Why the Smart Move Would be to Trade Thaddeus Young Right Now

[timvp]

https://www.spurstalk.com/san-antonio-spurs-need-to-trade-thaddeus-young-right-now/

A potential added bonus that didn't make the article: A trade might (depending on the specific trade and the timing of it) allow the Spurs to keep both KBD and Al-Farouq Aminu. Even though Aminu is probably washed up, his contract holds some value as an expiring deal. Otherwise, the Spurs will need to waive someone and eat more guaranteed money. They're already eating the contracts of Samanic, Hutchinson and the great DeMarre Carroll -- a fourth serving of that pie wouldn't be too appealing, tbh.

[Fusternino]

Can't the Spurs waive KBD and sign him to a two-way?

What is even out there that doesn't involve 1+ player(s) coming back?

[Degoat]

I’m hoping the spurs find a way to get some value for back for Thad young but I just don’t know if it’ll happen. I think if something we’re to happen it would have happened by now

[pookenstein]

https://www.spurstalk.com/san-antonio-spurs-need-to-trade-thaddeus-young-right-now/

A potential added bonus that didn't make the article: A trade might (depending on the specific trade and the timing of it) allow the Spurs to keep both KBD and Al-Farouq Aminu. Even though Aminu is probably washed up, his contract holds some value as an expiring deal. Otherwise, the Spurs will need to waive someone and eat more guaranteed money. They're already eating the contracts of Samanic, Hutchinson and the great DeMarre Carroll -- a fourth serving of that pie wouldn't be too appealing, tbh.

Thanks. How likely do you think is a trade before the season?

[Chinook]

I'm going to write this as a series of responses to the article's headers.

Thaddeus Young Isn’t a Good Fit on the Spurs

Young is a good fit for the Spurs. Them having signed a bunch of worse centers doesn't change that. Collins doesn't fit. Eubanks and Landale should be competing for a spot instead of both being guaranteed one. But if the Spurs have the opportunity to get last year's Young, and all they have to give up is a replacement-level fourth-string big, how is this even a question?

Of course, I agree that more than where Young plays, how he's used is a question. Ideally off the bench, he'd be the main facilitator. Pop seems to want to stagger Murray and White, and have them and Johnson dominate the ball when they're on the court. You can argue that will help with their development, though I'd question that given how many prospects there are on the team. But if the idea is for Pop to try to win games, then it's worth the investment to get his team to play a style that better fits Young's skill-set. It's not to make Thad look good, but the Spurs are going to need a productive bench if they're going to make up for their starters being raw. The key to the bench has long since been flow and cohesion. They have a few players who fit in really well with that kind of offense, and Pop should implement that if he's trying to compete for a playoff spot.

Thaddeus Young’s Value Will Decrease if the Spurs Hold Onto Him

Who cares? What value are we talking about? "The best they can get" being a second-rounder would mean there's basically no opportunity cost in keeping him. The Spurs already have three picks this year. I don't think missing out on say the Suns second-rounder is really going to hurt them. Of course, the "halfway interesting player" runs headlong into your bonus point, but we'll get there.

Other Consideration When Trading Thaddeus Young

So there are a number of better ways to get Vassell into the rotation. They should start him instead of McDermott. They should play Young at center. They could trade Walker or not play Forbes. They should just not play White and Murray like they're stars who have to stagger minutes and get the bulk of the court time so Pop can run a normal 10-man rotation. If their goal is to develop players, then they shouldn't put themselves in these false dilemmas. Nothing is preventing the Spurs from giving time to their best prospects. Certainly, they aren't struggling to find a way to develop their SG because of a backup PF.

I like Eubanks and Landale, and they're fine depth. But they're not that young, and if they aren't better than Thad, then the team shouldn't be too concerned with giving them minutes. Either or Mark were very likely to be Spurs if the off-season played out the way it seems to have. So they went into the Collins negotiations knowing they were getting at least two bigs. Collins was an awful contract, especially seeing as they basically had Landale locked in. But the team can't compound that bad roster move by making bad rotation moves to cover up for it. Young didn't sneak up on the team. So if they have too many players, the goal should be to get rid of worse players at the overstocked positions, not keep them because of some misplaced sense of fairness.

Young's on the team now and not part of the DeRozan or Kawhi (or Hill) deals. He needs to be judged on his own merits, not on how whatever return combos with the other trades.

As far as the bonus goes: You know as well as any of us that the Spurs are extremely unlikely to trade Young without getting back salary. Most likely, they'd be getting back multiple players like Smith and Saric. If KBD or Aminu is the 16th man, then they aren't surviving a Young trade. What's a more likely scenario to save a spot would be if someone like Walker or Eubanks were included with Young to get back a single big salary, like Young and Walker for Barnes or Young and Aminu for Wiggins. Those scenarios keep KBD and don't involve waiving Aminu. But they do involve getting rid of one of the players trading Young is supposed to allow the Spurs to keep. So one could argue that just keep Young and moving on from that player makes more sense.

I imagine the Spurs knew waiving these guys was an option when they acquired them, so I think they'd okay with eating more dead money. As far as I'm concerned, I think Aminu's expiring has utility that makes keeping him over some end-of-roster guys a legit question. I think we'd know the Spurs were planning to get rid of him already if they weren't still trying to avoid it. But just like how I don't care about the Holt's pocketbook, I don't care if the Spurs have dead money (this year) on their ledger if that's the result of them trying to put together the best team they can. That means keeping the best players and using them correctly. So eating Aminu's deal is fine by me, as would be eating Collins' deal or letting KBD, Eubanks or Landale go to a different team even though they're interesting players. They're going to have to be willing to move on and feel a bit of pain in their quest to get better. That's a far better alternative to messing up the rotation trying to make up for their mistakes.

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

While it's true that his fit on the current Spurs is iffy, I don't think his value would change significantly based on his time there. Any team trading for him would know exactly what they're getting. The problem is that most contenders can't trade any first round picks until 2028 and it wouldn't make much sense for middling teams to burn a first on him, so he'll probably fetch a couple of 2nds at best, unless a team gets desperate.

Philly, post Simmons trade, would be the best trade partner. Phoenix is currently the most obvious destination, and they can trade their 2024 first, but it doesn't seem like they're in a hurry. He'd probably fit well in Atlanta as well, as a small ball center.

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

I imagine the Spurs knew waiving these guys was an option when they acquired them, so I think they'd okay with eating more dead money. As far as I'm concerned, I think Aminu's expiring has utility that makes keeping him over some end-of-roster guys a legit question. I think we'd know the Spurs were planning to get rid of him already if they weren't still trying to avoid it. But just like how I don't care about the Holt's pocketbook, I don't care if the Spurs have dead money (this year) on their ledger if that's the result of them trying to put together the best team they can. That means keeping the best players and using them correctly. So eating Aminu's deal is fine by me, as would be eating Collins' deal or letting KBD, Eubanks or Landale go to a different team even though they're interesting players. They're going to have to be willing to move on and feel a bit of pain in their quest to get better. That's a far better alternative to messing up the rotation trying to make up for their mistakes.

Exactly. Who cares if they have dead money on the cap for this season. They're over the cap and way below the hard cap and tax.

As for the last guy getting cut, are we sure Tre Jones is safe?

[Chinook]

Exactly. Who cares if they have dead money on the cap for this season. They're over the cap and way below the hard cap and tax.

As for the last guy getting cut, are we sure Tre Jones is safe?

I think Jones is pretty safe. If the Spurs had brought in a PG prospect they really liked with their second two-way slot, I'd be wondering. But it looks more like they're just trying out guys to be the emergency fill-in until Tre gets back. I'd find it far more likely that he's part of a trade than just straight cut. He's a good prospect at a thin position.

[tbdog]

I was going to reply that I actually disagree with timvp article here, then Chinook did it better. In summary, I actually think Young is our backup 5 against most team. Except probably game one, where the magic have multiple centers. Eubanks and landale are like depth 5. Playing when teams go big in the second unit or token starts when Poeltl can't play.

Walker is the biggest enigma here. Spurs have leaked that they believe he has allstar talent. This is another issue with Johnson. I love the energy but it he can't become a dependable shooter, then the Spurs current big man depth is going to lose game value.

[slick'81]

AminU is garbage. What exactly are we going to get in a deal for that unless anyone thinks a team wants his ass included in anything? Young hopefully can fetch something but of course spurs as usual will hold on too long

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

AminU is garbage. What exactly are we going to get in a deal for that unless anyone thinks a team wants his ass included in anything? Young hopefully can fetch something but of course spurs as usual will hold on too long

It's not Aminu's value as a player, it's his mid-sized contract, which is valuable for trade purposes, especially if he can prove he's not a negative but, say, neutral.

[slick'81]

It's not Aminu's value as a player, it's his mid-sized contract, which is valuable for trade purposes, especially if he can prove he's not a negative but, say, neutral.

Aminu definitely wont be a positive especially on his own but maybe sours can attach him to something to make salaries work but thats about it. Young needs to be traded asap but we already knew that

[Mr. Body]

My guess is a good trade hasn't materialized yet. The one with Phoenix for Saric and Smith got play, but that's not a great fit. As the season progresses, and especially if there are injuries, I can see teams recognize a need for him.

I disagree with those who say he has a place on this team, given changes in tempo and points of attack.

[Fusternino]

Boston's trade exception is only for ~9-10 M. Can they send us cash to help match salaries?

[D-Robinson 50 fan]

I think the front office is going to eat Aminu’s deal and go forth with the rest of the roster. I was hoping they would move Thad for a pick or the opportunity to get an interesting young player attached with salary filler .

[Ed Helicopter Jones]

The way we signed so many guys to guaranteed deals it sure has the earmarks of a situation where the Spurs were anticipating a trade that didn't materialize.

It Thaddeus isn't part of the plan for this young group, I think the fair thing to him would be to trade him. Last year he was still really good. I don't think it's a Demarre Carroll situation where there's nothing left in the tank. I think we just saw a veteran in the meaningless preseason who didn't get a lot of reps and is probably rounding into form. Older players seem to need a little more time to get the lubricant in the joints flowing, so I'd dismiss the preseason for him, personally.

But, yeah, if the plan was to connect his signing to later trade that fell through, and now he'll rot on our bench, please, Pop, trade him now. Don't let his career end on a sour note.

[R. DeMurre]

I think if an important big on a serious playoff team gets hurt mid-season, Young's value might actually go up. I'm guessing the Bucks, Lakers, or Nets would love to grab him to replace someone in that scenario. The hard part about Thaddeus right now-- especially since I've always liked him-- is that he would potentially make the very mediocre Spurs a slightly better team... but I don't know if playing a classy vet on this team matters. If it means the Spurs win 38 games instead of 33 and some young guys get fewer minutes and less development time, is it even worth it? Right now development is all that matters, at least to me.

[mo7888]

Boston's trade exception is only for ~9-10 M. Can they send us cash to help match salaries?

Don't they have about a $17M TE on the Fournier deal?

[Mugen]

"Smart Move" :lol

https://www.nba.com/resources/static/team/v2/spurs/Schad/img/Spurs/Headshots/brian.jpg

[Degoat]

Not that he automatically deserves playing time but I don’t want Thad young to get playing time over Jock Landale or Zach Collins when he returns

[Twisted_Dawg]

I wonder if Thad and the Detroit 2nd rd pick would bring back a low 1st rd pick?

[exstatic]

I wonder if Thad and the Detroit 2nd rd pick would bring back a low 1st rd pick?

A high second rounder would be worth more that a low first, from a flexibility stand point. There is a very specific structure to first round pick contracts that you’re not bound to for second rounders, and the talent difference is negligible in most drafts. I’d rather flip him for another second than use ours to move up into the late first.

[timvp]

Thaddeus Young Isn’t a Good Fit on the Spurs

Young is a good fit for the Spurs. Them having signed a bunch of worse centers doesn't change that. Collins doesn't fit. Eubanks and Landale should be competing for a spot instead of both being guaranteed one. But if the Spurs have the opportunity to get last year's Young, and all they have to give up is a replacement-level fourth-string big, how is this even a question?

I mean, yeah, if we could turn back the hands of time, I would have done things differently. I don't like the Zollins deal. I don't like that the Spurs have invested so much in the center position (both money-wise and roster spot-wise). But as it stands, the Spurs have purposefully signed four centers. I agree that Young is one of the two top centers on this team but the way this roster is built, it'd be weird to push Eubanks to 3rd string center, Landale to 4th string center and Zollins to 5th string center.


Of course, I agree that more than where Young plays, how he's used is a question. Ideally off the bench, he'd be the main facilitator. Pop seems to want to stagger Murray and White, and have them and Johnson dominate the ball when they're on the court. You can argue that will help with their development, though I'd question that given how many prospects there are on the team. But if the idea is for Pop to try to win games, then it's worth the investment to get his team to play a style that better fits Young's skill-set. It's not to make Thad look good, but the Spurs are going to need a productive bench if they're going to make up for their starters being raw. The key to the bench has long since been flow and cohesion. They have a few players who fit in really well with that kind of offense, and Pop should implement that if he's trying to compete for a playoff spot.With how preseason played out, it's pretty clear that winning isn't the top priority. If winning was the top priority, preseason would have been spent figuring out how to integrate Young as the bench facilitator. Instead, the Spurs didn't run a single play for Young in the preseason.

I don't disagree with much of what you posted but I'm basing my opinion off of the current realities as I see it.


Thaddeus Young’s Value Will Decrease if the Spurs Hold Onto Him

Who cares? What value are we talking about? "The best they can get" being a second-rounder would mean there's basically no opportunity cost in keeping him. The Spurs already have three picks this year. I don't think missing out on say the Suns second-rounder is really going to hurt them. Of course, the "halfway interesting player" runs headlong into your bonus point, but we'll get there.Basically, I want the Spurs to either use Young properly or trade him at his peak value. It's pretty clear they have no intention on maximizing Young's skills so trading him at his peak value is the only avenue left. The moment the regular season starts and Young is averaging 6, 3 and 2 or whatever, his value plummets to zero.


Other Consideration When Trading Thaddeus Young

So there are a number of better ways to get Vassell into the rotation. They should start him instead of McDermott. They should play Young at center. They could trade Walker or not play Forbes. They should just not play White and Murray like they're stars who have to stagger minutes and get the bulk of the court time so Pop can run a normal 10-man rotation. If their goal is to develop players, then they shouldn't put themselves in these false dilemmas. Nothing is preventing the Spurs from giving time to their best prospects. Certainly, they aren't struggling to find a way to develop their SG because of a backup PF. In theory, all of those solutions are possible but none of them appear likely. Not signing Forbes in the first place could have solved the issue. But they did. Now of those solutions you described, probably the most likely is trading Walker -- and that's not likely.


I like Eubanks and Landale, and they're fine depth. But they're not that young, and if they aren't better than Thad, then the team shouldn't be too concerned with giving them minutes. Either or Mark were very likely to be Spurs if the off-season played out the way it seems to have. So they went into the Collins negotiations knowing they were getting at least two bigs. Collins was an awful contract, especially seeing as they basically had Landale locked in. But the team can't compound that bad roster move by making bad rotation moves to cover up for it. Young didn't sneak up on the team. So if they have too many players, the goal should be to get rid of worse players at the overstocked positions, not keep them because of some misplaced sense of fairness. Eh, Eubanks and Landale might not be young but they could be pieces that stick around for the next half decade. Young, even if things go well, wouldn't be re-signed (or at least shouldn't be re-signed) unless the Spurs win like 45+ games this season with Young playing as well as he did last season. Even then, do you want to re-sign a 34-year-old Young? I'm not sure I would.

Overall, I see where you're coming from but after factoring in roster decisions (loading up on centers, re-signing Forbes to muddy the swingman waters, etc.) and what I saw in preseason (Young being an Al-Farouq Aminu-level afterthought), I think trading Young now is the best move. Otherwise, by far the most likely outcome is the Spurs buy out his contract at the trade deadline.

[Robz4000]

I mean, yeah, if we could turn back the hands of time, I would have done things differently. I don't like the Zollins deal. I don't like that the Spurs have invested so much in the center position (both money-wise and roster spot-wise). But as it stands, the Spurs have purposefully signed four centers. I agree that Young is one of the two top centers on this team but the way this roster is built, it'd be weird to push Eubanks to 3rd string center, Landale to 4th string center and Zollins to 5th string center.

With how preseason played out, it's pretty clear that winning isn't the top priority. If winning was the top priority, preseason would have been spent figuring out how to integrate Young as the bench facilitator. Instead, the Spurs didn't run a single play for Young in the preseason.

I don't disagree with much of what you posted but I'm basing my opinion off of the current realities as I see it.

Basically, I want the Spurs to either use Young properly or trade him at his peak value. It's pretty clear they have no intention on maximizing Young's skills so trading him at his peak value is the only avenue left. The moment the regular season starts and Young is averaging 6, 3 and 2 or whatever, his value plummets to zero.

In theory, all of those solutions are possible but none of them appear likely. Not signing Forbes in the first place could have solved the issue. But they did. Now of those solutions you described, probably the most likely is trading Walker -- and that's not likely.

Eh, Eubanks and Landale might not be young but they could be pieces that stick around for the next half decade. Young, even if things go well, wouldn't be re-signed (or at least shouldn't be re-signed) unless the Spurs win like 45+ games this season with Young playing as well as he did last season. Even then, do you want to re-sign a 34-year-old Young? I'm not sure I would.

Overall, I see where you're coming from but after factoring in roster decisions (loading up on centers, re-signing Forbes to muddy the swingman waters, etc.) and what I saw in preseason (Young being an Al-Farouq Aminu-level afterthought), I think trading Young now is the best move. Otherwise, by far the most likely outcome is the Spurs buy out his contract at the trade deadline.

Buying out Young is the most likely outcome tbh.

[emanueldavidginobili]

Buying out Young is the most likely outcome tbh.
A' la DeMarre Carroll, even though I think Young isn't anywhere close to washed as DC was.

[itzsoweezee]

All in all, pretty poorly managed roster construction. If the Spurs can’t get anything for young, some people need to lose their jobs.

[Chinook]

I mean, yeah, if we could turn back the hands of time, I would have done things differently. I don't like the Zollins deal. I don't like that the Spurs have invested so much in the center position (both money-wise and roster spot-wise). But as it stands, the Spurs have purposefully signed four centers. I agree that Young is one of the two top centers on this team but the way this roster is built, it'd be weird to push Eubanks to 3rd string center, Landale to 4th string center and Zollins to 5th string center.

Yes, we can't change the past... and that's why the Spurs can't let their roster mistakes turn into coaching mistakes. They over invested in their center depth. The solution to that is cutting the worst centers ... not getting rid of one of the top-two centers so you don't have to admit you made a mistake. If Landale or Eubanks doesn't want to stick around due to not being in the rotation, you let them go and use the spot on a player somewhere else. I like both, but they're replacement-level guys, and you don't need to make big roster decisions over those kind of players.


With how preseason played out, it's pretty clear that winning isn't the top priority. If winning was the top priority, preseason would have been spent figuring out how to integrate Young as the bench facilitator. Instead, the Spurs didn't run a single play for Young in the preseason.

I don't disagree with much of what you posted but I'm basing my opinion off of the current realities as I see it.

...

In theory, all of those solutions are possible but none of them appear likely. Not signing Forbes in the first place could have solved the issue. But they did. Now of those solutions you described, probably the most likely is trading Walker -- and that's not likely.

Putting these together since they're basically the same argument. There's a fine line between being realistic and appealing to tradition/nature. We both can agree that the Spurs will make certain choices regardless of how we feel about them. That's why we aren't talking about retroactively passing up on Collins. But it's okay to separate what we think the team should do and what we think the team will do. You're probably right that the team will play a similar rotation as we saw in most of the pre-season with Murray, White, Johnson, McDermott, Eubanks becoming Forbes, Walker, Vassell, Young and Eubanks. Pop will probably start the season that way and adjust if he feels he needs to. It's likely McDermott with vacillate between the bench and starting unit, likely with Vassell or Forbes. Some of us will probably be complaining about the rotation just as we always have. We know this. But that argument has limits, because it pushes out questions about what the Spurs should do -- like the premise of this thread/article. The Spurs shouldn't trade Young unless they're looking at a good return. They should work on integrating him to refine their bench into a strong unit. They should also figure out who their prospects are and develop them instead of clogging the minutes for their younger players and making them play in the d-league so worse prospects can keep getting minutes.

I agree the Spurs' sole priority isn't winning games, and it shouldn't be no matter what right now. But their goal is definitely not to tank, so they need to balance out development and performance, and they can do that in many ways other than dumping Young. Will they? Who knows, and maybe not even. But that doesn't mean they shouldn't do it or that doing it would be the smart move.


Basically, I want the Spurs to either use Young properly or trade him at his peak value. It's pretty clear they have no intention on maximizing Young's skills so trading him at his peak value is the only avenue left. The moment the regular season starts and Young is averaging 6, 3 and 2 or whatever, his value plummets to zero.

Wait, no. You were just arguing for keeping AFA due to his contract potentially being useful. Young's floor is Aminu at this point. If the possible downside is to go from a meh or bad second to him just being somewhat buoyant filler, that's okay. The world isn't going to be saved by having that second, but this season could be a pretty productive one if they can get Young to play well. Young more than anyone else would be a great bellwether for the overall cohesion and flow of the bench. Them playing well with Young most likely means guys like Walker and Vassell are also playing well, and that's probably the best potential outcome for this season.


Eh, Eubanks and Landale might not be young but they could be pieces that stick around for the next half decade. Young, even if things go well, wouldn't be re-signed (or at least shouldn't be re-signed) unless the Spurs win like 45+ games this season with Young playing as well as he did last season. Even then, do you want to re-sign a 34-year-old Young? I'm not sure I would.

The Spurs should draft a center and stop messing around. They've needed to do it since 2015 (and yes I did just have another capillary in my eye burst when I typed that -- thanks for asking). That reality isn't changed by Eubanks or Landale, so I really don't care if they're around for the next half-decade or whatever. They are good depth and maybe useful rotation players. But the Spurs aren't in a position where they need to worry about that. When it comes to times to actually make playoff runs and they don't have roster flexibility or salary space then cheap useful guys are gems. They're currently in a position to cycle through guys like that now.

If Young is playing well and wants to stay, I'd absolutely extend him. It's not even a question. There's no good that comes from getting young just to be young. Him playing well, helping mentor guys and creating good flow is exactly the type of benefit the team should be hoping to get out of their vets. The Spurs are not the Hinkie-Sixers. They're trying to make a contender through development, not accumulating high picks. So the goal isn't going to be giving minutes to all the young guys and seeing if one becomes a star out of nowhere. It's going to be creating an environment and culture that hopefully leads to learning how to play the right way. I'd rather give money to a proven older vet than continuously extending mediocre draft picks under some idea that guys need 10 years to develop or whatever the Spurs are doing.


Overall, I see where you're coming from but after factoring in roster decisions (loading up on centers, re-signing Forbes to muddy the swingman waters, etc.) and what I saw in preseason (Young being an Al-Farouq Aminu-level afterthought), I think trading Young now is the best move. Otherwise, by far the most likely outcome is the Spurs buy out his contract at the trade deadline.

That's fine. Buying out Young is fine if it comes to it. I mean if he has been asking to be traded, they should definitely do that now. But if he's not, the Spurs should be willing to end up losing him for nothing. It'd be their own faults for keeping him if they don't value him. Out of all the acquisitions on the team now, Young has one of the smallest downsides. Unless we hear the Spurs have been passing up on expirings and firsts for Thad, there isn't a bad outcome with him.

[TD 21]

Basically, I want the Spurs to either use Young properly or trade him at his peak value. It's pretty clear they have no intention on maximizing Young's skills so trading him at his peak value is the only avenue left. The moment the regular season starts and Young is averaging 6, 3 and 2 or whatever, his value plummets to zero.

Agree with the sentiment, but if we know his fit/role are going to affect his counting stats, league executives wouldn't nor realize how irrelevant that is? That doesn't make sense.

[Drom John]

I don't see "right now" as peak value.
Contenders are set.
Someone on a contender will get hurt or just not play well enough.
Then will be the peak.

[TimDunkem]

If trading him is the smart move then the 2021 Spurs will certainly not do that.

[NASpurs]

The smart move was to trade him like a month ago when he hadn't stepped on the court. We're past the smart move per par the course for Brian Wrong.

[Mugen]

The smart move was to trade him like a month ago when he hadn't stepped on the court. We're past the smart move per par the course for Brian Wrong.

:lol This, why people continue to give this moron any credit for checkers type moves is beyond me. He's also probably untouchable for the next 10 years if the old man and the drunk are still running the organization....

At this point, they'll be lucky to get a 2nd rounder for him. Most likely option is they end up buying him out and get literally zero in return except a few nice sound bites from Thaddeus about how classy the team is :lol, that might be enough for the cryptkeeper tbh

[Mr. Body]

There's a lot of armchair idiocy in this thread.

[8FOR!3]

He's the only player on the team over 30. You've got a couple of shooters in their late 20's and a few really core pieces (Poeltl/White/etc.) in their mid 20's. I don't think this team needs someone in their 30's getting a lot of minutes. Would rather see Landale/Collins get his minutes tbh so again I tend to agree.

[baseline bum]

https://www.spurstalk.com/san-antonio-spurs-need-to-trade-thaddeus-young-right-now/

A potential added bonus that didn't make the article: A trade might (depending on the specific trade and the timing of it) allow the Spurs to keep both KBD and Al-Farouq Aminu. Even though Aminu is probably washed up, his contract holds some value as an expiring deal. Otherwise, the Spurs will need to waive someone and eat more guaranteed money. They're already eating the contracts of Samanic, Hutchinson and the great DeMarre Carroll -- a fourth serving of that pie wouldn't be too appealing, tbh.

You think the Spurs should try to take a flyer on Bagley for Young since Bagley's agent says he's not even in the rotation in Sacramento? It'll never not be funny that the Kings passed on Doncic for this guy. :lol

1450584705665953792

[Seventyniner]

You think the Spurs should try to take a flyer on Bagley for Young since Bagley's agent says he's not even in the rotation in Sacramento? It'll never not be funny that the Kings passed on Doncic for this guy. :lol

1450584705665953792

Another Greg Oden/Sam Bowie level disaster.

[exstatic]

Another Greg Oden/Sam Bowie level disaster.

They, at least, had health excuses. Bagley just flat sucks. He came out putting down 14/7 his rookie year. The next two seasons, he put down 14/7. He hasn’t gotten any better in 3 years. His career VORP is -0.1, meaning he isn’t significantly better, and may be marginally worse than a guy you can grab off the waiver wire. Sacto has told him he’s not going to play in the rotation. They should literally have taken anything that was offered last spring, since they appear to be tossing him in the dumpster.

Can you imagine the shitstorm here if we muffed a #2 overall pick like this? People slinging nooses over the shower rod about#19.

[Seventyniner]

They, at least, had health excuses. Bagley just flat sucks. He came out putting down 14/7 his rookie year. The next two seasons, he put down 14/7. He hasn’t gotten any better in 3 years. His career VORP is -0.1, meaning he isn’t significantly better, and may be marginally worse than a guy you can grab off the waiver wire. Sacto has told him he’s not going to play in the rotation. They should literally have taken anything that was offered last spring, since they appear to be tossing him in the dumpster.

Can you imagine the shitstorm here if we muffed a #2 overall pick like this? People slinging nooses over the shower rod about#19.

I meant to include Darko in there, he's probably a better comparison than Oden or Bowie.

Shitty organizations are shitty organizations because they consistently make shitty decisions. I can't say I love all the moves the Spurs have made, especially the seemingly wholly unnecessary Forbes and Zollins signings, but they aren't anywhere near the level of franchises like the Kings/Wolves/Wizards/Magic.

[T Park]

The smart move was to trade him like a month ago when he hadn't stepped on the court. We're past the smart move per par the course for Brian Wrong.


Too bad no one was offering anything worth a shit a month ago. But forum GMs know it all.

[NASpurs]

Too bad no one was offering anything worth a shit a month ago. But forum GMs know it all.

Did the hot dog vendor guy tell you this?