If you've read me long enough, you know I'm a Spurs fan, and so, as you've likely guessed, I'm going to talk about the Spurs. While it bothers me somewhat that it's Dallas of all teams that's ousting my beloved Spurs, rather embarassingly, from the first round, there's a part of me that's sort of glad that they were rather soundly trounced. No one ever likes seeing their team lose, but nonetheless, I hope that Greg Popovich and RC Buford see this as a strong wakeup call that it's not 2005 anymore. While Tony Parker has evolved to become the star that everyone hoped for, Manu Ginobili and Tim Duncan, while by no means quickly losing ground to old age, aren't really quite what they were almost 5 years ago. I don't want to hear the, "If only Manu were healthy..." excuses, the fact of the matter remains, outside of the Big 3 of Duncan, Ginobili, and Parker, the San Antonio Spurs are a mediocre team, at best.
Please don't tell me otherwise, I have no delusions of grandeur. Don't tell me how Roger Mason has been clutch, because while he's made a couple of big shots, he's a relatively ineffecient player and scorer. He's just getting more attention because he's not buried behind Gilbert Arenas and Antonio Daniels on the Wizards. In the additional 9 minutes of play he's averaging an additional 2.7 points, 1.5 rebounds, 0.4 assists, and 0.3 turnovers on 3 additional shot attempts, shooting roughly the same percentages (with a slightly increased 3pt shooting percentage I attribute to better looks). 11 points, 3 rebounds, and 2 assist, with essentially no steals, no blocks, and a couple of threes in 30+ minutes of play isn't my definition of stellar. The guy turns 29 by the start of the next regular season, so I can't really imagine him getting better. Don't get me wrong, he's solid, an average role player, I just don't want people getting the wrong idea he's some kind of savior. If you don't believe me, check his per 36 numbers between this year and last. He actually did better last year because he had to facilitate more, since the only time he got to see significant floor time was when both Arenas and Daniels were injured.
I know Michael Finley can get hot once and a while and shoot the Spurs to a win. However, the distance between such games is growing ever larger. The man is 36, we have to remember that. He's almost 10 years removed from his best season. This isn't the 1999 22 point per game Michael Finley, this is the 2009 9 point per game, with streaky 3s, as capable of being red hot as he is consistently ice cold.
While Bruce Bowen is a solid contributor on the defensive end, he's about a month shy of 38. In basketball terms, 38 is a big number, when referring to age, big numbers are bad. Ok, maybe not "bad" but certainly it doesn't help his athleticism and ability to stay in front of younger, more athletic players. Same goes for Kurt Thomas and Fabricio Oberto, who are 36 and 34 respectively.
Finally, while Matt Bonner has been a pleasant surprise this season, it's only because everyone had absolutely no expectations about him whatsoever coming into the season. When nothing turns out to be something, it's always something of a shock (in a good way). Let's be honest though, while Bonner's production was somewhat serindipidous, he's not much more than a poor man's version of Al Harrington or Andrea Bargnani. That's pretty bad. Granted, he's no Mark Blount or Brian Cook, but still, I don't know that it merits 23 minutes per game.
Jacque Vaughn was, well... Jacque Vaughn, I don't know that I really need to say much more than that. As for Drew Gooden, it was too little, too late. He's good, and he played fairly well with the Spurs, but I think that he's going to want more than he's worth, at least to the Spurs. There are other intricacies involved with Gooden, I'll get into that later.
Generally speaking, you could probably just read Timothy Varner's post at 48 Minutes regarding how the Spurs should move forward, which boils down a lot of the needs. It doesn't quite sum up what I want to talk about, but definitely is worth reading. I take a slightly different approach from Varner, but I think his ideas have merit and work too. Sounds like Varner is going to have a bunch of upcoming posts as to how the Spurs should improve their roster, so I'd always keep an eye on what Graydon and Varner have going on there, it's usually good stuff.
As you might've heard, the salary cap is supposed to fall. If you're not sure what that means, it means that teams are allowed less money to sign their players. Since as the cap falls, so does the luxury tax threshhold and likely the mid-level exception. The current salary cap is set at $58.68 million, it's expected to drop to $57.3 million, now in terms of salary flexibility, it doesn't mean much for the Spurs, as they're over the cap either way, however, if the MLE drops, they have less money with which to improve their roster. If we look at the roster next season, the Spurs will have approximately $66 million in salary tied up in Duncan, Parker, Ginobili, Thomas, Bowen, Mason, Bonner, Hill, Mahinmi (if they exercise their team option), and Finley (if he exercises his player option). Of the above mentioned players, the core I think Spurs should rebuild around are Duncan, Parker, Ginobili, Hill, and Mahinmi. While it would be nice to retain Mason and maybe Bonner, I personally don't think it necessary, and am willing to part with them, if it means an improvement to the roster, in short, they're not untouchable.
So far, the only thing the Spurs really have to play around with are expiring contracts, as everyone on the roster except essentially Duncan and Parker are not guaranteed past 2010. Given that a lot of teams are probably looking to cut costs, it's not a bad situation to be in. We'll see how all that pans out though. However, before we start looking into that, I want to address one thing:
In short, my answer is: no. I suppose I should probably expound on that a little bit, there are various posts/comments and such around the internet regarding whether or not Manu should be traded. There are various reasons to think consider trading Manu. He's 32, he's beat up, and he's not getting younger, and therefore has the "injury-prone" label applied to him, especially given his style of play, granted, he's never played a whole season in his 7 season in the NBA, but still, he has been playing basketball essentially for the past 2-3 years (since the 2006-2007 season), straight, meaning no offseason (FIBA qualifiers and then Olympics). I'm not going to get into whether or not he should've been allowed to represent Argentina in the international games, but I'm just going to say this, while the Spurs pay him, they don't own him. Let the man make his decisions. You don't see Laker fans complain about how Kobe put off hand surgery and represented the US, oh yeah, Kobe's turning 31 by the way.
Anyways I digress. While I won't off handedly turn down any offers for Manu (like say LeBron for Manu), I don't believe that it's in the Spurs' best interest to trade him. Firstly, as he has the "injury-prone" label, I don't think his stock is that high. Yes, I think we all realize that he's only one season removed from the best statistical season he's ever had (2007-2008), but still, given that he hasn't played for most of the year, and only played a gimpy 44 games this season, I don't know that the Spurs could really get anything of significant value back for him. Secondly, I believe that Ginobili can still continue to contribute to the Spurs, and I honestly don't want to take the risk that Ginobili comes back with a vengence next season, on a different team. I can't really articulate another reason beyond that it just feels wrong, but I honestly think that a player of Ginobili's ilk is definitely something the Spurs need and it brings an intangible aspect of mojo and chemistry to the lockerroom. I'm sure Ginobili will be reasonable about what to expect in the form of an extension next season. Spurs are good at drafting players that usually are (reasonable about their salary).
So what've we got to work with? Well, simply put, we have the MLE (approximately $5 million), tack on another million or so for a veteran's minimum, plus upwards of $20 million in expiring contracts. Rumors are swirling about how Rasheed Wallace is a significant possibility come this offseason. While 'Sheed isn't exactly what the Spurs need to get younger (he turns 35 by next season), he's definitely what the Spurs want in another big man to play around Duncan. He's solid in the low post, he's a decent mid-range to long-range shooter, he's effective as a defender for a big man, he's a shot blocking presence, a decent rebounder, and he's played for a defense-first championship caliber Detroit Pistons. Finally, 'Sheed being 35, would likely not field offers anywhere near his current salary of $13 million per year. If 'Sheed is serious about winning another ring, there's not much better place than the one team that has won the most rings in the past 10 years (4 since 1999, Lakers have 3, Pistons 1, Miami 1, Boston 1). Timothy Varner mentions somewhere in his post that Spurs might be able to get Wallace for about $3.5 million of the MLE, ok, let's say he takes that much, what are the Spurs' other options now?
I've been pretty extensive looking through the free agency list, and honestly, for under $2 million, I don't know that we could sign anyone great, reasonably, I say we have a decent shot at someone like Walter Herrmann, who's been somewhat buried in the Piston's roster ever since the trade for Allen Iverson. Herrmann is currently signed for $2 million, I don't know if Pistons want to keep him, but surely, the Spurs could afford to try to throw at least a little money at him. Marquis Daniels is another intriguing option, but it's possible that he might be commanding a little more than Spurs could really afford.
Given the money situation, restricted free agents like Marvin Williams, Josh Childress, Paul Millsap, Brandon Bass are all a little out of reach. Before we get any further though, so as not to utterly confuse you all, I suppose it would be best to sit down and hammer out what exactly the Spurs need. Well, the obvious answer would be, any player not named Tony Parker, Tim Duncan, or Manu Ginobili, but it helps to have something a bit more concrete of an idea. There are two dire needs that have shown up towards the waning stages of the regular season and well into the playoffs that seem to plague the Spurs.
First order of business I believe would be a legitimate big man to play next to Tim Duncan. The Spurs believed that it would be young French draft prospect Ian Mahinmi, but he was injured during the course of the season and therefore couldn't play. However, I don't really see Mahinmi being the solution in the near future. While he continues to develop under Duncan, I think that as of now, he'd best serve as a sort of energy man off the bench, much in the mold of Anderson Varejao or Brandon Bass. While, I've yet to see him play, hopefully he gets some more playing time and experience in and it pans out. However, the immediate need for a big man that can immediately step into a starting role and play next to Tim Duncan then still remains very real and very unfilled. The roles have traditionally been filled with big men that were able defenders and able to spread the floor with a mid-range jumper, generally spreading the floor and allowing Duncan to work his magic in the low post. For those that don't remember, this group includes David Robinson in the later years of his career, Rasho Nesterovic, and Fabricio Oberto. While Kurt Thomas fits this role fairly well, his offense is somewhat too inconsistent to rely on, hence, Popovich went with Matt Bonner, sacrificing defense for some added offense. While Drew Gooden might be serviceable, and while both he and Duncan can play on the block and pull out defenses, I'm not a fan of Gooden when he starts jacking up wing 20 footers. The general consensus is that his game isn't versatile enough and too similar to Duncan's for him to be worth much money to hold on to. Additionally, his weakness on the defensive end certainly doesn't help matters any.
Enter Rasheed Wallace. No one expects Wallace to carry a team anymore, and on the Spurs he won't have to. He's a solid man-to-man defender, and between him and Duncan, they can split defensive assignments against opposing bigs. While 'Sheed isn't inclined to play much in the low block anymore, he certainly is more than able when the need arises, and he won't have to really do it all that much. Additionally, the need for his offense is generally something he's been doing a lot of lately (much to the frustration of many Detroit fans I'm sure), that is, shooting outside jumpers. No one questions Wallace's ability to play solid defense in the post, and of course, Wallace, while not known to be a crusher, does add a much needed shot blocking presence outside of Duncan for the Spurs' frontcourt. The biggest caveat with Sheed is simply that he might be something of a headcase, however, I think that two things mitigate the risk and make it worth taking; first, if 'Sheed wants to win, he knows he has to shape up. Remember, he played for Larry Brown, I'm sure Greg Popovich is used to having to deal with antics as such after Dennis Rodman. Secondly, Tim Duncan will still be there to help keep 'Sheed in line.
Now, I don't believe Rasheed Wallace to be the ultimate answer, but he certainly is the most realistic and I believe will help the Spurs tremendously. Granted if I could choose any player flirting with free agency, I'd actually take Mehmet Okur over Rasheed Wallace. However, given the situation, I highly doubt that Okur would opt out of his contract from the Jazz ($9 million) as he knows given the market he won't get anything more, and I highly doubt that the Spurs could offer him much, unless they pulled a sign-and-trade. Varner declares the Spurs to be major players in the 2010 market, and he's probably better informed than I am, however, I still don't really see the Spurs making a huge splash. However, I'm not going to complain if Spurs manage to somehow nab Chris Bosh via free agency. Given that, if Spurs really are looking into the 2010 free agency, and that the only reason Mehmet Okur would opt out would be for a longer contract since he's not getting a bigger one, then I don't know that the Spurs would want to go for Okur. While I'm rather skeptical about the amount of involvement Spurs will have in the 2010 free agency, I'm in agreement with Varner that should we tie someone up long term, at a fairly steep price, we might as well swing for the fences. $10 million per for Mehmet Okur for the next 5 seasons isn't exactly my idea of a home run.
There are also a number of restricted free agents that might come cheap, names such as Paul Millsap, David Lee, Charlie Villanueva, and Brandon Bass have all played themselves into prominence. However, being RFAs, I don't believe that their respective teams are willing to let them just walk, especially not at whatever the Spurs might be asking for. Furthermore, I see all of these guys more as kind of hustle players, and therefore, I'm willing to let these guys walk for the sake of seeing how Mahinmi pans out. I don't see any of these guys starting well next to Duncan, hence I generally tend to look more for players that are center eligible, and I mean on a normal team, not in a Mike D'Antoni offense.
Secondly, I believe that an upgrade in the wing position is needed, primarily the starting and backup SF position. Currently, the spot is platooned between Michael Finley, Bruce Bowen, and Ime Udoka. Now the commonality between the three is that they can all kind of hit threes, Bowen and Udoka are known more for their abilities on the defensive end, and Finley is just a slight upgrade offensively and downgrade defensively from the two. I believe this to be one of the biggest needs of the Spurs, and to make the biggest impact, I believe that the Spurs will have to trade themselves into a good spot. The biggest issue, is how the Spurs can't keep up with more athletic and younger teams, well to solve that, I would imagine the Spurs would just have to get more athletic and younger. Ideally, you'd want someone that can defend and hit threes (i.e. Bowen and Udoka). Now if I were to make a list of lockdown defenders, I could tell you that I don't see any of them falling into San Antonio in the near future, so, since we're likely not getting the likes of Shane Battier or Tayshaun Prince, I would propose that the Spurs alter some of the criteria, this would undoubtedly change the overall "feel" of the Spurs, but I think the long run make them better. I'll take an above average defender, esepcially if the Spurs land someone like Rasheed Wallace. I'm also willing to forgo 3 point shooting prowess to the level that said player can make enough to keep defenses honest.
That being said, I'm not sure that the free agency then is the best place in which the Spurs will be able to make a major splash and upgrade their roster, in which case they will need to do something via trade. However, one name in free agency that I've continually brought up and will continually bring up is the name of Walter Herrmann. I'm sure most of you are wondering who the heck I'm talking about, those of you that actually know me and have talked with me about basketball have surely heard his name mentioned somewhere in the course of conversation before. Fabio, as he's known in the basketball world, has proven that he's effective when he gets minutes. He's a little older, yes, turning 30 this June, however, he's on Detroit's books for $2 million and is a free agent this summer, and averages slightly more than 10 minutes per game, playing just under 6 minutes per during the playoffs. He's shown on Charlotte and in Detroit that if he's given extended minutes he can definitely do some damage. Additionally, he's a solid defender and can hit threes, he understands the team chemistry thing as he's won an Olympic gold medal playing with fellow Argentines Manu Ginobili and Fabricio Oberto, so I don't see chemistry being a huge issue. He's not a guy that demands shots, and is someone that makes the most of them. He's virtually an ideal Spur. RC Buford, if you are reading this, and ignore everything else I say, FIND A WAY TO SIGN WALTER HERRMANN!!!
Anyways, there are a number of other options both in restricted and unrestricted free agency that seem to be fairly intriguing. My sign-and-trade dream player that's semi-realistic would likely be Marvin Williams, who's definitely shown that he can step up and play big when he's called to do so. The only reason I say semi-realistic is because of the ineptitude with which the Hawks' front office handled the Josh Smith and Josh Childress contracts last offseason. Additionally, he and Raymond Felton are the only players picked top 5 in their class to not have a contract extension agreement already reached (the other 3 players being Andrew Bogut, Deron Williams, and Chris Paul). Re-signing Williams should be something of a no-brainer for the Hawks, but it's possible that they re-sign Mike Bibby for way too much and can't afford to match offers made to Williams. Of course, I doubt the Spurs would be the ones making that sort of offer. Josh Childress would be another guy I'd look for, but I don't know that he's coming back from Europe quite yet, and again, Hawks still own his rights.
Another player to look at would be Marquis Daniels, who has played exceptionally well for the Pacers, in light of injuries to Mike Dunleavy and Danny Granger throughout the season (mostly Dunleavy). He's rather expensive at the moment, so I don't really expect Indiana to pick up his $7.3 million team option. If he can be convinced to play for less, then it might be worthwhile.
Otherwise, the Spurs really have to look into various trade options in order to better improve their situation on the wings. Milwaukee looks to be a venue of possibility, however, the only player I'd really look into in Milwaukee would be Joe Alexander, as he's little used. While I'd rather have Luc Richard Mbah-a-Moute, I understand that Milwaukee probably would be a little unwilling to part with him. Alexander is somewhat little used and I see a lot of potential there that the Spurs could really tap into. I think a system like the Spurs is one where Alexander could really thrive in. The main problem is that I don't really see the Bucks adding salary just to get rid of Alexander, as they're looking to cut costs to be able to re-sign Ramon Sessions and Charlie Villanueva. Therefore, it's possible that they might ask the Spurs to take Richard Jefferson as part of the package. While I'm not entirely against having Richard Jefferson on the roster, I am opposed to adding $13 million in salary for a single player while having to dump virtually all tradeable assets (it'd end up being something like Bowen, Oberto, Bonner, and Thomas for Jefferson and Alexander).
I'm actually not super opposed to taking on Jared Jeffries's contract on the condition we can land Wilson Chandler. Bowen and Oberto for Jeffries and Chandler would be the scenario. Of course, that likely tears a hole in any 2010 plans that the Spurs may have had.
Another player I'm rather fond of would be Kelenna Azubuike. Though I doubt the Warriors part with him, and would likely give the Spurs Jamal Crawford or Corey Maggette in the process, both at prices that I wouldn't want, it's still something to consider. That being said, I wouldn't mind seeing Stephen Jackson back in a Spurs uniform.
All in all, there aren't a whole lot of options out there, so I'm kind of digging the bottom of the barrel here. I highly doubt that the Spurs land Trevor Ariza somehow, but Jamario Moon might be another player that they decide to take a risk on. Ultimately, I'm sure RC Buford has a plan worked out, and he probably has better scouts for younger players in D-League and Europe than I do. As you can see, the Spurs need to seriously retool their roster. The premise I think will be generally the same, fundamentally sound, defensive basketball, just how it's done will be somewhat different. However, I think the Spurs, with the right moves, can definitely stay in the thick of it.
Posts
