanking him. Best 1-2 combo defensively at the wing position when him and Kawhi run together. Let's also not forget he woke up and started making 3's again this year.

You're my least favorite poster since Simplebay.

---

Patty has been off , retain Simmons and dedmon*, pau doesn't contribute much except rebounds and some block shots, Danny green is still not worth his current salary . Get rid of Aldridge, not that hard to put together

In the end all we need is consistency, LMA and Danny may have their spur of the moment games where they play well but we need somebody who can play well on a daily basis. Everybody loved LMA after game 6 vs Houston, but what's the point of having that caliber player when he can't contribute when we need him to like last night.

Green is not overpaid. Not in this age of NBA players making buckets of money. Is he the greatest offensive threat? No. But he isn't a huge drain on our cap space either for what the alternative would be if we went to the open market.

azulAg said:

---

In the end all we need is consistency, LMA and Danny may have their spur of the moment games where they play well but we need somebody who can play well on a daily basis. Everybody loved LMA after game 6 vs Houston, but what's the point of having that caliber player when he can't contribute when we need him to like last night.

---

Well no sh*t we need consistency. LMA has largely been a disappointment, but you just talked about blowing up our 60+ win roster. Green is a huge asset to our team, especially for what we are paying him.

You are just complaining without offering any realistic solutions.

Green isn't overpaid, but if you need to move him to pay Chris Paul you do so. He is a solid role player but not a must keep no matter what player. He is way too inconsistent and his defense without Kawhi is not that elite.

If the Spurs decided to trade Green and pay Simmons $6-$8 million, which would save a few million and get a 2 year younger player then we should be fine with it.

But if you can keep Green and Simmons while adding Paul, that's about the best defensive set you can ask for against the Warriors big 4.

Kings trying to set picks to get you to switch isn't going to help as much when you can keep four guys with that type of defensive ability on the floor