Summer 2012 Free Agents Thread - Part II

Dat2U · Post #161 » by **Dat2U** » Thu May 31, 2012 11:33 pm

Nate, at this point, I'd rather either try to find that role player in the NBDL & save our cap room for a more significant purchase.

I like Danny Green but watching him in the WCF, it's clear what his limitations are. A great guy to have on your team but even though he starts for SA, he's probably their 7th or 8th best player. Paying $5 million per for a guy that should be rounding out your rotation would make more sense if we needed one more piece to the puzzle. But without landing Anthony Davis, we'll need more than just one piece.

rockymac52 · Post #162 » by **rockymac52** » Fri Jun 1, 2012 12:08 am

Dat2U wrote:Nate, at this point, I'd rather either try to find that role player in the NBDL & save our cap room for a more significant purchase.

I like Danny Green but watching him in the WCF, it's clear what his limitations are. A great guy to have on your team but even though he starts for SA, he's probably their 7th or 8th best player. Paying $5 million per for a guy that should be rounding out your rotation would make more sense if we needed one more piece to the puzzle. But without landing Anthony Davis, we'll need more than just one piece.

I agree with you about Green, and my reasoning is pretty much the same for any of San Antonio's many role players over the years.

The reason that San Antonio always seems to find cheap role players that no one else wanted, and the reason why they always seem to find quality contributors late in the 1st and 2nd rounds of the draft, is twofold. One, Popovich is an amazing coach. Two, they have a fantastic core (Parker/Ginobili/Duncan), and everyone in the NBA knows that those three are the top three players on the Spurs. It's their team. When a player joins the Spurs, whether it's through the draft, a trade, or as a free agent, they know from day one that they are a role player at best. They will be asked to do very specific things, and likewise, they won't be asked to do too much. San Antonio is not a team that will allow anyone outside of their big three to try and be the hero.

Take Stephen Jackson, for example. He's thrived as a role player off the bench for the Spurs because there's no pressure on him. They don't need him to score 15+ PPG, or create his own shots. He's there to contribute here and there. He knows his place. And he accepts it, because there's no denying the Spurs organization and coaching staff know what they're talking about at this point, AND they win games, so it's hard not to be happy coming off the bench as a result. Furthermore, since the Spurs are so good, the league-wide perception is that nearly all of their backups and starters outside of the big three are excellent role players, and are guys that any NBA team would like to have on their roster. However, when you put a player like Jackson (who is a pretty decent player, all things considered) on a team like the Bucks, who don't have as many go-to players or wins, he thinks it's his job to take over and score more. He thinks he's better than he is at that point. He tries to be the hero. He's decent, but he's not nearly good enough to be the hero or even one of the main players for an NBA team.

Then there's the guys like Udrih or Oberto. The guys that play a small role with the Spurs, and do it fairly well because they're disciplined and don't try and do too much, but hey, they're NBA caliber players, they're good at some things, and those things are put on display in their limited role with the Spurs. Teams fall into the trap of thinking these players are better than they are when they're on the Spurs because the Spurs win games and these guys are decent backups who know their role and excel at it. But when they go to another team and are asked to take on a bigger role, they fail miserably. The Spurs' role players know that they are role players. They don't think they could be stars if they were on different teams, for the most part (I'm guessing).

Bottom line, I'm not convinced Danny Green is that good at all. If we sign him, I hope it's for a very small amount of money, and I hope we sign him with the intent of making him a role player - NOT a starter. If we want a guy like Green to come in and be a starter, we're going to be terribly disappointed. He's just very average, if that. If we had a good roster from top to bottom and were already a playoff team, then I'd be all for bringing in a guy like Green to come off the bench and be a real role player. But we're not at that point. Don't overpay.

willbcocks · Post #163 » by **willbcocks** » Fri Jun 1, 2012 2:14 am

If we want to find a stretch 4, I'd try to poach Novak from the Knicks instead of Fields.

I've long been in the patient rebuild camp, and I've been very happy with how everything has turned out in the past two years, but the first stage of the rebuild ends when EG puts in the layup and drafts Beal or MKG (don't blow the layup, EG!).

At that point we're on to stage 2, even though it would have been ideal to have acquired one more top 5 pick while we were in stage 1. The ideal way to manage stage 2 is to build a competitive team without exploding our long-term salary situation. I no longer think it's acceptable to have gaping holes in the lineup or mine the NBDL for guys to play big minutes. We know we will have a gaping hole at either SG and SF, and we should sign someone decent enough to fill it.

In my opinion that gives us two options: sign a lesser player (fields) while preserving max cap room for next year, or sign a better player now. The only 2/3 I would bust next year's budget for is Batum. I don't know about the Blazer FO, but some Blazer fans are hesitant to pay him 10 million a year. Because of the new limitation of 4 years to FA contracts, I don't think a 4 year deal to Batum would hurt us in the long-run, especially if we signed him to a decreasing contract like 12/11/10/9.

If that doesn't work, I would figure out the exact amount we can pay a guy now while maintaining max cap room for next year. Then I would target a player who can play the 2 or the 3 and sign him to, say, a 4/18 deal. If we get lucky and sign Harden or another FA, or draft a starting caliber 2/3 next year, this 4/18 player would be the primary backup at both the 2/3 positions, justifying his cost for the next 3 years of his deal. If we can't find someone better next year, we would still have a starter who's not a complete joke.

A stretch four is more of a luxury given we have 4 guys at the 4/5 who should play significant minutes. I would have CCJ target d league players who can shoot the ball and at one at a miminum salary. Our significant FA signing this summer needs to be a 2 or 3.

ETA: I didn't make it clear above, but the reason I think we're on to stage two and it is acceptable to spend some money is that I think we'll be too good to earn a high lottery pick. We'll likely be drafting in the 10-15 range next year and the 15-20 range the year after. Hopefully we'll get good players in that range like the pacers did.

Dat2U · Post #164 » by **Dat2U** » Fri Jun 1, 2012 11:03 pm

willbcocks, my concern with Novak is that he's too one dimensional. Signing guys like that are fine for contenders but I don't think were in position to make that sort of move.

As of now I'd say Ersan Ilyasova would be my #1 target in free agency. Not only does he stretch the floor, he rebounds, he's impoved as a defender under Skiles and he was Milwaukee's best player IMO last year.

jivelikenice · Post #165 » by **jivelikenice** » Fri Jun 1, 2012 11:16 pm

I've read where Ilyasova may prefer to go back overseas.

I agree that Novak is too one dimensionsal. If you're looking for bench shooting there are other guys who should be available for less like Meeks, Belinelli , & Cartier Martin....

What's the consensus on Gerald Green here? 39% from 3 & 48 % from the field, and he has all the athleticism in the world needed to run the floor with Wall. You might be able to get him at a reasonable contract because teams will be weary of the sample size. He could end up being as good as any of the big free agent 2s and 3s (except for Eric Gordon if he's healthy)....

theboomking · Post #166 » by **theboomking** » Sat Jun 2, 2012 3:55 am

How good is this team next year if we sign Batum, and draft Beal?

Seraphin/Nene
Vesely/Booker
Batum/Martin
Beal/Crawford
Wall/Mack

I think that might be a playoff team in the East, if Wall makes a jump.

Benjammin · Post #167 » by **Benjammin** » Sat Jun 2, 2012 4:06 am

^^^
Not a big deal but I think Nene would certainly start, and likely Booker over Vesely. I don't think the Wiz will be able to get Batum but if they did, I would certainly think that could be a playoff team.

Upper Decker · Post #168 » by **Upper Decker** » Sat Jun 2, 2012 5:34 am

I think Washington might be a place Batum is considering as it'd allow him to play with fellow Frenchman Seraphin. However, any reasonable contract will be matched so i won't get my hopes up.

closg00 · Post #169 » by **closg00** » Sat Jun 2, 2012 4:33 pm

Upper Decker wrote:I think Washington might be a place Batum is considering as it'd allow him to play with fellow Frenchman Seraphin. However, any reasonable contract will be matched so i won't get my hopes up.

Forget it, Aldridge and Batum are the Blazers untouchables.

jivelikenice · Post #170 » by **jivelikenice** » Sat Jun 2, 2012 6:43 pm

Blazers don't have a gm, right? its possible a new gm might not want to invest $10Mm plus in Batum. it would be a tough 1st contract to hand out as it would restrict you for the forseeable future. Not saying its likely, but not a slam dunk they match it.

jivelikenice · Post #171 » by **jivelikenice** » Sat Jun 2, 2012 6:46 pm

The more I think about it, the more Green makes sense.

1. Cheap alternative w/ high upside
2. Only 26 yrs old
3. Can shoot the 3 reasonably well (39%) and has the size necessary to play the 2 & 3
4. Can run the floor and finish

His drawback is defense, but there's no reason he shouldn't be able to improve there.

If you sign him and we end up drafting Beal, we would have added athleticism, shooting, and the ability to space the floor. if you draft Robinson, Green is inexpensive enough where you can still go after a Courtney Lee type...

Post #172 » by **Ruzious** » Sun Jun 3, 2012 1:26 pm

Green's star has not been shining in the playoffs - probably making him an affordable target. His shooting percentages have been okay, but he's gotten to the line for a total of 10 foul shots, and the tv commentators have been making comments questioning his toughness.

cleek+wall · Post #173 » by **cleek+wall** » Sun Jun 3, 2012 8:02 pm

i think we should save our money n go for the bigger free agents in 2013and try to land either howrd or harden. I think they would consider the wiz as a team that can win.. wall , beal? , seraphin and howard?thats a championship team

jivelikenice · Post #174 » by **jivelikenice** » Sun Jun 3, 2012 8:45 pm

Ruzious wrote:Green's star has not been shining in the playoffs - probably making him an affordable target. His shooting percentages have been okay, but he's gotten to the line for a total of 10 foul shots, and the tv commentators have been making comments questioning his toughness.

I was actually referring to Gerald Green. Danny is ok, but is proving to be more of a spot up shooter w/o the ability to offer much else against good competition. More of a backup imo.

Dat2U · Post #175 » by **Dat2U** » Sun Jun 3, 2012 10:20 pm

My concern with Gerald Green is with his b-ball IQ & defense. And after a fast started he faded a bit at the end of the year with the Nets. Plus there's not much history of him playing at a high level. He's not someone I'd feel comfortable overpaying for at this stage.

sfam · Post #176 » by **sfam** » Sun Jun 3, 2012 11:06 pm

Ruzious wrote:Green's star has not been shining in the playoffs - probably making him an affordable target. His shooting percentages have been okay, but he's gotten to the line for a total of 10 foul shots, and the tv commentators have been making comments questioning his toughness.

Yeah, but the reason he'd be affordable is he's sucked hard when they needed him the most. Count me as not overly excited about landing Green. I could live with it, but I'm not one to jump on people who suck under the harsh spotlight of playoff basketball.

sfam · Post #177 » by **sfam** » Sun Jun 3, 2012 11:15 pm

jivelikenice wrote:Blazers don't have a gm, right? its possible a new gm might not want to invest $10Mm plus in Batum. it would be a tough 1st contract to hand out as it would restrict you for the forseeable future. Not saying its likely, but not a slam dunk they match it.

Batum has made it clear he's taking the first good offer that comes:

http://www.blazersedge.com/2012/5/15/30 ... or-blazers

If we want him, it would make sense to throw 11 mil at him the moment FA opens. This in essence ties their GM's hands to either make the rest of their moves within that 72 hour window, and thus exceeding the cap by signing Batum, or flat out to let him go. If we get Beal, this would be a good move, as we really will have to overpay a second tier player to come here. Batum makes sense in that he's still improving - he may end up really great in another year or two.

J-Ves · Post #178 » by **J-Ves** » Mon Jun 4, 2012 12:24 am

I'd be willing to go as high as 5 years 60 million for Batum. It would be grossly overpaying for what is essentially a super 3andD guy, but hes exactly what this team needs.

Its either go for this guy now or Harden next year. Harden is the better player of the two, dont get me wrong, but the Wiz cant afford to pass up a chance to acquire the top free agent at their greatest position of need.

Adding Batum and Beal, while retaining guys like Martin and J. Singleton would be my ideal offseason.

closg00 · Post #179 » by **closg00** » Mon Jun 4, 2012 1:41 am

Batum's agent can say whatever he wants, sure they will sign an offer, however Batum remains a restricted FA and Portland intends to have him as part of their rebuilding core.

The Blazers have two untouchable players right now in LaMarcus Aldridge and Nicolas Batum. They could use help everywhere else. It will be very interesting to see if they roll the dice on Drummond if he slides this far. The upside, at No. 6, may be too much to pass up.

http://www.oregonlive.com/blazers/index ... links.html

Portland has also turned-down trade-offers for Batum and they traded Wallace. Batum is staying in Portland.

theboomking · Post #180 » by **theboomking** » Mon Jun 4, 2012 2:36 am

closg00 wrote:Batum's agent can say whatever he wants, sure they will sign an offer, however Batum remains a restricted FA and Portland intends to have him as part of their rebuilding core.

The Blazers have two untouchable players right now in LaMarcus Aldridge and Nicolas Batum. They could use help everywhere else. It will be very interesting to see if they roll the dice on Drummond if he slides this far. The upside, at No. 6, may be too much to pass up.

http://www.oregonlive.com/blazers/index ... links.html

Portland has also turned-down trade-offers for Batum and they traded Wallace. Batum is staying in Portland.

Fine. Sign him to an offer sheet and make Portland match.