Last week, I looked at three teams in the Eastern Conference holding an important position in trade talks because of their possessing expiring contracts. Whether many or one huge one, the power to only pay a player for five more months is a wonderful thing to have ? or to parlay into something the team really wants. Taking on salary, dangerous as it can be (see: Thomas, Isiah and McHale, Kevin), allows for teams to gain leverage in a trade and then consequently extract a greater talent level in the return.

There are another three teams, this time in the West, with the same trade deadline capabilities as the Heat, Magic, and Wizards. As with those Southeast division teams, the Western teams with abundant expiring salary are all in significantly different situations and can use their assets to different ends. Similarly, the Western Conference teams with the ability to act should think carefully about whether that would be so wise.

Since expiring contracts can?t be dealt after the deadline, there?s a sense of urgency for each one of these teams. That makes their situations all the more interesting: a great move could be an enormous benefit; an ill-advised move could spell disaster, and inactivity has its consequences as well. Again, the question that?s running through every general manager?s mind this time of year is bound to be prominent for these three: to trade for a larger contract or to trim the pocketbooks? for now.

San Antonio Spurs

Believe it or not, the vaunted defending champs have a little breathing room. Brent Barry, Robert Horry, and Fabricio Oberto all have expiring contracts, and they combine to be about $13 million. That?s a significant chunk of money that could be used to bring in a really good player or maybe even two of them. Considering the Spurs? aging roster, that might not be a bad idea.

It?s tough to justify trading Barry if you?re San Antonio. Throughout his four-year contract signed in 2004, his play hasn?t diminished at all; this season, he?s shooting 48% from the field, 43% from three, and is averaging almost a steal per turnover. He is thirty-six years old, though, which underscores the issue that team has. As Tim Duncan?s health fails and many of his support players get old, what?ll be left there besides Tony Parker and a bunch of cap space? Enticing as that proposition could be, the thought of another half-decade or more of deep playoff runs is even more so.

Horry and Oberto are replaceable at different levels. Horry, although he hasn?t been turning the ball over this season, hasn?t been doing anything else either; he?s been good for 18% shooting from the field and all of two rebounds per game. Oberto?s averaged five and five, solid for his twenty minutes of play, and is shooting a scorching 64% from the field. Horry is thirty-seven and clearly on the downside of his career and probably better as a mentor for young players than as a player at this point. Oberto, not quite 33, is productive and spry, having not been subjected to so many years of NBA pounding. Even so, while Horry is clearly expendable at this point, Oberto could be too if the player coming back is a starting-caliber big man.

The main thing stopping the Spurs from making a trade is that the expiring contracts they have are attached to players only contenders would want, and there is no way a Western Conference contender dares making a trade with the Spurs. None of the Mavericks, Suns, Hornets, or Lakers would particularly enjoy trading a player only to get burned by him three months later, I?d imagine. The logical place for the Spurs to look is East, but not that many Eastern teams would be willing to part with young(er) talent for the sole purpose of being the team that gets to be annihilated by the Celtics/Pistons' chainsaw in the second round.

The Verdict: If the Spurs can find a player around the league who?s on a small contract and is young but who doesn?t necessarily fit into his team?s system, trading Horry and maybe a second-rounder or two for the guy is a no-brainer. Barry and Oberto both have something left in the tank and are tougher to part with on that basis, but a starter at the five or maybe even the three would be too tempting. What the Spurs should do this deadline is what they?ve always done and what?s made them so successful: go bargain shopping and if the price isn?t right, be happy with a team that?s already championship-quality anyway.

Minnesota Timberwolves

We?ve all associated the Timberwolves with owning some very unsavory contracts, whether the players attached to them have been desirable or not. Twenty million a season to Kevin Garnett, $14 million to Latrell Sprewell, $10 million to Wally Szczerbiak? those days are over. Sure, the team still has some awful deals (Marko Jaric and Antoine Walker come to mind), and Juwan Howard is getting paid through 2009 for what seems like no reason at all, but there?s a little more flexibility than there has been in the past. There?s also that $12 million expiring contract belonging to Theo Ratliff.

The first thing to notice about Ratliff is that his name doesn?t carry the weight it did when he signed his $35 million, three-year extension with Portland. Back then, he was the league?s best shot-blocker and one of its best interior defenders, easily worth that massive chunk of coin. Now, his body is so worn-down that he can?t even be considered a player anymore. (For those of you who read last week?s article or who remember the situation, think of Chris Mills in early 2004.) It?s truly sad because a healthy Ratliff would have been a great complement to Al Jefferson, maybe to the point where the Celtics would have put those two up front instead of making last summer?s blockbuster. Not only would a healthy Ratliff be great for Big Al, but he?d also be so valuable in a trade that the Timberwolves could get a young stud for him and really have numerous pieces for the future.

The reality, unfortunately, is that Ratliff?s contract situation is all he is at this point. He?s still valuable in a trade, whether as filler to make disparate salaries match (as he was for those of Jefferson and Garnett) or as a mechanism for a capped-out team to unload someone. Add in Michael Doleac?s $3 million expiring contract, and the Wolves could take on a ton of salary at the deadline. With the oft-maligned Kevin McHale at the helm, though, it?s up to you to decide if that?s a good thing.

The Wolves are in a tricky position because it?s so tempting to make a trade, but it might not be a good idea. The team has many young players it could tack on to Ratliff and/or Doleac to produce a package capable of netting a superior talent. McHale also has to be wary of adding anyone who won?t be around when the team?s contending again which will be in at least a couple of years. At the very least, it would be prudent not to take on any contract going very far into the future unless the player attached to it is a young player with upside and with the capability to make a huge impact.

The Verdict: Ironically, rather than using its expiring contracts, Minnesota might be better advised to seek more. Purging the bad contracts could open up valuablecap space this offseason or next. Then again, if there?s a young franchise player on the block and Al Jefferson wouldn?t be required to obtain him, that?s a deal McHale has to make. Minnesota?s direction (way down until June and then back up) is obvious, but how the team plans to get there could be determined by this deadline. Me, I?d see what?s available and only act if the deal is slanted more toward the future than the present.

Los Angeles Lakers

They both have great records, but the Lakers can?t be viewed in the same light as the Spurs. The Spurs are a team with a win-now roster that could trade for the future while the Lakers are a team that should only get better but could make a big deal to win now. The Lakers? only expiring contract of note is that of Kwame Brown, but it?s pivotal; he makes $9 million, enough to rake in an important player, and he?s young enough that a rebuilding team could justify trading for him on that alone.

The Lakers have plenty of young players to attach to Brown in order to bring back someone important. Javaris Crittenton, Jordan Farmar, Luke Walton, and Ronny Turiaf are all on reasonable salaries and bring a combination of upside and energy. To some teams on the market, those players will be more valuable than Brown and could be the starting point of trade talks. The Lakers might not want to part with them, but Brown alone is only so much of an asset. If the price is right, young talent could easily go. Lamar Odom?s name has come up as well, but he fits in nicely with Kobe Bryant and Andrew Bynum so trading him would be a risk that might be better left untouched.

As for Brown?s contributions on the court, they?re not that bad. He?s clearly unworthy of his #1 overall draft position, but it?s not his fault when he was drafted. What is his fault is that he has no real offensive game in terms of passing or scoring. What he can do is defend the bucket, and he does it well even if he isn?t that great a shot-blocker. His positional man defense is more than competent, a nice complement at centre for a star power forward on any number of teams. Alternately, he could get quality minutes as a backup almost anywhere. Watch for any team trading for him to maybe even take a look at re-signing him this summer, albeit not for the $9 million he?s making right now.

The X-factor is Bynum?s injury. As long as Bynum is out, there is no possible justification for trading Brown, especially if a perimeter-oriented player is the main piece coming back. Young as they are, the Lakers are in the midst of a playoff run, and that would be a bad thing to sacrifice. Bryant is almost thirty, and the team is regaining the prestige it had only four years ago when it made its most recent Finals' appearance. Especially if a big man is packaged with Brown, the team could be dangerously thin up front for an extended period of time. For that reason alone, it would make no sense to trade Brown until the very eve of the deadline unless the player coming back for him is, say, a forward who can play center until Bynum returns.

The Verdict: This is a team that should probably make a trade. Outside of Bryant, Odom, and Bynum, all of whom are amazing talents, there really isn?t that much on this team, and Mitch Kupchak would be wise to rectify that. Sure, the team has the makings of a contender already, but adding a point guard or another forward, grizzled or green, could make the Lakers one team that nobody wants to play in the playoffs. Brown would be a small price to pay. The Lakers' franchise is profitable enough to support some salary, and it would probably be worth shipping a lamb or two in return for a lion.

Teams in need of expiring contracts

What would the NBA be if not a world of extravagant yearly salaries, constricting contracts, and general managers desperate to emerge from luxury-tax quicksand? Let?s look at a couple Western Conference teams other than the aforementioned Timberwolves that could really use some cap relief this deadline:

Denver: The team has Allen Iverson, Carmelo Anthony and Marcus Camby, a formidable top three. They also make a combined $41 million this season. With that much salary tied up in the core, Kenyon Martin and Nene, each making over $8 million this season and neither expiring until 2011, don?t look like good guys to have around. In the 2010/2011 season, they and Anthony are the only three players under contract so far yet the team is already committed to $45 million, even more than the three stars are making now. It might be difficult and it will almost certainly require a drop-off in talent but if the Nuggets can move an overpaid, injury-prone big man at the deadline, that would open up room to add another solid veteran.

Memphis: The Grizzlies only have the league?s 28th-highest payroll, but it?s hard to call much of that money justified. Pau Gasol and Mike Miller are cornerstones who are making what they?re worth, but they could be seen as overly expensive if the team wants to use that money on free agents. Meanwhile, Brian Cardinal and the recently-suspended Stromile Swift are each making $6 million this season which is a problem. If the Grizzlies can ship one of those two, it could mean serious cap space in a short period of time.