What is up with this Spurs trade!?

[Reality]

SAN ANTONIO -- The NBA champion San Antonio Spurs have acquired guard Vassilis Spanoulis from the Houston Rockets in exchange for center Jackie Butler and the draft rights to Luis Scola.

The Rockets also are giving the Spurs a 2009 second-round draft pick and other considerations in the trade, the Spurs said in a news release late Thursday.
Spanoulis, who averaged 2.7 points and 0.9 assists in 31 games as a rookie last year, has said he didn't want to return to the Rockets because he was homesick and wanted to remain in his native Greece.

Butler played in 11 games for the Spurs last year. He averaged 3.7 points and 2 rebounds.

The San Antonio Express-News reported in its online edition that Spanoulis was expected to remain in Europe.
Spanoulis said in a telephone interview with Houston television station KRIV from Greece that the trade didn't change his mind.
"Nothing changes my mind. I still want to stay in Greece," he said.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2934887

[Reality]

Spanoulis says he won't return to Rockets

By JONATHAN FEIGEN
Copyright 2007 Houston Chronicle

After one largely disappointing season with the Rockets, guard Vassilis Spanoulis said there will not be another.

Spanoulis said Wednesday that he and his agent have told the Rockets many times he will not leave Greece for a second season in the NBA, or to play for another team in Europe.

Rockets general manager Daryl Morey said on Tuesday that the Rockets still want Spanoulis back for next season and have no plans of releasing him from his three-year contract. Spanoulis cannot sign with any FIBA team, which includes the teams in the Greek league, unless released by the Rockets. Morey had no further comment on Wednesday.

"It's something very personal," Spanoulis said. "It's family problems.

"I'm not disappointed. In life, you never know how things are coming. Some things you expect when you sign a contract, you go there, something happens, and your decision has to change. When we are so far away from home, the culture and life and all these things are different. It's very difficult to know what will happen.

"I want to stay in my country. My hope is to play for one team in my country."

Spanoulis played in 31 games last season, averaging 2.7 points and .9 assists in 8.8 minutes per game. He made 31.9 percent of his shot, 17.2 percent of his 3-pointers.

Spanoulis' agent, Miodrag Raznatovic, said he and Spanoulis have told the Rockets 10 times since the end of the season that Spanoulis will never return to play for the Rockets and that nothing would change his mind.

"He told them 10 times 'I am not coming back,' " Raznatovic said. "In the beginning it was between him and Jeff Van Gundy. Now it is not. He didn't adjust to the American way of living. 'I cannot survive. I must stay at my home.' I do not understand how they cannot understand. It's something serious.

"I've been trying for one month and a half to make them understand. This is crazy. Believe me, he sold everything, his car, his apartment. He is not coming back. I don't understand how they don't understand. He said, 'I cannot live there. I thought I can. I was very happy when I signed the contract. After eight months, 10 months, I don't want a single second more.'

"It's not about money. It's not about playing time. It's not about anything else. They could trade him to San Antonio and he could be the starting point guard, and he would he would say, 'No, I cannot.' "

Raznatovic said Spanoulis, who earned $1.8 million as a rookie last season, would repay the $350,000 buyout the Rockets paid Panathinaikos last season out of his next contract.

He said Spanoulis has told him he would not play for any team outside Greece again.

"They could try Miami, New York, L.A., it would not matter," Raznatovic said. "Maybe he goes to Spain and (would) feel different, but we'll never know. He said, 'No, no, no. I cannot leave Greece.'

"He is looking for an escape. He calls me every day. His mother calls me crying, saying, 'Get my son back.' This is serious. If they want to send a message to all international players that if (they) come and cannot adjust, they cannot go back, that they have to stay there like a slave, that won't work. If he comes back, what can he do? Can he be a good player? Of course not. It could be a disaster."

The Rockets have repeatedly called to try to convince Spanoulis to return, with Morey, Rick Adelman and Yao Ming each calling. But Spanoulis said his decision is not about basketball.

"It was very hard," Spanoulis said. "This life was very different. I expected it to be a lot different. I am very close with my family. I prefer to be with my family than to play in the United States. It is very difficult for me to make that step, to be away from them and live there.

"From the basketball side, I had a very tough season with Jeff. That year was 5, 10 percent what I had in my mind. Now this is past. I respect all the people there. I respect the new coach, Rick Adelman. I respect him as a person and as a coach, and the new GM and the people of Houston. But to me, I cannot come back."

jonathan.feigen@chron.com

[Reality]

"While the trade potentially landed Houston a starting power forward, it did little for the Spurs other than reduce their payroll and open up a roster spot. The trade removed the $2.4 million Butler was due to make this season, and the Spurs also might not have to pay Spanoulis the $1.9 million he is slated to earn."
http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/basketball/nba/spurs/stories/MYSA071307.01D.BKNspurs.trade.35d9aa1.html
And within the division.
Some answers but it still seems like they gave up way too much for nothing other then salary dumps/Spanoulis agreeing to renig his contract.
Scola alone should have been worth a Round 2 pick.
Butler, with Bigs in such high demand he himself should have been worth a 2 also.

[Lurker]

"...it did little for the Spurs other than reduce their payroll and open up a roster spot. The trade removed the $2.4 million Butler was due to make this season, and the Spurs also might not have to pay Spanoulis the $1.9 million he is slated to earn."

This is exactly the reason for the move...save $$$ and open roster spot.  Also the Spurs were afraid that Scola would sign another long term deal in Europe and then they would get nothing for him.  So far the Spurs are impressed with the defensive effort of the rookie from Arizona (or Az State?).  Also they have their first rounder from last year that they are trying to put on the roster.  Both will probably spend a lot of time in Austin (NBDL) but will also get court time with the Spurs in practice.

But then any TRUE follower of the Spurs would be aware of such things.   

[Reality]

But then any TRUE follower of the Spurs would be aware of such things.   

     Holt really needs to save money.
Dumbass.

[Lurker]

But then any TRUE follower of the Spurs would be aware of such things.   

     Holt really needs to save money.
Dumbass.

In one of the smallest NBA markets with basically NO corporate sponsership...

You're right, Holt needs to save money.  One for a million...I knew you would eventually get one thing right about the Spurs.



BTW I would rather be dumb below the belt than dumb between the ears.   

[Reality]

In one of the smallest NBA markets with basically NO corporate sponsership...

You're right, Holt needs to save money.  One for a million...I knew you would eventually get one thing right about the Spurs.
BTW I would rather be dumb below the belt than dumb between the ears.   

  You just made my day. 
http://www.forbes.com/lists/2006/32/biz_06nba_San-Antonio-Spurs_323002.html
The Spurs are profitting at least 40 million per year.  That's yearly profit, not including the value of the team which goes up how much?
The value of the team has gone from Holts 1996 purchase 76 million to 390 million.

"Major corporate sponsors are Coca-Cola (nyse: KO), Southwest Airlines (nyse: LUV), HEB Grocery Stores, Anheuser-Busch (nyse: BUD). Naming rights sponsor is AT&T"

[westkoast]

But then any TRUE follower of the Spurs would be aware of such things.   

     Holt really needs to save money.
Dumbass.

Are you for or against franchises just throwing money away for the hell of it?

Cuz to me it seems like they ALL need to save some money in certain spots by not paying more then they should for players.

[Lurker]

In one of the smallest NBA markets with basically NO corporate sponsership...

You're right, Holt needs to save money.  One for a million...I knew you would eventually get one thing right about the Spurs.
BTW I would rather be dumb below the belt than dumb between the ears.   

  You just made my day. 
http://www.forbes.com/lists/2006/32/biz_06nba_San-Antonio-Spurs_323002.html
The Spurs are profitting at least 40 million per year.  That's yearly profit, not including the value of the team which goes up how much?
The value of the team has gone from Holts 1996 purchase 76 million to 390 million.

"Major corporate sponsors are Coca-Cola (nyse: KO), Southwest Airlines (nyse: LUV), HEB Grocery Stores, Anheuser-Busch (nyse: BUD). Naming rights sponsor is AT&T"

WOW!  I read that little article and find no where that it says the Spurs made $40 million.  Being somewhat financially challenged as a CPA, I see operating income of just $11 million which ranks 15th in the NBA.  And if the Spurs weren't so fiscally responsible then it would be lower.   And then there is this little disclosure about operating income:

Earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization.

I would be more impressed if you could show me their net cash flow, or distributions to the various owners (Spurs have approx 30 owners).  Also increase in value don't mean jack...unless you sell. 

And 4 "major" corporate sponsers don't buy 30 luxury boxes.  Try comparing the Spurs corporate support to that of Chicago, LA (2 teams), NY, or most of the other larger cities.

[Reality]

Are you for or against franchises just throwing money away for the hell of it?

Cuz to me it seems like they ALL need to save some money in certain spots by not paying more then they should for players.

 westkoast I'm going to assume you made your post before seeing the Forbes report on Spurs profits and value.  
Allegedly the Spurs FO was balking at earlier offers from teams (Chicago) offering a 2R pick for just Scolas rights.  Now they toss in Butler for free.
Houstons GM is saying they plan to start Scola.

Butler and his huge 2.3 salary for a big that can play center was really holding down the Spurs.
But *real Spurs* know it's all good because it created a roster spot.  
Well maybe Butler has a coke addiction and Scolas ankle is about ready to Grant Hill.  Or not.

[Lurker]

Butler and his huge 2.3 salary for a big that can play center was really holding down the Spurs.
But *real Spurs* know it's all good because it created a roster spot.  
Well maybe Butler has a coke addiction and Scolas ankle is about ready to Grant Hill.  Or not.

So just exactly who would Butler have replaced?  Duncan?  Fabs?  Elson?  Horry?

Same goes for Scola.

And "true Spurs fans" know that on the same Spanish team that Scola plays for there is another PF/C who is taller and younger.  Look up the Spurs 2007 first rounder.  Also the Spurs are looking at adding their 2006 first round pick: a 19 year old athletic PF.  Maybe THAT is why they needed a roster space.

Are you purposefully playing stupid?

[westkoast]

Are you for or against franchises just throwing money away for the hell of it?

Cuz to me it seems like they ALL need to save some money in certain spots by not paying more then they should for players.

  westkoast I'm going to assume you made your post before seeing the Forbes report on Spurs profits and value. 
Allegedly the Spurs FO was balking at earlier offers from teams (Chicago) offering a 2R pick for just Scolas rights.  Now they toss in Butler for free.
Houstons GM is saying they plan to start Scola.

Butler and his huge 2.3 salary for a big that can play center was really holding down the Spurs.
But *real Spurs* know it's all good because it created a roster spot.  
Well maybe Butler has a coke addiction and Scolas ankle is about ready to Grant Hill.  Or not.

I did read it before you posted and made this one right after I read what Lurker said.  Now I am no business expert but I would imagine that freeing up money in a business is important to maximize profits.  Or to free up money to re-invest into your own company.  Sounds to me like the Spurs don't see what you see in Scola and they rather invest in another spot.  Maybe Houston does but I wouldn't quite pat yourself on the back for that...they thought Skip To My Lou the AND1 street basketball player was the answer to their issues at that position.  Now if this was the Lakers under Mitch Kupchek, the Hawks, the Clippers, etc....then I wouldn't blindly agree with a decision being made.  The Spurs franchise however is one of the most successfull over the past few years and have been very good at making the RIGHT moves.

And I dont think you can fully comment on the move until you see who they fill with that roster spot.  Until then you can't fully see how the move effects them.  For all you know they could fill it with Fabs brother and then the team goes 81-1 losing only to the Lakers at home when Fabs is out with the flu.

[Reality]

WOW!  I read that little article and find no where that it says the Spurs made $40 million.  Being somewhat financially challenged as a CPA, I see operating income of just $11 million which ranks 15th in the NBA.  And if the Spurs weren't so fiscally responsible then it would be lower.   And then there is this little disclosure about operating income:

Earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization.

I would be more impressed if you could show me their net cash flow, or distributions to the various owners (Spurs have approx 30 owners).  And 4 "major" corporate sponsers don't buy 30 luxury boxes.  Try comparing the Spurs corporate support to that of Chicago, LA (2 teams), NY, or most of the other larger cities.

EBITDA is just a sneakly little accounting tool.  Earnings on what is the real question.
Revenues for 2005 Spurs was 122 million.  Per the CBA NBA salaries are supposed to be 51-55% of revenue, which they were at 67 million.  That leaves a 55 million pot.  To get down to 11 million you would have to subtract 44 million bucks.  No way no how the Spurs have 44 million dollars worth of expenses.  If they do, lets see it.  I also would like to see net cash flow, or distributions to the owner(s) but guess what, corps like the NBA and the Spurs get to keep that hidden.

Also increase in value don't mean jack...unless you sell.  

 Ah but it does mean jack, lots of jack.  Capitalism 101 is based in large part on borrowing money.  What gives one the ability to borrow money?  Assests.  If you be one of the owners you can most certainly borrow money against the value of your ownership.  Invest it.  Make profits.  Borrow more.  Invest more.  Profit more.

[Reality]

So just exactly who would Butler have replaced?  Duncan?  Fabs?  Elson?  Horry?

Same goes for Scola.

And "true Spurs fans" know that on the same Spanish team that Scola plays for there is another PF/C who is taller and younger.  Look up the Spurs 2007 first rounder.  Also the Spurs are looking at adding their 2006 first round pick: a 19 year old athletic PF.  Maybe THAT is why they needed a roster space.

Are you purposefully playing stupid?

Why would Butler or Scola have to replace anyone to be traded?  The point is not whether or not they would have played next year on the Spurs, it's whether or not they had more trade value then what the Spurs recieved in Greeky Scrapollonis and why they would help Houston improve.

So you caught the Spurs 2007 1st round draft pick?  Bravo.  Since they have him they in turn had to give Butler and Scola away?  C'mon Randy.  And Ian Manhimmi (sp) does not even look ready from what i hear. 

So is it another one n done Spurs title?  I hope not.
westkoast yes i agree lets see what all shakes out.  Spurs still may be looking to move Barry.

[Lurker]

WOW!  I read that little article and find no where that it says the Spurs made $40 million.  Being somewhat financially challenged as a CPA, I see operating income of just $11 million which ranks 15th in the NBA.  And if the Spurs weren't so fiscally responsible then it would be lower.   And then there is this little disclosure about operating income:

Earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization.

I would be more impressed if you could show me their net cash flow, or distributions to the various owners (Spurs have approx 30 owners).  And 4 "major" corporate sponsers don't buy 30 luxury boxes.  Try comparing the Spurs corporate support to that of Chicago, LA (2 teams), NY, or most of the other larger cities.

EBITDA is just a sneakly little accounting tool.  Earnings on what is the real question.
Revenues for 2005 Spurs was 122 million.  Per the CBA NBA salaries are supposed to be 51-55% of revenue, which they were at 67 million.  That leaves a 55 million pot.  To get down to 11 million you would have to subtract 44 million bucks.  No way no how the Spurs have 44 million dollars worth of expenses.  If they do, lets see it.  I also would like to see net cash flow, or distributions to the owner(s) but guess what, corps like the NBA and the Spurs get to keep that hidden.

Maybe you should stick to talking basketball...obviously you know even less about finances.  Where to start?

How about the simple fact that the Spurs (and the NBA for that matter) are NOT corporations.

Maybe that most organizations have at least 2 or 3 (or 30-40) more employees than just the players.

Maybe some money is spent on uniforms, travel, advertising, medicine/trainer supplies, utilities, a practice facility, basketballs, retirement plans, community relations, etc.

And if you want to talk accounting tricks...is that revenue number based on actual cash receipts, accrual items or maybe deferred revenue which was received in earlier years (naming rights) but recognized over several years.