Author Topic: Should Spurs sign Scola now?  (Read 3932 times)

Offline Lurker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3705
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Should Spurs sign Scola now?
« Reply #15 on: March 21, 2007, 02:25:09 PM »
 The key in this report is less money....all they could offer him was all or part of the midlevel exception.  And Scola wanted it all...which makes sense because almost all of his earnings would go to his Euro team for the buyout.


Quote
Argentine forward Luis Scola is one of the best players in Europe and most scouts agree he would be a rotation-worthy player in the NBA. The Spurs wanted to sign him two summers ago, but the buyout with his Spanish team was enormous. The figure has been reduced to a more modest $3.5 million, but the Spurs now have less room on their roster — and payroll — for Scola.


I don't have more time to search...enjoy spinning these reports as you do everything else posted that you disagree with....
It riles them to believe that you perceive the web they weave.  Keep on thinking free.
-Moody Blues

Offline Reality

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8738
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Should Spurs sign Scola now?
« Reply #16 on: March 22, 2007, 11:20:42 AM »
The key in this report is less money....all they could offer him was all or part of the midlevel exception.  And Scola wanted it all...which makes sense because almost all of his earnings would go to his Euro team for the buyout.

I don't have more time to search...enjoy spinning these reports as you do everything else posted that you disagree with...

Awwww.  Are those "reports of the Spurs offer" that were "all over the local media" no where to be found?

Well if anyone is interested in some truth, the buyout apparantly cannot be done during the Euro season.  Euro league will not allow it.  So this year even the idea of it is out till when the Euro league ends, around 1st week of June.  By that time Spurs will be in the Finals led by Michael Finley.

And the figures you are guessing at may well be what Scola was asking, but no one knows what/if the Spurs were offering nor what Scola was asking, because neither party ever said.

Also, minimum for a first year NBA player is $412,718.

Quote
Argentine forward Luis Scola is one of the best players in Europe and most scouts agree he would be a rotation-worthy player in the NBA. The Spurs wanted to sign him two summers ago, but the buyout with his Spanish team was enormous. The figure has been reduced to a more modest $3.5 million, but the Spurs now have less room on their roster — and payroll — for Scola.

Yep.  Scola would not have been the key, but he may have been a small key.  So while Cuban spends 17 mil per on Finley the Spurs are not spending a cent on Scola and won't be until 2007-8 season at the earliest if at all.  Pretty much a blown draft pic, certainly for now but perhaps still salvageable.

Offline Lurker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3705
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Should Spurs sign Scola now?
« Reply #17 on: March 22, 2007, 01:01:17 PM »
And the figures you are guessing at may well be what Scola was asking, but no one knows what/if the Spurs were offering nor what Scola was asking, because neither party ever said.

Also, minimum for a first year NBA player is $412,718.

To play your game.  Sources?  Proof?  Or just because you can't refute something your version must be true.

Also that minimum would be pro-rated for the remainder of the season.  So it makes a lot of sense for Scola to sign a contact for less than $500,000 so he can pay $2.7 million to his Euroleague team.

I'm sure koast or WOW will give you a nickle so you can pay me a dollar.  If you are as smart as you think Scola should be you would jump on that offer.

It riles them to believe that you perceive the web they weave.  Keep on thinking free.
-Moody Blues

Offline Reality

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8738
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Should Spurs sign Scola now?
« Reply #18 on: March 22, 2007, 01:15:36 PM »
And the figures you are guessing at may well be what Scola was asking, but no one knows what/if the Spurs were offering nor what Scola was asking, because neither party ever said.

Also, minimum for a first year NBA player is $412,718.

To play your game.  Sources?  Proof?  Or just because you can't refute something your version must be true.

Also that minimum would be pro-rated for the remainder of the season.  So it makes a lot of sense for Scola to sign a contact for less than $500,000 so he can pay $2.7 million to his Euroleague team.

I'm sure koast or WOW will give you a nickle so you can pay me a dollar.  If you are as smart as you think Scola should be you would jump on that offer.
Kori Ellis WOAI.  http://www.woai.com/content/sports/spurs/default.aspx
She has followed this Scola story for years and would be all over any official Spurs offer.
And the onus is on you to produce the articles, not on me to prove they do not exist.  101. 
Scola has made how much over the past 10 years? 
Had the Spurs offered him one year at the figure you posted 3-4 mil that would cover his buyout you're darned tootin i think he should have jumped on it.  Which they can offer next season at the MLE.  However if he is holding out for 5 mil i doubt this deal ever happens.  Cuban yes, Holt no.
Bottom line he signed a relatively horrible contract 10 years ago -if he ever wanted to come to the NBA.

Offline Lurker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3705
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Should Spurs sign Scola now?
« Reply #19 on: March 22, 2007, 02:01:48 PM »
Kori Ellis WOAI.  http://www.woai.com/content/sports/spurs/default.aspx
She has followed this Scola story for years and would be all over any official Spurs offer.
And the onus is on you to produce the articles, not on me to prove they do not exist.  101. 
Scola has made how much over the past 10 years? 
Had the Spurs offered him one year at the figure you posted 3-4 mil that would cover his buyout you're darned tootin i think he should have jumped on it.  Which they can offer next season at the MLE.  However if he is holding out for 5 mil i doubt this deal ever happens.  Cuban yes, Holt no.
Bottom line he signed a relatively horrible contract 10 years ago -if he ever wanted to come to the NBA.

Absolutely nothing on that website talks about any contract offers to Scola.  So yes that is great proof.

Besides if you actually read that site you would see that they list him as a PF.  In the NBA the PF is the 4 spot...so your crazy notion he can play with both Duncan & Elson is disproved.

The Spurs did offer him the money....and yes it would have covered the buyout but he would have NO MONEY LEFT.  And besides the simple fact that Uncle Sam takes a share of the paycheck before the player gets it so it wouldn't have been enough to cover the buyout.

Your lack of reasoniong on this subject is becoming boring.  Post all the additional spins that you want but this is my last reply.  I already regret not sticking with my earlier resolution to avoid trying to discuss basketball with you.
It riles them to believe that you perceive the web they weave.  Keep on thinking free.
-Moody Blues

Offline Reality

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8738
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Should Spurs sign Scola now?
« Reply #20 on: March 22, 2007, 07:49:29 PM »
Kori Ellis WOAI.  http://www.woai.com/content/sports/spurs/default.aspx
She has followed this Scola story for years and would be all over any official Spurs offer.
And the onus is on you to produce the articles, not on me to prove they do not exist.  101. 
Scola has made how much over the past 10 years? 
Had the Spurs offered him one year at the figure you posted 3-4 mil that would cover his buyout you're darned tootin i think he should have jumped on it.  Which they can offer next season at the MLE.  However if he is holding out for 5 mil i doubt this deal ever happens.  Cuban yes, Holt no.
Bottom line he signed a relatively horrible contract 10 years ago -if he ever wanted to come to the NBA.

Absolutely nothing on that website talks about any contract offers to Scola.  So yes that is great proof.

Besides if you actually read that site you would see that they list him as a PF.  In the NBA the PF is the 4 spot...so your crazy notion he can play with both Duncan & Elson is disproved.

The Spurs did offer him the money....and yes it would have covered the buyout but he would have NO MONEY LEFT.  And besides the simple fact that Uncle Sam takes a share of the paycheck before the player gets it so it wouldn't have been enough to cover the buyout.

Your lack of reasoniong on this subject is becoming boring.  Post all the additional spins that you want but this is my last reply.  I already regret not sticking with my earlier resolution to avoid trying to discuss basketball with you.
RanDandykoast..er Lurker,
http://www.woai.com/content/sports/spurs/story.aspx?content_id=67ad8412-8c4a-4594-a6c1-c94b6d70ed0b

Frankie Elson and Duncan will need rests.  Scola could spell either one of them.
As for the three of them together, it might be doable for spells.  We can't guard their athletic 3, they can't guard our frontline.


Offline Lurker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3705
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Should Spurs sign Scola now?
« Reply #21 on: March 23, 2007, 08:14:08 AM »
http://www.woai.com/content/sports/spurs/story.aspx?content_id=67ad8412-8c4a-4594-a6c1-c94b6d70ed0b

Frankie Elson and Duncan will need rests.  Scola could spell either one of them.
As for the three of them together, it might be doable for spells.  We can't guard their athletic 3, they can't guard our frontline.



From your link...
Quote
The problem with bringing Scola to San Antonio has always been his buyout with his European team.  NBA teams are only permitted to pay $500,000 toward an international player's buyout.  Therefore, he must negotiate a buyout with his current team and pay the balance of his buyout from his NBA salary.  In recent years, Scola's buyout amount was reportedly near $14 million, but that number has apparently been reduced considerably.

So obviously no matter how much the Spurs offered it wasn't enough for Scola to want to pay the buyout.  So in essence the Spurs have had no control over the situation.  The reduction in the buyout just came about DURING this season and...again per your earlier post...that buyout cannot be paid during the season.  So the earliest the Spurs could negotiate with him is THIS off season.

As far as guarding three big men that all need to be in the paint.  Once you put 6 players in the paint there is no room for even the best player to score consistantly...except maybe steamroller Shaq.  Do you bother to think about your proposals in light of the real world?  Or are you like Bushie that believes what is in your mind with absolutely no regard for facts.

Spin again.....
« Last Edit: March 23, 2007, 09:17:56 AM by Lurker »
It riles them to believe that you perceive the web they weave.  Keep on thinking free.
-Moody Blues

Offline Reality

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8738
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Should Spurs sign Scola now?
« Reply #22 on: March 23, 2007, 09:57:24 AM »
So obviously no matter how much the Spurs offered it wasn't enough for Scola to want to pay the buyout.  So in essence the Spurs have had no control over the situation.  The reduction in the buyout just came about DURING this season and...again per your earlier post...that buyout cannot be paid during the season.  So the earliest the Spurs could negotiate with him is THIS off season.
The reduced buyout figure was active prior to the start of this '06-07 season.  What the Spurs offered/ what Scola did or did not reject we simply do not know.  All indications are the Spurs stance was "We signed Fins,Fabs, Bonner and Butler therefore we have no cash or space left for Scola" as Holt went on record as saying he would not pay anymore over the cap tax.
Meanwhile Cuban pays Finley 17 to go away.

So would Scola have been a small piece, an improvement?
Well, since you won't trust me lets quote you lurker.  Hows that for a source?  Ha! ;D  Better the Bushie? ;)

lurker:
Quote
Spin again..... 
You got it:

lurker
Quote
Scola would be better than the other 3.  (Fabs, Ely, Butler) 

Offline Lurker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3705
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Should Spurs sign Scola now?
« Reply #23 on: March 23, 2007, 10:20:37 AM »
Yes, Scola is better than Fabs, Butler & Ely.  Ely was obtained in trade after the season started so his "money" had no bearing on trying to sign Scola during the off season.  Fabs was signed last season so also had no bearing on this season's signings.

The two players signed this offseason were Butler and Elson.  If the Spurs were have given their entire mid-level exemption to Scola then they would have had no money to sign Elson.  And therefore your fantasy lineup could never exist.  So now you choose...would you rather have Scola or Elson?  You can't sign both.
It riles them to believe that you perceive the web they weave.  Keep on thinking free.
-Moody Blues

Offline WayOutWest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7411
    • View Profile
Re: Should Spurs sign Scola now?
« Reply #24 on: March 23, 2007, 12:16:34 PM »
Why do the Spurs need anything other than "Fabs"?  I thought he was the dominant piece of the Spurs puzzle?  No way he's a nothing stiff ala Rasho right?
"History shouldn't be a mystery"
"Our story is real history"
"Not his story"

"My people's culture was strong, it was pure"
"And if not for that white greed"
"It would've endured"

"Laker hate causes blindness"

Offline Reality

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8738
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Should Spurs sign Scola now?
« Reply #25 on: March 23, 2007, 01:58:45 PM »
Why do the Spurs need anything other than "Fabs"?  I thought he was the dominant piece of the Spurs puzzle?  No way he's a nothing stiff ala Rasho right?
No, you're misquoting ala Randolph.  Fabs a key piece of the role player puzzle for the 2006 title chase.
Cementavich instead benched Fabs and tried to go uber small ball and got run by his ex assistant Avery J.

2007 instead of having Fabs be a role player Pop swung entirely the other way and tried to make him a 30-35 minute a game starting center.

Offline WayOutWest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7411
    • View Profile
Re: Should Spurs sign Scola now?
« Reply #26 on: March 23, 2007, 02:58:04 PM »
No, you're misquoting ala Randolph.  Fabs a key piece of the role player puzzle for the 2006 title chase.
Cementavich instead benched Fabs and tried to go uber small ball and got run by his ex assistant Avery J.

2007 instead of having Fabs be a role player Pop swung entirely the other way and tried to make him a 30-35 minute a game starting center.


But Fabs was supposed to soooooo much more after dominating the Euro leagues.  So he's not even as good as a nothing stiff ala Rasho was was a 30-35 minute starting center?
"History shouldn't be a mystery"
"Our story is real history"
"Not his story"

"My people's culture was strong, it was pure"
"And if not for that white greed"
"It would've endured"

"Laker hate causes blindness"

Offline Reality

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8738
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Should Spurs sign Scola now?
« Reply #27 on: March 23, 2007, 09:52:41 PM »
But Fabs was supposed to soooooo much more after dominating the Euro leagues.  So he's not even as good as a nothing stiff ala Rasho was was a 30-35 minute starting center?
His long floppy hair may have seduced your eyes into wandering from Kobe.  However Fabs was only slated by coach Reality to be a solid role player.
He also does not have Rashos bulk to twin tower with Tim.  Altho they both share a last second 2nd round greasejob to be eliminated from the playoffs.
But Rashos 2005 ring will forever shine brightly.  Fabs has no such ornament so far. :'(

Scola is widely reported to be even more dominant then Fabs. :D

Offline Reality

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8738
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Should Spurs sign Scola now?
« Reply #28 on: March 23, 2007, 10:05:21 PM »
Yes, Scola is better than Fabs, Butler & Ely.  Ely was obtained in trade after the season started so his "money" had no bearing on trying to sign Scola during the off season.  Fabs was signed last season so also had no bearing on this season's signings.

The two players signed this offseason were Butler and Elson.  If the Spurs were have given their entire mid-level exemption to Scola then they would have had no money to sign Elson.  And therefore your fantasy lineup could never exist.  So now you choose...would you rather have Scola or Elson?  You can't sign both.
A huge negatory on all accounts.

Scola Remains Shackled to team in Spain
Web Posted: 07/06/2006 09:48 PM CDT
Johnny Ludden
Express-News Staff Writer

One of the agents for Luis Scola accused the Spurs on Thursday of making the Argentine forward a "prisoner" because they don't intend to sign him this summer and have yet to trade his rights.

The Spurs drafted Scola in the second round in 2002. He has hoped to come to the NBA each of the past two seasons but has been unable to work out an agreement with the Spurs, in part because of the large buyout he has with his Spanish team, Tau Ceramica.

Spurs officials made it clear after the season they likely wouldn't sign Scola because they didn't want to invest in another power forward, especially after signing Fabricio Oberto, Scola's friend, last year and trading for Matt Bonner two weeks ago. They also are unsure how well Scola would play next to Tim Duncan, given that both like to work out of the post.

"In the country of liberty, Luis is a prisoner," Claudio Villanueva, one of Scola's three agents, told Argentine newspaper La Nación. "The Spurs do not utilize him, neither do they want to yield him to another team and they impede him to play in the NBA."

Spurs officials declined comment except to say they have not spoken to Villanueva. Instead, they have worked with Scola's U.S. agent, George Bass, for more than a month to find him another team.

Several executives from other NBA teams said the Spurs tried to use Scola's rights to move into the first round of last week's draft. They also have sought to secure a future first-round pick for him.

Cleveland and Memphis expressed some interest, but the talks never yielded an offer.

Bob Myers, the agent for Utah's Jarron Collins — the top NBA free-agent center left on the market — called the Spurs "an attractive option" Thursday but also said Collins is assessing all opportunities. The Jazz have said they hope to re-sign him.

Milwaukee is trying to trade Jamaal Magloire but doesn't like what the Spurs have to offer.

Moving Duncan to center and signing Scola isn't being considered. Scola is seeking a three-year contract worth between $9 million and $10 million, about a third of which would go to paying the $3.5 million buyout he has with Tau.
Had the Spurs not signed Oberto last summer — when Scola's buyout was nearly four times as much as it is now — or if Scola were in position to sign for the $1.5 million Manu Ginobili drew for his first-year NBA salary, the Spurs would be more willing to gamble on Scola. Other teams also seem hesitant.

Scola has distinguished himself as one of Europe's top players, which, coupled with the success of Ginobili and Chicago forward Andres Nocioni, has made him into a mythical star among Spurs fans, most of whom have seen him play few, if any, games. NBA officials, however, seem split on how Scola would fare in the league.

One Eastern Conference general manager said the Spurs could do a lot worse than signing Scola. Others question whether he is athletic and big enough. A Western Conference executive said his team didn't have much interest in Scola in the 2002 draft and is even less interested now.

With the Spurs unwilling to sign him — and apparently unable to trade him — Scola said he would play for Tau.

"Luis is young; he is 26 years old," Villanueva told La Nación. "He can expect that next year he surely he will fulfill his dream."


FWIW here is what Scolas agent said in July about what came down:
http://www.lanacion.com.ar/820978
"I will continue one more year in Tau Ceramica", is the announcement argentinian power forward Luis Scola will make today during a press conference to be held in Vitoria, Spain where Tau's president, Joan Quereteja, will present the new roster.

Therefore, for the third consecutive year, the dream of the olympic champion won't come true because the team which owns his NBA rights, San Antonio Spurs, didn't show any interest in signing him. "In the country of freedom, Luis is a slave", said Claudio Villanueva, Scola's agent and added: "The Spurs are preventing him from playing in the NBA, they don't want to trade him".

According to Villanueva, it is clear that "San Antonio doesn't want Luis Scola. They don't valuate him as a player although he is one of the best in Europe and a winner of many tournaments and individual awards. Actually, I don't know why Gregg Popovich doesn't want him", said the argentinian agent.

Scola was decided to pay his buyout ($4 millions for the two years left in his contract) to accept offers from Chicago Bulls or Utah Jazz, who had shown interest in signing him. "Phoenix and Memphis also asked for him", said Villanueva. However, Spurs asked for money and first round picks in next year's draft to trade Scola's rights.

"Luis is young, he is 26 years old, and can wait: I am sure his dream will come true next year", affirmed the agent.