Tjarks: The Spurs Turn the Page and Look Ahead to . . . What, Exactly?

[TD 21]

The Spurs Turn the Page and Look Ahead to … What, Exactly? - The Ringer (https://www.theringer.com/2021/8/5/22610653/san-antonio-spurs-demar-derozan)


Mostly right obviously (some of the commentary of the youth is off), but yet another example of the media absolving Scumbag and refusing to acknowledge that he was by far the biggest reason they were unable to get the type of youth/picks package they should have been able to.

[SAGirl]

He was the reason in 2017. 4 years later are on the FO.

[SAGirl]

Btw, rightful criticism about the point of Derozan in SA.

[Leetonidas]

He was the reason in 2017. 4 years later are on the FO.

He was traded prior to the 2019 season. I'd say from '20 til now is all FO as we all know they should have dumped LA/DD/Rudy to contenders for assets when they still had value

[TD 21]

He was the reason in 2017. 4 years later are on the FO.

Obviously, but the point is, they all want to pretend the Spurs choose some "win now" package, when in reality they couldn't get the types of building blocks they otherwise would have if not for his antics.

Still never should have made the trade they made under any circumstances though.

[MultiTroll]

they otherwise would have if not for his antics.
site owner called it 50/50.

Any ownership there or wanna blame it all on the Klaw?

[MannyIsGod]

How the fuck do people get paid to say the Spurs plan isn't clear? Its 100% clear. They plan to compete for a play in/ play off spot this season with the team they have. They are not tanking and will probably never intentionally tank. If you don't agree with that, fine, but how can people say its not clear? They have cap flexibility going forward, a shit ton of young players who may turn into assets or all stars, but they likely are never going to tank with the current ownership group. There's never been a season where the Spurs went into it planning to tank and I don't know why anyone would expect that to start now. You can argue all you want about tanking in order to get better, but please point me to the team that has won an NBA championship doing that?

This shit is fucking tired. its been years of people clamoring for a tank that is not going to come. When are y'all going to understand that this team simply won't do that? There are 100% some merits to tanking. But there are also merits to doing it the way the Spurs are doing it.

[Trill Clinton]

Looking ahead to getting Chet in a Spurs Jersey

https://media.krem.com/assets/KREM/images/37372041-73fa-48cd-b1c9-ffc4fc92d72d/37372041-73fa-48cd-b1c9-ffc4fc92d72d_750x422.jpg

[MannyIsGod]

There were times in Murray’s second season, in 2017-18, when he looked like a future star. But his development was derailed when he tore his ACL, and he hasn’t gotten back on track. Now he’s the worst of both worlds—he doesn’t look capable of being a featured player, and his poor jumper makes everyone around him worse when he’s in a secondary role. White is more well-rounded but lacks the elite athleticism or scoring ability of the top point guards in the NBA. He’s a career 51.3 percent shooter from 2 and 35.7 percent from 3.



San Antonio has too many guards who may top out as sixth men on a good team. Walker is the most explosive scorer of the bunch. But that can only get you so far when that’s all you can do. He hasn’t met a shot that he won’t take over his first three seasons. He’s also yet another midrange killer who doesn’t shoot enough 3s (4.7 per game last season) to thrive in a smaller role in the starting lineup.

Imagine getting paid to write shit that is obviously about at team you have never watched. Walker hasn't met a shot he won't take? What the actual fuck? Murray hasn't gotten back on track? Really?

I'm not arguing the Spurs are going to be world beaters or even good, but I HATE when people post this kind of shit from national writers that obviously have no fucking clue what they're writing about.

[Allan Rowe vs Wade]

idiot says forbes will help

[Dex]

This article makes some decent points, but still is a bunch of revisionist history. It's easy to look back in retrospect and say you have all the answers.

Just because the DeRozan experiment didn't work out doesn't mean it was destined to fail. If you look at things through that lense, there are about 25 other teams in the league right now that are destined to fail. I guess they should just stop trying, too.

Also, this part:

It’s time for San Antonio to get back to what made it great in the first place—getting lucky in the draft and winning the lotteries for David Robinson and Tim Duncan. The Spurs have gone from a model franchise to a cautionary tale.

Oh, it's that easy huh? Just need to luck into another #1 pick and draft another Duncan or Robinson? Gee, why didn't we think of that? :rolleyes

[MannyIsGod]

Right? Like San Antonio just needs to get another top 5 all time player in order to be a model franchise is a laughable take. I like Bill Simmons but man almost every other person aside from Serano is full of shit when it comes to sports. They really don't know shit about what they run their mouth on.

[D-Robinson 50 fan]

Where is the link to the article? Or some of the main talking points?

[The Truth #6]

They are arguing for tanking, obviously. That’s not a left field argument. But I agree the Spurs have proven they aren’t going down that road/hole.

I disagree that DDR wasn’t destined to fail. I mean that initial team roster was a mess. If they had moved pieces it could have had a chance. I agree with that idea. But as everyone said, it can’t be both LMA and DDR and they failed to make a choice. So in that lens, of LMA and DDR, this article isn’t completely off. Sure, their individual player assessments are off.

[The Truth #6]

They are arguing for tanking, obviously. That’s not a left field argument. But I agree the Spurs have proven they aren’t going down that road/hole.

I disagree that DDR wasn’t destined to fail. I mean that initial team roster was a mess. If they had moved pieces it could have had a chance. I agree with that idea. But as everyone said, it can’t be both LMA and DDR and they failed to make a choice. So in that lens, of LMA and DDR, this article isn’t completely off. Sure, their individual player assessments are off.

[RC_Drunkford]

This article is stupid. Some valid points but you can tell they only looked up stats and haven’t really watched the team. Keldon Johnson’s biggest weakness is not that he can’t create for others, it’s that he can’t shoot the 3 to open up driving lanes. Murray has a jumper, that’s not an issue either. He just needs to shoot the 3 better. A lot of stupid takes. Get back to lucking into a top 5 NBA player of all time. Yeah right. Apparently this dude thinks it’s that easy :lol

[John B]

Classiest organization, but at times to their detriment.

[SPURt]

Well that’s depressing

[Chinook]

If anything, the problem with the Spurs wasn't not tanking it was that they didn't horsewhip their roster enough in 2018. They absolutely should've pursued a third star instead of keeping Murray and Walker. Maybe a three-team deal where SA got DeRizan and Kemba along with Toronto's first, Toronto got Leonard and Charlotte got Lonnie, Murray and Poeltl.

Kemba
White
DeRozan
Gay
Aldridge

Considering how weak the West was that year, it was Pop's last shot at a ring, and they should've gone for it instead of clinging to their young guys.

[RC_Drunkford]

To be fair the team would’ve been a lot better if Marcus Morris didn’t fuck them over. That was exactly the player the team needed at that point and they went to 7 games with Denver

[SpursforSix]

Everyone needs to buckle up and accept the fact that we're probably not going to see another Spurs ring in our (or grandkids lifetime).
It took a pretty amazing confluence of circumstances to do what we did. Not going to happen again.

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

This is one of the worst articles I've read on the Spurs. A sandwich of bad takes, obviously by someone who hasn't watched them much, plus laughable conclusions.

[LeBowen]

To be fair the team would’ve been a lot better if Marcus Morris didn’t fuck them over. That was exactly the player the team needed at that point and they went to 7 games with Denver

Nuggets series happened before he fucked the Spurs over.


As per usual, articles by people who're not following a team closely are awful.

[Leetonidas]

If anything, the problem with the Spurs wasn't not tanking it was that they didn't horsewhip their roster enough in 2018. They absolutely should've pursued a third star instead of keeping Murray and Walker. Maybe a three-team deal where SA got DeRizan and Kemba along with Toronto's first, Toronto got Leonard and Charlotte got Lonnie, Murray and Poeltl.

Kemba
White
DeRozan
Gay
Aldridge

Considering how weak the West was that year, it was Pop's last shot at a ring, and they should've gone for it instead of clinging to their young guys.

The West wasn't weak in 2018...the Rockets and Warriors were absolute juggernauts and they would have curbstomped that hypothetical roster imo. Hindsight is 20/20 of course but I am super glad the Spurs did not try to get Kemba. Especially since this roster would have fallen off a cliff in 2 years

edit: nvm, realized you meant the 2019 season / summer of 2018 and not the 2018 season

[Chinook]

The West wasn't weak in 2018...the Rockets and Warriors were absolute juggernauts and they would have curbstomped that hypothetical roster imo. Hindsight is 20/20 of course but I am super glad the Spurs did not try to get Kemba. Especially since this roster would have fallen off a cliff in 2 years

You're thinking of 17/18, not 18/19 when those teams were hurt at the end of the post-season.

The roster fell off a cliff two years later anyway. They wouldn't lost much long-term value in that deal.

[Chinook]

The West wasn't weak in 2018...the Rockets and Warriors were absolute juggernauts and they would have curbstomped that hypothetical roster imo. Hindsight is 20/20 of course but I am super glad the Spurs did not try to get Kemba. Especially since this roster would have fallen off a cliff in 2 years

You're thinking of 17/18, not 18/19 when those teams were hurt at the end of the post-season.

The roster fell off a cliff two years later anyway. They wouldn't lost much long-term value in that deal.

[Leetonidas]

You're thinking of 17/18, not 18/19 when those teams were hurt at the end of the post-season.

The roster fell off a cliff two years later anyway. They wouldn't lost much long-term value in that deal.

yeah, just edited the post right as you were replying :lol

[Spursfanfromafar]

The article is largely right on the limbo that the Spurs are stuck in with a lot of talented young players who are mostly complementary pieces with none looking like breaking out into a star. That is, to an extent, a fair point. What Tjarks gets wrong though is that these youngins' have actually developed quite well from where they came from and the point of entry into the NBA. The least developed one is Lonnie Walker who seems to have many tools but hasn't put it all together, is inconsistent and has been poor on defense.

Murray and White on the other hand have developed really well. Murray isn't still a consistent shooter, but he has become much better at mid-range, decent at finishing and very good at playmaking by especially cutting his turnover rate a lot. His ACL injury hasn't been that huge a setback except possibly it held him back a little on defense. He is still a A- defender overall and one of the best in his position.

White, if not for his injuries, could have threatened an All Star spot last season considering how good he was in the Bubble. He was working his way into shape and becoming a very good contributor for a Spurs team that threatened to make the playoffs before COVID19 hit and he injured his ankle. Plain bad luck for a really good two-way player who can defend 1-3 both in the paint and in the perimeter and most importantly adds value as a shot blocker as well. He has good playmaking skills and his shot has been improving every season. White can still threaten to be at least an All Star reserve if he recovers quickly from his injury.

Keldon is all heart and productivity for a small ball 4 and as a small forward and has a long way to go to be more productive and efficient from the perimeter, but he has willed himself to be a starter quickly in his career and his arc only points upwards.

Poeltl is more than a journeyman center. Ask Timvp who grossly underestimated his worth and use. He was very good on defense last year.. possibly the second best defensive center behind Rudy Gobert and despite being only a roll man/ finisher, he was right up there in efficiency. The free throw efficiency or the lack of it was a bogey, but he corrected it quite well in late season.

Yes, the Spurs are one All NBA player/ two All Stars from contention but they can get one of them from within - White, I would bet on .. and Murray could be a borderline All Star sometime too. If they can develop Keldon, Vassel and Primo well in the next two years and draft well again next year/ strike rich in free agency/ trade by getting that elusive all-Star/ All-NBA player.. They will be back in the hunt. Its not a bleak future at all.

[Truckules]

It's Tjarks. The dude's had bad takes on the Spurs (and basketball in general) for his entire career. One of my favorites is https://basketball.realgm.com/analysis/218793/Saving-The-Duncan-Spurs. He argued for trading Kawhi after his rookie season and said that Andre Drummond is the best big man prospect since TD.

[TimDunkem]

Looking ahead to getting Chet in a Spurs Jersey

https://media.krem.com/assets/KREM/images/37372041-73fa-48cd-b1c9-ffc4fc92d72d/37372041-73fa-48cd-b1c9-ffc4fc92d72d_750x422.jpg
Is he skilled and taller than 6'5? If so, they'll pass on him for another guard project or someone with a massive forehead and glass feet.

[koriwhat]

Is he skilled and taller than 6'5? If so, they'll pass on him for another guard project or someone with a massive forehead and glass feet.

he's 7ft tall and from what I've seen he's bigger than he looks in photos as far as mass goes but he's still super slim like Durant. Seems pretty skilled but I haven't watched much of him at all to really say one way or the other.

[RC_Drunkford]

Nuggets series happened before he fucked the Spurs over.


Huh? That‘s what I said. We went 7 games against the Nuggets and our biggest need was a 3-and-D combo forward

[gambit1990]

If anything, the problem with the Spurs wasn't not tanking it was that they didn't horsewhip their roster enough in 2018. They absolutely should've pursued a third star instead of keeping Murray and Walker. Maybe a three-team deal where SA got DeRizan and Kemba along with Toronto's first, Toronto got Leonard and Charlotte got Lonnie, Murray and Poeltl.

Kemba
White
DeRozan
Gay
Aldridge

Considering how weak the West was that year, it was Pop's last shot at a ring, and they should've gone for it instead of clinging to their young guys.

still believing in demar :lmao

thinking a starting lineup with demar / gay / la would get anywhere in the playoffs :lmao wtf

[The Truth #6]

They should have gone all in on DDR if they weren’t exploding the roster. I suppose both options indicate big changes, but surrounding DDR with 3/D players was the only way to go in my opinion. A homeless man’s Harden type of team but it would have at least been an acknowledgment of reality. An appreciation for reality is barely coming back. If Forbes is packaged I will have a lot more faith. But as of now the FO needs to prove themselves.

[The Truth #6]

But the author does say idiotic things, don’t get me wrong. Zach Collins is our most promising signing? It’s much closer to a money laundering scheme than creating a winning roster.

[cd98]

At first I thought the Spurs had a trade in mind and they were pulling moves to get the trade done. But no trade has happened. So in my mind, what they probably did was flood themselves with pieces that could be used in various types of trades and see what happens the rest of the summer. If nothing worthwhile materializes, then they will have to dump a few players, but I believe they will keep as many options open so they can take advantage of any opportunities that come. Their main competition for any moves will be Thunder and the Hornets.

[NO LIMIT ARMY COMMANDER]

Everyone needs to buckle up and accept the fact that we're probably not going to see another Spurs ring in our (or grandkids lifetime).
It took a pretty amazing confluence of circumstances to do what we did. Not going to happen again.

Let’s frame this.

[spurs1990]

None of it was DeRozan’s fault. He’s just not the future Hall of Famer his predecessors were. He did everything the Spurs asked him in his time with the franchise, averaging 21.6 points on 50.1 percent shooting, 6.2 assists, and 5.3 rebounds per game. DeRozan turned himself into a point forward in his first season there after Dejounte Murray tore his ACL. Then he changed positions in the bubble and played as a small-ball forward to help develop their young players. It would have been nice if he had taken more 3s, but it wouldn’t have changed much in the big picture.

I don't know... DeRozan being ranked 315th in 3pt ATTEMPTs implies he definitely should've taken more three's.
He on multiple occasions purposely stepped on or over the 3pt line as it was a psychological impediment.

Great PR paragraph by the author for DeRozan.

[8FOR!3]

Imagine getting paid to write shit that is obviously about at team you have never watched. Walker hasn't met a shot he won't take? What the actual fuck? Murray hasn't gotten back on track? Really?

I'm not arguing the Spurs are going to be world beaters or even good, but I HATE when people post this kind of shit from national writers that obviously have no fucking clue what they're writing about.[/FONT][/COLOR]

Yeah it's insane at least I've only written about the Spurs and Cowboys two teams I watch religiously if I'm going to talk about them. But damn it makes me wonder should I just apply to write for sports in general and just talk narratives and not care to actually watch the games :lol

Even if you're just looking on paper, Murray clearly got back on track last year lol so he didn't even look at the stats. And he's improving and developing his game each season. White starts sometimes and comes off the bench sometimes and he needs to be consistently healthy but the talent is there. If anything he can disappear in games sometimes and then other times be the best player. Walker lacks confidence as a scorer, so it's a joke to call him a chucker...

And then they made a snark comment about us being good at lucking into Hall of Fame talent with top picks (Robinson/Duncan) and how that's what brought us to the table. Which yes there is truth to that. But also we were the team that really brought international talent to the table in Ginobili/Parker. AND we (and a few other teams) first used the G League to really develop NBA talent. We also drafted Kawhi #15 and through our staff and his hard work turned him into a generational talent. Even if that story doesn't have a happy ending, we got a ring out of it and he has multiple. Article is so lazy.

[LeBowen]

Huh? That‘s what I said. We went 7 games against the Nuggets and our biggest need was a 3-and-D combo forward

My bad, I just skimmed through your post and misread. :lol

[objective]

It's kind of weird how Bill Simmons sells The Ringer for hundreds of millions of dollars, and Tjarks, one of his premiere writers there for the NBA after KOC, gets cancer and has to hold fundraisers and beg for money to save his life.

Simmons knows how to take care of his guys :lol

"Jonathan, you've helped build The Ringer into what it is today. So let me help you out: you can do a BBQ plate fundraiser, and make sure people see your baby as they drive by, you can get more sales that way. And don't wear your hat, let them see your chemo head. Good luck out there, I gotta go re-watch Necessary Roughness in my guest house theater room."

[TD 21]

site owner called it 50/50.

Any ownership there or wanna blame it all on the Klaw?

Even if true, that doesn't absolve his unprecedented unprofessional behavior which intentionally and successfully tanked his value in a failed attempt to strongarm them into trading him to L.A.



Yes, the Spurs are one All NBA player/ two All Stars from contention but they can get one of them from within - White, I would bet on .. and Murray could be a borderline All Star sometime too. If they can develop Keldon, Vassel and Primo well in the next two years and draft well again next year/ strike rich in free agency/ trade by getting that elusive all-Star/ All-NBA player.. They will be back in the hunt. Its not a bleak future at all.

:lmao Every non contender could say all they need is a myriad of unlikely things to break their way and they'll be "back in the hunt" . . . and all of them have a better starting point than this one. This is as bleak as it gets.

[MultiTroll]

Even if true, that doesn't absolve his unprecedented unprofessional behavior which intentionally and successfully tanked his value in a failed attempt to strongarm them into trading him to L.A.
Is this an acknowledgement that management could have contributed to their own demise?

[TD 21]

Is this an acknowledgement that management could have contributed to their own demise?

Nah, it's an acknowledgement that no matter what they supposedly did, it's not an excuse for doing what he did. Wanting out for whatever reason(s) is fine, making it impossible for your incumbent team to receive commensurate value isn't.

[MultiTroll]

Oh i myself if on the Spurs Board would have voted to let him sit.
Then go to Workmans Comp board (which NBA like all legit employers are under) and ask for a ruling on whether his salary needed to be paid since team Dr.s said go.
Work Comp would have assigned a panel to decide. If panel ruled he was able to play he would then have to play or forego salary.

See how far your "LA or nothing" bullshit would then go.

[MultiTroll]

Truth is fucked by Kawhi or not, they did a bunch of self inflicted shit after that.
50 Mils, Traitor Gasol on and on.

[TD 21]

Truth is fucked by Kawhi or not, they did a bunch of self inflicted shit after that.
50 Mils, Traitor Gasol on and on.

Of course . . . I damn sure haven't let them off the hook. Just saying, the national media's portrayal of the "trade" is asinine.

[Ed Helicopter Jones]

Whatevs....

There are more insightful posts in this forum than anything this bozo wrote.

[ElNono]

How the fuck do people get paid to say the Spurs plan isn't clear? Its 100% clear. They plan to compete for a play in/ play off spot this season with the team they have. They are not tanking and will probably never intentionally tank. If you don't agree with that, fine, but how can people say its not clear? They have cap flexibility going forward, a shit ton of young players who may turn into assets or all stars, but they likely are never going to tank with the current ownership group. There's never been a season where the Spurs went into it planning to tank and I don't know why anyone would expect that to start now. You can argue all you want about tanking in order to get better, but please point me to the team that has won an NBA championship doing that?

This shit is fucking tired. its been years of people clamoring for a tank that is not going to come. When are y'all going to understand that this team simply won't do that? There are 100% some merits to tanking. But there are also merits to doing it the way the Spurs are doing it.

Because they seemingly are absorbing shitty contracts and collecting picks (something tanking teams do) while also handing out future cap space and ridiculously long contracts (which is what contending teams do).

So there's no clear goal here to turn this team into a contender. "Making the playoffs" is not a goal in this league, it's actually the absolute worst place to be.

Are they trying to get there via picks? via trades? via free agency? It's not really clear. Ok, this team isn't tanking, fine. Then what are we doing? This team seems completely averse to do any kind of big trades. Then we go to free agency, and we end up throwing ridiculous cap space on injured players, middle-of-the-road talent, people we gave up on a few years back...

[ElNono]

BTW, not defending the article (haven't read it yet), but pointing out that it's entirely fair to say this FO has shown no clear direction.

[MultiTroll]

Insider info on Chet, I'm talking HEB aisle + level stuff.

Dudes game can be likened to Durant. Did not say he is Durant.
Saying his playing style has good portion of Durant. For real.
Can stroke treys and dribble.
Huge sample size.

[TheChillFactor]

They absolutely have a direction. Yall just discredit it to make yourselves feel smart.

[spurraider21]

They absolutely have a direction. Yall just discredit it to make yourselves feel smart.
down?

[Rummpd]

How the fuck do people get paid to say the Spurs plan isn't clear? Its 100% clear. They plan to compete for a play in/ play off spot this season with the team they have. They are not tanking and will probably never intentionally tank. If you don't agree with that, fine, but how can people say its not clear? They have cap flexibility going forward, a shit ton of young players who may turn into assets or all stars, but they likely are never going to tank with the current ownership group. There's never been a season where the Spurs went into it planning to tank and I don't know why anyone would expect that to start now. You can argue all you want about tanking in order to get better, but please point me to the team that has won an NBA championship doing that?

This shit is fucking tired. its been years of people clamoring for a tank that is not going to come. When are y'all going to understand that this team simply won't do that? There are 100% some merits to tanking. But there are also merits to doing it the way the Spurs are doing it.

BLUF this FO is too stupid or stubborn to tank or really try to stay competitive and the coach is retired in place and the wrong fit to grow youth. So you have a holding pattern of being borderline competitive- the absolute worst thing to be in NBA. But like you say it the reality is they won’t tank but there is NO plan this farce of FO cannot think ahead.

[MannyIsGod]

Because they seemingly are absorbing shitty contracts and collecting picks (something tanking teams do) while also handing out future cap space and ridiculously long contracts (which is what contending teams do).

So there's no clear goal here to turn this team into a contender. "Making the playoffs" is not a goal in this league, it's actually the absolute worst place to be.

Are they trying to get there via picks? via trades? via free agency? It's not really clear. Ok, this team isn't tanking, fine. Then what are we doing? This team seems completely averse to do any kind of big trades. Then we go to free agency, and we end up throwing ridiculous cap space on injured players, middle-of-the-road talent, people we gave up on a few years back...

IMO the plan is clear. Hope the players take a step up, roll over cap space till next year and see if they can bring someone in that makes them better. If enough of their assets develop, they also have pathways via trades.

I really can't disagree more than making the playoffs is not a goal. Last year with the introduction of the play in games, making the playoffs became a direct goal of more teams than ever before. Fewer teams than ever were sellers at the market last year.

[ElNono]

IMO the plan is clear. Hope the players take a step up, roll over cap space till next year and see if they can bring someone in that makes them better. If enough of their assets develop, they also have pathways via trades.

I really can't disagree more than making the playoffs is not a goal. Last year with the introduction of the play in games, making the playoffs became a direct goal of more teams than ever before. Fewer teams than ever were sellers at the market last year.

It doesn't work because you're more or less foregoing 2 out of the 3 high impact ways your team can improve (high picks and free agency).

Spurs loaded up on 2-3 year deals right now, absorbed salary, in order 'not to tank' (but not to contend either, just be competitive). So we're first round fodder at best, and, barring a major derail of what appears to be 'the plan', we're going to whiff on a high pick as well.

Trades are the remaining avenue, but this team appears to be allergic to them. I can't even think the last time this team did a blockbuster trade (that was not forced on them, like nephew).

Clear direction to me means:

1) We're taking on crap 1-2 year salaries but we're also loading up on picks, preferably 1st round. That clearly means they're shooting towards improving via the lottery.
2) Except for rookie deals, we're only signing 1-2 year deals, and strictly to fulfill the team's minimum salary. That to me means we're shooting for capspace and the free agent market.
3) We hear the Spurs being involved in a 2+ team trade to land some above average talent. We would hear this relatively often during the trade window. That would clearly sound like the Spurs are in the market for trades.

1 and 2 probably involves tanking of some shape or form. If we're not doing any of those though, then how are we supposed to get better? Just hope the kids grow up and one of them turn out to be a star?

I mean, if there's something we saw with nephew, is that you can tell fairly quickly who those guys are, and they're not in our roster right now.

[sananspursfan21]

I didn’t read anything inherently wrong, except that Vassell was a touch undersold. Also, I don’t think Keldon’s value relies on being some kind of playmaker for others like the author suggests. To be the type of player we’re realistically hoping for, becoming a distributor isn’t in his wheelhouse, although it would be cool if he developed that.

And while the direction may not be crystal clear, I think the franchise knows what they want. It seems like they’ve got a direction, but may also be hoping to catch lightning in a bottle with one of the young guys while they press toward what they’re trying for.

[Chinook]

It doesn't work because you're more or less foregoing 2 out of the 3 high impact ways your team can improve (high picks and free agency).

Spurs loaded up on 2-3 year deals right now, absorbed salary, in order 'not to tank' (but not to contend either, just be competitive). So we're first round fodder at best, and, barring a major derail of what appears to be 'the plan', we're going to whiff on a high pick as well.

Trades are the remaining avenue, but this team appears to be allergic to them. I can't even think the last time this team did a blockbuster trade (that was not forced on them, like nephew).

Clear direction to me means:

1) We're taking on crap 1-2 year salaries but we're also loading up on picks, preferably 1st round. That clearly means they're shooting towards improving via the lottery.
2) Except for rookie deals, we're only signing 1-2 year deals, and strictly to fulfill the team's minimum salary. That to me means we're shooting for capspace and the free agent market.
3) We hear the Spurs being involved in a 2+ team trade to land some above average talent. We would hear this relatively often during the trade window. That would clearly sound like the Spurs are in the market for trades.

1 and 2 probably involves tanking of some shape or form. If we're not doing any of those though, then how are we supposed to get better? Just hope the kids grow up and one of them turn out to be a star?

I mean, if there's something we saw with nephew, is that you can tell fairly quickly who those guys are, and they're not in our roster right now.

Your definition is running into the critique others made. You're artificially defining what directions are possible then saying not following one of those means they are being confusing.

The Spurs aren't tanking. They're trying their best to improve their long-term position. That means developing players and drafting well. Part of that development requires vets and role-players. But they also need the flexibility to make trades, so they got some extra picks. You personally think being an eight-seed is not a desirable and try to push that as a view every team agrees. But most clubs don't think like that. Sacramento, New Orleans, Memphis, Indiana - - I'd even put DC on the list - - none of them think they're winning a title with their off-season.

This is why it's really clear what they're doing. A lot of posters are seeing it. What they're doing this year is basically an extension of what they did last year. I don't agree with some of the moves they're making (I even hate a couple) but it's not confusing or anything.

[SpurPadre]

What I question to those who insist we’re not tanking is this: how does a team full of players who aren’t “go to” players, make a play in game, let alone the playoffs in a league that’s defined by proven stars carrying teams on their backs? We also have quite a few players on the roster that many would argue are g-league talent (Hutchison, Jock, Forbes, Eubanks) and may end up getting non-insignificant minutes. Then you have our two best players left: Murray and White, the latter of which is very injury-prone and objectively inconsistent while the former has the higher ceiling but also inconsistent. Neither of them have proven they are ready to be go to players. When you take those factors in mind, is it that unreasonable to think this might be tanking? Is it really far-fetched to think this team will regress significantly this coming season?

[Chinook]

What I question to those who insist we’re not tanking is this: how does a team full of players who aren’t “go to” players, make a play in game, let alone the playoffs in a league that’s defined by proven stars carrying teams on their backs? We also have quite a few players on the roster that many would argue are g-league talent (Hutchison, Jock, Forbes, Eubanks) and may end up getting non-insignificant minutes. When you take those factors in mind, is it that unreasonable to think this might be tanking?

The first answer is "who cares?" The Spurs aren't trying to win a hypothetical play-in game any more than they're trying to win a hypothetical Finals Game Seven. Their goal for this season is to win games.The post-season might be the result of that, or it might not. They'll deal with it when it makes sense to.

The second answer is no. Having a roster bottom of young guys trying to figure things out or towel-wavers is completely normal

[ElNono]

Your definition is running into the critique others made. You're artificially defining what directions are possible then saying not following one of those means they are being confusing.

The Spurs aren't tanking. They're trying their best to improve their long-term position. That means developing players and drafting well. Part of that development requires vets and role-players. But they also need the flexibility to make trades, so they got some extra picks. You personally think being an eight-seed is not a desirable and try to push that as a view every team agrees. But most clubs don't think like that. Sacramento, New Orleans, Memphis, Indiana - - I'd even put DC on the list - - none of them think they're winning a title with their off-season.

This is why it's really clear what they're doing. A lot of posters are seeing it. What they're doing this year is basically an extension of what they did last year. I don't agree with some of the moves they're making (I even hate a couple) but it's not confusing or anything.

I'm not artificially defining anything, I didn't make the rules when it comes to acquiring superlative talent to improve your team. That's just how this league operates.

There's a whole other discussion as to whether the system itself (lottery, caps, etc) is fair, unfair, good or bad, but I'm not even going into that, I'm merely addressing the system as it exists right now. Again, those parameters are not defined by me, they're defined by the league and the union.

If the Spurs plan not to tank, then the big jump in quality is going to have to come via a trade, like when they traded for Kawhi on draft night. I was asking when was the last time they did a big trade, that was probably as gutsy and risky a trade as they've ever made in the modern era.

None of the teams you listed have been contenders either (maybe Memphis the odd year out), so that's exactly what I would like to avoid as a fan. Perennial middle-ground purgatory.

So, I get that it's clear what they're doing, what's not clear is which direction they're taking to improve the team back from middle of the road into being a contender, which is a completely different thing.

[ElNono]

Hilariously enough, Chinook, I was actually going to mention your "year XXXX plan", which never seemingly pans out when it comes to planning. :lol

Don't take it as a dig, I think you were 100% on track in having the idea that there was a plan for a given year to collect capspace, etc, to make that jump in quality I'm talking about, it just seemingly never pans out, which really makes you wonder if there's a plan at all.

[SpurPadre]

The first answer is "who cares?" The Spurs aren't trying to win a hypothetical play-in game any more than they're trying to win a hypothetical Finals Game Seven. Their goal for this season is to win games.The post-season might be the result of that, or it might not. They'll deal with it when it makes sense to.

The second answer is no. Having a roster bottom of young guys trying to figure things out or towel-wavers is completely normal

1. We, as fans, as well as a 5 time Championship Franchise “should care”. How can the goal be to win games when the team can realistically be worse this coming season than they were last season and other teams in the West will likely be better? You say they’ll deal with it when it makes sense but that doesn’t sound like a team with a clearly defined direction, does it? Quite the contrary.

2. It’s not about whether or not it’s normal having a team that has alot of g-leaguers. It’s about how that doesn’t bode well in the “goal of winning games”.

[MannyIsGod]

Nono, FWIW the Spurs aren't foregoing free agency. I'm pretty sure they can easily open up a Max slot again next season. Young and Aminou come off the books and Zach Collins is more than likely mostly unguaranteed money. They have a ton of moveable contracts. They're going to be a player next year in free agency if they want to be. They're forgoing tanking in order to get draft picks now, but if this team is atrocious (I really doubt they will be) then they can definitely do that mid season.

[ElNono]

Nono, FWIW the Spurs aren't foregoing free agency. I'm pretty sure they can easily open up a Max slot again next season. Young and Aminou come off the books and Zach Collins is more than likely mostly unguaranteed money. They have a ton of moveable contracts. They're going to be a player next year in free agency if they want to be. They're forgoing tanking in order to get draft picks now, but if this team is atrocious (I really doubt they will be) then they can definitely do that mid season.

I'd like to see them grabbing picks for those moveable contracts, not taking on more salary. I want the team to do good, but when you see them throw away $20m+ of capspace in guys like McDermott, Zollins... and we still haven't heard about the Forbes deal, it just annoys the fuck out me.

You say it's mostly unguaranteed money for Zollins, and one would hope you're right, but with this FO I can't even be sure. They sometimes get enamored with these 2-3 year project pet players that are a waste of both time and money.

[duncan2150]

Nono, FWIW the Spurs aren't foregoing free agency. I'm pretty sure they can easily open up a Max slot again next season. Young and Aminou come off the books and Zach Collins is more than likely mostly unguaranteed money. They have a ton of moveable contracts. They're going to be a player next year in free agency if they want to be. They're forgoing tanking in order to get draft picks now, but if this team is atrocious (I really doubt they will be) then they can definitely do that mid season.


Agree with that, they don't have bad contracts, they could have some flexibility next summer if they want.

[dbestpro]

Defensively, we have improved significantly as long as Forbes is not on the floor. LMA, DDR, and Gay are replaced by people who play defense. I would love to see an identity evolve like the Pistons of old.

[rankingtear]

We are bottoming out next year, don't see how we win a lot of games without an efficient offensive engine. Brought shooters for development and so we don't play like a team from a different era.

Collins is a modern big flyer who is out for half of the year. Primo needs on ball reps in the g-league so his creation upside would not atrophy.

[rah88sa]

San Antonio wanted to remain competitive when Kawhi Leonard forced his way out in 2018, so it traded him and Danny Green to Toronto for DeRozan, Jakob Poeltl, and one first-round pick. But all that did was delay the inevitable. Now the Spurs are in a worse position than if they had let him walk for nothing.

I agree that the spurs should have chosen a better direction after Kawhi ditched us, but getting Keldon, Poeltl, and now the first and second picks from this trade is definitely not worse than letting Kawhi walk for nothing.

[Chinook]

I'm not artificially defining anything, I didn't make the rules when it comes to acquiring superlative talent to improve your team. That's just how this league operates.

But that is an artificial distinction, especially in the modern era. You can't build through the draft nowadays -- especially by tanking. Players' don't have the patience for it. You have to build through player acquisitions and development. So tanking isn't a really a viable strategy, let alone one of just two possible ways a team can go. Treading water while improving the team's long-term hand is a legitimate path toward a star. It requires them to be willing to make the trades they need to in order to upgrade their talent -- and I do have my doubts about that. But no, "The rules when to comes to acquiring superlative talent to improve your team" isn't to be bad. The Lakers can afford to do that because their brand doesn't depend on them being good. SA can't.


If the Spurs plan not to tank, then the big jump in quality is going to have to come via a trade, like when they traded for Kawhi on draft night. I was asking when was the last time they did a big trade, that was probably as gutsy and risky a trade as they've ever made in the modern era.

You need assets to do that kind of trade, and those take time to develop and collect. You're acting like they need to trade immediately just to satisfy your desire for instant gratification. In reality, such a trade right now would overleverage them. They could get Simmons, but it would require them to give up their future. Give them time to make Primo, Vassell and the like into good pieces, and it probably doesn't take as much the next time. Or maybe Primo develops into a star or whatever.


None of the teams you listed have been contenders either (maybe Memphis the odd year out), so that's exactly what I would like to avoid as a fan. Perennial middle-ground purgatory.

So, I get that it's clear what they're doing, what's not clear is which direction they're taking to improve the team back from middle of the road into being a contender, which is a completely different thing.

Saying, "I don't want them to be mediocre" isn't the same thing as "them being mediocre is confusing". The reality is they might not win another title for a long time. We should just get that out of the way. Pop deciding to keep Murray and Walker in 2018 basically shut the door on him getting another ring. To a very real extent, you're just going to have to decide if you want to be a fan of a mediocre team, because they'll be that for an indefinite period of time if they don't get lucky or sly. But what they aren't going to do is gut their whole team hoping to get a top pick that hopefully becomes a franchise talent who also hopefully doesn't want to leave.

Contenders come together quickly and break apart quickly. The Spurs are going to have to be ready to make a flurry of moves to bring together a few stars for a couple of years and then just go for it. To do that, they'll need to be flexible with their roster construction and have a team filled with tradeable assets. They'll have to go from potential to realization over the course of like a season or two, so they need to keep the potential ready. That means they're going to basically be stagnant for a few years in terms of playoff chances until the right deal comes along.

There are treadmill teams that are leveraging their assets to stay that way, like maybe Chicago and Portland. And there are treadmill teams that have a clean cap and lots of assets, like Phoenix before Paul. If you want a direction, it's toward being in that second group.


Hilariously enough, Chinook, I was actually going to mention your "year XXXX plan", which never seemingly pans out when it comes to planning. :lol

Don't take it as a dig, I think you were 100% on track in having the idea that there was a plan for a given year to collect capspace, etc, to make that jump in quality I'm talking about, it just seemingly never pans out, which really makes you wonder if there's a plan at all.

Eh, one of my roles on this forum is to make cap projections and scenarios about what combination of moves are possible. I don't have a "Year XXXX Plan" now. I don't even necessarily think the Spurs are making the right moves toward that. I think John Collins instead of McD, Zach and Hutch would've been better, even in light of the DeRozan trade. I'm not someone who tries to pretend the FO isn't who they are. That said, this off-season looked great before the extensions come in. It's like how so many people were saying last year that the 2021 draft was so much better than 2020, then 2021 rolls around and people got to see those high-school players in a bigger setting and all of the sudden, that draft sucks too but 2022 is going to be great.

[look_at_g_shred]

I am happy that at least they saw there was no reason in keeping the trio of ddr/gay/mills .The GM even made trades to attain draft capital....nice. I didn't think he had it in him. I was so sure they were going to give them loyalty deals. The only puzzling move was the Forbes signing. Overall B+ off season. It at least gave me some confidence that Wright is competent at his job.

[Chinook]

1. We, as fans, as well as a 5 time Championship Franchise “should care”. How can the goal be to win games when the team can realistically be worse this coming season than they were last season and other teams in the West will likely be better? You say they’ll deal with it when it makes sense but that doesn’t sound like a team with a clearly defined direction, does it? Quite the contrary.

2. It’s not about whether or not it’s normal having a team that has alot of g-leaguers. It’s about how that doesn’t bode well in the “goal of winning games”.

1. No, we shouldn't. I don't care that the team doesn't have a star right now. They aren't a contender. When it's time to be a contender this question matters, just like the ones about who would check Giannis or James.

It has absolutely nothing to do with whether they have a direction though.

2. It's normal, even for teams that win games. Therefore, it's not an omen against teams wanting to win games. Also, "wanting to win games" isn't the same thing as "winning games at all costs". Like how working-class people have to budget their expenses between need and luxury. A small-market, poor-owner team like SA has to balance development and production. ST has some of the most hard-core Spurs fans out there, and look how many of them are freaking out about them being mediocre. How many of the casual fans would let them tank?

[Brazil]

Spurs deserve some critics obviously but we tend to forget, this whole organization has been fucked over by motherfucker kiwi leonard. Any small market team being that screwed by a player would have struggled like hell. We can argue about this or that move but there is nothing that they could have done different that would have changed drastically this team fate, everything you can think of would be slight improvements maybe here and there...

[JeffDuncan]

But that is an artificial distinction, especially in the modern era. You can't build through the draft nowadays -- especially by tanking. Players' don't have the patience for it. ...



You’re just making things up.

Giannis was drafted by the Bucks, has been there 8 years, and recently signed a 5yr extension. Remember that?

Jokic was drafted by Denver, has been there 6 years, and is in the middle of a 5yr extension he signed.

Lillard has apparently been grumbling, but he was drafted by Portland and has been there 9yrs.

Steph Curry was drafted by the Warriors and has been there 12yrs.

Durant was drafted by the Sonics/OKC and spent 9yrs with the team before he got itchy for rings.

I could mention much more if it was worth the trouble, in trying to talk to you.

[Chinook]

You’re just making things up.

Giannis was drafted by the Bucks, has been there 8 years, and recently signed a 5yr extension. Remember that?

Jokic was drafted by Denver, has been there 6 years, and is in the middle of a 5yr extension he signed.

Lillard has apparently been grumbling, but he was drafted by Portland and has been there 9yrs.

Steph Curry was drafted by the Warriors and has been there 12yrs.

Durant was drafted by the Sonics/OKC and spent 9yrs with the team before he got itchy for rings.

I could mention much more if it was worth the trouble, in trying to talk to you.

So none of those teams tanked... I can't imagine why you brought any of them up, let alone got haughty because you thought they proved your point.

[Ed Helicopter Jones]

down?

Ouch! Funny...but ouch.


Pop is one of those long-term planner types. He had Kawhi's entire career with the Spurs mapped out, along with the pieces he intended to put around him to keep the team relevant for the next ten years. That's probably why the FO even attempted to sooth egos and keep the plan in place despite the grumblings of Kawhi's discontent in San Antonio that started way back around the championship or even before.

We know Pop has a hard time deviating from his plan once he makes his mind up. We see that in his in-game coaching all the time. Pop pivots like an ocean-liner, and it's a trait that's become more prevalent as he's gotten older it seems. It's pretty obvious the FO really had a hard time changing course after Kawhi's departure. Kawhi fvcked us, and we didn't counter-punch nearly as well as we should have. It took several rounds of body blows and shots to the head for us to switch things up.

I think everyone, Spurs connected, did the best they could given the circumstances. Hindsight is 20-20. The armchair GMs around here always have it figured out though. Glad we have so many geniuses in this group. I learn a lot from everyone.

[MVPCues]

Ouch! Funny...but ouch.


Pop is one of those long-term planner types. He had Kawhi's entire career with the Spurs mapped out, along with the pieces he intended to put around him to keep the team relevant for the next ten years. That's probably why the FO even attempted to sooth egos and keep the plan in place despite the grumblings of Kawhi's discontent in San Antonio that started way back around the championship or even before.

We know Pop has a hard time deviating from his plan once he makes his mind up. We see that in his in-game coaching all the time. Pop pivots like an ocean-liner, and it's a trait that's become more prevalent as he's gotten older it seems. It's pretty obvious the FO really had a hard time changing course after Kawhi's departure. Kawhi fvcked us, and we didn't counter-punch nearly as well as we should have. It took several rounds of body blows and shots to the head for us to switch things up.

I think everyone, Spurs connected, did the best they could given the circumstances. Hindsight is 20-20. The armchair GMs around here always have it figured out though. Glad we have so many geniuses in this group. I learn a lot from everyone.

I was subscribed until the last sentence of the 2nd paragraph. We have switched things up now?

Forbes was literally the worst defender in the league before he went to Milwaukee. With Milwaukee he was literally the worst defender in the league. Why do we need to repeat that experiment? Zollins likely won't play at all this coming year. A good contract (if it is mostly unguaranteed and he can be let go after a year) doesn't make it a good decision. Anyone who thinks those are terrible decisions aren't claiming they have "it figured out". If signing those two is their best, maybe some leadership changes are warranted.

The Derozan trade was good, they got something out of the situation. Better than I expected. Signing Jock is a good gamble and could pay off if his confidence has merit in the NBA. Mcdermott was a little overpriced but OK so ignoring that move, viewing two A's and two F's as their best is allowing the bar to be too low for some people.

[Drom John]

So none of those teams tanked... I can't imagine why you brought any of them up, let alone got haughty because you thought they proved your point.

The Warriors tanked hard to keep their protected draft pick in 2012.
Harrison Barnes wasn't worth it, but that was some awful basketball.

The SuperSonics tanked for Durant.

[JeffDuncan]

So none of those teams tanked...



They all drafted their stars, and their stars stayed with them for years. And in many cases are still there.

You tried to argue that wasn’t the case in the modern era, and you were mistaken. Drafting your star really does still matter. The draft is very important.

[The Truth #6]

It's kind of weird how Bill Simmons sells The Ringer for hundreds of millions of dollars, and Tjarks, one of his premiere writers there for the NBA after KOC, gets cancer and has to hold fundraisers and beg for money to save his life.

Simmons knows how to take care of his guys :lol

"Jonathan, you've helped build The Ringer into what it is today. So let me help you out: you can do a BBQ plate fundraiser, and make sure people see your baby as they drive by, you can get more sales that way. And don't wear your hat, let them see your chemo head. Good luck out there, I gotta go re-watch Necessary Roughness in my guest house theater room."


Damn. Didn’t know that. That’s awful.

[Chinook]

They all drafted their stars, and their stars stayed with them for years. And in many cases are still there.

You tried to argue that wasn’t the case in the modern era, and you were mistaken. Drafting your star really does still matter. The draft is very important.

No, obviously I didn't. Stars have to come into the league somehow. Duh. The point isn't that you can't draft a star. It's that the process of tanking to find a franchise player and only then deciding to be good doesn't work, because stars are impatient and don't stay with their teams a long time if they aren't willing. Guys on their second contracts when they couldn't walk aren't the same as the third-contract guys who actually run the league. The window from when a guy becomes a top-five to -10 player to when he gets to the end of his second contract is usually short, and that's when you see most move. The Spurs would be better off collecting assets to trade for one of those guys than they would of drafting such a guy and keeping him. Leonard was uniquely snakey in how he left, but leaving the general is the norm.

It works both ways. Stars are more likely to leave and are thus worse long-term investments for a tanking team. But thw greater than number of stars on the move makes it more likely for a team to snag one. The Spurs have to accept this reality instead of hoping to draft the next Duncan.

[Chinook]

The Warriors tanked hard to keep their protected draft pick in 2012.
Harrison Barnes wasn't worth it, but that was some awful basketball.

The SuperSonics tanked for Durant.

I don't mean keeping guys off the court because the season is over and wins can only hurt the draft stock. I have no issue with pivoting to that (which I've called "stealth-tanking" when advocating for it on this board) around the TDL if thing go wrong. I'm talking about Philly-style tanking where you're trying to lose games from the outset due to hamstringing the roster to maximize assets. If the Spurs owed a pic they could protect by dropping a couple of meaningless games at the end of season, I'd want them to lose.

I don't mean tanking to get those players per se. I mean tanking as a way to build the team. They blew it up and got extremely lucky to draft three MVPs in a row. That way, they did all their building very quickly. That's not normal. The closest replicant to that is Memphis with JJJ and Ja, but they're actually an example of why you don't need to tank to turn it around anyway.

[KobesAchilles]

We have officially given the keys to DJM. Whether or not that’s the direction people want doesn’t matter but we clearly have a direction in mind for this year. I can’t speak for the future but for this one particular year, it looks like the Spurs have gone all in on DJM and are going to see whether or not we have a star or secondary star in the making.

Dejounte has a very simplistic running of the offense. He doesn’t really have a feel for getting players involved other than to drive and kick. Well we have made that as easy as possible for him. Simple reads and simple decisions. High pick n roll with Jak at the 3 point line, take on the opposing Center, either find your midrange shot/finish at the rim or just drive to the hoop and kick it out to the wide open man when the defense collapses.

This year we have gone all in of DJM and it will finally give us an evaluation of whether or not he is a key franchise piece. And we don’t even have to be that good to recognize this. Zach Lavine is a perfect example of this. He is clearly a star player but not a franchise player. If the Bulls knew how to actually draft, instead of picking players like Wendell Carter or Colby something or Patrick Williams, then they would be in a much better spot

If DJM turns out to be a real #2 guy then that is one problem solved and opens the door to so many things.

[PrimeMinister]

a starting line up with demar derozan in it will never run complex half court sets or do anything outside drive and kick

dj made a massive leap last year in his ball handling and creation off the dribble. lets see what he can do next year within the context of a team that actually makes sense.

[The Truth #6]

We have officially given the keys to DJM. Whether or not that’s the direction people want doesn’t matter but we clearly have a direction in mind for this year. I can’t speak for the future but for this one particular year, it looks like the Spurs have gone all in on DJM and are going to see whether or not we have a star or secondary star in the making.

Dejounte has a very simplistic running of the offense. He doesn’t really have a feel for getting players involved other than to drive and kick. Well we have made that as easy as possible for him. Simple reads and simple decisions. High pick n roll with Jak at the 3 point line, take on the opposing Center, either find your midrange shot/finish at the rim or just drive to the hoop and kick it out to the wide open man when the defense collapses.

This year we have gone all in of DJM and it will finally give us an evaluation of whether or not he is a key franchise piece. And we don’t even have to be that good to recognize this. Zach Lavine is a perfect example of this. He is clearly a star player but not a franchise player. If the Bulls knew how to actually draft, instead of picking players like Wendell Carter or Colby something or Patrick Williams, then they would be in a much better spot

If DJM turns out to be a real #2 guy then that is one problem solved and opens the door to so many things.

Solid insight. With the addition of those shooters it really could be a test of DJM. Forbes spacing, I suppose, could be there to help other players develop. It feels counter intuitive, but I’m thinking about it.

[Russ]

Forbes was literally the worst defender in the league before he went to Milwaukee. With Milwaukee he was literally the worst defender in the league. Why do we need to repeat that experiment? Zollins likely won't play at all this coming year. A good contract (if it is mostly unguaranteed and he can be let go after a year) doesn't make it a good decision. Anyone who thinks those are terrible decisions aren't claiming they have "it figured out". If signing those two is their best, maybe some leadership changes are warranted.

Forbes was #249 of out 250 defensive players last year.

Patty Mills was #213 out of 250 defensive players last year.

In all seriousness, what's the big deal?

[objective]

Damn. Didn’t know that. That’s awful.

Slight exaggerating for comedy purposes. There was a fundraiser, I don't know if there was bbq, he was there, I think it was at a restaurant or bar but not literally waving at traffic

But

It was promoted on some of the Locked on Network podcasts, where he doesn't even work or appear as a guest. But i never heard it mentioned on any of The Ringer NBA related podcasts. This was all in the run up to the draft so i listened to almost everything NBA related and was flummoxed at him being taken care of by a rival podcast network.

[MVPCues]

Forbes was #249 of out 250 defensive players last year.

Patty Mills was #213 out of 250 defensive players last year.

In all seriousness, what's the big deal?

Thanks for the correction, I didn't know Forbes improved so much. Solid signing.

[Seventyniner]

Forbes was #249 of out 250 defensive players last year.

Patty Mills was #213 out of 250 defensive players last year.

In all seriousness, what's the big deal?

There's no reason to have either on the team at this point. Signing Forbes is a huge unforced error.

[Russ]

Thanks for the correction, I didn't know Forbes improved so much. Solid signing.

Let me horrify you even more.

The actual worst defender in the league (#250 out of 250) was some scrub named Trae Young.

So our off-season could have been even worse if we signed that guy!

[MultiTroll]

Let me horrify you even more.

The actual worst defender in the league (#250 out of 250) was some scrub named Trae Young.

So our off-season could have been even worse if we signed that guy!
Ahahahahahaha.

Because Forbes provides what Trae Young does on offense.

[JeffDuncan]

No, obviously I didn't. ...



Obviously, you did. Perhaps in some way that was not obvious, and taking into account the complexities of language, the inherent limitations of media, the vagaries and peculiarities of this particular language we call English, the abiding questions about communication itself, and indeed, the eternal debate about the very concept of “meaning,” a weak contention might be advanced that you failed in some hypothetical way to do so. But obviously, you did.

[Chinook]

Obviously, you did. Perhaps in some way that was not obvious, and taking into account the complexities of language, the inherent limitations of media, the vagaries and peculiarities of this particular language we call English, the abiding questions about communication itself, and indeed, the eternal debate about the very concept of “meaning,” a weak contention might be advanced that you failed in some hypothetical way to do so. But obviously, you did.

No, I didn't say you can't draft stars, even in that snippet you quoted. I said you can't build through the draft by tanking. You then listed examples that didn't show that since you think a team keeping their star for ninish years means they built through the draft. Stop cutting responses off, and you wouldn't run into situations like this. You did it again here, again missing what I said and meant and why.

[JeffDuncan]

No, I didn't say you can't draft stars, ...


I know you can’t keep track. What I replied to was this:

“ You can't build through the draft nowadays -- especially by tanking. Players' don't have the patience for it. ...”

In fact, yes, you can build through the draft. Nor can you fault player’s patience when they stay with their original teams for 7 yrs, 9 yrs, 12 yrs etc.

[Chinook]

I know you can’t keep track. What I replied to was this:

“ You can't build through the draft nowadays -- especially by tanking. Players' don't have the patience for it. ...”

In fact, yes, you can build through the draft. Nor can you fault player’s patience when they stay with their original teams for 7 yrs, 9 yrs, 12 yrs etc.

Dude, what's wrong with you? Milwaukee didn't build through they draft. And players literally can't leave until after their second contracts. But they also aren't really franchise players until they're older. This is getting really annoying. You keep pulling a sentence to attack because you don't like dealing with nuanced points. It's a really bush-league tactic. If you're actually confused about why what I'm saying isn't refuted by your rebuttal just say that. Otherwise, I'm going to assume that you understand you're wrong and are just trolling. Because, fuck, this isn't a hard point to get.

[acoelho1]

The issue with the Spurs is giving our young guys enough rope to grow and make mistakes while maximizing the amount of playing time. The Spurs are acting like Duncan, Ginobili & Parker are still on the team and have the time to slowly bring them into the fold. We won't know what we have until they are brought to the forefront and that may result in more losses but at least they are gaining experience at a faster rate and allows us to possibly get a higher caliber talent in the draft. I didn't see any benefit from bringing in DDR and it pretty much went as I expected. I like the talent we have accumulated but they need to play extensive minutes. It's time to sink or swim.

[Sugus]

I am happy that at least they saw there was no reason in keeping the trio of ddr/gay/mills .The GM even made trades to attain draft capital....nice. I didn't think he had it in him. I was so sure they were going to give them loyalty deals. The only puzzling move was the Forbes signing. Overall B+ off season. It at least gave me some confidence that Wright is competent at his job.

It's actually been really interesting to watch the goalpost move in regards to the critique of the FO's plan and moves before the season ended, before FA began, and up to now. I remember a lot, to not say most ST users, being not only highly skeptical of the FO's ability to get "on track" with any sort of long-term plan (way, way too many comments about how they would immediately re-sign DeRozan, Mills and Gay at like 12:01 and carry on the mediocrity - too many to quote), but their ability to make any sort of moves at all (the endless jokes on "we like what we have", running it back, FO's supposed inability to recognize there was a problem/multiple problems and how to address them).

I despise the Forbes signing, as do most. But apart from that, I don't think anyone can deny that the Spurs have been not only incredibly active in FA (with more moves seemingly on the horizon), but also very aggressive in aiming towards their rebuilding strategy. I get the complaints that it's not the strategy everyone would've liked, but seeing the new criticisms over which FA project we signed or the protections on this or that pick we got back in a trade sure is a different tune from the pre-end of the season, apocalyptic takes of "Spurs ain't gonna do shit and run it back and you're gonna like it".

The epitome of this for me was posters cutting their cloths over the protections on the Bulls' pick we got on the DDR trade. Weren't we supposedly gonna re-sign him to a terrible deal and carry on the non-playoffs, non-sucking limbo? Weren't we gonna let him walk in FA and "waste another asset"? Weren't we gonna be "looking even worse in the Nephew trade"? Wasn't the pick going to never convey, or turn into 2nds, or whatever? Such a different tune being sung these days...

It's a pity Spurstalk doesn't have a good, easy to use, in-forum search function. Saves a lotta posters' asses for sure.

[Ed Helicopter Jones]

I was subscribed until the last sentence of the 2nd paragraph. We have switched things up now?

Forbes was literally the worst defender in the league before he went to Milwaukee. With Milwaukee he was literally the worst defender in the league. Why do we need to repeat that experiment? Zollins likely won't play at all this coming year. A good contract (if it is mostly unguaranteed and he can be let go after a year) doesn't make it a good decision. Anyone who thinks those are terrible decisions aren't claiming they have "it figured out". If signing those two is their best, maybe some leadership changes are warranted.

The Derozan trade was good, they got something out of the situation. Better than I expected. Signing Jock is a good gamble and could pay off if his confidence has merit in the NBA. Mcdermott was a little overpriced but OK so ignoring that move, viewing two A's and two F's as their best is allowing the bar to be too low for some people.

I think by Spurs' standards, they have changed things up a bit. Pop resigning Forbes was just confirmation that we haven't completely shed our old skin.

I'm with you. That's easily the sh!ttiest signing of the year. Made $22MM to Zach Collins look like a great move. I had to vent over the Forbes signing by spending an hour and a half doing some creative writing trying to spin my despair into something almost funny...all to ease my frustration.

I'm glad to see them making moves though. It could have been a lot worse. They could have used their capspace to resign Demar, Mills and Gay. At least they're not running it back with the same, sad group.

[JeffDuncan]

Dude, what's wrong with you? ...


I don’t know what’s wrong with you, dude. Don’t really care.

But you don’t need to be so defensive. And you don’t need to try to bury a discussion in bs when it’s pointed out that you’re mistaken about something. People aren’t doing that because they don’t like you.

As a famous man in the world of sports once said, get over yourself.

[MVPCues]

I think by Spurs' standards, they have changed things up a bit. Pop resigning Forbes was just confirmation that we haven't completely shed our old skin.

I'm with you. That's easily the sh!ttiest signing of the year. Made $22MM to Zach Collins look like a great move. I had to vent over the Forbes signing by spending an hour and a half doing some creative writing trying to spin my despair into something almost funny...all to ease my frustration.

I'm glad to see them making moves though. It could have been a lot worse. They could have used their capspace to resign Demar, Mills and Gay. At least they're not running it back with the same, sad group.

Yeah, you right. Could have been worse no doubt. I do have high hopes for the young guys to step up as clear leaders, and Jock to make some noise!

[ElNono]

But that is an artificial distinction, especially in the modern era. You can't build through the draft nowadays -- especially by tanking. Players' don't have the patience for it. You have to build through player acquisitions and development. So tanking isn't a really a viable strategy, let alone one of just two possible ways a team can go. Treading water while improving the team's long-term hand is a legitimate path toward a star. It requires them to be willing to make the trades they need to in order to upgrade their talent -- and I do have my doubts about that. But no, "The rules when to comes to acquiring superlative talent to improve your team" isn't to be bad. The Lakers can afford to do that because their brand doesn't depend on them being good. SA can't.

No, there's no artificial anything. I don't know why you keep trying to crowbar that in. There's only three ways to acquire talent in this league, the draft, trades or free agency. Nothing artificial about that, and nothing I came up with, that's just the rules of this league. If you have a 4th or a 5th, spell them out, or we can move on from this silly argument.
If your strategy is the draft, logic dictates you want picks, the higher the better. If your strategy is free agency, then you wan to have cap space and be convincing. If you have neither of those, then trades is your avenue.
Ideally, if you're rebuilding, you want to have more than one of those, in the hope you have more options to find that talent you need to turn things around.

And I disagree about that you can't build through the draft. Philly tanked for Simmons and Embiid, and they didn't win, but they became contenders. Cavs tanked for Lebron. Sonics tanked for Durant. Lakers tanked for... Lonzo Ball (lmao).

I don't disagree with "Treading water while improving the team's long-term hand is a legitimate path toward a star" but "treading water" can mean a number of things. From actually tanking, to focusing on collecting picks while being mediocre, to singing talent to short deals to be a player in free agency. The notion here is that you don't want to stay mediocre and that you're taking clear, precise steps to get away from mediocrity. I don't think those steps are clear, based on the moves the team makes.


You need assets to do that kind of trade, and those take time to develop and collect. You're acting like they need to trade immediately just to satisfy your desire for instant gratification. In reality, such a trade right now would overleverage them. They could get Simmons, but it would require them to give up their future. Give them time to make Primo, Vassell and the like into good pieces, and it probably doesn't take as much the next time. Or maybe Primo develops into a star or whatever.

What future? You have a chance at Simmons, you take it. Talent brings talent, that's another axiom that works in this league. Teaming up, super-friends. But, you need that first piece.


Saying, "I don't want them to be mediocre" isn't the same thing as "them being mediocre is confusing". The reality is they might not win another title for a long time. We should just get that out of the way. Pop deciding to keep Murray and Walker in 2018 basically shut the door on him getting another ring. To a very real extent, you're just going to have to decide if you want to be a fan of a mediocre team, because they'll be that for an indefinite period of time if they don't get lucky or sly. But what they aren't going to do is gut their whole team hoping to get a top pick that hopefully becomes a franchise talent who also hopefully doesn't want to leave.

"I don't want them to be mediocre" I think is the motto for any fan of any team? What we'd like to know/infer as fans is what is the FO is doing to get away from mediocrity. That is confusing, given both the poor communication and the moves this FO makes. Understanding why your team is mediocre is never confusing.


Contenders come together quickly and break apart quickly. The Spurs are going to have to be ready to make a flurry of moves to bring together a few stars for a couple of years and then just go for it. To do that, they'll need to be flexible with their roster construction and have a team filled with tradeable assets. They'll have to go from potential to realization over the course of like a season or two, so they need to keep the potential ready. That means they're going to basically be stagnant for a few years in terms of playoff chances until the right deal comes along.

There are treadmill teams that are leveraging their assets to stay that way, like maybe Chicago and Portland. And there are treadmill teams that have a clean cap and lots of assets, like Phoenix before Paul. If you want a direction, it's toward being in that second group.


Don't disagree with most of this, but what moves this FO has made makes you think they're getting tradeable assets or they're even thinking that way?
We don't even re-sign our own project pets (Fathead, Forbes, Simmons come to mind recently), and we keep hiring or extending 30+ year old talent for money that make them untradeable. When we had a tradable assets in LMA before he was over the hill, we stood pat.


Eh, one of my roles on this forum is to make cap projections and scenarios about what combination of moves are possible. I don't have a "Year XXXX Plan" now. I don't even necessarily think the Spurs are making the right moves toward that. I think John Collins instead of McD, Zach and Hutch would've been better, even in light of the DeRozan trade. I'm not someone who tries to pretend the FO isn't who they are. That said, this off-season looked great before the extensions come in. It's like how so many people were saying last year that the 2021 draft was so much better than 2020, then 2021 rolls around and people got to see those high-school players in a bigger setting and all of the sudden, that draft sucks too but 2022 is going to be great.

Like I said, not a dig, I appreciate the conversation.

[CGD]

I’m excited to see how the Spurs engage in the trade market from here on. Two trades this summer already to wet the beak, but hopefully more ahead.

Goals should be:

- flip Thad and McBob for 1sts
- trade Murray/Jakob for assets
- use Aminu’s expiring strategically
- move Forbes (just move him)

reset clock with latest crop of youngsters and hope one becomes a true building block— Vassel, Keldon, Primo, Tre Jones, Luka