The 2013 NBA Free Agency Thread

[verbal8]

I know I'm in the minority on this, but really hope we aren't trying to bring back Webster AND keep Ariza. No matter how much love there is for Webster, folks have got to realize that's poor allocation of the limited resources we have this offseason.

I am in favor of retaining Webster at a reasonable cost. It does crowd the SF position, but he also looks like a good option as a back-up SG.

I think Ariza can get enough PT early in the season to have some trade value. It would be ideal to trade him for a big or back-up guard, but a future pick and cap space or expiring contract would be fine also.

[rockymac52]

Actually I don't think it is. Nevermind the fact that I think Webster is very important to our future and that I think we can keep him and Ariza, the reason I'm starting to realize might be more important is the alternative options, or lack thereof.

Let's say we didn't re-sign Webster. Then we'd have the full MLE to work with, and we could spend it on either a backup PG or another big man. I agree that both of those positions are definitely in need of an upgrade. However, I'm not so sure that there is anybody available this year that we could sign with the MLE that is that good of a value.

Regarding the backup PG, I think we can re-sign AJ Price for the vet min or BAE at most very easily. That's the bar we would have to beat. There's a solid collection of veteran backup PGs available that have been thrown around as possibilities here and elsewhere, but IMO, most of them are no better than Price, despite the fact that they're likely going to cost us more annual salary as well as a commitment of at least 2 years, which will therefore eat into our cap space next summer, whereas a 1 year deal for Price would not. We all have our personal preferences, but I'm just not convinced that the likes of Aaron Brooks, Beno Udrih, CJ Watson, etc. are that much better than Price, if at all. Maybe they'd be worth spending $3 million on instead of Price's $1-2 million, but not if it's a multi-year deal, because that would eat into our cap space next summer. If we aren't re-signing Webster, then the only backup PGs I want to look at are guys who would cost the full MLE and deserve it. Some guys who fit that profile that I'd consider are Jarrett Jack, Jose Calderon, and Mo Williams. But there's no guarantee that those guys will sign for the MLE, and even if they will, there's no guarantee that they'd do so with us, especially if they are going to struggle to find consistent minutes other than the 12 MPG backing up Wall at PG.

As for big men, there's some guys available that I like (Brandan Wright, DeJuan Blair, Carl Landry), but some of them don't deserve the full MLE, and some of them might cost more than the MLE, meaning we couldn't sign them. There just aren't many legit upgrades worth spending the full MLE on that are available at our positions of need. That's why this is a good time to spend a portion of the MLE, probably the majority, on Webster. There's plenty of similarly talented wings available right now, so we might be able to get Webster for less than we would have if he were a free agent in another year.

Until someone gives me a good alternative of where we'd spend the MLE money, I just don't see why you wouldn't want Webster.

[rockymac52]

I know I'm in the minority on this, but really hope we aren't trying to bring back Webster AND keep Ariza. No matter how much love there is for Webster, folks have got to realize that's poor allocation of the limited resources we have this offseason.

I am in favor of retaining Webster at a reasonable cost. It does crowd the SF position, but he also looks like a good option as a back-up SG.

I think Ariza can get enough PT early in the season to have some trade value. It would be ideal to trade him for a big or back-up guard, but a future pick and cap space or expiring contract would be fine also.

I've heard a lot of people talk about trading Ariza at the deadline, but honestly, I don't see us getting a draft pick in return for him. First of all, he's expiring, so even if a team really wanted him, he wouldn't be guaranteed to stay with his new team, so they wouldn't give up a 1st rounder in return, no matter how much protection was attached. Second, if a team really wanted him, they could just sign him that summer as a free agent most likely, so again, no need to give away their 1st round pick. If we can get a 1st rounder, even if it's heavily protected for the forseeable future, then sure, go ahead, but I just don't see it happening.

Then maybe we could trade Ariza for a backup PG or big man, but I wouldn't want to do that unless it was a quality player we actually wanted, and he'd have to be signed to a very reasonable deal. If it's not an expiring contract, then I don't want that player's salary to eat up our cap space that we're on track to have next summer. Unless of course it's for a player that's young and good, but guess what? No one is trading us a young and good player signed to a reasonable deal for an expiring Trevor Ariza. Get real.

And if we're talking about trading Ariza for a similarly talented player at PG or PF/C who is also expiring, then I don't think it's worth it. First of all, that same deal would probably be available this summer, so if we're interested in that trade now, we should just take it. Second of all, I don't really see many players who are expiring next year that fit that profile, at least not anybody that their teams would want to give up in return for Ariza. And at the deadline, as long as things are going well for us, I'd rather not rock the boat and lose a contributing player and try to integrate a new guy mid-season.

I'm just very skeptical of our ability to trade Ariza at the deadline for a fair value that doesn't hurt our long-term cap situation. I'd rather just keep Ariza on the team for the rest of the season, do what we can in the playoffs (hopefully), and then let Ariza walk next summer if need be.

[Dat2U]

I know I'm in the minority on this, but really hope we aren't trying to bring back Webster AND keep Ariza. No matter how much love there is for Webster, folks have got to realize that's poor allocation of the limited resources we have this offseason.

I am in favor of retaining Webster at a reasonable cost. It does crowd the SF position, but he also looks like a good option as a back-up SG.

I think Ariza can get enough PT early in the season to have some trade value. It would be ideal to trade him for a big or back-up guard, but a future pick and cap space or expiring contract would be fine also.

A 3rd guard can slide over to SG as well. If you have 3rd guard, you really don't have a need for backup SG outside of someone like Garrett Temple for depth purposes.

Webster isn't really a 2 anyways. He can play there in a pinch, but that's not his ideal position in terms of ball skills or lateral quickness. I'd say the same goes for Rice, he's ideally a SF.

My problem is if you throw money at Webster and keep Ariza, that's going to leave us looking back at A.J. Price or having to settle for a 3rd guard types like John Lucas III or Eric Maynor as your first guard off the bench and IMO that's not satisfactory depth for a team with real playoff aspirations. I would have hoped lessons would have been learned from last years debacle due to no legit depth behind Wall.

[rockymac52]

I know I'm in the minority on this, but really hope we aren't trying to bring back Webster AND keep Ariza. No matter how much love there is for Webster, folks have got to realize that's poor allocation of the limited resources we have this offseason.

I am in favor of retaining Webster at a reasonable cost. It does crowd the SF position, but he also looks like a good option as a back-up SG.

I think Ariza can get enough PT early in the season to have some trade value. It would be ideal to trade him for a big or back-up guard, but a future pick and cap space or expiring contract would be fine also.

A 3rd guard can slide over to SG as well. If you have 3rd guard, you really don't have a need for backup SG outside of someone like Garrett Temple for depth purposes.

Webster isn't really a 2 anyways. He can play there in a pinch, but that's not his ideal position in terms of ball skills or lateral quickness. I'd say the same goes for Rice, he's ideally a SF.

My problem is if you throw money at Webster and keep Ariza, that's going to leave us looking back at A.J. Price or having to settle for a 3rd guard types like John Lucas III or Eric Maynor as your first guard off the bench and IMO that's not satisfactory depth for a team with real playoff aspirations. I would have hoped lessons would have been learned from last years debacle but apparently they weren't.

See, I keep seeing people say things like this, and it really frustrates me because I don't understand your logic. I agree that those types of PGs aren't very inspiring, and they leave a lot to be desired. Ideally we'd have a better player at that position. However, I don't see who that player could be, even if we let Webster walk. Who would you prefer we spend the MLE on that drastically improves our backup PG spot?

[Dat2U]

Nate Robinson IMO is the absolute perfect fit. Were a defensive minded team that's going to need scoring off the bench. Who better than a guy that can handle a heavy workload and hit big shots when needed?

[Dat2U]

Replace A.J. Price with Nate Robinson last year, and we might have been legitimately fighting for a playoff spot (we wouldn't have tanked the last 6 games or so to end the season).

[popper]

I like both Nate Robinson and Will Bynum. I've got to think that if Webster is a priority signing then Ariza trade discussions must be taking place. It doesn't make sense otherwise unless he'll sign for cheap.

[FAH1223]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/TommyDeeTKB/status/351713320560111616[/tweet]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/TommyDeeTKB/status/351714019935137794[/tweet]

[Higga]

I like Webster, but you gotta be careful about what kinda contract you give him. The key to building a championship contender is having lots of guys on bargain contracts since the superstars take up so much. Pay Webster even a few million too much and it's gonna hurt us in the long run. Even moreso now with the drafting of Porter. Really wish we hadn't made that Ariza/Okafor deal...

Nate Robinson would be a good backup PG for us, but I bet there will be a lot of contenders who will want him and I can't imagine him picking us over a team that has a shot at a ring.

[jivelikenice]

Nate Robinson IMO is the absolute perfect fit. Were a defensive minded team that's going to need scoring off the bench. Who better than a guy that can handle a heavy workload and hit big shots when needed?

Dat, I'm stunned at how many ppl want to keep Ariza and Webster. Do ppl actually think that Ariza/Webster/Otto can share minutes and be happy about their roles and the inconsistent playing time that will come along with it? It makes no sense. This roster has two glaring weaknesses. Why allocate further resources into a position that already is pretty much set and ignore other vital needs? Otto/ Webster or Otto/Ariza is enough at the 3. Can you really justify spending $15+ million and the 3rd pick on one position?

Back to the PT issue, I keep reading ppl say, "well Webster can play some 2 and Trevor can play some 4". You're trying to piece together minutes and the one constant in bball is you can't have consistent results w/o consistent playing time and a consistent role. Ariza and Webster aren't guys like Vesely or Singleton who have no business complaining about whatever opportunities they get. They're vets who have established themselves and played better given bigger opportunties. If all three are on the team, 100% guaranteed you will hear complaints from either Ariza or Webster (most likely Ariza) before the deadline. Its soo easily predictable that its maddening that people want to go through the motions to get to that result.

[jivelikenice]

You could also sign Webster and keep Ariza and have all the depth you want at SF, and it wouldn't help one iota if Wall got hurt and a portion of the season. A 3rd guard capable of filling in is a greater need than keepnig 3 SFs.

[LyricalRico]

Agree with not preferring a SF logjam. My preference is to move Ariza for depth at other positions and still bring back Webster.

[jivelikenice]

Agree with not preferring a SF logjam. My preference is to move Ariza for depth at other positions and still bring back Webster.

that's my preferred scenario because Webster can be a long-term fit as a rotational piece off the bench while Ariza is gone after this year regardless.

[Deeptu McPullup]

Why allocate further resources into a position that already is pretty much set and ignore other vital needs?

Because change is a terrible, vile, awful thing that's really scarey.

There's no way to balance the roster without change, so we're just not going to do it, OK? Change = bad.

If it were up to me, we'd still have Overton and LaBradford under contract.

[nate33]

I agree with rockymac on this. In theory, letting Webster go and using the money to fill a need makes sense, but it doesn't work with this crop of free agents. There isn't a full-MLE stretch four that interests me, and the only full-MLE combo guard I like is Jack. Outside of Jack, I'd rather have Webster at 3 years $10-12M than anyone else at the full MLE.

I'd REALLY like to see Ariza bulk up with the goal of being a fill time PF. I think he could be as effective as Shawn Marion or Robert Horry if he did so. If he did so and it worked out, I'd be willing to resign him next summer. He's got a long term home here if he's willing to do what out takes.

[GhostsOfGil]

I agree with rockymac on this. In theory, letting Webster go and using the money to fill a need makes sense, but it doesn't work with this crop of free agents. There isn't a full-MLE stretch four that interests me, and the only full-MLE combo guard I like is Jack. Outside of Jack, I'd rather have Webster at 3 years $10-12M than anyone else at the full MLE.

I'd REALLY like to see Ariza bulk up with the goal of being a fill time PF. I think he could be as effective as Shawn Marion or Robert Horry if he did so. If he did so and it worked out, I'd be willing to resign him next summer. He's got a long term home here if he's willing to do what out takes.

If Ariza hasn't bulked up by now, I doubt he will. His commitment to the team seems half hearted as is. I'm not sure he's willing to change his game for the sake of this team as an expiring contract.
Question: If we let Webster walk, would it allow us to absorb Milsap via an Ariza S&T?

[jivelikenice]

Why would Ariza attempt to change his whole body type and take on an entirely different role going into a contract year? He already feels he's a starting 3 in the league and has said so. And what's wrong with Nate as a third guard?

[Dat2U]

Why allocate further resources into a position that already is pretty much set and ignore other vital needs?

Because change is a terrible, vile, awful thing that's really scarey.

There's no way to balance the roster without change, so we're just not going to do it, OK? Change = bad.

If it were up to me, we'd still have Overton and LaBradford under contract.

And we fall in love with our players. We overvalue continuity and familiarity. We artificially inflate the value of our roster. It's something fans, coaches, GMs and ownership always do.

We'll do anything to make a Webster/Ariza/Porter trio work, regardless if it's ideal or not. Ariza at PF, Webster at SG, some scrub guard at PG because we can't afford to upgrade if we pay Webster. The desire to resign Price & Temple and keep things status quo. Yep, we are definitely scared of change.

[jivelikenice]

I just can't believe the need to keep Ariza and Webster trumps the need for a viable third guard after our start last season.