It’s “Unlikely” that Spurs Pull the Plug on this Roster

[BatManu20]

According to Kevin O’Connor



Will other teams on the bubble follow OKC’s lead? It’s hard to say. The San Antonio Spurs could get a hefty return for LaMarcus Aldridge or Rudy Gay if they choose to abort this season; DeMar DeRozan could also have appeal (https://www.theringer.com/nba/2019/11/13/20962320/san-antonio-spurs-demar-derozan-popovich-trade-style) for a team in need of scoring. It’s unlikely that the Spurs would pull the plug, though.


1204451236088430592

[RC_Drunkford]

Well they could still make the playoffs, but they should make at least 1 move to add another rotation player. Marvin Williams, Robert Covington and Gallinari should be on the market

[MultiTroll]

Go Mediocrity Go!

[MultiTroll]

Btw what is this Kevin Oc'Conners cred?

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

He's guessing of course, but it surely makes sense not to tank while there's a realistic chance to make the playoffs. They have a business to run and have to make a profit. Easier for us fans to have a championship or bust attitude but that's very far away from reality.

[BatManu20]

Spurs don’t tank anyways. It’s not in their DNA tbh. This article doesn’t tell us anything new. There’s not going to be a fire sale or any of that bullshit. We’re 1 game out if the 7th seed right now... but that doesn’t mean we can’t better our team through a trade if it presents itself.

[Sugus]

Well, there goes my slight hint of hope. Makes sense then that LW4 is getting so little playing time; Pop actually thinks the vets need to figure it out on the floor. Hope we get the 9-10th place so the FO can finally wake up to reality... A playoff berth might be enough to delude the Spurs into a DeMar extension, which is inarguably the bleakest of outcomes.

[K...]

Do people really care if they tank now, next year or what? I feel the tank is comin no matter what moves they make. This team can try, but won't make the playoffs thanks to the hard schedule. Odds are that two close wins were just a fluke and San Antonio will resume losing plentifully.

Once they do miss a playoffs, the "we don't tank" is trash. Every tank team starts the season expecting to compete, then pulling the plug.

[DPG21920]

He's guessing of course, but it surely makes sense not to tank while there's a realistic chance to make the playoffs. They have a business to run and have to make a profit. Easier for us fans to have a championship or bust attitude but that's very far away from reality.

But if they have a business to run, it can’t just be about one year. Is making the revenue for one round of playoffs worth losing DeRozan for nothing (if he opts out and walks) when you need as much draft capital as possible?

Is eking into the playoff while having a possible losing record really going to sell tickets or just piss fans off even more?

[DPG21920]

Spurs don’t tank anyways. It’s not in their DNA tbh. This article doesn’t tell us anything new. There’s not going to be a fire sale or any of that bullshit. We’re 1 game out if the 7th seed right now... but that doesn’t mean we can’t better our team through a trade if it presents itself.


Why do people keep spouting this? SA has a losing record and is just as close to the 13th spot in the West as they are to the playoffs. Being close to the7th seed does not equal good.

SA has to the deadline to decide, but if they don’t see a DRASTIC turn around in their play, whether or not they are in the playoff hunt still, they have to do something.

They cant afford to lose assets like DeRozan for nothing just for the chance to eek into the PO and get knocked out in RD1. They need draft capital and as much of it as they can get.

Now, if the lightbulb clicks for DeRozan from 3PT land, Lonnie/White/Murray bust out and they start playing 60% winning ball? Ok, that’s another story. But they can’t keep on this same trajectory.

Win building was fine when you are firmly playing good basketball and in the playoffs. It’s good for young players to learn while winning and having vets take pressure off of them. But when you are losing? It’s doing nothing but preventing growth and development. And if you aren’t extending DeRozan, he’s gone anyway next season.

[BillMc]

Make the playoffs now just for the record. Tough rebuilds will be hell (especially for us spoiled fans) so let it wait a year anyway.

[DPG21920]

Make the playoffs now just for the record. Tough rebuilds will be hell (especially for us spoiled fans) so let it wait a year anyway.

Honest question Bill - you’ve seen the importance of the draft for all teams. Now factor in how well SA drafts and how it’s a small market that doesn’t draw free agents that well, do you feel like having that PO record is worth it more than the possibility to draft the next franchise player along with another Murray/White/Lonnie caliber player?

Because we know rebuilds are tough so wouldn’t that lend itself to the logic of giving yourself as much opportunity via the draft as possible?

Because if you don’t trade DeRozan for a pick(s) this season, you’ve 99% lost your chance to do so.

[Collins21]

Why do people keep spouting this? SA has a losing record and is just as close to the 13th spot in the West as they are to the playoffs. Being close to the7th seed does not equal good.

SA has to the deadline to decide, but if they don’t see a DRASTIC turn around in their play, whether or not they are in the playoff hunt still, they have to do something.

They cant afford to lose assets like DeRozan for nothing just for the chance to eek into the PO and get knocked out in RD1. They need draft capital and as much of it as they can get.

Now, if the lightbulb clicks for DeRozan from 3PT land, Lonnie/White/Murray bust out and they start playing 60% winning ball? Ok, that’s another story. But they can’t keep on this same trajectory.

Win building was fine when you are firmly playing good basketball and in the playoffs. It’s good for young players to learn while winning and having vets take pressure off of them. But when you are losing? It’s doing nothing but preventing growth and development. And if you aren’t extending DeRozan, he’s gone anyway next season.


What you're saying makes sense coming from a fan however that's not how most business operate. This team if they make the playoffs will ring in massive revenue which to them is worth not tanking alone. The second part is they have until June to reach a new deal with DeRozan so if the light bulb goes on as you say then regardless of if we like it or not they will extend him. Where I agree with you is that if they want to go for the playoffs this year and keep this same core they need to make a move to signal that they're trying to get better.

[duncan2k5]

I actually think if we make a trade we will get better... DDR isn't good... At least not for us (neither for the raptors)... We WILL get better simply by getting rid of him... Now imagine a decent 3/D guy in his place... Then LMA can net us the same or a decent stretch big... Now we play faster and more open... Not only will we be better, but I'm sure we will get at least one pick for each...

I remember when pistons traded for Rasheed Wallace in the middle of the season, they went from a team that wasn't on the radar at ALL to a team that won the ring that year

[duncan2k5]

What you're saying makes sense coming from a fan however that's not how most business operate. This team if they make the playoffs will ring in massive revenue which to them is worth not tanking alone. The second part is they have until June to reach a new deal with DeRozan so if the light bulb goes on as you say then regardless of if we like it or not they will extend him. Where I agree with you is that if they want to go for the playoffs this year and keep this same core they need to make a move to signal that they're trying to get better.

That's not how businesses operate... Good businesses take the initial hit (I don't think we get worse if we trade them, but let's say we do for the sake of argument) if it means long term success... See 1997

[DPG21920]

What you're saying makes sense coming from a fan however that's not how most business operate. This team if they make the playoffs will ring in massive revenue which to them is worth not tanking alone. The second part is they have until June to reach a new deal with DeRozan so if the light bulb goes on as you say then regardless of if we like it or not they will extend him. Where I agree with you is that if they want to go for the playoffs this year and keep this same core they need to make a move to signal that they're trying to get better.

I disagree, even purely from a business perspective, that if things stay basically the same (meaning SA’s win %) and even if they make the playoffs, that the revenue from one round would outweigh the business benefits of getting an exciting lottery pick, exciting trades and taking the team a specific direction.

Fans are frustrated and if this type of play continues or only marginal improvement, fans aren’t going to show up for that and you will have lost the potential for extra revenue for following years.

I know for sure, that if you are rebuilding, having lottery picks is way more of a draw and exciting than not having them. So if you eek into the playoffs, DeRozan walks and you have no lottery pick (because you got into the playoffs with a .500 record) and no multiple 1sts either (because you didn’t trade DeRozan/Gay/LMA and DeRozan walks)? It’s bad news and the floor will be much lower business wise in that scenario.

Beyond that we have 2 years of data with DeRozan on SA. Would anything he does this year make it palatable for SA to give him a large deal knowing he’s already past his prime?

[BillMc]

Honest question Bill - you’ve seen the importance of the draft for all teams. Now factor in how well SA drafts and how it’s a small market that doesn’t draw free agents that well, do you feel like having that PO record is worth it more than the possibility to draft the next franchise player along with another Murray/White/Lonnie caliber player?

Because we know rebuilds are tough so wouldn’t that lend itself to the logic of giving yourself as much opportunity via the draft as possible?

Because if you don’t trade DeRozan for a pick(s) this season, you’ve 99% lost your chance to do so.

First of all overtly trying to tank is bad precedent when you've got so many young guys (and this is the youngest Spurs team in decades). You want to instill a mindset of discipline, optimism and professionalism. Tanking is for loser franchises. It brings a mindset that losing is okay. I am against it on principle. Really anything else in this discussion is superfluous.

Secondly, as they'd likely be a mid-lottery or lower lottery team, I'd rather have the Spurs organization reap the income of another playoff appearance. You want your small market teams to survive in their current cities so, all this helps. And if they do somehow get a high lottery, well, unfortunately this is a weak draft. There are no sure things even in the top 5 (or so I read, I don't follow college ball.)

If DeRozan walks, he walks. Or maybe he opts in or maybe they do a sign and trade. I'd almost rather have salary cap than flotsam from a trade. He's not bringing back anything amazing.

Anyway, tearing it down always takes time like 5+ years to rebuild, often decades. You never know when you'll get out of it. So, yeah, I'd rather get the PO record to cap our run before the coming doldrums.

[DPG21920]

First of all overtly trying to tank is bad precedent when you've got so many young guys (and this is the youngest Spurs team in decades). You want to instill a mindset of discipline, optimism and professionalism. Tanking is for loser franchises. It brings a mindset that losing is okay. I am against it on principle. Really anything else in this discussion is superfluous.

Secondly, as they'd likely be a mid-lottery or lower lottery team, I'd rather have the Spurs organization reap the income of another playoff appearance. You want your small market teams to survive in their current cities so, all this helps. And if they do somehow get a high lottery, well, unfortunately this is a weak draft. There are no sure things even in the top 5 (or so I read, I don't follow college ball.)

If DeRozan walks, he walks. Or maybe he opts in or maybe they do a sign and trade. I'd almost rather have salary cap than flotsam from a trade. He's not bringing back anything amazing.

Anyway, tearing it down always takes time like 5+ years to rebuild, often decades. You never know when you'll get out of it. So, yeah, I'd rather get the PO record to cap our run before the coming doldrums.

Fair enough. I don’t agree with that at all :lol, but fair enough. Tanking to me means you are trying to be bad on purpose; SA is losing as is and the result is the same.

You’ve already seen the frustration boil up because of that..Lonnie, Murray specifically.

So losing is losing, and I doubt the young guys would see trading DeRozan/LMA as the franchise wanting them to lose. They would view it as the opportunity they’ve been waiting for to shine and grow and show what they could do.

[timtonymanu]

Lol “standing pat” cause it had to take a Lonnie breakout to beat the Rockets at home and barely beating a Fox/Bagley less Kings team at home. Would be so typical of this team. I don’t even think they have to do a fire sale, but at least upgrade the flaws. (Forbes/Mills redundancy, find a legit SF that isn’t aging Rudy Gay/undersized Derozan, perimeter defender, etc.)

But it’s gonna be stand pat again, this team never learns.

[Collins21]

Lol “standing pat” cause it had to take a Lonnie breakout to beat the Rockets at home and barely beating a Fox/Bagley less Kings team at home. Would be so typical of this team. I don’t even think they have to do a fire sale, but at least upgrade the flaws. (Forbes/Mills redundancy, find a legit SF that isn’t aging Rudy Gay/undersized Derozan, perimeter defender, etc.)

But it’s gonna be stand pat again, this team never learns.

This was y point if you don't want to complete tank then make the small steps to get better and if you're not going to that then bow it up.

[DPG21920]

Yeah, if SA believes in DeRozan/LMA and truly wants to win, then offer up White/Murray/Lonnie and some picks and go get some real help. Shape this roster to actually fit and win now.

[acoelho1]

Trading anyone of our young guys doesn't make much sense either. I don't like the Gordon trade and I'm not sure what's out there in the trade market that would help us move the needle in terms of improving this team. Therefore, I think the team is banking on internal improvement from Murray, White & Walker. Imagine if Murray got more consistent, White getting back to what he did last year and Walker with a breakout rest of the season. You add in DDR with an improved 3 pt shot and the possibilities could entice the team to want to play it out.

[DPG21920]

Trading anyone of our young guys doesn't make much sense either. I don't like the Gordon trade and I'm not sure what's out there in the trade market that would help us move the needle in terms of improving this team. Therefore, I think the team is banking on internal improvement from Murray, White & Walker. Imagine if Murray got more consistent, White getting back to what he did last year and Walker with a breakout rest of the season. You add in DDR with an improved 3 pt shot and the possibilities could entice the team to want to play it out.

To what end though? Let’s say all of that happens. Do you then extend DeRozan and lock him in on an expensive deal for 4 more years (his player option next year, then 3 more years)?

[tbdog]

You can't just get picks for DD. A team needs to match his salary, which means possibly a bad one.

[DPG21920]

You can't just get picks for DD. A team needs to match his salary, which means possibly a bad one.

So? If you are rebuilding, what does it matter having a bad contract for a year or two when you aren’t a free agency player anyways? Smart teams do that all the time and pays off big time; they have salary cap space they know they aren’t using and they absorb bad deals for draft picks.

It’s legit great GM’ing to do that.

I also don’t believe Sa would need to do that either; yes they need to match salaries, but there are plenty of guys on expiring deals, just like DeRozan “functionally” is. DET for example has Reggie Jackson making 18M then off the books for next season.

[dbestpro]

So? If you are rebuilding, what does it matter having a bad contract for a year or two when you aren’t a free agency player anyways? Smart teams do that all the time and pays off big time; they have salary cap space they know they aren’t using and they absorb bad deals for draft picks.

It’s legit great GM’ing to do that.

I also don’t believe Sa would need to do that either; yes they need to match salaries, but there are plenty of guys on expiring deals, just like DeRozan “functionally” is. DET for example has Reggie Jackson making 18M then off the books for next season.

Schooled.

[Roscoe P. Coltrane]

I actually think if we make a trade we will get better... DDR isn't good... At least not for us (neither for the raptors)... We WILL get better simply by getting rid of him... Now imagine a decent 3/D guy in his place... Then LMA can net us the same or a decent stretch big... Now we play faster and more open... Not only will we be better, but I'm sure we will get at least one pick for each...

I remember when pistons traded for Rasheed Wallace in the middle of the season, they went from a team that wasn't on the radar at ALL to a team that won the ring that year
Where will the points come from?

[itzsoweezee]

I don't know why there is this assumption that moving one of those guys would hurt playoffs chances. I think LMA is the most important out of those guys, but the Spurs would be fine without DeRozan or Gay.

[DPG21920]

Where will the points come from?

Is it possible that White/Lonnie/Murray pick up some of the slack and the defense improves more than the offense suffers? I don’t know..it’s a question of what the stats say vs reality and application of those stats.

[DPG21920]

I don't know why there is this assumption that moving one of those guys would hurt playoffs chances. I think LMA is the most important out of those guys, but the Spurs would be fine without DeRozan or Gay.

I’m saying I think people need to stop thinking about the playoffs at all regarding these questions. Playoffs or not, you either believe in the DeRozan led Spurs or you don’t. Eeking into the playoffs playing .500 ball shouldn’t change anyone’s mind either way in my opinion.

[JeffDuncan]

So? If you are rebuilding, what does it matter having a bad contract for a year or two when you aren’t a free agency player anyways? Smart teams do that all the time ...

That's how we got DDR in the first place. Toronto wanted to dump his bad contract. And they found a sucker. So you want to do it again, you say, because you think it's smart for the Spurs.

Or did you mean something else? Please clarify if so.

DDR will finish the season here. He will then look around. He can get $27.7 million by exercising his player option, to stay with the Spurs.

[DPG21920]

That's how we got DDR in the first place. Toronto wanted to dump his bad contract. And they found a sucker. So you want to do it again, you say, because you think it's smart for the Spurs.

Or did you mean something else? Please clarify if so.

DDR will finish the season here. He will then look around. He can get $27.7 million by exercising his player option, to stay with the Spurs.

Short answer: Yes. Exactly.

Longer answer: No, this is not comparable to that. DeRozan was still viewed as an all NBA player and SA thought getting him with LMA would help keep them a contender. They were forced to trade Kawhi and chose win now. My example is SA would be missing the playoffs and use DeRozan to get a first round pick. If they have to take on a bad player with an extra year on their deal, it functionally doesn’t matter. The same way teams that have cap space and don’t use it, take on deals for draft capital.

[JeffDuncan]

... My example is SA would be missing the playoffs and use DeRozan to get a first round pick. If they have to take on a bad player with an extra year on their deal, it functionally doesn’t matter. ...

What is the cost of that bad player, in your scenario? I mean, how much are you spending on the pick, and how much on the player? The number to match is, again, $27.7 million.

(Understanding that, in a trade, it would be pro rata this season, and the player option next.)

The pick, whoever it is, will be on rookie scale. Of course.

With the Spurs, the pick will spend a year in Austin, most likely. While that bad player will be on the Spurs roster. Are you taking that into account?

So you've skipped a chance at the playoffs in exchange for a rookie in Austin and a bad player in S.A. Hm.

[DPG21920]

What is the cost of that bad player, in your scenario? I mean, how much are you spending on the pick, and how much on the player? The number to match is, again, $27.7 million.

(Understanding that, in a trade, it would be pro rata this season, and the player option next.)

The pick, whoever it is, will be on rookie scale. Of course.

With the Spurs, the pick will spend a year in Austin, most likely. While that bad player will be on the Spurs roster. Are you taking that into account?

So you've skipped a chance at the playoffs in exchange for a rookie in Austin and a bad player in S.A. Hm.

In this scenario - SA is either missing the playoffs with DeRozan, or barely eeking in and getting bounced in the first round and then DeRozan walks for nothing. So lets say you don’t trade and let DeRozan walk, you’d be in the exact same position as if you made the deal with the bad contract in it, but no pick (because whether or not a bad contract is on the books, you aren’t using the money on another player anyways and aren’t a playoff team anyways)



So yeah, I would skip those two things for the chance at drafting the next Murray/White/Lonnie or the slim chance of it being the next TP/Manu. All day.

So the cost would be instead of having DeRozan opt out and his money off the books completely, you would have player “X” with his fully guaranteed deal next season and a first round pick.

SA would be rebuilding anyways, that player wouldn’t even have to play and you aren’t signing anyone with cap space anyways.

[tbdog]

So? If you are rebuilding, what does it matter having a bad contract for a year or two when you aren’t a free agency player anyways? Smart teams do that all the time and pays off big time; they have salary cap space they know they aren’t using and they absorb bad deals for draft picks.

It’s legit great GM’ing to do that.

I also don’t believe Sa would need to do that either; yes they need to match salaries, but there are plenty of guys on expiring deals, just like DeRozan “functionally” is. DET for example has Reggie Jackson making 18M then off the books for next season.

The issue is unless DD commits to a team we trading him for, that pick or prospect wouldn't be a good one. The best thing the Spurs could do is have DD commit to the Spurs, regardless what people think of him.

[XDT76]

I really don't see a scenario where a trade happens. DDR's salary is too high. The possible teams who would consider a trade for him are either going for a title this year or a team that wanted to get rid of bad multiple year contracts. Teams that wanted to win this year would probably not have a good pick next year and unlikely to have a matching contract. We probably would not want multiple years of bad contract in exchange with DDR either.

[DPG21920]

The issue is unless DD commits to a team we trading him for, that pick or prospect wouldn't be a good one. The best thing the Spurs could do is have DD commit to the Spurs, regardless what people think of him.

I mean, I agree he isn’t likely to fetch a lottery pick, but all first rounders have solid value. Either via the pick itself (think of Murray, Lonnie, White, Manu, TP) or combined in a trade to move up.

I also agree that a team trading for DeRozan would likely want some assurances he would sign an extension, but I dont think that would be a major stumbling block with the teams mentioned who have interest in him.

DD is committed to the Spurs IMO; they just don’t seem to want to extend him. I’m 99% certain that if SA came with a large extension offer DeRozan would immediately sign it.

[TD 21]

Not surprised. The West being unusually bad in the middle makes the playoffs more attainable than it otherwise would be for a team this bad. So they'll probably keep pretending and put off making a decision on DeRozan until the off season.

At that point, I'd imagine they'd work in concert with his agent on a trade, whereby he either agrees to opt in and/or extend with whoever acquires him.

As long as they're on the same page with them, nothing would change functionally. All the pieces that have discussed ad nauseam would still theoretically be in play, save for Gallinari, but they might have the cap space to sign him outright (Pistons will have the cap space to absorb DeRozan at that point), if they're so inclined.

Too bad he didn't define "hefty" for Aldridge and Gay. I still think the return would be modest enough that they'd prefer to keep them, so long as they're interested in staying.



Lol “standing pat” cause it had to take a Lonnie breakout to beat the Rockets at home and barely beating a Fox/Bagley less Kings team at home. Would be so typical of this team. I don’t even think they have to do a fire sale, but at least upgrade the flaws. (Forbes/Mills redundancy, find a legit SF that isn’t aging Rudy Gay/undersized Derozan, perimeter defender, etc.)

But it’s gonna be stand pat again, this team never learns.

:tu I've been beating this drum for a while. They can continue along this path (at this point, I don't even mind because of the likely trade value of Aldridge and Gay), just make one of the theoretical DeRozan trades that have been discussed ad nauseam.

[gambit1990]

dear PATFO,

moving demar doesn’t mean you’re blowing up the team.

[MultiTroll]

I don't know why there is this assumption that moving one of those guys would hurt playoffs chances. I think LMA is the most important out of those guys, but the Spurs would be fine without DeRozan or Gay.
This. Boston let Flat Earther walk and got better.

Might as well get a pick or two for Derosian.

[DAF86]

Go Mediocrity Go!

Only season it makes sense to go for mediocrity. Go get that record.

[tbdog]

I mean, I agree he isn’t likely to fetch a lottery pick, but all first rounders have solid value. Either via the pick itself (think of Murray, Lonnie, White, Manu, TP) or combined in a trade to move up.

I also agree that a team trading for DeRozan would likely want some assurances he would sign an extension, but I dont think that would be a major stumbling block with the teams mentioned who have interest in him.

DD is committed to the Spurs IMO; they just don’t seem to want to extend him. I’m 99% certain that if SA came with a large extension offer DeRozan would immediately sign it.

Looking at Magic, it would be unlikely Spurs could get Gordon and Founier for him unless DD has intension to resign. If he does not, Magic won't give up Gordon unless we give up a youth asset, ie White. It's a pretty big deal.

[DPG21920]

Looking at Magic, it would be unlikely Spurs could get Gordon and Founier for him unless DD has intension to resign. If he does not, Magic won't give up Gordon unless we give up a youth asset, ie White. It's a pretty big deal.

Sure, but that’s a very specific scenario- there are other teams.

[spurs10]

He's guessing of course, but it surely makes sense not to tank while there's a realistic chance to make the playoffs. They have a business to run and have to make a profit. Easier for us fans to have a championship or bust attitude but that's very far away from reality. Nice take and one I think about a lot. It's not simply the money you make or lose in one round of the playoffs. It cost as much money to see the Spurs play the Hornets on a Tuesday night with floor seats as it does to see the Stones on the front row basically.


First of all overtly trying to tank is bad precedent when you've got so many young guys (and this is the youngest Spurs team in decades). You want to instill a mindset of discipline, optimism and professionalism. Tanking is for loser franchises. It brings a mindset that losing is okay. I am against it on principle. Really anything else in this discussion is superfluous.

Secondly, as they'd likely be a mid-lottery or lower lottery team, I'd rather have the Spurs organization reap the income of another playoff appearance. You want your small market teams to survive in their current cities so, all this helps. And if they do somehow get a high lottery, well, unfortunately this is a weak draft. There are no sure things even in the top 5 (or so I read, I don't follow college ball.)

If DeRozan walks, he walks. Or maybe he opts in or maybe they do a sign and trade. I'd almost rather have salary cap than flotsam from a trade. He's not bringing back anything amazing.

Anyway, tearing it down always takes time like 5+ years to rebuild, often decades. You never know when you'll get out of it. So, yeah, I'd rather get the PO record to cap our run before the coming doldrums. Yep, fans are not going to continue supporting a team with fervour and their hard earned money if they don't feel like they are trying to win.


Fair enough. I don’t agree with that at all :lol, but fair enough. Tanking to me means you are trying to be bad on purpose; SA is losing as is and the result is the same.

You’ve already seen the frustration boil up because of that..Lonnie, Murray specifically.

So losing is losing, and I doubt the young guys would see trading DeRozan/LMA as the franchise wanting them to lose. They would view it as the opportunity they’ve been waiting for to shine and grow and show what they could do. Tanking is intentionally trying not to win or 'be bad on purpose' as far as I know. Our losing streak had me wondering 'are we trying to lose or do we just suck' and 'what's the difference' is a reasonable answer. I agree that 'shaping up the roster' is always likely on their minds. The last few games (minus the Motor City Horror Show) has shown us DDR shooting 3's, a coming out party for Walker IV, and some tenacity at the end of games. As Pop said after the Rockets game 'This is the team we thought we had,' but I doubt he meant they don't have their antennas up.

[Chinook]

Why do people keep spouting this? SA has a losing record and is just as close to the 13th spot in the West as they are to the playoffs. Being close to the7th seed does not equal good.

SA has to the deadline to decide, but if they don’t see a DRASTIC turn around in their play, whether or not they are in the playoff hunt still, they have to do something.

They cant afford to lose assets like DeRozan for nothing just for the chance to eek into the PO and get knocked out in RD1. They need draft capital and as much of it as they can get.

Now, if the lightbulb clicks for DeRozan from 3PT land, Lonnie/White/Murray bust out and they start playing 60% winning ball? Ok, that’s another story. But they can’t keep on this same trajectory.

Win building was fine when you are firmly playing good basketball and in the playoffs. It’s good for young players to learn while winning and having vets take pressure off of them. But when you are losing? It’s doing nothing but preventing growth and development. And if you aren’t extending DeRozan, he’s gone anyway next season.

They don't have to decide to build around DeRozan or blow it up. They can (and are planning to) play DeRozan to stay competitive while growing their young guys. In that vein, yes, it's important that they are close to the seventh seed. It's completely unimportant that they are close to 13th. They aren't trying to avoid the worst record in the league -- they are trying to get a top-eight record in the conference.

They can afford to lose DeRozan for nothing. People keep acting like you sign or trade for players to keep indefinitely. But that's not the case. They made that trade specifically to remain a playoff team for two years. If they were so desperate to keep him, they'd've caved on an extension. Guys can walk. It's okay. The most valuable piece to Spurs' future is likely going to be the team's natural picks after bottoming out. Seriously acting like the team NEEDS to get say, Aaron Gordon rather than nothing is just bizarre. As I've said, I'm not against getting value for anyone on the roster. But worse role-players who are "better fits" with the inconsistent and underperforming guards on the team. Just get whatever draft or prospect capital you can and more one. If the guards pick it up, sign the role-playing forwards next year (there will be a number on the market). If they continue to disappoint, you get a higher pick and a clearer roster to rebuild.

Would I rather them make no moves? No. I think they should do something. They should consolidate the expirings on the roster into a legit rotation player. But I also think they are a better team than last season and will see the most improvement just by playing better. This is one of Pop's worst coaching jobs due in large part to missing the summer. If they can get on the same page, they'll make the playoffs. That's important to the team, especially more so than a middling role-player or even getting a high pick a year or so earlier than they're scheduled to.

[tholdren]

Why do people keep spouting this? SA has a losing record and is just as close to the 13th spot in the West as they are to the playoffs. Being close to the7th seed does not equal good.

SA has to the deadline to decide, but if they don’t see a DRASTIC turn around in their play, whether or not they are in the playoff hunt still, they have to do something.

They cant afford to lose assets like DeRozan for nothing just for the chance to eek into the PO and get knocked out in RD1. They need draft capital and as much of it as they can get.

Now, if the lightbulb clicks for DeRozan from 3PT land, Lonnie/White/Murray bust out and they start playing 60% winning ball? Ok, that’s another story. But they can’t keep on this same trajectory.

Win building was fine when you are firmly playing good basketball and in the playoffs. It’s good for young players to learn while winning and having vets take pressure off of them. But when you are losing? It’s doing nothing but preventing growth and development. And if you aren’t extending DeRozan, he’s gone anyway next season.

Lol a grown man still believing media superstar hype. How long you gonna keep that up?

[Ocotillo]

The article posted is not really going out on a limb. The Spurs rarely make in season moves (I know of the exceptions) and "pulling the plug" would be out of character for them. On the other hand, this is new for Pop and R.C. Those two have always had highly competitive teams and have not been in the situation where they are managing a sub-500 team. They may be learning this on the fly.....

I would imagine if some player or piece became available, they would make a move but that will be closer to the deadline. I don't know what goes on in the front office but I wonder, do the Spurs typically make calls around the league to see who is available or do they generally take the calls? Maybe in the past they were getting the calls and now they have to be more proactive.

Sirius NBA Radio were talking hypotheticals about Kevin Love today who supposedly is going on the block and is said to want to end up in Portland. Maybe you get in on a three way that involves moving Love to another team and we help facilitate it.

[tholdren]

The article posted is not really going out on a limb. The Spurs rarely make in season moves (I know of the exceptions) and "pulling the plug" would be out of character for them. On the other hand, this is new for Pop and R.C. Those two have always had highly competitive teams and have not been in the situation where they are managing a sub-500 team. They may be learning this on the fly.....

I would imagine if some player or piece became available, they would make a move but that will be closer to the deadline. I don't know what goes on in the front office but I wonder, do the Spurs typically make calls around the league to see who is available or do they generally take the calls? Maybe in the past they were getting the calls and now they have to be more proactive.

Sirius NBA Radio were talking hypotheticals about Kevin Love today who supposedly is going on the block and is said to want to end up in Portland. Maybe you get in on a three way that involves moving Love to another team and we help facilitate it.

Why you want a poor man's LaMarcus when LaMarcus isn't that good?

[Dhbsr555]

It’s not that Aldridge is bad he’s good however, when you have the youth in the wings and la being 35 it would be smart to package him

[ZeusWillJudge]

First of all overtly trying to tank is bad precedent when you've got so many young guys (and this is the youngest Spurs team in decades). You want to instill a mindset of discipline, optimism and professionalism. Tanking is for loser franchises. It brings a mindset that losing is okay. I am against it on principle. Really anything else in this discussion is superfluous.

Secondly, as they'd likely be a mid-lottery or lower lottery team, I'd rather have the Spurs organization reap the income of another playoff appearance. You want your small market teams to survive in their current cities so, all this helps. And if they do somehow get a high lottery, well, unfortunately this is a weak draft. There are no sure things even in the top 5 (or so I read, I don't follow college ball.)

If DeRozan walks, he walks. Or maybe he opts in or maybe they do a sign and trade. I'd almost rather have salary cap than flotsam from a trade. He's not bringing back anything amazing.

Anyway, tearing it down always takes time like 5+ years to rebuild, often decades. You never know when you'll get out of it. So, yeah, I'd rather get the PO record to cap our run before the coming doldrums.


These days, you either need to convince 2-3 stars to come together to form a super-team (not happening in SA), or you need to put together a nucleus of 2-3 really good young (cheap) players within the span of a few years. They need to be close together so that you can afford to keep them all when their rookie deals begin to come up. It's almost impossible to do the latter without having a bad year or two, to get good draft picks. You don't have to tank - you can do the same thing by being legitimately shitty. But the worst of all possible worlds is having two highly-paid players who are just good enough to get you to the playoffs, but not good enough to go anywhere. You can't afford to hire a top FA, and you can't get a decent draft pick.

Boston tanked (Ryan Gomes ratted them out in an interview) and parlayed the picks into a Championship. The Tank wasn't the only factor - they also made the decision to bite the bullet and commit to a rebuild, rather than settling for years of mediocrity by taking half measures. But it wouldn't have been possible to put the whole thing together without trading the pick they got from the tank.

Seattle traded away ALL their best players, and used the picks as the basis for the OKC team. They never won a 'ship, but that wasn't some kind of legacy of tanking. And they were sure as hell strong contenders for years. You may not count that as a "tank", but they stripped the team of any chance of winning by trading away those players.

You're right - rebuilding after a teardown often takes a lot of years, and sometimes never happens. But a lot of that has to do with the quality of the FO. As the saying goes - "Shit rolls downhill." A solid, well-executed plan makes all the difference. And that means commitment and focus. As DPG has pointed out numerous times, the Spurs made a win-now move by taking DeRozan in that trade, but then didn't commit with their other moves. A lot of teams tank, but then start buying high-priced FA's too soon, and wind up with the worst of both worlds.

Pointing at teams that fail at rebuilding doesn't mean much. I knew guys who said that a college degree was worthless, because they knew people who got their degree and then wound up working at Radio Shack. Those people were going to be working at Radio Shack no matter what. And a lot of NBA front offices are going to fail no matter what kind path they take. A shitty carpenter is going to fail, no matter which tool he picks up.

DeRozan and Aldridge are NOT a nucleus to build a championship contender around. The Spurs need to make a move. Or more than one move. And tanking for one season would add to that, not take away. You just can't over-estimate the value of a good first round pick.

[tholdren]

It’s not that Aldridge is bad he’s good however, when you have the youth in the wings and la being 35 it would be smart to package him

He's empty stats. He can get you 10 rebs a game because he's on the low block during fts and he can score 20 by hitting 16 foot fadeaways. He gets you 0 rings being the man because he's soft.

[ZeusWillJudge]

So? If you are rebuilding, what does it matter having a bad contract for a year or two when you aren’t a free agency player anyways? Smart teams do that all the time and pays off big time; they have salary cap space they know they aren’t using and they absorb bad deals for draft picks.


It’s legit great GM’ing to do that.



How do you get to the point that you can afford to absorb contracts? You do it by casting off highly-paid players, and running with whatever you can cobble together. You may not call that a "tank" but it amounts to the same thing.

In that situation, taking on a couple of really bad contracts has two benefits. You get to bank draft picks, in exchange for taking them on... AND you get your own good draft picks, because your team stays shitty. And THAT is legit great GM'ing.

I really don't understand why you're talking about that scenario, when the Spurs are in salary cap hell. Yeah, they're going to get out of it soon, but only if they don't fuck it up by buying half-assed high-priced players (Think Pau Gasol - not the same thing as taking on contracts for future picks.) And even at that, it's two more seasons before they get out of cap jail. Then at least a couple more to do anything with the resulting cap space. Even longer if they decide to do what you're talking about. That's starting to look sort of long term to me.

[Leetonidas]

Lol when spurs are 15 games under .500 in February maybe they'll finally realize this roster sucks. Probably not though

[TimDunkem]

^Speaking of first round picks: Matisse Thybulle is killing the Nuggets right now. Would he even be playing right now if the Spurs chose him over Puka?

[Ocotillo]

Why you want a poor man's LaMarcus when LaMarcus isn't that good? Within my post, my suggestion was to be part of a three team trade with Love going elsewhere. I would not target Love for our team.

[JeffDuncan]

In this scenario - SA is either missing the playoffs with DeRozan, or barely eeking in and getting bounced in the first round and then DeRozan walks for nothing.


Ok, you're sure DDR won't exercise his player option. Why are you sure of that?


So lets say you don’t trade and let DeRozan walk, ...

There isn't any "let." DDR has a player option.

But ok, the Spurs don't trade him, and....



you’d be in the exact same position as if you made the deal with the bad contract in it, ...

OK, if you trade DDR and his bad contract for another bad player, with a bad contract, that would be the same. And we're missing the playoffs for this?



but no pick ...


The Spurs will have a draft pick, actually two, whether they miss the playoffs or not. But you want a lottery pick?

Basically, you want to miss the playoffs to get a lottery pick?

And apparently you want to trade DDR in some way to get another 1st round pick. Is that what you have in mind?

Do you want to trade DDR, and also miss the playoffs, to get two high 1st round picks? Is that the objective?



...(because whether or not a bad contract is on the books, you aren’t using the money on another player anyways and aren’t a playoff team anyways)

Hm? If another contract is on the books, then yes, you are using money on that player.

It is when a contract is not on the books that you are not using money on a player.



So the cost would be instead of having DeRozan opt out and his money off the books completely, ...

That is not a cost. A cost is when you do pay a player.

If DDR does not exercise his option the cost associated with him disappears.



...you would have player “X” with his fully guaranteed deal next season and a first round pick.

So, you'd have the Spurs trade DDR for Ferd Stumbleflop if the deal nets a first round pick.

And you'd have the Spurs miss the playoffs for that.

I wonder if you fully appreciate the value of cap space. At the time of the Morris fiasco, if the Spurs had had enough cap space they could have made their same offer to Morris without losing Bertans.

[r0drig0lac]

^Speaking of first round picks: Matisse Thybulle is killing the Nuggets right now. Would he even be playing right now if the Spurs chose him over Puka?

no way

[Larry O]

SIGH.... as much as us Spurs fans would like to see a trade or two to either make Improvements now or for the future with 1st round picks, I'm sorry to bust bubbles, but I just don't see PATFO pulling the trigger right now to pull a blockbuster trade or even a minor trade... well, perhaps at least for now, in my opinion. I think that the organization still wants to be competitive this season, and will use this much needed 5 day break to work on their defense and chemistry, among other things. Hopefully for DDR, he can continue to work on his 3 point shooting, and perhaps LW4 can work more on his game, too. I'm sure that the coaching staff is hoping that this break to practice, will help this team to get their act together and transform what they practiced into game time situations, especially their defense. This team is about 3 wins away from the 8th spot in the WC. I'm sure that Pop and the coaching staff are hoping that this will be the turning point in this season to get this team going. BUT if this team continues to struggle through February, and have not cracked somewhere in the top eight spot, and with no hope in making the playoffs, then perhaps they may look into the possibility of making trades, in my opinion. In the game against the Kings, the Spurs played better defense and had some stops. DJ's minutes restrictions seem to be lifted now, so that's going to help the team's defense, etc, going forward. I also think that White can use the time off to heal up a bit as well. We'll see, starting this Thursday night and going forward, if this time off will be the catalyst to turn this team around or just blow it up down the road at some point. :corn:

[GAustex]

Why cannot Spurs rookies play with freedom and elan like Matisse Thybulle?
Did Pop really pass on Matisse Thybulle?

[DPG21920]

How do you get to the point that you can afford to absorb contracts? You do it by casting off highly-paid players, and running with whatever you can cobble together. You may not call that a "tank" but it amounts to the same thing.

In that situation, taking on a couple of really bad contracts has two benefits. You get to bank draft picks, in exchange for taking them on... AND you get your own good draft picks, because your team stays shitty. And THAT is legit great GM'ing.

I really don't understand why you're talking about that scenario, when the Spurs are in salary cap hell. Yeah, they're going to get out of it soon, but only if they don't fuck it up by buying half-assed high-priced players (Think Pau Gasol - not the same thing as taking on contracts for future picks.) And even at that, it's two more seasons before they get out of cap jail. Then at least a couple more to do anything with the resulting cap space. Even longer if they decide to do what you're talking about. That's starting to look sort of long term to me.

Because trading DeRozan functional expiring and LMA functional expiring can net you 2 1sts in addition to your own for deals that are only 1 year guaranteed past theirs.

So you don’t need cap space. You need the ability and willingness to absorb deals longer than you send out. Trading Derozan and Lma does that. Then in a year, you also have cap space.

So I am not saying take on any contract; and with LMA/DeRozan value I dont think that would even be a consideration. Taking on deals that are fully guaranteed next year though? Should be on the table if it nets you what you want (picks)

[DPG21920]

They don't have to decide to build around DeRozan or blow it up. They can (and are planning to) play DeRozan to stay competitive while growing their young guys. In that vein, yes, it's important that they are close to the seventh seed. It's completely unimportant that they are close to 13th. They aren't trying to avoid the worst record in the league -- they are trying to get a top-eight record in the conference.

They can afford to lose DeRozan for nothing. People keep acting like you sign or trade for players to keep indefinitely. But that's not the case. They made that trade specifically to remain a playoff team for two years. If they were so desperate to keep him, they'd've caved on an extension. Guys can walk. It's okay. The most valuable piece to Spurs' future is likely going to be the team's natural picks after bottoming out. Seriously acting like the team NEEDS to get say, Aaron Gordon rather than nothing is just bizarre. As I've said, I'm not against getting value for anyone on the roster. But worse role-players who are "better fits" with the inconsistent and underperforming guards on the team. Just get whatever draft or prospect capital you can and more one. If the guards pick it up, sign the role-playing forwards next year (there will be a number on the market). If they continue to disappoint, you get a higher pick and a clearer roster to rebuild.

Would I rather them make no moves? No. I think they should do something. They should consolidate the expirings on the roster into a legit rotation player. But I also think they are a better team than last season and will see the most improvement just by playing better. This is one of Pop's worst coaching jobs due in large part to missing the summer. If they can get on the same page, they'll make the playoffs. That's important to the team, especially more so than a middling role-player or even getting a high pick a year or so earlier than they're scheduled to.

Seen you say this before and yeah don’t agree. Great franchises do view it the optimal way. They see players as assets and don’t let them go for nothing just because they fulfilled their contract. That’s sub optimal poor GM’img.

Also, everything I said is assuming they don’t change course and get a lot better (60% win percentage or more). I don’t think they turn it around and therefore they would not be paying DeRozan to be competitive since they aren’t competitive. I don’t care how close you are to the playoffs if you have a losing record or even .500 you aren’t competitive. Getting to the 8th seed isnt the goal; fielding a competitive team is. Lucking into the playoffs, IMO, with a bad team is not the goal. Two very different things and evaluations.

Making the PO with a roster you don’t believe in and won’t keep together (hence no extension) isn’t worth not getting an asset. I agree they don’t want to extend him which is the center of my point; if you don’t believe in him enough to win now and make moves for that but also don’t believe in him enough for the future with an extension THAT is a the tell-tale sign to move him. While SA getting lottery picks on their own for bottoming out is the most valuable that is absolutely no excuse in this scenario to not collect other bullets.

I’ve already clarified some assumptions with my thinking; that 1) they have no interest in trading youth/picks to win now, 2) they have no interest in extending DeRozan no matter what and most importantly 3) they aren’t going to start winning a lot more games than they have.

Under that context, it would be bad GM’ing to not get something and I’m ok giving it another 6 weeks to find out too and see if something drastic changes in their play.

[tbdog]

Next free agency is the weakest in years, and DD is probably the best player in that free agency market. I am sure he will get enough $ out East if he tests free agency. And the Hawks are my bet for a big contract as he would fit well Trey. I am sure the Spurs don't want to lose DD for zilch, because we would not get under the cap enough to sign a difference maker. Besides, Gay, LMA, Mills are expire the season after. It would make too much sense for the Spurs to convince DD to opt in. But I can't see DD doing that.

[tbdog]

Because trading DeRozan functional expiring and LMA functional expiring can net you 2 1sts in addition to your own for deals that are only 1 year guaranteed past theirs.

So you don’t need cap space. You need the ability and willingness to absorb deals longer than you send out. Trading Derozan and Lma does that. Then in a year, you also have cap space.

So I am not saying take on any contract; and with LMA/DeRozan value I dont think that would even be a consideration. Taking on deals that are fully guaranteed next year though? Should be on the table if it nets you what you want (picks)

LMA money is guaranteed next season.

[DPG21920]

LMA money is guaranteed next season.

That is not confirmed..

[Chinook]

Great franchises do view it my way.

:lol They clearly don't. Houston thinks of it that way, maybe Boston. I can't think of another good team that considers players assets. Don't confuse being wiling to move on from guys like GS did with Iggy and Livingston with them considering them assets. If anything, they overpaid them because they didn't care about their value. Honestly, I think you need to take a step back. You've been acting abnormal all year, and saying something like this just highlights it. Even if PATFO is now a bad front office, they certainly haven't always been, and they've never behaved in the way you think "Great Franchises" should.


Making the PO with a roster you don’t believe in and won’t keep together (hence no extension) isn’t worth not getting an asset.

How can you say that when they... did whatever to LMA's deal and gave Gay all that money? They may not think it's their new five-year core, but they clearly don't seem keen to move on. YOU don't believe in it, but they seem to at least believe they've assembled talent. It's really not a good argument to point to the DeRozan extension as some gate-keeper to their belief. You don't have to think a guy is a max player to want him to stay (hence Murray), and there's no nearing timetable on a deal.

Regardless, making the playoffs is worth it to a lot of teams. Clubs like Minny and Orlando struggle to do so despite numerous GMs and high picks. You can value what you want, but you should be able to see that other folks might value other things. There's nothing objectively right about your point of view on when to tank.

[DPG21920]

Ok, you're sure DDR won't exercise his player option. Why are you sure of that?

I am absolutely making a guess, but the fact he can get a long term deal for sure while it being a weak FA class leads me to believe he is gone. Plus, if SA isn’t willing to extend him now, I can see him wanting out.




There isn't any "let." DDR has a player option.

Obviously “let” in the sense of not trading him now and putting it in his hands whether or not you have another opportunity to trade him.



But ok, the Spurs don't trade him, and....



OK, if you trade DDR and his bad contract for another bad player, with a bad contract, that would be the same. And we're missing the playoffs for this?

You are missing the playoffs anyways as things stand...if the trade deadline approaches and nothing changes in that regard? Why would you think it would change later with no changes to the team?






Again, SA is already missing the playoffs as things stand. If in 6 weeks things still look the same? You would not only get your own lottery pick but additional assets (picks) whether you agree on their value or not. It’s either or: Miss the PO and no extra chances in the draft or miss the PO and extra chances in the draft.

And apparently you want to trade DDR in some way to get another 1st round pick. Is that what you have in mind?

Yes. Any deal for DDR would include a first round pick coming to SA.


Do you want to trade DDR, and also miss the playoffs, to get two high 1st round picks? Is that the objective?

The objective is to maximize ROI. If you are missing the PO anyways or even if you can make the playoffs but have a losing record or even .500, I’d rather have multiple picks instead of that. Yes.






Hm? If another contract is on the books, then yes, you are using money on that player.

It is when a contract is not on the books that you are not using money on a player.

No, money has to be spent any ways. Its not like a team if they wanted could only field league min players and just pocket the profit. You know you are going to not sign anyone in free agency so in that regard you aren’t using any real money that you need.



[quote]That is not a cost. A cost is when you do pay a player.

If DDR does not exercise his option the cost associated with him disappears.



So, you'd have the Spurs trade DDR for Ferd Stumbleflop if the deal nets a first round pick.

And you'd have the Spurs miss the playoffs for that.

I wonder if you fully appreciate the value of cap space. At the time of the Morris fiasco, if the Spurs had had enough cap space they could have made their same offer to Morris without losing Bertans.

Cap space matters mostly when you are a winning team and trying to sign free agents - SA would not be in this position in this scenario so no, I don’t value cap space next year.

Beyond that, I value it for either signing players to be a playoff team again or taking on more bad contracts to get more picks.

[DPG21920]

:lol They clearly don't. Houston thinks of it that way, maybe Boston. I can't think of another good team that considers players assets. Don't confuse being wiling to move on from guys like GS did with Iggy and Livingston with them considering them assets. If anything, they overpaid them because they didn't care about their value. Honestly, I think you need to take a step back. You've been acting abnormal all year, and saying something like this just highlights it. Even if PATFO is now a bad front office, they certainly haven't always been, and they've never behaved in the way you think "Great Franchises" should.

I never said SA was always a bad franchise. But franchises is their position? Yeah, they do act rationally and like the players are assets. Especially when the players aren’t players you aren’t willing to over pay to keep. So how the Spurs behaved when they had TD/TP/Manu and were contenders is totally different than how they need to operate today.

They’ve been a bad FO for the past few years and that is all that matters going forward now. Not the past where they had franchise anchors that they no longer possess.




How can you say that when they... did whatever to LMA's deal and gave Gay all that money? They may not think it's their new five-year core, but they clearly don't seem keen to move on. YOU don't believe in it, but they seem to at least believe they've assembled talent. It's really not a good argument to point to the DeRozan extension as some gate-keeper to their belief. You don't have to think a guy is a max player to want him to stay (hence Murray), and there's no nearing timetable on a deal.

Regardless, making the playoffs is worth it to a lot of teams. Clubs like Minny and Orlando struggle to do so despite numerous GMs and high picks. You can value what you want, but you should be able to see that other folks might value other things. There's nothing objectively right about your point of view on when to tank.

I think SA *thought they were doing that, but that goes back to their evaluation of talent and their performance if they thought this team was legit enough to compete. I would say the fact that they didn’t get aggressive in the draft or free agency and offer up any youth or future picks is a great indicator they didn’t believe coupled with the fact they seem to have no interest in extending DeRozan.

They did that stuff (Gay, LMA) to hedge and hope for the best; that is not a sign of their realistic plan nor is it something that should cement them in the face of what appears to be overwhelming evidence (bounced in first round, losing record, nothing added in off season and one of the worst most unsustainable defenses in the nba).

There is also a massive difference in Murray (still young with untapped potential) and DeRozan (career worth of data with no inkling of an extension on the horizon). You know this.

Making the playoffs is valuable to a lot of teams; SA is one of them. However, that is an arbitrary measuring stick considering you might make the playoffs at .500 which is an unacceptable record for now and future plans for a team trying to win.

I never said tank now or else! I said if things continue down this path where they are a sub 500 team (or even 500) that regardless of making the playoffs or not you have to move on.

I don’t think that is subjective; if SA truly morphs the next 6 weeks and plays legit winning ball? Sure. Forget this. I don’t think they will.

[Big P]

^Speaking of first round picks: Matisse Thybulle is killing the Nuggets right now. Would he even be playing right now if the Spurs chose him over Puka?

No, pop knows best, and he would be in Austin for the next 3 years.

[DPG21920]

:lol They clearly don't. Houston thinks of it that way, maybe Boston. I can't think of another good team that considers players assets. Don't confuse being wiling to move on from guys like GS did with Iggy and Livingston with them considering them assets. If anything, they overpaid them because they didn't care about their value. Honestly, I think you need to take a step back. You've been acting abnormal all year, and saying something like this just highlights it. Even if PATFO is now a bad front office, they certainly haven't always been, and they've never behaved in the way you think "Great Franchises" should.



How can you say that when they... did whatever to LMA's deal and gave Gay all that money? They may not think it's their new five-year core, but they clearly don't seem keen to move on. YOU don't believe in it, but they seem to at least believe they've assembled talent. It's really not a good argument to point to the DeRozan extension as some gate-keeper to their belief. You don't have to think a guy is a max player to want him to stay (hence Murray), and there's no nearing timetable on a deal.

Regardless, making the playoffs is worth it to a lot of teams. Clubs like Minny and Orlando struggle to do so despite numerous GMs and high picks. You can value what you want, but you should be able to see that other folks might value other things. There's nothing objectively right about your point of view on when to tank.

Also, context matters. I thought most would understand without me needing to explain that I meant if SA continued on this path that started the season.

If they were playing well, on pace for 50 wins (or close) I would be totally fine. Heck, I was the one that coined “win building” on here and marveled at how SA did that.

So when I say “great franchises do that” I’m not meaning HOU. Im meaning that when the time is right and you aren’t a contender with a legit core and you don’t have a Duncan, that yeah, you need to treat players like assets especially when the alternative is getting into the playoffs with 42 wins...

[MultiTroll]

A rebuild that could have gone right is Boston. They could have parted with Flat Earther and their juicy picks for Kawhi and I think the Spurs would have gone for it. Instead Ainge held on too long and got zippo for Irving. For that matter got nothing for Horford. Yet here they are at 17-5.

I think some of you are downplaying what good young players we could get with picks. All while possibly even playing better. See above Celtics before you keep spouting about how we are destined to be a losing team without Defrozen and Stat Padder LMA.

[Down Under]

Is the team actually worse if they traded Aldridge for filler & a 1st? If Poeltl starts, you have a rim runner to collapse defenses & allows the young talent & DD more touches & space. Additionally, you're now starting a Centre who can anchor a defense.

[tbdog]

A rebuild that could have gone right is Boston. They could have parted with Flat Earther and their juicy picks for Kawhi and I think the Spurs would have gone for it. Instead Ainge held on too long and got zippo for Irving. For that matter got nothing for Horford. Yet here they are at 17-5.

I think some of you are downplaying what good young players we could get with picks. All while possibly even playing better. See above Celtics before you keep spouting about how we are destined to be a losing team without Defrozen and Stat Padder LMA.

Celtics benefited by securing one of the most lopsided lengthy trades in the NBA. They got like 4 lottery picks, Brown, Tatum, Smart, and used one for two years of Irving. Obviously losijg Hayward game one hurt their chances. But Ainge not getting Kawai was his short fall. They would be champs right now.

[JeffDuncan]

I am absolutely making a guess, but the fact he can get a long term deal for sure while it being a weak FA class leads me to believe he is gone. Plus, if SA isn’t willing to extend him now, I can see him wanting out.

What is the magic, in your mind, of a "long term deal?" Why must it be "long term" in particular?

Then, do you really think DDR would walk away from $27.7 million for no other reason than the Spurs declining to give him more? Do you truly believe that? Nobody would do that.



You are missing the playoffs anyways as things stand...if the trade deadline approaches and nothing changes in that regard? Why would you think it would change later with no changes to the team?

Are you advocating making the playoffs, or not?

Or, if you're asking my position, it is certainly better to make the playoffs than not, because of the additional income, to both businesses and the community. Businesses, and communities, rely on income for their prosperity. The Spurs do not exist in isolation.

Maybe the Spurs, as they stand, will make the playoffs. Maybe not.

Who do you see in this year's draft class who'd be worth missing the playoffs to draft?



No, money has to be spent any ways. Its not like a team if they wanted could only field league min players and just pocket the profit. ...

Under the CBA, the team minimum salary is 90% of the salary cap. The salary cap this season is $109 million. So, the minimum team salary, this season, is $98 million (rounded.)

The cap is, as you may know, a so-called soft cap. It is typically exceeded, because of this-or-that. The only team actually under the cap, now, is Atlanta, with a current payroll of $108 million. All the other teams are over.

The Spurs payroll this season is currently $124 million (rounded.) The Spurs are $15 million over the salary cap, and $26 million over the minimum team payroll.

And for that we're getting Forbes, Beli, Mills, DDR, etc., and a losing record, so far.

But anyway, it is certainly possible to carry some cap space. $11 million could be carried directly, this season, without even going into cap exceptions.



You know you are going to not sign anyone in free agency ...

The Spurs sign free agents every year, but only cheap ones, because the team wastes its money by overpaying inferior players.

Again, the Spurs are currently $26 million above the minimum team payroll, and for what?

The Raptors, the Fakers, Dallas, and the Celtics all have a lower team payroll than the Spurs.



Cap space matters mostly when you are a winning team and trying to sign free agents - SA would not be in this position in this scenario so no, I don’t value cap space next year.

Cap space always matters.

But about next year, the NBA has projected a salary cap of $116 million next season, and the Spurs currently have player salary commitments for next season of $117 million. The legal minimum team payroll will be $104 mil.

Mucus Morris orally agreed to accept a two-year $20 million deal with the Spurs, presumably $10 million a year. The Spurs had to give up Bertans to scrounge the money, because of their fiscal irresponsibility, in my opinion. Speaking of free agents.



Beyond that, I value it for either signing players to be a playoff team again or taking on more bad contracts to get more picks.

Why are you insistent on a bad contract? What's wrong with a good one?

[CGD]

To someone’s earlier point that Spurs should essential ride it out.

I agree that it would be “off brand” for the Spurs to now start viewing their players as assets in the way that a HOU and BOS does, but it is also GM malpractice NOT to consider ways to improve the roster including but not limited to moving LMA or DDR. We need look no further than the Bertans debacle— spurs were clearly moving a beloved player to improve the roster. And, for where the team is now more so than in the past that involves looking at the long ball.

I would say really the big two competing interests at play are — putting butts in seats/playoff gate today v making moves now to ensure you have a product that will put butts in seats in the near future.

[Roscoe P. Coltrane]

Is it possible that White/Lonnie/Murray pick up some of the slack and the defense improves more than the offense suffers? I don’t know..it’s a question of what the stats say vs reality and application of those stats.I like white but there is indication that he can constantly score, same with Walker. You need someone that score inside and a 3 and D player and a stretch 4 ain't going to be able to do it.

[TD 21]

They don't have to decide to build around DeRozan or blow it up. They can (and are planning to) play DeRozan to stay competitive while growing their young guys. In that vein, yes, it's important that they are close to the seventh seed. It's completely unimportant that they are close to 13th. They aren't trying to avoid the worst record in the league --they are trying to get a top-eight record in the conference.

They can afford to lose DeRozan for nothing. People keep acting like you sign or trade for players to keep indefinitely. But that's not the case. They made that trade specifically to remain a playoff team for two years. If they were so desperate to keep him, they'd've caved on an extension. Guys can walk. It's okay. The most valuable piece to Spurs' future is likely going to be the team's natural picks after bottoming out. Seriously acting like the team NEEDS to get say, Aaron Gordon rather than nothing is just bizarre. As I've said, I'm not against getting value for anyone on the roster. But worse role-players who are "better fits" with the inconsistent and underperforming guards on the team. Just get whatever draft or prospect capital you can and more one. If the guards pick it up, sign the role-playing forwards next year (there will be a number on the market). If they continue to disappoint, you get a higher pick and a clearer roster to rebuild.

Would I rather them make no moves? No. I think they should do something. They should consolidate the expirings on the roster into a legit rotation player. But I also think they are a better team than last season and will see the most improvement just by playing better. This is one of Pop's worst coaching jobs due in large part to missing the summer. If they can get on the same page, they'll make the playoffs. That's important to the team, especially more so than a middling role-player or even getting a high pick a year or so earlier than they're scheduled to.

This is insane. DeRozan can more than likely net them a qualify, young veteran or a lottery protected 1st (either of which, but particularly the latter, can be used as a vehicle with their own pick potentially, to move up to the mid lottery), but they should not take that why?

This notion that he helps them compete for the 7th-8th seed and that the myriad hypothetical trades that have been discussed ad nauseam wouldn't, is asinine.

"Guys can walk". You say it like this is some irrelevant role player, instead of the clown they gave away a top 5 player and elite role player for.

Gordon is nothing special, but players like him don't grow on trees. They don't often get to UFA status and if they do, it usually requires over paying them, especially in markets and situations like this one.

They're significantly worse. This was a house of cards team to begin with. They couldn't afford age related declines, replacing their most impactful offensive player with a net negative and adding another non shooter in a prominent role.

Pop "missing the summer" is irrelevant. The deployment has been predictably poor, but it comes down to personnel and their fit is the worst in the league, exacerbated by the lack of elite talent to overcome it.

[Floyd Pacquiao]

Honestly I just think it's a huge mistake to hold on to derozan. His game is bad for the team and he's mentally weak (crumbles in crunch time and when he doesn't get calls). I don't want Lonnie, White and Murray picking up any bad habits from this man. It's bad enough that they have to pass him the ball in crunch time or his ego will shatter.

[cd98]

Honestly I just think it's a huge mistake to hold on to derozan. His game is bad for the team and he's mentally weak (crumbles in crunch time and when he doesn't get calls). I don't want Lonnie, White and Murray picking up any bad habits from this man. It's bad enough that they have to pass him the ball in crunch time or his ego will shatter.

Weird because I would think Lonnie, White, and Murry would be great if they could reach Derozan's ceiling. I'm not sure any of them will ever be near as good as Derozan.

[Floyd Pacquiao]

Weird because I would think Lonnie, White, and Murry would be great if they could reach Derozan's ceiling. I'm not sure any of them will ever be near as good as Derozan.

I dont want them to be derozan, no one in their right mind should a want them to be another player who can't shoot 3s and plays bad defense who's weak mentally. That's not a winning player.

[tbdog]

I dont want them to be derozan, no one in their right mind should a want them to be another player who can't shoot 3s and plays bad defense who's weak mentally. That's not a winning player.

Despite his flaws, DD is far and away better offensively. The guy has immense skill and doesn't get benefit of calls going his way. You got people here that would trade for Beal, yet here he is stinking it up in the East. DD is who he is, an on the border allstar, who sometimes is the best player on the court but not consistently the best.

[Dennis the Menace]

Go Mediocrity Go!

[slick'81]

Despite his flaws, DD is far and away better offensively. The guy has immense skill and doesn't get benefit of calls going his way. You got people here that would trade for Beal, yet here he is stinking it up in the East. DD is who he is, an on the border allstar, who sometimes is the best player on the court but not consistently the best.


Since when is 27 ppg/7dimes and a steal stinking it up? Id love beal for derozan for numerous reasons

[Floyd Pacquiao]

Despite his flaws, DD is far and away better offensively. The guy has immense skill and doesn't get benefit of calls going his way. You got people here that would trade for Beal, yet here he is stinking it up in the East. DD is who he is, an on the border allstar, who sometimes is the best player on the court but not consistently the best. he's got a good 1 on 1 low post game for a guard but that style of play is just hard to coexist with. His flaws out weigh his positives. Beal on the other hand would be great for this team. He's everything Forbes wishes he could be

[lmbebo]

listening to NBA radio earlier, Justin Termine went off on the Spurs. First for the horrible Kwahi trade (giving away Kwahi and Green) and not getting anything of value in return. Then for somewhat blowing this Bertans trade. Says the Spurs are getting away on reputation, but have had 2 horrible summers now.

[TimDunkem]

Go Mediocrity Go!

[TimDunkem]

listening to NBA radio earlier, Justin Termine went off on the Spurs. First for the horrible Kwahi trade (giving away Kwahi and Green) and not getting anything of value in return. Then for somewhat blowing this Bertans trade. Says the Spurs are getting away on reputation, but have had 2 horrible summers now.

*3 summers in a row...Outbidding themselves with Patty at 12:01, and giving the washed up Spanish llama millions for barely playing after he rejected the team when he could actually contribute was bad too. They're still paying him, btw.

[Degoat]

listening to NBA radio earlier, Justin Termine went off on the Spurs. First for the horrible Kwahi trade (giving away Kwahi and Green) and not getting anything of value in return. Then for somewhat blowing this Bertans trade. Says the Spurs are getting away on reputation, but have had 2 horrible summers now.

thats such BS tho, the spurs have made some bad calls but to say the spurs didn’t get value for kawhi is bogus. Demar albeit frustrating af is a borderline all star, Jakob has shown he can be a really good defensive anchor, Keldon Johnson looks like he’ll be a good 3&D guy.

Marcus Morris> Davis Bertans too, l really like Davis but the guy can’t defend

[sasaint]

*3 summers in a row...Outbidding themselves with Patty at 12:01, and giving the washed up Spanish llama millions for barely playing after he rejected the team when he could actually contribute was bad too. They're still paying him, btw.

Because I regard the LMA signing as the debacle that marked the beginning of the end, I honestly don’t remember a good summer for PATFO. Their last great moment was trading George Hill for Number 2, but I sure wish we had George now.

[sasaint]

thats such BS tho, the spurs have made some bad calls but to say the spurs didn’t get value for kawhi is bogus. Demar albeit frustrating af is a borderline all star, Jakob has shown he can be a really good defensive anchor, Keldon Johnson looks like he’ll be a good 3&D guy.

Marcus Morris> Davis Bertans too, l really like Davis but the guy can’t defend

Leldon Johnson just hit his first few 3s in the G league in the last week or ten days.

[Degoat]

Leldon Johnson just hit his first few 3s in the G league in the last week or ten days.

Have you seen one Austin Spurs game this season? Keldon looks like a beast, results haven’t shown yet but he’s a good shooter just not great

[sasaint]

Have you seen one Austin Spurs game this season? Keldon looks like a beast, results haven’t shown yet but he’s a good shooter just not great

Keldon shows a lot - just not 3 point shooting... at least not yet.

[Chinook]

This is insane.

You and I both know it's not insane. Come on.


DeRozan can more than likely net them a qualify, young veteran or a lottery protected 1st (either of which, but particularly the latter, can be used as a vehicle with their own pick potentially, to move up to the mid lottery), but they should not take that why?

No one gives a shit about a guy like Gordon in comparison to a legit franchise player. DeRozan just turned 30 a few months ago. That Gordon is 24 means nothing. I get getting a guy in his first or second year and considering him a piece. But I'd want no part in getting borderline busts from other teams hoping they stop being bad. The team already has "young veterans" who should still be here after the tank is in full swing. A first is way better, but if you don't understand why the Spurs would be focused on anything besides the future, I don't know what to tell you.


This notion that he helps them compete for the 7th-8th seed and that the myriad hypothetical trades that have been discussed ad nauseam wouldn't, is asinine.

We both know he's better than all of those guys. He helps more than them. No reason to keep spinning off on hyperbole.


"Guys can walk". You say it like this is some irrelevant role player, instead of the clown they gave away a top 5 player and elite role player for.

They traded him for two or three years, not forever. Contracts are ephemeral. You don't have to "get something" for every guy who leaves. Guys can sign contracts, play them out and then go their separate ways without it being a big deal. Sure, I am not against moving DeRozan, especially if he wants to leave. But he's on the team for what he does now, not for what he would get in a trade later. I also don't see how Kawhi has anything to do with it at this point. He's gone. Let it go. No one here thought it was a good trade. There aren't extra points to be had for continuing to hammer the point home so long after the fact.


They're significantly worse. This was a house of cards team to begin with. They couldn't afford age related declines, replacing their most impactful offensive player with a net negative and adding another non shooter in a prominent role.

They're better. They're PLAYING worse for sure, but they are more talented and have much higher upside.


Pop "missing the summer" is irrelevant.

It's not. Coaching matters, and the Spurs more than most rosters needed really adroit direction, and they didn't get it. Before Murray got hurt, the Spurs had a specific plan to make their lack of spacing work. We don't know how it would have fared, but they needed to build on it this off-season and couldn't. They needed to work on their defensive rotations (especially now that Messina is gone), and they didn't. No one is denying the personnel problems, but they'd be solidly in the top-eight in the conference records right now with better coaching.

[Chinook]

I never said SA was always a bad franchise. But franchises is their position? Yeah, they do act rationally and like the players are assets.

They really don't. Some are loyal to the end. Regardless, you're confusing a Boston-like situations where their core got old to a situation where the core is just disappointing. Usually trading guys for assets is a part of rebuilding, but it usually don't mean to trade guys ASAP to optimize value.


They’ve been a bad FO for the past few years and that is all that matters going forward now. Not the past where they had franchise anchors that they no longer possess.

They have made some bad or questionable moves like Gasol's renegotiation and using the MLE (somehow again) on Beli. They made some decent moves in the draft/UDFA, some cheap free agents and getting Gay to sign on. They aren't a bad front office now, and if they are, it's certainly not for not trading DeRozan yet. You keep straddling the line between them failing or turning it around. But if it's still up in the air, why would the FO tear it down? Do you have any reason to believe the offers are going to be worse in two months? I don't.


I think SA *thought they were doing that, but that goes back to their evaluation of talent and their performance if they thought this team was legit enough to compete. I would say the fact that they didn’t get aggressive in the draft or free agency and offer up any youth or future picks is a great indicator they didn’t believe coupled with the fact they seem to have no interest in extending DeRozan.

Competing and contending are different things. The Spurs likely don't see a championship window yet and aren't going to spend until/unless they do. That's different than them hoping to be solid playoff team until someone can come along and elevate them again. Now, I wish the Spurs had gotten aggressive, especially in the draft. I said as much constantly at the time and don't need to do so again. But it's easy to see why they wouldn't do so and still not trade their guys away.


They did that stuff (Gay, LMA) to hedge and hope for the best; that is not a sign of their realistic plan nor is it something that should cement them in the face of what appears to be overwhelming evidence (bounced in first round, losing record, nothing added in off season and one of the worst most unsustainable defenses in the nba).

Getting bounced in the first round is evidence of nothing.


There is also a massive difference in Murray (still young with untapped potential) and DeRozan (career worth of data with no inkling of an extension on the horizon). You know this.

No really. The Spurs extended Murray because he was willing to meet their price. DeRozan isn't (hence the two sides being far apart). But that doesn't mean the team has no interest in extending him. Ozzie Newsome had a motto "right player, right price" which meant that there was a limit that you'd be willing to go to sign guys and if it were over that limit, they walked, no matter who they were. With max salaries in the NBA, that motto isn't as necessary for stars. But when there's a guy like DeRozan where no one wants to max him, the Spurs can love him and not being willing to go high enough to get a deal done. I said at the time that it seemed like both sides wanted more data. We're getting that. Maybe they'll come to an agreement; maybe they won't. But that doesn't mean PATFO doesn't "believe" in him.


Making the playoffs is valuable to a lot of teams; SA is one of them. However, that is an arbitrary measuring stick considering you might make the playoffs at .500 which is an unacceptable record for now and future plans for a team trying to win.

Dude...

Yes, making the playoffs is valuable to SA. Just because it's not the ultimate goal doesn't mean it can't be a goal for a year or even a stretch of years.

[SAGirl]

Calling the team mediocre is generous frankly. They have been bad and have sucked with a scattered game by game exception. It doesn’t matter what you call it. Mediocre isn’t it. They have sucked.

I do expect some improvement bc they have young guys who hopefully get better through the season and perhaps the coaching staff has learned enough about who plays well enough in what situations, but frankly they need more talent and some roster turnover. If they miss the playoffs at least I expect some changes, and at least a good draft pick. Why continue to suck, stand pat, and sign what will be an aging demar to an extension? Seriously, do people want to continue to stand pat with this crew?

[tbdog]

Since when is 27 ppg/7dimes and a steal stinking it up? Id love beal for derozan for numerous reasons

I mean the team. Beal playing SF would be a disaster. DD is playing out of position as he is, but he will do immensely better than Beal would.

[tbdog]

he's got a good 1 on 1 low post game for a guard but that style of play is just hard to coexist with. His flaws out weigh his positives. Beal on the other hand would be great for this team. He's everything Forbes wishes he could be

Except he isn't a SF, and could even play SF. Heck, Beal has his faults too. Grass isn't always greener.

[Prime BEEF]

Calling the team mediocre is generous frankly. They have been bad and have sucked with a scattered game by game exception. It doesn’t matter what you call it. Mediocre isn’t it. They have sucked.

I do expect some improvement bc they have young guys who hopefully get better through the season and perhaps the coaching staff has learned enough about who plays well enough in what situations, but frankly they need more talent and some roster turnover. If they miss the playoffs at least I expect some changes, and at least a good draft pick. Why continue to suck, stand pat, and sign what will be an aging demar to an extension? Seriously, do people want to continue to stand pat with this crew?
Most people do not want to stand pat. Evidently some of the players don’t want to as well. You are going to see a huge depression cloud hit this franchise, it’s players, and fans if no moves are made. All glimmer of hope or little excitement some fans might have will be completely gone. Potential dark times ahead. The spurs will just be a blah team that no one cares about...not the fans or the media. Basically the pistons. No one cares about them, they aren’t good, rarely make headlines, never make the playoffs, and can’t sign big name free agents.

Sounds crazy but the next 7-10yrs of spurs relevance depends on them making mid-season moves this season. It will be to late if they sign DDR and keep LMA

[DPG21920]

FYI

1205144368539156480

[JeffDuncan]

FYI

1205144368539156480

What's happened there is that they wanted the guarantee date to be in the next calendar year.

[JeffDuncan]

Most people do not want to stand pat. ...

Truth.



Sounds crazy but the next 7-10yrs of spurs relevance depends on them making mid-season moves this season. It will be to late if they sign DDR and keep LMA

This midseason is not that important, for the long term. The crucial time will be the spring of '21. That's when most of the existing commitments expire. With no major changes, the Spurs could go into the free agent market with $90 million, or more, to spend on talent (depending on where the NBA sets the salary cap.). As it currently shapes up, only Atlanta and Charlotte will have more money available than the Spurs, at that time.

For now, the question ought to be addressed, given their contracts, and their level of performance, who on the Spurs roster is tradeable? I'm not being sarcastic. Serious question.

[TimDunkem]

^The Spurs could move the entire roster if they wanted - yes - even Scrubinelli. The question isn't tradeability but desire and what the pieces could net in return.

[CGD]

listening to NBA radio earlier, Justin Termine went off on the Spurs. First for the horrible Kwahi trade (giving away Kwahi and Green) and not getting anything of value in return. Then for somewhat blowing this Bertans trade. Says the Spurs are getting away on reputation, but have had 2 horrible summers now.

What a lazy take.

Also, F Morris and F Uncle.

[Coach X]

People doesn't know what they're talking about when they speak about signing an allstar caliber player on the free agency after blowing everything up.

The big three is retired, Pop retires, Bufford is no longer the GM, playoff streak and winning seasons end up, Spurs culture is gone.

Why should a decent free agent sign for the San Antonio Spurs when the few things that made this franchise attractive for decades are gone? What will be the difference between us and, let's say, the Memphis Grizzlies or the Cleveland Cavaliers?

[TD 21]

You and I both know it's not insane. Come on.



No one gives a shit about a guy like Gordon in comparison to a legit franchise player. DeRozan just turned 30 a few months ago. That Gordon is 24 means nothing. I get getting a guy in his first or second year and considering him a piece. But I'd want no part in getting borderline busts from other teams hoping they stop being bad. The team already has "young veterans" who should still be here after the tank is in full swing. A first is way better, but if you don't understand why the Spurs would be focused on anything besides the future, I don't know what to tell you.



We both know he's better than all of those guys. He helps more than them. No reason to keep spinning off on hyperbole.



They traded him for two or three years, not forever. Contracts are ephemeral. You don't have to "get something" for every guy who leaves. Guys can sign contracts, play them out and then go their separate ways without it being a big deal. Sure, I am not against moving DeRozan, especially if he wants to leave. But he's on the team for what he does now, not for what he would get in a trade later. I also don't see how Kawhi has anything to do with it at this point. He's gone. Let it go. No one here thought it was a good trade. There aren't extra points to be had for continuing to hammer the point home so long after the fact.



They're better. They're PLAYING worse for sure, but they are more talented and have much higher upside.



It's not. Coaching matters, and the Spurs more than most rosters needed really adroit direction, and they didn't get it. Before Murray got hurt, the Spurs had a specific plan to make their lack of spacing work. We don't know how it would have fared, but they needed to build on it this off-season and couldn't. They needed to work on their defensive rotations (especially now that Messina is gone), and they didn't. No one is denying the personnel problems, but they'd be solidly in the top-eight in the conference records right now with better coaching.

Did you just call DeRozan "a legit franchise player"? :lmao Gordon isn't a bust or bad. He's a solid, if erratic player, with delusions of grandeur. He's also a scarce, valuable archetype. He could help now and in the future, which fits with what they're trying to do anyway.

He's not. Paul is still clearly better and Gallinari arguably is too and is more valuable. As a net negative player, it's less about that and more about fit though. If it were a real star we were talking about, it'd be different.

Scumbag wasn't "every guy", he was and is a top 5ish player. There are extra points to be earned for trying to salvage as much value as possible.

They're clearly worse. Even if they are marginally more talented (which is debatable), the fit is so much worse that it supersedes that.

Coaching, x's and o's wise, is largely irrelevant in this homogenized era. Why are you pretending as if you have inside knowledge of what they were thinking? There is no "plan" to make a lineup with 1.5 3-point shooters work.

[DPG21920]

And again, this hinges on the teams play. If there is not a dramatic turn around and improvement and no reason given to extend Derozan and build around him you should absolutely trade him.

[Coach X]

Coaching, x's and o's wise, is largely irrelevant in this homogenized era.

https://media2.giphy.com/media/h8ISBQ4maqq5oYLM78/giphy.gif

https://media1.giphy.com/media/7EhpltGE7noYG12Z2t/giphy.gif

https://media2.giphy.com/media/lSgWFZZ9uhpMGyiMVh/giphy.gif

[TD 21]

https://media2.giphy.com/media/h8ISBQ4maqq5oYLM78/giphy.gif

https://media1.giphy.com/media/7EhpltGE7noYG12Z2t/giphy.gif

https://media2.giphy.com/media/lSgWFZZ9uhpMGyiMVh/giphy.gif

:lmao Nurse is the latest great white hope fraud coach that's cozied up to media big wigs, who reciprocate by attempting to brainwash the masses into thinking he's some genius because he's doing look at me shit, like running grade school defenses.

The real reason for their "success", is because Scumbag intentionally destroyed his value, the Spurs front office went senile, the Warriors were decimated by injury and they fell ass backwards into a roster loaded with athleticism and 3 and D players.

[daslicer]

Did you just call DeRozan "a legit franchise player"? :lmao Gordon isn't a bust or bad. He's a solid, if erratic player, with delusions of grandeur. He's also a scarce, valuable archetype. He could help now and in the future, which fits with what they're trying to do anyway.

He's not. Paul is still clearly better and Gallinari arguably is too and is more valuable. As a net negative player, it's less about that and more about fit though. If it were a real star we were talking about, it'd be different.

Scumbag wasn't "every guy", he was and is a top 5ish player. There are extra points to be earned for trying to salvage as much value as possible.

They're clearly worse. Even if they are marginally more talented (which is debatable), the fit is so much worse that it supersedes that.

Coaching, x's and o's wise, is largely irrelevant in this homogenized era. Why are you pretending as if you have inside knowledge of what they were thinking? There is no "plan" to make a lineup with 1.5 3-point shooters work.

Agreed have been saying this for a while. Lebron definitely proved your point in 2016 when he won with Coach Lue.

[pad300]

The real reason for their "success", is because Scumbag intentionally destroyed his value, the Spurs front office went senile, the Warriors were decimated by injury and they fell ass backwards into a roster loaded with athleticism and 3 and D players.

You can argue the other points, but here you are just drunk off your ass. Masai knows what he is doing, that much is clear.

[Chinook]

Did you just call DeRozan "a legit franchise player"?

No. Come on man, it wasn't that hard to get given what you originally wrote. If the Spurs draft a franchise player, it's not going to matter whether they have Gordon or not. He's a non-factor to a rebuilding foundation.


He's not. Paul is still clearly better and Gallinari arguably is too and is more valuable. As a net negative player, it's less about that and more about fit though. If it were a real star we were talking about, it'd be different.

Neither one of those guys is healthy enough to replace DeRozan, and Paul is a worse bet even if you believe he's a better player. Paul definitely isn't a better fit, and there's no point in making a trade for Gallo now if the goal isn't to pair him with Aldridge and DeRozan. If the guards were playing consistently good ball, then I could understand taking a hit in talent for better fit. But they aren't.


Scumbag wasn't "every guy", he was and is a top 5ish player. There are extra points to be earned for trying to salvage as much value as possible.

No, there aren't more points to be earned. This is where you go from very good but somewhat too pessimistic poster to edgelord. Kawhi's gone. We all know that at this point. Most of us hold a certain bitterness toward Kawhi leaving just like we do toward the .4 shot or choking away the title in 2013. It sucks, and it's gonna always be a sore spot. But it's over. They only traded him once. What happens from here with those pieces is irrelevant to him.


They're clearly worse. Even if they are marginally more talented (which is debatable), the fit is so much worse that it supersedes that.

The fit is only different in that Murray has a spot again. Forbes/White/DeRozan/Gay/Aldridge fits well enough, and the bench definitely has the pieces to fit well but needs to stick with Walker and gel. It's definitely not debatable that they have more talent, as they are the same team except with more talented players instead of Cun and Pon.


Coaching, x's and o's wise, is largely irrelevant in this homogenized era. Why are you pretending as if you have inside knowledge of what they were thinking? There is no "plan" to make a lineup with 1.5 3-point shooters work.

I'm not pretending anything. I've never claimed that I knew of some plan to fix spacing besides what they were saying before last pre-season. Pop wanted to spread the court by having Murray push the ball. I don't know that it would have worked, but they don't seem to be doing that this time around. I don't disagree at all about the need for shooters on the court. They should have three at a minimum. And at best, Aldridge and DeRozan shooting more threes only counts as one shooter combined. I do think this current starting unit works, spacing-wise. They just have to gel. The same is true for the defense. They won't be great without better forward defenders. But they can be average with the players they have, just like they were last year.

[timtonymanu]

Lol standing pat cause the West is bad and you think 2 fluke wins against the Rockets and Kings means the season turned around.

[Sugus]

Still not the 15th yet... There is hope. Futile as it may be.

[timtonymanu]

Thank God they lost to Cleveland. It was about to be another fools gold win against another lottery team. Sadly, I still don’t see them making moves like they should.

[Floyd Pacquiao]

Honestly I just think it's a huge mistake to hold on to derozan. His game is bad for the team and he's mentally weak (crumbles in crunch time and when he doesn't get calls). I don't want Lonnie, White and Murray picking up any bad habits from this man. It's bad enough that they have to pass him the ball in crunch time or his ego will shatter.

Same shit, different day tbh

[slick'81]

8th place still in sight,spurs&pop are content

[R. DeMurre]

And again, this hinges on the teams play. If there is not a dramatic turn around and improvement and no reason given to extend Derozan and build around him you should absolutely trade him.

I honestly don't think the record or team play matter. DeRozan should be traded regardless of whatever circumstances happen to play out. Even if the Spurs go on a ten game winning streak, DeRozan will still not be worthy of a near max contract and can not be a major piece on a championship level team.

[DPG21920]

I honestly don't think the record or team play matter. DeRozan should be traded regardless of whatever circumstances happen to play out. Even if the Spurs go on a ten game winning streak, DeRozan will still not be worthy of a near max contract and can not be a major piece on a championship level team.

I agree. I was just explaining the other side of the argument I could find reasonable. But to me, there is nothing that could happen that should change SAs mind about moving on from Derozan and probably LMA too. No result the least of which eeking into the playoffs despite being a average to below average team.

[DPG21920]

Imagine how toxic this can get when you have Murray, White and Lonnie watching Beli/Forbes/Mills get minutes while losing. They aren’t in a winning environment and they aren’t behind good players.

[Amuseddaysleeper]

People doesn't know what they're talking about when they speak about signing an allstar caliber player on the free agency after blowing everything up.

The big three is retired, Pop retires, Bufford is no longer the GM, playoff streak and winning seasons end up, Spurs culture is gone.

Why should a decent free agent sign for the San Antonio Spurs when the few things that made this franchise attractive for decades are gone? What will be the difference between us and, let's say, the Memphis Grizzlies or the Cleveland Cavaliers?

The fact that the Grizzlies and Cavs are still better than the Spurs

[sasaint]

Imagine how toxic this can get when you have Murray, White and Lonnie watching Beli/Forbes/Mills get minutes while losing. They aren’t in a winning environment and they aren’t behind good players.

That kind of shit is why Pop needs to be turned out to pasture before he can make any more personnel moves.

[K...]

If we are trading DeRozan , wouldn't it make sense to play him with his players?


Maybe DeRozan just looks better with worse defensive players (under the don't have a hotter wingman at the bar type things).

Maybe DeRozan gets ancy when young guys outplay him?

It's like that movie, the Truman show but built around demarr DeRozan

[Mugen]

Why would anybody trust this garbage front office with any trades? The last two trades they've completed featured RC (or whatever the puppet GM's name is) getting absolutely bent over by the opposing GM....

They're much, much more likely to trade away Lonnie/White/Dejounte than losers like Derozan and Lamarcus.

If Pop had everything he wanted going forward, Bryn Forbes would be the franchise player on the roster :lol

[UZER]

That kind of shit is why Pop needs to be turned out to pasture before he can make any more personnel moves.

Exactly. And then there are people that say he should just move to the front office. Hell no! Everyone is too scared of him. He needs to be moved as far away from this team as possible.

[rjv]

dreaming here, but the celtics need a big man and they have picks that the spurs could use.

[BackHome]

Yeah the Celtics are falling in the standings the pick they own is the Memphis pick which I believe is protected in top 6 picks in 2020 but not protected in 2021. I think trading them LMA would be a perfect fit to push them into real contenders. The only issue is who do we take from them to match salaries?

[sasaint]

Exactly. And then there are people that say he should just move to the front office. Hell no! Everyone is too scared of him. He needs to be moved as far away from this team as possible.

Problem is the extreme improbability of turning over the entire fruit basket mid-season - or getting the regime you want going forward. So you settle for an interim regime and all that entails. Basically we are screwed.

[SpaceCoast Spursfan]

Let's hope last night was the beginning of another long losing streak. Something needs to happen to get the Spurs to move forward. Pop needs to shift minutes to the young guys, letting them play through mistakes. He can still hold them accountable without just sending them to the bench, especially if they are giving max effort.

I don't buy the argument of the Spurs need to be competitive to stay profitable from a business standpoint. The crowd sizes are already down, and the team as currently constructed isn't getting out of the 1st round if they are even in play off contention come March. A young fun team playing up tempo basketball (White - Murray - Walker - Lyles - Poeltl for example) would be more entertaining than current lineups.

I have gone back & forth on pulling the plug or thinking maybe things could somewhat come together. I just think it's time to move forward. I not for trading away the vets for nothing, but if you can acquire picks or combination of pick/players that fit better with the Spurs current youth - do it. I just don't see a compelling reason not to.

[Sugus]

Imagine how toxic this can get when you have Murray, White and Lonnie watching Beli/Forbes/Mills get minutes while losing. They aren’t in a winning environment and they aren’t behind good players.

This is my biggest takeaway. How good the young players in our core look the little time they're allowed to showcase themselves (DJM at the start of the season, Lonnie at the Rockets game, etc) barraged by hundreds of minutes of them sitting on the bench behind vets and lesser players being abused and torched every night. I don't think we can make any kind of assessment on DJ-White-Lonnie's play this season as they are playing in quite literally the worst possible environment to develop and flourish - getting little to no PT, and when they do, they have to fix up mistakes from and force feed the god awful vets running the team and locker room. Just a shit show from top to bottom.

Hopefully we get a lottery pick this upcoming draft and whoever he is, has the balls to be a true leader and set things in their place, aided by some trades. But I don't have a lot of confidence for that right now.

[sasaint]

This is my biggest takeaway. How good the young players in our core look the little time they're allowed to showcase themselves (DJM at the start of the season, Lonnie at the Rockets game, etc) barraged by hundreds of minutes of them sitting on the bench behind vets and lesser players being abused and torched every night. I don't think we can make any kind of assessment on DJ-White-Lonnie's play this season as they are playing in quite literally the worst possible environment to develop and flourish - getting little to no PT, and when they do, they have to fix up mistakes from and force feed the god awful vets running the team and locker room. Just a shit show from top to bottom.

Hopefully we get a lottery pick this upcoming draft and whoever he is, has the balls to be a true leader and set things in their place, aided by some trades. But I don't have a lot of confidence for that right now.

Haha. A Draft Pick ain't gonna usurp the throne from Pop.

[K...]

Haha. A Draft Pick ain't gonna usurp the throne from Pop.

Limelo ball would be something in that direction

[sananspursfan21]

After beating the Rockets and even squeezing past the Kings, I thought this could be decent news. But now, I just look at this thread in disgust. Trade LMA STAT!!!!

[Chomag]

There is nobody in this draft that can save this franchise. If Spurs go lottery we are going to be there for a few years.

[cd98]

Spurs aren't going to rebuild through free agency. They are a small market. You can only rely on developing talent for so long until you need to have some luck in the lottery. Maybe this year there isn't a superstar, but there will be players that we can draft that could be starters and now is the time to start stockpiling assets. If the team is only good enough to get the 8th seed maybe, and then get destroyed in the first round, better to try to rebuild, especially because making the playoffs is no sure thing.

[DPG21920]

timvp - not what you think SA will do, but what the should do: is there any result, payoffs included that realistically should change SAs mind about keeping Derozan and/or LMA at this point?

[timvp]

timvp - not what you think SA will do, but what the should do: is there any result, payoffs included that realistically should change SAs mind about keeping Derozan and/or LMA at this point?

Come again?

[baseline bum]

There is nobody in this draft that can save this franchise. If Spurs go lottery we are going to be there for a few years.

If?

[DPG21920]

Come again?

Meaning is there any result (making the playoffs this year somehow, Derozan hitting 3s for the rest of the year, etc) that in your mind should change PATFO mind about extending Derozan or not & building around him and LMA for the next 3-5 years

[SAGirl]

Imagine how toxic this can get when you have Murray, White and Lonnie watching Beli/Forbes/Mills get minutes while losing. They aren’t in a winning environment and they aren’t behind good players.
So far they have kept quiet and have not voiced criticism that I know of (granted I am a lot more casual than I used to be) but these guys are not stupid. Keeping things to themselves is a great show of character and of being a profesional, but them keeping mum about this doesn't mean that there are no hard feelings.

[SAGirl]

Yeah the Celtics are falling in the standings the pick they own is the Memphis pick which I believe is protected in top 6 picks in 2020 but not protected in 2021. I think trading them LMA would be a perfect fit to push them into real contenders. The only issue is who do we take from them to match salaries?
They are not trading you the Memphis pick for LMA.
They might trade you their own pick, and that is just "might"

[Floyd Pacquiao]

How about derozan for Jae Crowder

[RC_Drunkford]

Meaning is there any result (making the playoffs this year somehow, Derozan hitting 3s for the rest of the year, etc) that in your mind should change PATFO mind about extending Derozan or not & building around him and LMA for the next 3-5 years

3-5 years??? Oh lawd have mercy. No Spurs fan wants to see that

[RC_Drunkford]

Imagine how toxic this can get when you have Murray, White and Lonnie watching Beli/Forbes/Mills get minutes while losing. They aren’t in a winning environment and they aren’t behind good players.

:pop: "Those team dinners will help them bond, understand and love each other. It's more important that basketball"

[gambit1990]

demar is who he is. cp3 can turn la into a different player (a happy, motivated one). and if the spurs got cp3, it guarantees that okc doesn't get a PO spot over the spurs.

if the spurs really wanna blow it up, they could move cp3 and la in a deal together next season.

cp3, diallo, noel :hungry:

[timvp]

Meaning is there any result (making the playoffs this year somehow, Derozan hitting 3s for the rest of the year, etc) that in your mind should change PATFO mind about extending Derozan or not & building around him and LMA for the next 3-5 years

No DeRozan extension should be on the table. I wouldn't even be in favor of a two-year, $40 million or something like that. DeRozan looks slower, his moping is infectious and it's just not possible to build around him, especially in today's NBA. He's not completely worthless but you don't extend a player who isn't a positive game-changer now who is actively slowing down as we type.

Aldridge? I mean, if he wants to sign a late-stage Duncan contract that is like $5 million per year, that'd be fine. He's not worth big money any more.

Should the Spurs decline that Jan. 1 option? It doesn't look like that's really an option, tbh. It's a fair enough deal in a vacuum. It might give the Spurs more incentive to trade him before that date, though. In theory, his value goes down a little bit after Jan. 1.

[DPG21920]

No DeRozan extension should be on the table. I wouldn't even be in favor of a two-year, $40 million or something like that. DeRozan looks slower, his moping is infectious and it's just not possible to build around him, especially in today's NBA. He's not completely worthless but you don't extend a player who isn't a positive game-changer now who is actively slowing down as we type.

Aldridge? I mean, if he wants to sign a late-stage Duncan contract that is like $5 million per year, that'd be fine. He's not worth big money any more.

Should the Spurs decline that Jan. 1 option? It doesn't look like that's really an option, tbh. It's a fair enough deal in a vacuum. It might give the Spurs more incentive to trade him before that date, though. In theory, his value goes down a little bit after Jan. 1.

I agree. Now having established that is there any reason not to trade Derozan and/or LMA assuming they have any positive value?

[timvp]

I agree. Now having established that

Ah, hitting dat timvp with the ol' 1-2 hezi step-back :tu


is there any reason not to trade Derozan and/or LMA assuming they have any positive value?

If (or when) the playoffs become unattainable, I'd be on the side of trading one or both -- starting with DeRozan, if we're being honest.

I think DeRozan has value if the Spurs are making a push for the playoffs. He also has enough value that you don't trade him for nothing or pay to trade him away. (Ironically, judging by the fact that he's been a net negative 17 out of 18 times or whatever the number is right now, he also has value as part of a tank -- but I'll ignore that.)

But, yeah, I'm totally on board with trading them for positive value. You might as well keep them if all you can get is a second rounder or something like that but if you can get positive assets, I wouldn't protest.

The only thing I would caution would be to fall into a sunk cost fallacy. "We traded Nephew for DeRozan so we have to trade DeRozan before letting him walk" is bad logic. I'm okay with letting him walk in principle. That doesn't bother me at all if the alternatives aren't in San Antonio's favor.

[DPG21920]

Ah, hitting dat timvp with the ol' 1-2 hezi step-back :tu



If (or when) the playoffs become unattainable, I'd be on the side of trading one or both -- starting with DeRozan, if we're being honest.

I think DeRozan has value if the Spurs are making a push for the playoffs. He also has enough value that you don't trade him for nothing or pay to trade him away. (Ironically, judging by the fact that he's been a net negative 17 out of 18 times or whatever the number is right now, he also has value as part of a tank -- but I'll ignore that.)

But, yeah, I'm totally on board with trading them for positive value. You might as well keep them if all you can get is a second rounder or something like that but if you can get positive assets, I wouldn't protest.

The only thing I would caution would be to fall into a sunk cost fallacy. "We traded Nephew for DeRozan so we have to trade DeRozan before letting him walk" is bad logic. I'm okay with letting him walk in principle. That doesn't bother me at all if the alternatives aren't in San Antonio's favor.

Finds DPG in the corner....BANG!.

Gotcha. Where I seem to disagree is the playoffs part. If you know that he’s not someone you want around at any price, then why would making the playoffs with him only to lose him be worth not trading him?

Especially in the West this year where it’s not hard to make the playoffs even with a medicore to bad team. That’s the bar?

For sure you don’t trade him if you can’t get anything; but my assumption is he would return something positive like a first round pick and/or a swing at a decent young player.

If you knew you could trade DeRozan for a first round pick, would you trade him no matter what? Playoffs or otherwise?

[JeffDuncan]

Yeah the Celtics are falling in the standings the pick they own is the Memphis pick which I believe is protected in top 6 picks in 2020 but not protected in 2021. I think trading them LMA would be a perfect fit to push them into real contenders. The only issue is who do we take from them to match salaries?

The Celtics are hard to trade with because their salary situation is so top heavy. They've got Kemba and Hayward maxed, at $32 million each. Below that, there's a dropoff like the edge of a cliff, down to Marcus Smart at $12.5 million. A $20 million gap with nobody there.

Looking at their lineup, yes, they could probably use LMA. The Celtics started Theis against Philly, a game Philly won. Theis is paid $5 million, tho, and LMA's contract is $26 million (with a 15% trade kicker, btw.) Shoehorning LMA into that Celtics roster would take a major feat of prestidigitation..

[GAustex]

prestidigitation
An excellent word

[gambit1990]

let demar walk? fvck that :lmao

you trade him and you trade him soon. even if the spurs are okay with letting demar walk... what if he opts in? then the spurs are in the same place they're in now :lol

get it over with and nip it in the bud.

[gambit1990]

trading kawhi for two years of demar :lol

get some fvcking return.

[TD 21]

You can argue the other points, but here you are just drunk off your ass. Masai knows what he is doing, that much is clear.

:lmao People used to think the same about the senile idiots who ran this franchise into the ground. Don't kid yourself, most of this is luck and the media brainwashes the masses into thinking whoever stumbles into it at a particular moment is smarter than everyone else.

For sure, Ujiri has done more good than bad, but he's had his share of screw ups or would be ones (most notably, trading Lowry to the Knicks for a lottery protected 1st, only for Dolan to nix it at the last second).

I don't buy for a second that they had some grand plan to become what they've become. They fell into it, the same way teams who reach a certain level of success almost always do.




No. Come on man, it wasn't that hard to get given what you originally wrote. If the Spurs draft a franchise player, it's not going to matter whether they have Gordon or not. He's a non-factor to a rebuilding foundation.




Neither one of those guys is healthy enough to replace DeRozan, and Paul is a worse bet even if you believe he's a better player. Paul definitely isn't a better fit, and there's no point in making a trade for Gallo now if the goal isn't to pair him with Aldridge and DeRozan. If the guards were playing consistently good ball, then I could understand taking a hit in talent for better fit. But they aren't.



No, there aren't more points to be earned. This is where you go from very good but somewhat too pessimistic poster to edgelord. Kawhi's gone. We all know that at this point. Most of us hold a certain bitterness toward Kawhi leaving just like we do toward the .4 shot or choking away the title in 2013. It sucks, and it's gonna always be a sore spot. But it's over. They only traded him once. What happens from here with those pieces is irrelevant to him.



The fit is only different in that Murray has a spot again. Forbes/White/DeRozan/Gay/Aldridge fits well enough, and the bench definitely has the pieces to fit well but needs to stick with Walker and gel. It's definitely not debatable that they have more talent, as they are the same team except with more talented players instead of Cun and Pon.



I'm not pretending anything. I've never claimed that I knew of some plan to fix spacing besides what they were saying before last pre-season. Pop wanted to spread the court by having Murray push the ball. I don't know that it would have worked, but they don't seem to be doing that this time around. I don't disagree at all about the need for shooters on the court. They should have three at a minimum. And at best, Aldridge and DeRozan shooting more threes only counts as one shooter combined. I do think this current starting unit works, spacing-wise. They just have to gel. The same is true for the defense. They won't be great without better forward defenders. But they can be average with the players they have, just like they were last year.

Oh. Well, I disagree. It may be a backwards or unconventional strategy, but I view it like his ceiling is elite role player, so if they find a franchise player, he can conceivably fit around them. Whereas DeRozan has no place.

I don't care about health. This isn't a contender either way. So what if Paul and Gallinari are roughly 60 something game, 30 mpg players? I'll take that over DeRozan's durability. Paul would be a good fit, who'd instantly improve them on both ends. Sure, they wouldn't have a legit SF, but that's no different than now anyway. Maybe the young guards grow with a better fitting team and more responsibility? If not, at least they get a clearly picture of what they have in them going forward.

Spare me this bigger man routine. Getting a piece that can help going forward (a solid young veteran, a pick, etc.) is absolutely another point to be earned. They can't salvage the initial trade, but they can salvage value for DeRozan.

Cunningham and Pondexter are irrelevant. They're slightly deeper in terms of rotation caliber players, but worse in the actual guts of the rotation.

Again, you can't "spread the court" with 1.5 3-point shooters and 1 player who generally refuses to even space to the line off ball. Deploying that "strategy" isn't rocket science and doesn't involve a coach being present all off season to implement. The current starting unit played together plenty last season. It's not about gelling, it's about them being a house of cards, who couldn't afford an ounce of regression.

[Chinook]

Oh. Well, I disagree. It may be a backwards or unconventional strategy, but I view it like his ceiling is elite role player, so if they find a franchise player, he can conceivably fit around them. Whereas DeRozan has no place.

Yeah, but you're talking about keeping a guy and trying for the playoffs now and then letting him walk. Versus trading him for a guy who isn't even a elite role-player yet, missing the playoffs but hoping for a pick to become a guy Gordon can fit around. That doesn't seem like a good bet. Like if you can get Sekou and cap space or a first and second or whatever, then I can understand your point. But would I rather have Gordon or DeRozan right now? It's DeMar by a long shot. I'd rather let DeRozan walk and use the cap space to take back bad money for a pick than trade him for Gordon Again, if we could have confidence one or two of the young guards was ready to go, then I can see the argument there too. But they're not, so I don't see any reason to trade DeRozan and not tank.


I don't care about health. This isn't a contender either way. So what if Paul and Gallinari are roughly 60 something game, 30 mpg players? I'll take that over DeRozan's durability. Paul would be a good fit, who'd instantly improve them on both ends. Sure, they wouldn't have a legit SF, but that's no different than now anyway. Maybe the young guards grow with a better fitting team and more responsibility? If not, at least they get a clearly picture of what they have in them going forward.

Paul is definitely not a better fit for the team. And I don't think anyone else would argue that it's better to have him on his contract rather than letting DeRozan walk. I think we're getting a pretty clear picture on the guards right now. Walker's the only one who can argue he hasn't really have the opportunity. Yes, Murray could get healthier, and everyone could improve. But none of those guys has shown anything to suggest they should be given star roles when they can't fill role-player spots. Walker may be changing that idea. Maybe in two months, he'll have shown enough to where the team could feel comfortable moving DeMar. But if they're roughly like this then, then I'm not too interested in seeing them get the reigns.


Spare me this bigger man routine. Getting a piece that can help going forward (a solid young veteran, a pick, etc.) is absolutely another point to be earned. They can't salvage the initial trade, but they can salvage value for DeRozan.

It's not about being the bigger man. It's about you harping on shit no one disagrees with. The Leonard trade sucked. A DeRozan trade might suck, but it won't suck extra because of the Leonard trade. If they do trade DMDR for say Gordon and then Gordon is about to expire, are you going to want the Spurs to trade him to salvage value from the Leonard trade again? Where does it end? Truth is, it ended the moment the trade was completed last year. You can totally make the argument for moving DeRozan on its own merits, but Leonard has nothing to do with it.


Cunningham and Pondexter are irrelevant. They're slightly deeper in terms of rotation caliber players, but worse in the actual guts of the rotation.

Carroll would have probably started last year. I don't disagree that they're performing poorly right now. But their rotation is better. Aldridge is actually outperforming his start to last season in all major categories besides rebounding. DeRozan is outplaying his season average from last year though not his hot start. Gay's shooting has fallen off, but his rate stats are about the same. Mills is playing better as well. The top of the rotation really isn't the problem. The bottom we agree is better. The middle lost Bertans, whom Lyles doesn't really replace. But who Davis is not really wasn't who is was with the Spurs. Certainly, this team could use this year's Bertans. But they're better than they were with the 2018 version.


Again, you can't "spread the court" with 1.5 3-point shooters and 1 player who generally refuses to even space to the line off ball. Deploying that "strategy" isn't rocket science and doesn't involve a coach being present all off season to implement. The current starting unit played together plenty last season. It's not about gelling, it's about them being a house of cards, who couldn't afford an ounce of regression

It's about gelling. Again, the Spurs' stars haven't regressed the way you think they have. They aren't as good as they were at their peak last season, but they started last year off slowly as well. Plenty of folks wanted to tank then too. I'm not trying to argue this year's situation isn't more dire. There's more reason to want to tear it down now. But, yeah, the team can totally play better if they gel, just like they did last year. They're only a "house of cards" if you think about them as a contender. They clearly don't have the players for that. But compared to like the Suns and other bottom-half-of-the-bracket clubs? Yeah, they are better positioned than that. They didn't lose to Cleveland because of fit or even spacing. They lost because of consistently poor execution. Guys don't get open behind the line because the defenders aren't 6-8, fast-footed shot-blockers. They do so because guys fuck up rotations. Don't fuck up the rotations, guys don't get nearly as many easy looks. Coaching.

[timvp]

If you knew you could trade DeRozan for a first round pick, would you trade him no matter what? Playoffs or otherwise?

Optimal situation is the Spurs make the playoffs the next two seasons. At that point, the Spurs will have a seamless transition to the next era as DeRozan, Aldridge, Gay, Carroll, etc. will be gone and/or free agents. By that point, the Spurs will know exactly what they have in White, Murray, Walker, etc. and can build their strategy around that core. If none of the youth develops, the Spurs could do a teardown. If a few more pieces could turn the team into a contender, you can go that route.

I know Spurs fans are tantalized by lottery balls but avoiding a teardown this season would make for a smoother transition. It's easy to tank -- it's a lot more difficult to untank, especially when it's a spur of the moment tank.

So, no, I don't go for a teardown just because a team dangles a first round pick. That's especially true with how all the contracts are aligned. You do a halfway teardown now and then you can be left with a toxic situation that takes years to recover.

Going into the season, it was obvious the Spurs were aiming for that two-year glide where they can ease their way into whatever is to come next. Going away from that idea while the playoffs are still possible would be unwise.

Peaceful and strategic gliding in 2020 :tu

[baseline bum]

Optimal situation is the Spurs make the playoffs the next two seasons. At that point, the Spurs will have a seamless transition to the next era as DeRozan, Aldridge, Gay, Carroll, etc. will be gone and/or free agents. By that point, the Spurs will know exactly what they have in White, Murray, Walker, etc. and can build their strategy around that core.

How would they know what they have if Pop keeps playing DePression and Marco Del Negro instead of Walker and Murray?

[Chinook]

How would they know what they have if Pop keeps playing DePression and Marco Del Negro instead of Walker and Murray?

DeRozan is better than Walker and especially Murray. I still can't understand why so many fans think you're supposed to hand young players spots. Beli is awful this year, and no one wants him playing over Walker -- not even Pop anymore. But you don't trade DeRozan to give Murray more time when Murray can't even dribble the ball half the time. May as well be trying to make room for Metu in the starting front court while you're at it.

[Floyd Pacquiao]

DeRozan is better than Walker and especially Murray. I still can't understand why so many fans think you're supposed to hand young players spots. Beli is awful this year, and no one wants him playing over Walker -- not even Pop anymore. But you don't trade DeRozan to give Murray more time when Murray can't even dribble the ball half the time. May as well be trying to make room for Metu in the starting front court while you're at it.

You trade derozan cause hes stunting the growth of the young players. His offensive game is horrible for a team and his melt downs are egregious

[CGD]

Optimal situation is the Spurs make the playoffs the next two seasons. At that point, the Spurs will have a seamless transition to the next era as DeRozan, Aldridge, Gay, Carroll, etc. will be gone and/or free agents. By that point, the Spurs will know exactly what they have in White, Murray, Walker, etc. and can build their strategy around that core. If none of the youth develops, the Spurs could do a teardown. If a few more pieces could turn the team into a contender, you can go that route.

I know Spurs fans are tantalized by lottery balls but avoiding a teardown this season would make for a smoother transition. It's easy to tank -- it's a lot more difficult to untank, especially when it's a spur of the moment tank.

So, no, I don't go for a teardown just because a team dangles a first round pick. That's especially true with how all the contracts are aligned. You do a halfway teardown now and then you can be left with a toxic situation that takes years to recover.

Going into the season, it was obvious the Spurs were aiming for that two-year glide where they can ease their way into whatever is to come next. Going away from that idea while the playoffs are still possible would be unwise.

Peaceful and strategic gliding in 2020 :tu

That assumes that fundamentals of the approach are right: you have a system that is simultaneously suitable for your “transition team” AND the young core you are evaluating to help turn the leaf. I’m concerned the current approach impinges the growth of the youngsters. The team can accomplish the goals of your glide path more effectively In my view by moving one of your two ball dominant midrange scorers.

[Chinook]

You trade derozan cause hes stunting the growth of the young players. His offensive game is horrible for a team and his melt downs are egregious

He's not stunting them. They're stunting themselves. Murray wouldn't all of the sudden be able to shoot threes if DeRozan left. Toronto somehow managed to have strong guard play with DeRozan. Stop using that as an excuse.

[Floyd Pacquiao]

He's not stunting them. They're stunting themselves. Murray wouldn't all of the sudden be able to shoot threes if DeRozan left. Toronto somehow managed to have strong guard play with DeRozan. Stop using that as an excuse.
What strong guard play did Toronto have? Kyle Lowry who was already a devolved and established star?
White would handle the ball more as would Lonnie, you'd see a more free flowing offense instead of just dumping it to derozan and watching him do his iso game that doesn't command a double team..

[Sugus]

He's not stunting them. They're stunting themselves. Murray wouldn't all of the sudden be able to shoot threes if DeRozan left. Toronto somehow managed to have strong guard play with DeRozan. Stop using that as an excuse.

He is definitely stunting them to an extent. Not only does he take away ball handling and scoring opportunities from every young player, he simply forces them to feed him for an offense-killing, inefficient score attempt every single time. He makes Murray and White's jobs harder by being ass on defense, forcing them to help. He sets the mood of the team and constantly gives up on plays, especially on defense, whilst taking every last minute shot and being ass at it. How is any of this not demoralizing and damaging to the rest of the players?

Yes, Murray wouldn't instantly learn to shoot 3's, but he'd get a lot more chances to try them. God knows I'd much rather have DJ try and miss a thousand 3s for his own development than watch DeMar, a known quantity and developed player, taking yet another contested 20ft shot. LMA is also a problem for the team; not only has his defense been very bad this season as well as DD's, his heavily declining athleticism impedes him from running the naturally fast-paced offense that the young players prefer. You saw DJ at the start of the season, running on transition and initiating fast offense... Only to have to wait for LA's corpse to drag up the court and demand the ball. And you know there's orders from above to give it to him.

DeMar and LMA are inequivocally stunting the Spurs. Any other average replacement players, simply by virtue of not being "stars" that need their touches, would make the team cohesiveness better. Would the team overall be better? Maybe not, we'd probably lose more games. But it would be watchable, instead of the trash product we're currently rolling out.

[DPG21920]

Optimal situation is the Spurs make the playoffs the next two seasons. At that point, the Spurs will have a seamless transition to the next era as DeRozan, Aldridge, Gay, Carroll, etc. will be gone and/or free agents. By that point, the Spurs will know exactly what they have in White, Murray, Walker, etc. and can build their strategy around that core. If none of the youth develops, the Spurs could do a teardown. If a few more pieces could turn the team into a contender, you can go that route.

I just don’t agree with the playoffs mattering much in the context of how this team is playing and built and the opportunity cost associated with not extending DeRozan. If you aren’t going to extend DeRozan, he likely opts out and is gone next season? SA won’t have a bunch of money to sign a premier FA so are they really going to be a playoff threat in that scenario?

Why would the Spurs know less about their youth if they traded DeRozan/LMA for picks and let them play?


I know Spurs fans are tantalized by lottery balls but avoiding a teardown this season would make for a smoother transition. It's easy to tank -- it's a lot more difficult to untank, especially when it's a spur of the moment tank.

I don’t want to speak for everyone but I am not tantalized by lottery balls. I’ve been one of the biggest defenders and proponents on this site of win building and the benefits. However, if this is the type of team and type of play? Yeah, I am not for this. I don’t care that SA might be able to make the playoffs with 40-42 wins. It’s one thing to win build when it’s a positive environment with solid basketball being played and real development but this very clearly isn’t it.

If SA starts to play 60% winning ball and things click? Absolutely, but if not, regardless of if they stay within 2 games of the playoffs at the deadline I don’t see how anyone could advocate for not trading DeRozan and maybe LMA too. Especially if you know him walking next year means it’s even harder to win build.


So, no, I don't go for a teardown just because a team dangles a first round pick. That's especially true with how all the contracts are aligned. You do a halfway teardown now and then you can be left with a toxic situation that takes years to recover.

Going into the season, it was obvious the Spurs were aiming for that two-year glide where they can ease their way into whatever is to come next. Going away from that idea while the playoffs are still possible would be unwise.

Peaceful and strategic gliding in 2020 :tu

This situation feels toxic. You said it yourself that DeRozan’s attitude (and let’s be honest, his play) is infectious and not in a good way. The losing is bad for young players when coupled with bad leadership and yoyo opportunity and learning from non-defensive players (Beli, Mills, Forbes, DeRozan) in front of them.

Nothing about this season has been peaceful despite being within a couple games of the PO IMO

[acoelho1]

To what end though? Let’s say all of that happens. Do you then extend DeRozan and lock him in on an expensive deal for 4 more years (his player option next year, then 3 more years)?

Probably not. I just don’t like the Gordon trade at all. If they include Okeke with Gordon that would be enticing. I’m very high on the Auburn product even though he’s coming off a major injury.

[sasaint]

Probably not. I just don’t like the Gordon trade at all. If they include Okeke with Gordon that would be enticing. I’m very high on the Auburn product even though he’s coming off a major injury.

Dream on. I am not excited by Gordon either - especially if we don't move LMA at the same time - but Orlando ain't giving up both for Dumbmar.

[acoelho1]

He's not stunting them. They're stunting themselves. Murray wouldn't all of the sudden be able to shoot threes if DeRozan left. Toronto somehow managed to have strong guard play with DeRozan. Stop using that as an excuse.

This is a very simplistic viewpoint and doesn't take into account the improved offensive pace and ball movement with DDR not on this squad. This is the reason he’s not that valuable around the league. In fact this was a question posed to a GM recently on ESPN and he stated he only likes DDR as a 3rd option. Also, the east was very weak those years the Raptors were winning reg season games. They probably would have been an 8 seed in the west if not missed the playoffs. Point being, we are not winning with him and I much rather ride with Walker who at least plays some semblances of defense instead of DDR’s loser mentality.

[timvp]

I just don’t agree with the playoffs mattering much in the context of how this team is playing and built and the opportunity cost associated with not extending DeRozan.

We will have to agree to disagree, tbh. You are paranoid of losing DeRozan and believe him walking would make the Nephew trade look worse ... while I don't care if DeRozan leaves because I view the Nephew trade as a sunk cost. You hate the team for aesthetic and on-court reasons and want it torn down ASAP, while I'm willing to wait until an opportunity arises -- even if that is at the trade deadline or next summer. You see no value in the Spurs attempting a graceful transition, while I think a haphazard teardown job could do more harm than good.

There's not enough common ground for us to reach an agreement beyond neither of us wanting the Spurs to extend DeRozan :tu

[DPG21920]

We will have to agree to disagree, tbh. You are paranoid of losing DeRozan and believe him walking would make the Nephew trade look worse ... while I don't care if DeRozan leaves because I view the Nephew trade as a sunk cost. You hate the team for aesthetic and on-court reasons and want it torn down ASAP, while I'm willing to wait until an opportunity arises -- even if that is at the trade deadline or next summer. You see no value in the Spurs attempting a graceful transition, while I think a haphazard teardown job could do more harm than good.

There's not enough common ground for us to reach an agreement beyond neither of us wanting the Spurs to extend DeRozan :tu

That’s not exactly accurate. I think it looks bad optically but that is not the “reason” I want DeRozan traded. Again, I coined the term win building. So I absolutely see the value in graceful transition - this is just far from that, agree?

I want DeRozan traded because while him walking doesn’t hurt the Spurs it doesn’t help. Getting a draft pick 100% helps and keeping him for the playoffs doesn’t seem to be worth it any longer with how bad this team is.

It’s chicken and the egg. I hate the team on the court because they are awful. I would prefer them to be good and be a legit playoff team playing good, healthy basketball. But they are not and that is the reality. I’m fine waiting until the deadline, but if they keep playing like this you still want them to hold on?

I’m totally fine waiting until the trade deadline as an FYI. Absolutely. Nothing will change between now and then (other than possible injury) to the value of DeRozan and LMA. My early post about “now” was more about if they were going to really push to be a “good” team that they needed to make a move ASAP (although I kind of saw this coming early and would have been ok if they moved DeRozan already)

[ZeusWillJudge]

What this team needs now is some draft picks that the next coach can work with. Because he/she sure as shit isn't going to build a winner around Aldridge and DeRozan. Stretching to be first round fodder isn't a strategy, it's retirement on the payroll for a bored old coach.

[RC_Drunkford]

DeRozan is better than Walker and especially Murray. I still can't understand why so many fans think you're supposed to hand young players spots. Beli is awful this year, and no one wants him playing over Walker -- not even Pop anymore. But you don't trade DeRozan to give Murray more time when Murray can't even dribble the ball half the time. May as well be trying to make room for Metu in the starting front court while you're at it.

DeRozan is not better than Walker. In the last 6 games Walker is averaging 10.7 PPG in 18 minutes. He could easily get 20 per game in 36-38 minutes per night if you run plays for him and give him enough shots while spacing the floor and defending better than DeRozan

[timvp]

That’s not exactly accurate. I think it looks bad optically but that is not the “reason” I want DeRozan traded.Why care about optics? Is there an optics trophy I don't know about?


Again, I coined the term win building.Winbuilding was you? That's a good term, tbh :tu


So I absolutely see the value in graceful transition - this is just far from that, agree?Two games out of the seventh seed? I mean, by definition if I were coining a term such as winbuilding, being two games out of the seventh seed would classify, IMO.


Getting a draft pick 100% helps and keeping him for the playoffs doesn’t seem to be worth it any longer with how bad this team is. A draft pick holds obvious value but I do think there is value in avoiding a hurried and haphazard teardown. The latter is nebulous, admittedly, but I think it's worth hanging onto until the playoffs are out of the question.


but if they keep playing like this you still want them to hold on?If they are two games from the seventh seed, yeah I don't know if I would be thrilled with a rushed fire sale, tbh.


I’m totally fine waiting until the trade deadline as an FYI. Absolutely. Nothing will change between now and then (other than possible injury) to the value of DeRozan and LMA. My early post about “now” was more about if they were going to really push to be a “good” team that they needed to make a move ASAP (although I kind of saw this coming early and would have been ok if they moved DeRozan already)IIRC, you wanted the Spurs to do something, anything NOW. Interesting to see that your stance has softened. Perhaps we will eventually meet at the same ground :tu

[DPG21920]

Why care about optics? Is there an optics trophy I don't know about?

Winbuilding was you? That's a good term, tbh :tu

In the big scheme of things, optics mean nothing. But it is something that is discussed in all nba circles (even if it literally has no meaning). But sure, I agree I place emphasis on things like optics and some softer science more than many.

I did coin that term - it’s why I’m a marketing genius.


Two games out of the seventh seed? I mean, by definition if I were coining a term such as winbuilding, being two games out of the seventh seed would classify, IMO.

A draft pick holds obvious value but I do think there is value in avoiding a hurried and haphazard teardown. The latter is nebulous, admittedly, but I think it's worth hanging onto until the playoffs are out of the question.

This logic, the 2 games out of the 7th seed, is what I don’t get. They have an awful record, awful defense and this is not a healthy and productive environment for now or the future. While you are technically correct with them being 2 games back off the 7th seed, they are equally close to the 13th seed. Win building implies winning; they have a losing record and it feels toxic to me - do you not agree?



IIRC, you wanted the Spurs to do something, anything NOW. Interesting to see that your stance has softened. Perhaps we will eventually meet at the same ground :tu

I did - I saw the writing on the wall very early and I wanted them to make a move to get better before things got worse and if they weren’t willing to do that I wanted them to pick another direction.

Unfortunately, things got much worse as I feared and look where they are with their record * shrugs *

[TD 21]

Yeah, but you're talking about keeping a guy and trying for the playoffs now and then letting him walk. Versus trading him for a guy who isn't even a elite role-player yet, missing the playoffs but hoping for a pick to become a guy Gordon can fit around. That doesn't seem like a good bet. Like if you can get Sekou and cap space or a first and second or whatever, then I can understand your point. But would I rather have Gordon or DeRozan right now? It's DeMar by a long shot. I'd rather let DeRozan walk and use the cap space to take back bad money for a pick than trade him for Gordon Again, if we could have confidence one or two of the young guards was ready to go, then I can see the argument there too. But they're not, so I don't see any reason to trade DeRozan and not tank.

Elite role player or not, he's a useful piece, a scarce, valuable archetype and both fits and times well with the youth currently in place. If it's not Walker, they've got time to find a star and I'd rather have Gordon than DeRozan.

Dead money for a pick is something I'll believe this organization will do when I see it. So will tanking. I believe they'll prefer a young veteran over a pick, especially considering they're not getting a lottery one for DeRozan.


Paul is definitely not a better fit for the team. And I don't think anyone else would argue that it's better to have him on his contract rather than letting DeRozan walk. I think we're getting a pretty clear picture on the guards right now. Walker's the only one who can argue he hasn't really have the opportunity. Yes, Murray could get healthier, and everyone could improve. But none of those guys has shown anything to suggest they should be given star roles when they can't fill role-player spots. Walker may be changing that idea. Maybe in two months, he'll have shown enough to where the team could feel comfortable moving DeMar. But if they're roughly like this then, then I'm not too interested in seeing them get the reigns.

He's clearly a better fit. I have no doubt they'd instantly improve on both ends if they made the iteration of the trade I detailed. Who cares about his contract? They don't have a core that's going to be expensive and they're not a free agent destination, so what's the difference? If he prevents them from blowing the MLE on some minimal retread for a year because of tax concerns, so be it.

Who thought Graham, Nunn, Van Vleet, etc. were ready for as prominent of roles as they've played so far? By necessity, their teams gave them the opportunity and they've mostly flourished. What's the worst that could happen? They fall flat on their face, the team sucks and they track towards a high pick? Too late.


It's not about being the bigger man. It's about you harping on shit no one disagrees with. The Leonard trade sucked. A DeRozan trade might suck, but it won't suck extra because of the Leonard trade. If they do trade DMDR for say Gordon and then Gordon is about to expire, are you going to want the Spurs to trade him to salvage value from the Leonard trade again? Where does it end? Truth is, it ended the moment the trade was completed last year. You can totally make the argument for moving DeRozan on its own merits, but Leonard has nothing to do with it.

Then don't act holier than thou. If Gordon weren't in the plans at that point, yes. It's called asset management. In a non glamour market, cap space is fools gold (unless you're willing to take dead money for picks).

You're too fixated on Scumbag and Gordon though. It's mostly about DeRozan being a terrible fit, needing to go and being able to net them a decent asset. The former is a secondary reason and the latter is just an example of said decent asset.


Carroll would have probably started last year. I don't disagree that they're performing poorly right now. But their rotation is better. Aldridge is actually outperforming his start to last season in all major categories besides rebounding. DeRozan is outplaying his season average from last year though not his hot start. Gay's shooting has fallen off, but his rate stats are about the same. Mills is playing better as well. The top of the rotation really isn't the problem. The bottom we agree is better. The middle lost Bertans, whom Lyles doesn't really replace. But who Davis is not really wasn't who is was with the Spurs. Certainly, this team could use this year's Bertans. But they're better than they were with the 2018 version.

:lmao Based on what, box score stats? Look at impact stats, like RAMP, where Aldridge and DeRozan are literally among the worst in the league.

Damn near everything is the problem. Mills, Poeltl and maybe Lyles are the only rotation players (Walker and Carroll are incomplete), who have performed up to snuff, relatively speaking.

Wrong. Bertans was the same player, only in a lesser role because this senile organization didn't know what they had (even though it was obvious). He led them in net rating.



It's about gelling. Again, the Spurs' stars haven't regressed the way you think they have. They aren't as good as they were at their peak last season, but they started last year off slowly as well. Plenty of folks wanted to tank then too. I'm not trying to argue this year's situation isn't more dire. There's more reason to want to tear it down now. But, yeah, the team can totally play better if they gel, just like they did last year. They're only a "house of cards" if you think about them as a contender. They clearly don't have the players for that. But compared to like the Suns and other bottom-half-of-the-bracket clubs? Yeah, they are better positioned than that. They didn't lose to Cleveland because of fit or even spacing. They lost because of consistently poor execution. Guys don't get open behind the line because the defenders aren't 6-8, fast-footed shot-blockers. They do so because guys fuck up rotations. Don't fuck up the rotations, guys don't get nearly as many easy looks. Coaching.

Man, you sound like a casual fan. They're 24 games in, have among the most continuity, have been been among, if not the, healthiest team(s), have played the 12th easiest schedule, yet sit 22nd in point differential and 24th in simple rating system. They suck.

They're the definition of a house of cards. They basically replaced Bertans with Lyles, added Murray to the rotation and went from average to terrible.

So the genius suddenly forgot how to coach defense? It's about personnel. Sure, their effort has sagged. That's what happens when a veteran team figures out it sucks. They're left waiting around for the other shoe to drop, so they can be put out of their misery.




Optimal situation is the Spurs make the playoffs the next two seasons. At that point, the Spurs will have a seamless transition to the next era as DeRozan, Aldridge, Gay, Carroll, etc. will be gone and/or free agents. By that point, the Spurs will know exactly what they have in White, Murray, Walker, etc. and can build their strategy around that core. If none of the youth develops, the Spurs could do a teardown. If a few more pieces could turn the team into a contender, you can go that route.

I know Spurs fans are tantalized by lottery balls but avoiding a teardown this season would make for a smoother transition. It's easy to tank -- it's a lot more difficult to untank, especially when it's a spur of the moment tank.

So, no, I don't go for a teardown just because a team dangles a first round pick. That's especially true with how all the contracts are aligned. You do a halfway teardown now and then you can be left with a toxic situation that takes years to recover.

Going into the season, it was obvious the Spurs were aiming for that two-year glide where they can ease their way into whatever is to come next. Going away from that idea while the playoffs are still possible would be unwise.


That cliché is a lot more effective when you're a team like the Raptors (before the Spurs bailed them out), Wizards (before Wall's injuries), Trail Blazers, etc. This team is not at that level and doesn't have an in their prime, borderline superstar like Lillard.

This team just flat out sucks. They're on pace to win something like a third of their games. It's not difficult to build a team to "achieve" that.

Newsflash: This is a toxic situation and the team is clearly waiting around for the organization to make a move.

They're more than likely not making them and even if they back in, you really want to see them get emasculated by an L.A. team (and with their luck, I'm sure it'd be Scumbag's)?

[sasaint]

I was guided to this post on Twitter. I haven't double checked it, but here it is:

https://twitter.com/HPbasketball/status/1205351637247651840?s=20

Statistics showing individual player +/- when paired/not paired with LMA.

[Chinook]

He is definitely stunting them to an extent. Not only does he take away ball handling and scoring opportunities from every young player, he simply forces them to feed him for an offense-killing, inefficient score attempt every single time. He makes Murray and White's jobs harder by being ass on defense, forcing them to help. He sets the mood of the team and constantly gives up on plays, especially on defense, whilst taking every last minute shot and being ass at it. How is any of this not demoralizing and damaging to the rest of the players?

He's not stunting them. That's just a fan excuse for why their guys aren't playing well. Murray has negative on/offs with seven of his 10 most-frequent partners. The three that are exceptions are Poeltl, Mills and Beli. Certainly, the argument about spacing applies here. But the argument about defense doesn't. And certainly DeRozan's player-pair data isn't better, but his pairing with Murray is third-worst for his top-10. Murray's has been the worst of LMA's top-10 partners as well. He's 7/10 with Forbes and Gay as well. For Lyle's, Murray is fourth of 10, but they are -8.4 per 100, so it's not like it was going well. DeJounte isn't playing well with any of the starters. The narrative that he's suffering with a poor lineup doesn't make sense. I doubt anyone believes Beli and Mills should start just to make DJM's lack of shooting not a fatal flaw.


Yes, Murray wouldn't instantly learn to shoot 3's, but he'd get a lot more chances to try them. God knows I'd much rather have DJ try and miss a thousand 3s for his own development than watch DeMar, a known quantity and developed player, taking yet another contested 20ft shot. LMA is also a problem for the team; not only has his defense been very bad this season as well as DD's, his heavily declining athleticism impedes him from running the naturally fast-paced offense that the young players prefer. You saw DJ at the start of the season, running on transition and initiating fast offense... Only to have to wait for LA's corpse to drag up the court and demand the ball. And you know there's orders from above to give it to him.

Murray wouldn't shoot more threes as a higher option, at least not the threes he should be shooting. If he's the primary ball-handler, then he'd be getting fewer spot-up looks. His evolution isn't to start taking a Forbes-like shot selection. DJ ran in transition also because Pop wants him to. That's where he scores best. But if he doesn't get a shot, he needs to be able to play in the half-court, and he's one of the worst players in the league there.


DeMar and LMA are inequivocally stunting the Spurs. Any other average replacement players, simply by virtue of not being "stars" that need their touches, would make the team cohesiveness better. Would the team overall be better? Maybe not, we'd probably lose more games. But it would be watchable, instead of the trash product we're currently rolling out.

Honestly, I think the Spurs are plenty watchable since they've started to play Walker. They've been in every game. I don't see why anyone would not see it that way. Those who want to make the playoffs have seen more wins. Those who want to take have seen nail-biting games. You may prefer to lose with the young guys getting burn in an abstract sense, but I doubt you'd rather watch 20-point blowouts.

[Chinook]

What strong guard play did Toronto have? Kyle Lowry who was already a devolved and established star?
White would handle the ball more as would Lonnie, you'd see a more free flowing offense instead of just dumping it to derozan and watching him do his iso game that doesn't command a double team..

Yes. Like a guy who maintain stardom (and no, he got better during his stint in Toronto) despite playing with DeRozan. Van Fleet wasn't bad with him either, actually. Good players will be good players even if they aren't in optimal situations. Some guys like Russell can turn around their careers in the right situations, but they don't become franchise players.

[Chinook]

DeRozan is not better than Walker. In the last 6 games Walker is averaging 10.7 PPG in 18 minutes. He could easily get 20 per game in 36-38 minutes per night if you run plays for him and give him enough shots while spacing the floor and defending better than DeRozan

That's not how rate stats work. I love Walker and was one of the founders of his fan club. But he has a long way to go to be better than DeRozan. Pop should be running more plays in general and definitely for Walker when Lonnie is out there. The best I could realistically hope for this season though is that he becomes consistent enough to replace Forbes as the starting two and shows enough promise to where the Spurs don't overcommit to DeMar. Guys just don't get multiple All-Stars and playoff appearances and make an All-NBA teams because they have good rate stats playing like a third of a game.

[Chinook]

This is a very simplistic viewpoint and doesn't take into account the improved offensive pace and ball movement with DDR not on this squad. This is the reason he’s not that valuable around the league. In fact this was a question posed to a GM recently on ESPN and he stated he only likes DDR as a 3rd option. Also, the east was very weak those years the Raptors were winning reg season games. They probably would have been an 8 seed in the west if not missed the playoffs. Point being, we are not winning with him and I much rather ride with Walker who at least plays some semblances of defense instead of DDR’s loser mentality.

The Raptors were a consistent playoff team, not a team that had a magical season to make a five-seed one year. They weren't contenders in the West for sure, but they had seasons that would be pretty desirable for Spurs fans right now. Third options are valuable. The Spurs don't have one and really haven't with Gay showing clear limitations. It's not like any of the young guards are doing that right now. I'm also not sure that the pace is purely a DeRozan problem given that he starts with Aldridge and Gay -- two guys who have often been on the bench during the Spurs' recent comebacks. DeRozan is usually on the court for those.

[duncan2k5]

The Raptors were a consistent playoff team, not a team that had a magical season to make a five-seed one year. They weren't contenders in the West for sure, but they had seasons that would be pretty desirable for Spurs fans right now. Third options are valuable. The Spurs don't have one and really haven't with Gay showing clear limitations. It's not like any of the young guards are doing that right now. I'm also not sure that the pace is purely a DeRozan problem given that he starts with Aldridge and Gay -- two guys who have often been on the bench during the Spurs' recent comebacks. DeRozan is usually on the court for those.

He is also usually on the court for our 4th quarter collapses and has a lot to do with them...conversely he isn't usually the catalyst of our comebacks...it's almost always the young guys

[Chinook]

Elite role player or not, he's a useful piece

He's not.


Who cares about his contract?

A lot of people should care about his contract. It's that bad. I also don't see how one can argue getting another ball-dominant guard who would be more useless on defense is better. Like sure, he can defend smalls better than DeMar can. But he better not be better at it than Murray and White, and if that's true, then DeMar being able to play at forward is more important, even for the defense.


Then don't act holier than thou.

Um... It's not about me trying to have a conversation with you but you continuing to bring up irrelevant things.


You're too fixated on Scumbag and Gordon though.

I'm not even a little fixated on Leonard though. That's kinda the point. You argued he was a consideration in the motivation to get value back for DeRozan. I don't think he is. Gordon, I'm only arguing because no one has brought up anyone else. The main point is that I don't see a point in trading DeRozan or Aldridge for present value.


:lmao Based on what, box score stats? Look at impact stats, like RAMP, where Aldridge and DeRozan are literally among the worst in the league.

Eh, I don't think impact stats have ever been kind to them, even when it was obviously they were playing really well. Those stats are also pretty unstable right now, with RPM having Mills as clearly the Spurs most impactful player.


Damn near everything is the problem. Mills, Poeltl and maybe Lyles are the only rotation players (Walker and Carroll are incomplete), who have performed up to snuff, relatively speaking.

Wrong. Bertans was the same player, only in a lesser role because this senile organization didn't know what they had (even though it was obvious). He led them in net rating.

Yes, the team is playing worse. We keep on agreeing on that. But they aren't actually a worse team. They are underperforming. Coaching.

DAF will never let me forget Bertans' stats, so I know them. But the point remains that his production as a Spur isn't what is hurting the club right now. Even if he were a secret superstar, the bit role that Pop (stupidly?) laid out for him wasn't determining the team's fate.


Man, you sound like a casual fan. They're 24 games in, have among the most continuity, have been been among, if not the, healthiest team(s), have played the 12th easiest schedule, yet sit 22nd in point differential and 24th in simple rating system. They suck.

Yes, they've played like shit. They're having games where they are missing easy passes, fucking up defensive rotations and clanking free throws. That's not because the roster lacks folks who can shoot a ball into a hoop from the line or who can run to a designated spot or who can toss a ball several feet. It's because all or most of the players don't seem to have their heads in the games, especially for the first 30 or so minutes. It's definitely not a case where the players themselves are blameless. They need to play better. The point is they physically CAN play better and aren't, and that's a coaching issue. I said this last year when they were terrible going into December, and folks (probably you among them) argued that it wasn't fixable given their personnel. But they put it together, became an average defense and made a run. This squad dug a way deeper hole, but not only is the bottom half of the Western bracket still within reach, but they have a way higher ceiling this year. Seriously, had they just held on against Cleveland, they'd be tied for the seventh seed right now.

For a team trying to win a title, being seventh and having a losing record wouldn't be anything to smile about. But if the goal is to continue to streak and keep the young players in a competitive environment, then being in a playoff spot after playing about as badly as possible to start the season would be something to build on.

[Chinook]

He is also usually on the court for our 4th quarter collapses and has a lot to do with them...conversely he isn't usually the catalyst of our comebacks...it's almost always the young guys

I don't disagree that he has been too keen to take over games where he hasn't led the comeback. There are times where the Spurs tie it based on someone else catching fire, and Pop for some reason still calls a DeRozan iso to end the game. The one that comes to my mind the most is that Lakers' game from last year where Pop let DeMar iso to end the fourth quarter and the first overtime to see him mess up both. Pop shouldn't do that, but that's something within the club's power to fix. If they just called plays for other people, then you get the DeRozan who clearly isn't impeding the comebacks while also not getting the one burping up terrible long-twos with no movement.

[sasaint]

I don't disagree that he has been too keen to take over games where he hasn't led the comeback. There are times where the Spurs tie it based on someone else catching fire, and Pop for some reason still calls a DeRozan iso to end the game. The one that comes to my mind the most is that Lakers' game from last year where Pop let DeMar iso to end the fourth quarter and the first overtime to see him mess up both. Pop shouldn't do that, but that's something within the club's power to fix. If they just called plays for other people, then you get the DeRozan who clearly isn't impeding the comebacks while also not getting the one burping up terrible long-twos with no movement.

But you probably do get the Dumbmar who mopes and loafs. Isn't it really the exact same issue we have with Touches?

[Collins21]

I don't disagree that he has been too keen to take over games where he hasn't led the comeback. There are times where the Spurs tie it based on someone else catching fire, and Pop for some reason still calls a DeRozan iso to end the game. The one that comes to my mind the most is that Lakers' game from last year where Pop let DeMar iso to end the fourth quarter and the first overtime to see him mess up both. Pop shouldn't do that, but that's something within the club's power to fix. If they just called plays for other people, then you get the DeRozan who clearly isn't impeding the comebacks while also not getting the one burping up terrible long-twos with no movement.

I wouldn't talk to any of these guys because they don't understand the game. All they do is look at stats and judge who is good/bad. I've played basketball and there's No way metrics can tell the whole story. Lonnie Walker has been excellent in his minutes this year but to say he is an all around better player than DeMar right now is idiotic. If DeMar wasn't on the team would Walker facilitate like DeRozan? Most people on this site have obviously never played organized basketball or else they wouldn't make half the suggestions they do.

[Sugus]

But you probably do get the Dumbmar who mopes and loafs. Isn't it really the exact same issue we have with Touches?

Yeah, exactly the problem, and it's the ultimate reason why DeMar actually stunts the growth of our young players: he feels like he's the best player on the court, and thus is entitled to a certain amount of shots/touches/end of game situation shots. Neither him nor LMA are fans of distribution and would rather take contested shots rather than make the extra pass (or any pass whatsoever); the ultimate anti-Spurs mentality.

You also can't experiment with starting a game with either of them on the bench in favor of other young players, or have them sitting out for long periods of time, since they start to fumble and play uninterested. The sooner we get rid of either of them, the better.

[Degoat]

I saw one rumor earlier today that proposed Demar for Dion waiters, James Johnson, and a 1st round pick. Now Demar shits the bed daily but damn that’s a gross ass trade for SA and those are kinda deals most likely being offered for Demar or Aldridge

[JeffDuncan]

I saw one rumor earlier today that proposed Demar for Dion waiters, James Johnson, and a 1st round pick. Now Demar shits the bed daily but damn that’s a gross ass trade for SA and those are kinda deals most likely being offered for Demar or Aldridge

That's nothing but a simple-minded salary match. In millions, Waiters is 12 Johnson is 15 and DDR is 27.

[Chinook]

But you probably do get the Dumbmar who mopes and loafs. Isn't it really the exact same issue we have with Touches?

Aldridge is undoubtedly the best player on the team when engaged, and the team should try to get him there as much as possible. The issue is that they build way too much of their offense of LMA isos and very little on plays that put him in good position for quick scores. If you did that, then his isos would have more weight, since he'd already be in rhythm. Even with all that, Pop still doesn't tend to force it to Aldridge if other people did the comeback. He's the third option behind DMDR and Gay (and maybe even Mills) unless he's already on fire.

[sasaint]

Aldridge is undoubtedly the best player on the team when engaged, and the team should try to get him there as much as possible. The issue is that they build way too much of their offense of LMA isos and very little on plays that put him in good position for quick scores. If you did that, then his isos would have more weight, since he'd already be in rhythm. Even with all that, Pop still doesn't tend to force it to Aldridge if other people did the comeback. He's the third option behind DMDR and Gay (and maybe even Mills) unless he's already on fire.

Actually, I thought we were discussing Dumbmar... But, friend, it is just incorrect to say Touches is anything less than a 2nd or 1B option. 3rd and 4th options do not carry his scoring average. I also think you are putting the horse before the cart when you say that they build very little of their offense on plays that put him in a quick position to score as if it is the team's choice. I think LMA prefers the iso game rather than having to hustle and get in position for early/quick offense. In fact, I believe that was part of his initial issue with Pop's efforts to "mold" his game when he wanted to be traded. And his entire career demonstrates that he much prefers to pick and pop rather than pick and roll. That said, he does work much better with Derrick in the game than with Murray or even Dumbmar.

[Chinook]

Actually, I thought we were discussing Dumbmar

You brought up Aldridge. My point was that he's so easily the best player on team that getting him to play to his potential is the focus of any win-now strategy. It's not the same as DeRozan, who will be engaged simply being the primary ball-handler in whatever unit he plays on.


But, friend, it is just incorrect to say Touches is anything less than a 2nd or 1B option. 3rd and 4th options do not carry his scoring average.

Aldridge is the second option in general this year, but in end-of-game situations, he's very low down. I had been under the assumption that our discussion was about crunch-time performance.


I also think you are putting the horse before the cart when you say that they build very little of their offense on plays that put him in a quick position to score as if it is the team's choice. I think LMA prefers the iso game rather than having to hustle and get in position for early/quick offense. In fact, I believe that was part of his initial issue with Pop's efforts to "mold" his game when he wanted to be traded. And his entire career demonstrates that he much prefers to pick and pop rather than pick and roll.

I think LMA's issue was with essentially being a Tyson Chandler. Not going to defend his reluctance to play winning ball other than to say that I believe he's come around more to that over the years. Regardless, there's a difference between having him run PnR all the time and having plays that screen him for deep posting position and duck-ins. Too much of the time, they give him the ball 20 feet from the basket. I don't think that's really what Aldridge wants. There's definitely some of it on him, because you're right that he'd get great early position more often if he consistently hustled. But even if he's not there early, you don't have to run static post plays for him.


That said, he does work much better with Derrick in the game than with Murray or even Dumbmar.

The data so far this year disagrees. LMA has been 1.5 net points per 36 with DeRozan than with White, and Murray has the worst pairing with LMA of any player who are in the top-10 minutes played with him this season. No disagreement that the two need to run more plays together. But the distaste for DeRozan has covered up that neither of the young PGs has been playing good ball for most of the year to date.

[sasaint]

You brought up Aldridge. My point was that he's so easily the best player on team that getting him to play to his potential is the focus of any win-now strategy. It's not the same as DeRozan, who will be engaged simply being the primary ball-handler in whatever unit he plays on.



Aldridge is the second option in general this year, but in end-of-game situations, he's very low down. I had been under the assumption that our discussion was about crunch-time performance.



I think LMA's issue was with essentially being a Tyson Chandler. Not going to defend his reluctance to play winning ball other than to say that I believe he's come around more to that over the years. Regardless, there's a difference between having him run PnR all the time and having plays that screen him for deep posting position and duck-ins. Too much of the time, they give him the ball 20 feet from the basket. I don't think that's really what Aldridge wants. There's definitely some of it on him, because you're right that he'd get great early position more often if he consistently hustled. But even if he's not there early, you don't have to run static post plays for him.



The data so far this year disagrees. LMA has been 1.5 net points per 36 with DeRozan than with White, and Murray has the worst pairing with LMA of any player who are in the top-10 minutes played with him this season. No disagreement that the two need to run more plays together. But the distaste for DeRozan has covered up that neither of the young PGs has been playing good ball for most of the year to date.

Even if we are limiting the discussion to crunch time I still think he is the second option.

I think his whole career shows that he wants the ball around 16-18 feet from the basket, and he absolutely loves his fade-away. I am not sure your raw scoring figure comparison is germane to our discussion. No doubt that slight increase in points is related to his touches in that 16-18 foot “sweet spot.” The statistic you cite doesn’t really even address his efficiency or effectiveness or what is best for the team. I may be thinking more about the Derrick/LMA combo of last season than the current one; however, considering the whole body of their time together on the floor, I do believe the Derrick/LMA combo improves LMA’s efficiency and is much better for the team’s overall performance. It is really unfortunate and cause for some concern that both Derrick and Dijon have not played up to potential/expectations. But again, I think Pop’s handling of starting lineups at season’s start, his whacked rotations and indulgence/insistence on Dumbmar’s being the centerpiece have all contributed to the malaise.

[duncan2k5]

Ppl are clearly confusing talent with what's best for the team... The classic example is Melo... Is Melo talented? Yes... Was he the most talented player on the Knicks? Yes .. was he a too 3 talent on all the other teams he went to after that? Yes... Is his gamegood for most of the teams he was on? No...

That's what's happening with DeMar and LMA... they're talented .. but they're not what's best for our team... Trading them is what's best ... And that has to do with their attitude and fragile mentality... There is such a thing as a team cancer and loser mentality

U can play on a playoff team and still have a loser mentality... See DDR .. u can also not have made it to the playoffs and have a winner's mentality...

[poopbox]

That's not how rate stats work. I love Walker and was one of the founders of his fan club. But he has a long way to go to be better than DeRozan. Pop should be running more plays in general and definitely for Walker when Lonnie is out there. The best I could realistically hope for this season though is that he becomes consistent enough to replace Forbes as the starting two and shows enough promise to where the Spurs don't overcommit to DeMar. Guys just don't get multiple All-Stars and playoff appearances and make an All-NBA teams because they have good rate stats playing like a third of a game.

I do not think there are very many people who watch basketball who would watch Lonnie play and then watch Derozan play and say "I would want Derozan".

Derozan is everything you DONT want in a guard or a wing. He doesn't take 3's...he is awful on defense...now he doesn't even make freethrows when he needs to. He pouts and makes bone headed decisions. He doesn't catch and shoot.

Overcommit to Derozan? It would be a catastrophic failure to even offer this guy a contract. It is already beyond negligent that he hasn't been traded yet.

[acoelho1]

The Raptors were a consistent playoff team, not a team that had a magical season to make a five-seed one year. They weren't contenders in the West for sure, but they had seasons that would be pretty desirable for Spurs fans right now.

Sure but doesn’t change the fact that we play out west so duplicating the Raptors regular season success won’t be possible. Also, the Spurs are about championships and DDR has shown time & time again here and with the Raptors that he comes up small in the playoffs.


Third options are valuable. The Spurs don't have one and really haven't with Gay showing clear limitations. It's not like any of the young guards are doing that right now. I'm also not sure that the pace is purely a DeRozan problem given that he starts with Aldridge and Gay -- two guys who have often been on the bench during the Spurs' recent comebacks. DeRozan is usually on the court for those.

A third option with a max salary, I’ll pass. A guy who plays no defense, has bad body language when things don’t go his way and doesn’t deserve to be treated as if he’s a superstar. He’s a net negative player and we are not winning with him anyways so what’s the point exactly?

[dbestpro]

Trade somebody. Trade anybody. Even the waterboy or better yet the half time yucks for some real cheerleaders.

[BillMc]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SP0Gz-BeOw8

[Prime BEEF]

He is definitely stunting them to an extent. Not only does he take away ball handling and scoring opportunities from every young player, he simply forces them to feed him for an offense-killing, inefficient score attempt every single time. He makes Murray and White's jobs harder by being ass on defense, forcing them to help. He sets the mood of the team and constantly gives up on plays, especially on defense, whilst taking every last minute shot and being ass at it. How is any of this not demoralizing and damaging to the rest of the players?

Yes, Murray wouldn't instantly learn to shoot 3's, but he'd get a lot more chances to try them. God knows I'd much rather have DJ try and miss a thousand 3s for his own development than watch DeMar, a known quantity and developed player, taking yet another contested 20ft shot. LMA is also a problem for the team; not only has his defense been very bad this season as well as DD's, his heavily declining athleticism impedes him from running the naturally fast-paced offense that the young players prefer. You saw DJ at the start of the season, running on transition and initiating fast offense... Only to have to wait for LA's corpse to drag up the court and demand the ball. And you know there's orders from above to give it to him.

DeMar and LMA are inequivocally stunting the Spurs. Any other average replacement players, simply by virtue of not being "stars" that need their touches, would make the team cohesiveness better. Would the team overall be better? Maybe not, we'd probably lose more games. But it would be watchable, instead of the trash product we're currently rolling out.
Exactly

[Prime BEEF]

What this team needs now is some draft picks that the next coach can work with. Because he/she sure as shit isn't going to build a winner around Aldridge and DeRozan. Stretching to be first round fodder isn't a strategy, it's retirement on the payroll for a bored old coach.
Perfectly stated. It’s pretty obvious. The FO is picking pop over the franchise, it’s players, and the fans.

[Collins21]

Perfectly stated. It’s pretty obvious. The FO is picking pop over the franchise, it’s players, and the fans.

It's obvious most of you have never played sports at competitive level to think that this is bad for the players. Ask any young player in that locker room if they would want to just play non competitive basketball or try and compete to make the playoffs. When you start that non competitive shit you get the Sacramento Kings, Minnesota timberwolves shit.

[sasaint]

Ppl are clearly confusing talent with what's best for the team... The classic example is Melo... Is Melo talented? Yes... Was he the most talented player on the Knicks? Yes .. was he a too 3 talent on all the other teams he went to after that? Yes... Is his gamegood for most of the teams he was on? No...

That's what's happening with DeMar and LMA... they're talented .. but they're not what's best for our team... Trading them is what's best ... And that has to do with their attitude and fragile mentality... There is such a thing as a team cancer and loser mentality

U can play on a playoff team and still have a loser mentality... See DDR .. u can also not have made it to the playoffs and have a winner's mentality...

Perfectly stated.

[sasaint]

It's obvious most of you have never played sports at competitive level to think that this is bad for the players. Ask any young player in that locker room if they would want to just play non competitive basketball or try and compete to make the playoffs. When you start that non competitive shit you get the Sacramento Kings, Minnesota timberwolves shit.

It is obvious from watching the lack of execution/concentration/dedication/intensity/passion of the players on the floor that the situation is already bad for the players. Pop has absolutely lost them.

Once lost, a competitive/winning culture, indeed, is extremely hard to restore. But their attitude shows that culture is already dissipating quickly. We already have Sacramento/Minnesota shit. While I do not advocate tanking, I believe that there is another alternative. I think the Spurs can get enough return on Dumbmar and LMA to win-build, as DPG21920 calls it.

[Prime BEEF]

It's obvious most of you have never played sports at competitive level to think that this is bad for the players. Ask any young player in that locker room if they would want to just play non competitive basketball or try and compete to make the playoffs. When you start that non competitive shit you get the Sacramento Kings, Minnesota timberwolves shit.
It is obvious from your comment that you have clearly never played or coached at any level

[offset formation]

Aldridge is undoubtedly the best player on the team when engaged, and the team should try to get him there as much as possible. The issue is that they build way too much of their offense of LMA isos and very little on plays that put him in good position for quick scores. If you did that, then his isos would have more weight, since he'd already be in rhythm. Even with all that, Pop still doesn't tend to force it to Aldridge if other people did the comeback. He's the third option behind DMDR and Gay (and maybe even Mills) unless he's already on fire.

Yes. This guy gets it.

[Prime BEEF]

It is obvious from watching the lack of execution/concentration/dedication/intensity/passion of the players on the floor that the situation is already bad for the players. Pop has absolutely lost them.

Once lost, a competitive/winning culture, indeed, is extremely hard to restore. But their attitude shows that culture is already dissipating quickly. We already have Sacramento/Minnesota shit. While I do not advocate tanking, I believe that there is another alternative. I think the Spurs can get enough return on Dumbmar and LMA to win-build, as DPG21920 (https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=13014) calls it.
Yes this team can be better with a trade.

DDR for Gordon/Bamba
Murray/Gay/LMA/1st Rd Pick for LaVine/OPJ

White/LaVine/OPJ/Gordon/Poeltl is a better SL than anything you can do with this current roster. That SL makes the playoffs, has length, can defend, and hit the 3.

[Collins21]

It is obvious from your comment that you have clearly never played or coached at any level

That's clearly not the case. I have yet to see anyone who's ever play organize basketball say yeah I hate the coach for trying to win. What fans want and what athletes who like to compete want are two different things. You think if you ask any of the young guys if they want to go into every game knowing they have no chance of competing. I can guarantee the answer would be no. Like I said tanking works for fans and media folks but no one with a competitive spirit wants to purposely suck.

[Collins21]

No it doesn't there's a reason why those players besides Porter hasn't made the playoffs in their careers. I know you're going to say "but they played for bad organizations" however that would be ironic because according to most of y'all this is a bad organization so what makes you think those career losers would be any better here. I don't think you dudes realize that Lamarcus has only missed the Playoffs twice in his career for "career loser" that's not bad.

[Prime BEEF]

That's clearly not the case. I have yet to see anyone who's ever play organize basketball say yeah I hate the coach for trying to win. What fans want and what athletes who like to compete want are two different things. You think if you ask any of the young guys if they want to go into every game knowing they have no chance of competing. I can guarantee the answer would be no. Like I said tanking works for fans and media folks but no one with a competitive spirit wants to purposely suck.
lol. Who said that they hate the coach for trying to win? I said the FO is picking pop over the franchise, the players and the fans. Big difference.

For those of us that have played, we know that there are tons of coaches out there trying their very best to win but still produce a losing product. Players on those teams don’t hate the coach for trying to win, they dislike the losing and the toxic environment that ultimately manifests from losing. If you’ve played then you’d know that.

WRT the spurs, you have a coach that is trying to win but absolutely is not producing a winning product. Therefore the FO is picking pop over the franchise, the players and the fans

[Collins21]

lol. Who said that they hate the coach for trying to win? I said the FO is picking pop over the franchise, the players and the fans. Big difference.

For those of us that have played, we know that there are tons of coaches out there trying their very best to win but still produce a losing product. Players on those teams don’t hate the coach for trying to win, they dislike the losing and the toxic environment that ultimately manifests from losing. If you’ve played then you’d know that.

WRT the spurs, you have a coach that is trying to win but absolutely is not producing a winning product. Therefore the FO is picking pop over the franchise, the players and the fans

Ok this sounds more reasonable and I can some what agree with this I'm just speaking as an athlete myself I would never fault my track coach for trying to win because I would never throw a race no matter how bad my team was.

[Prime BEEF]

No it doesn't there's a reason why those players besides Porter hasn't made the playoffs in their careers. I know you're going to say "but they played for bad organizations" however that would be ironic because according to most of y'all this is a bad organization so what makes you think those career losers would be any better here. I don't think you dudes realize that Lamarcus has only missed the Playoffs twice in his career for "career loser" that's not bad.

DDR/LMA or LaVine/OPJ/Gordon? Who would you rather have right now? Not 10yrs ago but right now.

[Collins21]

DDR/LMA or LaVine/OPJ/Gordon? Who would you rather have right now? Not 10yrs ago but right now.

I'd take Gordon and Fournier for DeMar right now but I want t no parts of Levine or Porter. Lavine is everything people claim they hate about DeRozan and Aldridge. I'd trade DeMar for Gordon straight up right now because I think it improves the team.

[Prime BEEF]

Ok this sounds more reasonable and I can some what agree with this I'm just speaking as an athlete myself I would never fault my track coach for trying to win because I would never throw a race no matter how bad my team was.
Ok. Understand your point now.

[JeffDuncan]

That's clearly not the case. I have yet to see anyone who's ever play organize basketball say yeah I hate the coach for trying to win. What fans want and what athletes who like to compete want are two different things. You think if you ask any of the young guys if they want to go into every game knowing they have no chance of competing. I can guarantee the answer would be no. Like I said tanking works for fans and media folks but no one with a competitive spirit wants to purposely suck.

You are exactly right. It's obvious from your comments that you have played some kind of seriously competitive ball. The locker room of a noncompetitive loser is a sad and sorry place to be, especially for the younger players.

It also sours the younger players, against the team. They'll want out. They won't want to stay when contract time comes.

[Collins21]

You are exactly right. It's obvious from your comments that you have played some kind of seriously competitive ball. The locker room of a noncompetitive loser is a sad and sorry place to be, especially for the younger players.
It also sours the younger players, against the team. They'll want out. They won't want to stay when contract time comes.\

Ok so tell me what sport have you played where everyone was happy with the coach or the team purposely trying to lose? Answer this for me. Like I said I've ran track my entire life and I never once have been told try to lose because we're not good enough.

[JeffDuncan]

\

Ok so tell me what sport have you played where everyone was happy with the coach or the team purposely trying to lose? Answer this for me. ...

Never seen it, never heard of it. Never happens, in real life. Maybe it could happen in some screwball comedy movie.

[JeffDuncan]

I'd take Gordon and Fournier for DeMar right now but I want t no parts of Levine or Porter. Lavine is everything people claim they hate about DeRozan and Aldridge. I'd trade DeMar for Gordon straight up right now because I think it improves the team.

No part of Porter, agreed. Way overpriced now, and he's hurt. Out at least another month with a foot injury. Pass.

One thing about LaVine is that he's young, at least, at 24. Maybe still coachable in a way DDR is not. But that's speculation. I like his scoring ability.

About DDR for Gordon, there's the basic matter of points. DDR scores 21, and Gordon 14. The team will not be better unless those points can be found.

Trading for players who score less, on a team with a losing record now, is not a promising approach. With the defensive problems, points production is all the team has going for it. Gotta be careful about that.

[poopbox]

I saw one rumor earlier today that proposed Demar for Dion waiters, James Johnson, and a 1st round pick. Now Demar shits the bed daily but damn that’s a gross ass trade for SA and those are kinda deals most likely being offered for Demar or Aldridge

Only reason you say no to that is the length of the contract. If those were 1 year deals you do that in a hearbeat...you tell dion to take the rest of the year off...maybe you let johnson play some minutes...but you get that 1st round pick even though it looks like it will be in the low 20's...because that is where the spurs have spent two decades drafting anyway so they should feel comfortable finding at least a future rotational player there

[TD 21]

He's not.

Big, young, athletic, versatile forwards, who aren't making exorbitant amounts, have value.



A lot of people should care about his contract. It's that bad. I also don't see how one can argue getting another ball-dominant guard who would be more useless on defense is better. Like sure, he can defend smalls better than DeMar can. But he better not be better at it than Murray and White, and if that's true, then DeMar being able to play at forward is more important, even for the defense.


Sure, but if it doesn't functionally change anything, what's the difference? He's less ball dominant than he was, better with and without it than DeRozan and even a better wing defender. Also, in my trade proposal, I had the Spurs receiving Ferguson as well, who'd play as the nominal "SF".



I'm not even a little fixated on Leonard though. That's kinda the point. You argued he was a consideration in the motivation to get value back for DeRozan. I don't think he is. Gordon, I'm only arguing because no one has brought up anyone else. The main point is that I don't see a point in trading DeRozan or Aldridge for present value.

A secondary one. I've given ample reason why DeRozan should be traded independent of that, but you're too concerned with arguing semantics and minutia.

It's insane that you want to continue to watch this sinking ship go down, as opposed to salvaging whatever value they can at least for the most ill-fitting piece of all, who could conceivably walk for nothing at the end of the season.



Yes, the team is playing worse. We keep on agreeing on that. But they aren't actually a worse team. They are underperforming. Coaching.

DAF will never let me forget Bertans' stats, so I know them. But the point remains that his production as a Spur isn't what is hurting the club right now. Even if he were a secret superstar, the bit role that Pop (stupidly?) laid out for him wasn't determining the team's fate.

There's no evidence that they're underperforming and even if they are, it's not in marked fashion. Even if they somehow manage to eek in to the playoffs, it'll only be to get emasculated by an L.A. team (with their luck, probably Scumbag's).

Not singlehandedly, but Bertans played a big part. A team this horribly constructed can't afford for much to go wrong (we saw it last season when Gay or White missed a game), so even something that might on the surface seem as relatively innocuous as going from Bertans to Lyles, was always going to be magnified. So was introducing another non shooter back into the rotation and slight collective regression from the veterans.



Yes, they've played like shit. They're having games where they are missing easy passes, fucking up defensive rotations and clanking free throws. That's not because the roster lacks folks who can shoot a ball into a hoop from the line or who can run to a designated spot or who can toss a ball several feet. It's because all or most of the players don't seem to have their heads in the games, especially for the first 30 or so minutes. It's definitely not a case where the players themselves are blameless. They need to play better. The point is they physically CAN play better and aren't, and that's a coaching issue. I said this last year when they were terrible going into December, and folks (probably you among them) argued that it wasn't fixable given their personnel. But they put it together, became an average defense and made a run. This squad dug a way deeper hole, but not only is the bottom half of the Western bracket still within reach, but they have a way higher ceiling this year. Seriously, had they just held on against Cleveland, they'd be tied for the seventh seed right now.

For a team trying to win a title, being seventh and having a losing record wouldn't be anything to smile about. But if the goal is to continue to streak and keep the young players in a competitive environment, then being in a playoff spot after playing about as badly as possible to start the season would be something to build on.

Yeah and the reason they don't seem to have their heads in the game, is because they've clearly reached the conclusion that this team sucks and are waiting for it to be broken up. This is a staple of veteran teams in this situation.

There is no putting it together because of the 3 things I mentioned above, plus some of the bad teams in the West being slightly better. They weren't that far from them to begin with.

Uh, they just played 4 consecutive overtime games and won 3, 2 of which on miracle late comebacks. They just as easily could have lost 3, so I don't want to hear about the Cavaliers game.

[tbdog]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SP0Gz-BeOw8

[MoSpur02]

I wouldn't mind the Spurs trading for JJ Redick. Something like Marco and Bryn for Redick works. New Orleans isn't going anywhere and I've heard they might be willing to part with Redick.

[DPG21920]

I wouldn't mind the Spurs trading for JJ Redick. Something like Marco and Bryn for Redick works. New Orleans isn't going anywhere and I've heard they might be willing to part with Redick.

It would take so much more than that my friend..

[baseline bum]

I saw one rumor earlier today that proposed Demar for Dion waiters, James Johnson, and a 1st round pick. Now Demar shits the bed daily but damn that’s a gross ass trade for SA and those are kinda deals most likely being offered for Demar or Aldridge

I'd let him walk for nothing before taking pick #28, a cancer, and a scrub like that.

[Ed Helicopter Jones]

I'd let him walk for nothing before taking pick #28, a cancer, and a scrub like that.

The Spurs best trade opportunity might be our old friend CapSpace.

[baseline bum]

The Spurs best trade opportunity might be our old friend CapSpace.

DeRozan is the capspace though (assuming he's opting out for a long term deal).

[sasaint]

It would take so much more than that my friend..

For JJ? “So much more?” What do you think it would take?

[MoSpur02]

It would take so much more than that my friend..

I don't know know about "so much" more. Probably a pick. A second round at that. He's not worth a first. They wanna clear cap as far as I'm concerned.

[Robz4000]

I'd let him walk for nothing before taking pick #28, a cancer, and a scrub like that.

This.

[Mugen]

I don't know know about "so much" more. Probably a pick. A second round at that. He's not worth a first. They wanna clear cap as far as I'm concerned.

Plenty of teams would give a 1st for Redick. Beli, Forbes, and a 2nd rounder isn't getting it done :lol

[TimDunkem]

Miami doesn't even have a 1st rounder to trade, fools.

[Kurgan]

No need to pull the plug on the roster. Just pull the plug on Derozan. Admit that was a bad trade and move on. Hoarding him just to save face is just making the team worse in the present.

[Sugus]

No need to pull the plug on the roster. Just pull the plug on Derozan. Admit that was a bad trade and move on. Hoarding him just to save face is just making the team worse in the present.

Trade DeRozan, force Pop to step down. Watch the team blossom and make the postseason. Neither will happen but we can dream...

[TD 21]

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2867227-insiders-scout-nba-trade-market-why-cp3-is-unmovable-trae-young-needs-love

San Antonio (10-15) may wait until the summer to see if there's a sign-and-trade market for DeMar DeRozan.

[TimDunkem]

No need to pull the plug on the roster. Just pull the plug on Derozan. Admit that was a bad trade and move on. Hoarding him just to save face is just making the team worse in the present.

I'm beginning to think that the rest of the league has figured out how bad DD is and won't give up much for him leaving the Spurs with no moves to make.

Poop and the FO are going to have to figure out the hard way that getting DD and holding on to him was a bad move.

[Prime BEEF]

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2867227-insiders-scout-nba-trade-market-why-cp3-is-unmovable-trae-young-needs-love

San Antonio (10-15) may wait until the summer to see if there's a sign-and-trade market for DeMar DeRozan.
If true, this franchise is a giant dumpster fire and may never recover due to an incompetent FO

[cool cat]

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2867227-insiders-scout-nba-trade-market-why-cp3-is-unmovable-trae-young-needs-love

San Antonio (10-15) may wait until the summer to see if there's a sign-and-trade market for DeMar DeRozan.

:pctoss:bang

[slick'81]

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2867227-insiders-scout-nba-trade-market-why-cp3-is-unmovable-trae-young-needs-love

San Antonio (10-15) may wait until the summer to see if there's a sign-and-trade market for DeMar DeRozan.

:lmao:rollin Why? Cant derozan just opt out!?

[duncan2k5]

It's obvious most of you have never played sports at competitive level to think that this is bad for the players. Ask any young player in that locker room if they would want to just play non competitive basketball or try and compete to make the playoffs. When you start that non competitive shit you get the Sacramento Kings, Minnesota timberwolves shit.

Aren't both teams better than us this year? Also trading them WILL make us competitive...that's what ur not getting...

[Collins21]

Aren't both teams better than us this year? Also trading them WILL make us competitive...that's what ur not getting...

No there not we beat Sacramento already and the Wolves are bout to lose 10 straight. DD I could care less about but Aldridge has missed the playoffs twice in his career the dude has always lead teams the playoffs despite this notion that he's a cancer.

[duncan2k5]

No part of Porter, agreed. Way overpriced now, and he's hurt. Out at least another month with a foot injury. Pass.

One thing about LaVine is that he's young, at least, at 24. Maybe still coachable in a way DDR is not. But that's speculation. I like his scoring ability.

About DDR for Gordon, there's the basic matter of points. DDR scores 21, and Gordon 14. The team will not be better unless those points can be found.

Trading for players who score less, on a team with a losing record now, is not a promising approach. With the defensive problems, points production is all the team has going for it. Gotta be careful about that.

That's a naive way of thinking about it...do u know how many players increase production on a new team simply because of how that team plays them? You can't just say DDR scores 21 and Gordon scores 14, so we will be missing 7 points....that's a very simplistic,childish way of understanding how basketball works

[duncan2k5]

No there not we beat Sacramento already and the Wolves are bout to lose 10 straight. DD I could care less about but Aldridge has missed the playoffs twice in his career the dude has always lead teams the playoffs despite this notion that he's a cancer.

Huh? Bro WE almost lost ten straight...and in some 9f our best years, trash teams like the Knicks beatvus. Does that mean they are better than us in those years? How old are u? U have a very basic way of looking at things...so Aldridge made the playoffs...so did Melo...does that mean having Melo on the team is a winning formula? Is Melo considered a winner because he makes the playoffs on his teams? U have a low bar for what u consider a winner

[Dverde]

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2867227-insiders-scout-nba-trade-market-why-cp3-is-unmovable-trae-young-needs-love

San Antonio (10-15) may wait until the summer to see if there's a sign-and-trade market for DeMar DeRozan.

http://bimshwel.com/frab/michaeljordancartoonphone.jpg

[duncan2k5]

No there not we beat Sacramento already and the Wolves are bout to lose 10 straight. DD I could care less about but Aldridge has missed the playoffs twice in his career the dude has always lead teams the playoffs despite this notion that he's a cancer.

Also kinda are in 7th, and wolves are in 11th...both are literally better than us

[JeffDuncan]

I'm a moron. It's true. I'm just plain stupid.


I noticed that.

[JeffDuncan]

:lmao:rollin Why? Cant derozan just opt out!?

He can, of course. He could decline his player option and walk away. That would certainly be the best outcome for the Spurs, since it would spare them having to try to peddle his toxic contract, for a toxic player, with so little chance for a reasonable result. The league knows all about DDR.

But if he signs, the Spurs will have to bust a gut to try to move him, if they have any semblance of human intelligence remaining.

[slick'81]

He can, of course. He could decline his player option and walk away. That would certainly be the best outcome for the Spurs, since it would spare them having to try to peddle his toxic contract, for a toxic player, with so little chance for a reasonable result. The league knows all about DDR.

But if he signs, the Spurs will have to bust a gut to try to move him, if they have any semblance of human intelligence remaining.


No doubt.i dont think many teams are looking at the spurs situation and thinking derozan is the answer to anything they need

[TD 21]

:lmao:rollin Why? Cant derozan just opt out!?

He could, but despite the weak free agent class, it's unlikely the market for him will be robust (if the Hawks rumors are true, they'd probably be the only team with significant cap space that could look to sign him).

This is the kind of thing that has to be broached and agreed to pre-deadline though. You don't just go into the off season blind and hope.

I'd prefer him gone yesterday, but the likely returns for him will probably still be available in the off season and retaining him until then is as likely, if not more, to provide them with as high a pick as any realistic trade could.