Latest Inside Info on Jakob Poeltl Trade Rumors

[DPG21920]

LOL what? The board mostly hated the McDermott signing. McDermott has never been anywhere close to as good a player as Poeltl has been these last two years.

I don’t know about that…(the board hating the move - I remember being pissed and everyone talking about his spacing and how his deal was fair etc..). Agree he’s not as good as Jak but shooters are valued much differently than non-scoring Centers..

[Robz4000]

Over under: Spurs make 1.5 trades this trade deadline?

Under imo

[Chinook]

That is where we disagree. You’d think we would have learned this lesson with everyone saying the same thing about the Doug signing while I was immediately pissed off about it calling it stupid lol.

Another season like this where his numbers (especially defensively) sink due to circumstances? That 20M looks a little more dicey. But ya, again, don’t think it’s catastrophic and I’m actually making the argument for KEEPING Jak at the heart of my post on it.

Just want SA to move Doug/Zach so that money SA was going to pay them anyways just goes to Jak (a better player) instead while still adding draft capital

I find this to be extremely wrong-headed.

There's no good reason to think the Spurs should not sign Poeltl because of the "lesson" they learned with McDermott's contract. I didn't like the deal either, but if you recall it's because I didn't see it as a win-now move. The credit you're trying to give yourself was because you thought it was too much of a win-now move and that the team wasn't "picking a direction". The reality is that Doug's done exactly what they signed him to do, and he didn't prevent them from tanking or lose his role or value on that tanking team.

If the Spurs learned anything from the signing it's that their cap space can be useful in multiple ways. It doesn't have to just be used to trade. They can use it to sign a caliber of player beyond what their amenities can afford them. If the Spurs were capped-strapped they likely would've lost Doug to a team for the MLE (he was fantastic the year before -- just because he's overpaid doesn't mean he's struggling to stay in the league). In that same way, they'd struggle to keep Poeltl this time if they could only offer him the MLE. They almost lost him last contract when he had to agree to basically the max contract the Spurs could offer to stay under the tax. By being able to overpay, they gain access to good players in a way analogous to Balmer's willingness to pay absurd tax bills allows the Clippers to continue to acquire talent in trades far beyond where their draft assets could take them.

SA has like $80 Million in cap space next year. Acting they like they should let go of a player they want to save a fraction of it would be like being stranded on an island with a friend and killing that friend to conserve oxygen.

[DPG21920]

I find this to be extremely wrong-headed.

There's no good reason to think the Spurs should not sign Poeltl because of the "lesson" they learned with McDermott's contract. I didn't like the deal either, but if you recall it's because I didn't see it as a win-now move. The credit you're trying to give yourself was because you thought it was too much of a win-now move and that the team wasn't "picking a direction". The reality is that Doug's done exactly what they signed him to do, and he didn't prevent them from tanking or lose his role or value on that tanking team.

If the Spurs learned anything from the signing it's that their cap space can be useful in multiple ways. It doesn't have to just be used to trade. They can use it to sign a caliber of player beyond what their amenities can afford them. If the Spurs were capped-strapped they likely would've lost Doug to a team for the MLE (he was fantastic the year before -- just because he's overpaid doesn't mean he's struggling to stay in the league). In that same way, they'd struggle to keep Poeltl this time if they could only offer him the MLE. They almost lost him last contract when he had to agree to basically the max contract the Spurs could offer to stay under the tax. By being able to overpay, they gain access to good players in a way analogous to Balmer's willingness to pay absurd tax bills allows the Clippers to continue to acquire talent in trades far beyond where their draft assets could take them.

SA has like $80 Million in cap space next year. Acting they like they should let go of a player they want to save a fraction of it would be like being stranded on an island with a friend and killing that friend to conserve oxygen.

This is wrong on many levels. I had an over arching theme about not picking a direction for years but with Doug specifically? I said it made no sense for a rebuilding team to give an aging non-defensive players multi year fully guaranteed deals. So it was not about him being win-now. It was 99% his contract length given the circumstances of being in a rebuild and how it would be a bad deal that was not any upside in terms of him being tradable and using cap space to sign a player that would not do anything but possibly suck minutes while also not netting us anything in a trade. Which so far is exactly what has happened.

Again, the math on using Doug+Zach money is just a bonus that makes the math on Jakobs deal for the Spurs “less” risk because they are shifting the money they would pay no matter what. So it’s a 3 year deal in a 4 year format which is great. I don’t mind overpaying in context and Spurs have no cap issues; that’s no the point I was making.

The point was 2 fold: Spurs need to be sharks in terms of squeezing any value out of their assets & 2 need to be very careful, cap flexibility aside, signing anyone to 80M deals especially older players with regards to the roster.

So to your point: “signing players that allow them to acquire talent in trades” that is exactly my worry. Doug doesn’t have good value IMO, spurs wasted the space for no reason and I don’t want the same with Jakob (although he’s much better than Doug) and I would love to get some picks (even 2nds) for Zach/Doug and that makes Jaks deal a really good value then from the Spurs perspective

[baseline bum]

I don’t know about that…(the board hating the move - I remember being pissed and everyone talking about his spacing and how his deal was fair etc..). Agree he’s not as good as Jak but shooters are valued much differently than non-scoring Centers..

Not 20 minute a game shooters with no defense turning 30.

[DPG21920]

Not 20 minute a game shooters with no defense turning 30.

Well lets hope some team steps up and pays the toll then…

[Chinook]

This is wrong on many levels. I had an over arching theme about not picking a direction for years but with Doug specifically? I said it made no sense for a rebuilding team to give an aging non-defensive players multi year fully guaranteed deals. So it was not about him being win-now. It was 99% his contract length given the circumstances of being in a rebuild and how it would be a bad deal that was not any upside in terms of him being tradable and using cap space to sign a player that would not do anything but possibly suck minutes while also not netting us anything in a trade. Which so far is exactly what has happened.

"Sucking minutes" is a fancy way of saying, "playing". That's all it is. They need to field a team each season, not just "collect assets". I get the desire to cycle players, but I don't believe in being the Hinkie Sixers. I would not've preferred Wieskamp get McDermott's minutes. Last season was fine, with a mix of cool moments and things to look forward to. To assume the Spurs signed him assuming they'd trade him immediately was not an actual standard to grade the acquisition. Predicting that he'd play, play to the level at which he normally performed and that he'd do that job for the team for at least a large portion of his contract is not some great insight. More than probably any Spur since the Big Three, Doug has come in and done exactly what he was supposed to do. It's okay to have not liked him then and still not like him. But that's not enough to claim victory. As looking through his thread would show, basically no one liked the signing.


Again, the math on using Doug+Zach money is just a bonus that makes the math on Jakobs deal for the Spurs “less” risk because they are shifting the money they would pay no matter what. So it’s a 3 year deal in a 4 year format which is great. I don’t mind overpaying in context and Spurs have no cap issues; that’s no the point I was making.

It's not a good point. The Spurs are under the floor after this new contract; they're literally paying that money no matter what. You have to assume they'd used that floor room on something else and because of this signing, they'd bypass the "value" that acquisition would presumably convey. That's not a sound assumption at all. There's not a good reason to assume the Spurs would use that floor space given their struggle to use it this year. It's also not sound to assume that having those expirings is less valuable than having cap space. A non-simultaneous TE is not inherently superior to an expiring contract. It can't play a role for you on the court. It can't mentor your younger players. It can't be used in latter trades to match additional salary. The Spurs are better for having Richardson than for having a bit more cap space, and he's not grading out all that well right now. Collins especially is playing really well, and there's no reason to think he wouldn't have more trade value if he can prove he can be mostly healthy for multiple off-seasons in a row.


The point was 2 fold: Spurs need to be sharks in terms of squeezing any value out of their assets & 2 need to be very careful, cap flexibility aside, signing anyone to 80M deals especially older players with regards to the roster.

We gotta nip this in the bud. There's a difference between players who are beyond their early years and guys who are aging. McDermott's contract takes him through his prime (when his skill is most honed before his body breaks down). Poeltl's next deal is likely to be the same. The Spurs don't have to sign contracts with the next contract in mind. They can sign guys they expect to only hold out for their deal. This isn't the NFL; NBA players in their early 30s are still fine physically.

So long as the Spurs have way too much cap space to trade away, they aren't going to use it completely efficiently. The benefit of having so much is that they don't have to. They can use overwhelming force to achieve their ends. In case you're wondering, they're more likely to need $20 Million less in four years than they do now. Even if they're spending close to the cap, the cap will be bigger, and that amount of money will be much closer to what role-players make. When they're getting ready to extend a guy like Wemby on a contract starting at $50 Million a year, they aren't going to care that Poeltl is on the books for $23 Million in his final year. It's not a thing.


So to your point: “signing players that allow them to acquire talent in trades” that is exactly my worry. Doug doesn’t have good value IMO, spurs wasted the space for no reason and I don’t want the same with Jakob (although he’s much better than Doug) and I would love to get some picks (even 2nds) for Zach/Doug and that makes Jaks deal a really good value then from the Spurs perspective

You quoted me as if I said that, when I didn't and literally meant the opposite. The point is that they can sign players to have them, without any intension to trade then, and by being able to pay more without it actually hurting them. An issue a lot of fans have is that they don't realize the Spurs don't have the available roster spots to absorb the contracts to use their cap space. They'd need to be willing to dump more than half their roster, and I don't think they want to move more than two or three guys. If they do find a way to grab more picks this year, that issue with get worse. So the opportunity cost of not using cap space for a trade is pretty small for them. If they instead use it to pay a premium for the guys they want, they can get a lot of use out of it that would instead just be rolled into floor payments. Teams that have a bunch of young players do this all the time. That's why NO paid Steven Adams so much. The Spurs have no business denying themselves what they want at this point. Once their moves might actually have an opportunity cost, then they can act like they're poor.

[DPG21920]

I’m sorry - I get what you are saying but I just see it differently. I am of the belief that just because you have money does not mean you should sign mediocre players (not Jak) or overpay because you can. It’s silly (IMO), wasteful to a degree and carries some risk that are just flat out unnecessary. It’s not about acting poor or whatever. It’s about being consistent with your vision, being absolutely steadfast in only securing assets right now alongside development of your youth and making sure you arent being wasteful for no reason.

You can sign lots of players - doesn’t have to be 3-4 year deals that are fully guaranteed especially when you aren’t going to win anyways with said player. That makes no sense. Give Doug 1 year, 40M I don’t care. Just not 3-4 years. That is the point.

I don’t care about the floor, or how much cap space and don’t need to assume anything. Doug does nothing for this team, sucks on defense, doesn’t fit the future and has no place with that contract on this team. Paying Jak, a good player with less risk than Doug in my context, Dougs money and Collins is just smart - there is no way around it. The only path should be signing vets for purposes of flipping them for assets. Youth? Ya, can keep and pay and develop. But I’m sorry, there’s plenty of vets that can mentor and not change win/losses that don’t require you to overpay and add many years to a deal.

If they are not trade assets, don’t use your space period IMO. Trade Josh. Trade Doug. Replace with other mentors - no biggie IMO. Cap space is a weapon, use it wisely to get assets that serve more of a purpose than “mentoring”.

Being able to be lazy because you can does not strike me as a strong argument. It’s just lazy and goes to my point of a FO being fully in tune and razor sharp which is what needs to happen for the Spurs. They have a lot to prove and work to do.

[mo7888]

I’m sorry - I get what you are saying but I just see it differently. I am of the belief that just because you have money does not mean you should sign mediocre players (not Jak) or overpay because you can. It’s silly (IMO), wasteful to a degree and carries some risk that are just flat out unnecessary. It’s not about acting poor or whatever. It’s about being consistent with your vision, being absolutely steadfast in only securing assets right now alongside development of your youth and making sure you arent being wasteful for no reason.

You can sign lots of players - doesn’t have to be 3-4 year deals that are fully guaranteed especially when you aren’t going to win anyways with said player. That makes no sense. Give Doug 1 year, 40M I don’t care. Just not 3-4 years. That is the point.

I don’t care about the floor, or how much cap space and don’t need to assume anything. Doug does nothing for this team, sucks on defense, doesn’t fit the future and has no place with that contract on this team. Paying Jak, a good player with less risk than Doug in my context, Dougs money and Collins is just smart - there is no way around it. The only path should be signing vets for purposes of flipping them for assets. Youth? Ya, can keep and pay and develop. But I’m sorry, there’s plenty of vets that can mentor and not change win/losses that don’t require you to overpay and add many years to a deal.

If they are not trade assets, don’t use your space period IMO. Trade Josh. Trade Doug. Replace with other mentors - no biggie IMO. Cap space is a weapon, use it wisely to get assets that serve more of a purpose than “mentoring”.

Being able to be lazy because you can does not strike me as a strong argument. It’s just lazy and goes to my point of a FO being fully in tune and razor sharp which is what needs to happen for the Spurs. They have a lot to prove and work to do.

It's been fascinating watching you two go at it... I see what you're saying but I don't agree with it either. I don't see where saving money on Doug and Zach makes any sense at all in our present situation because we don't really 'save' anything. Now if we can turn them in an asset we like, then I'm all for it or if we just want the roster spot for someone else, then that's fine but, I don't see the need.

But interesting discussion anyways...

[KingKev]

Jak looking like shit lately.

[The Truth #6]

Jak looking like shit lately.

I guess we’ll only be getting two first round picks for him, not three!

But for me, the real question is if the spurs are actually expecting to get two first round picks, or if that’s just a good bluff as we push towards the actual trade deadline.

[offset formation]

I guess we’ll only be getting two first round picks for him, not three!

But for me, the real question is if the spurs are actually expecting to get two first round picks, or if that’s just a good bluff as we push towards the actual trade deadline.

It's bluff when even a spurs message board largely sees it as a bunk starting point. Could they get two FRPs? It's feasible but they'd be heavily protected and likely involve a third team with other player movement, so not really a two FRP haul.

His game is simply limited too much to garner those kind of assets right now. And it appears as if the one thing he did at a really high level (defense) is no longer being done at a high level.

[rankingtear]

Salary floor makes it that we overpay more without Jakob contract next year. Cap rising and new CBA makes this a good deal than signing vet minimum guys and giving them 4 million bonuses each next year.

[KingKev]

According to BR Bulls want 2 FRPs for Caruso lol

That’s basically what we charged them for DDR and ate Aminu’s contract along the way :lmao

[rankingtear]

I’m sorry - I get what you are saying but I just see it differently. I am of the belief that just because you have money does not mean you should sign mediocre players (not Jak) or overpay because you can. It’s silly (IMO), wasteful to a degree and carries some risk that are just flat out unnecessary. It’s not about acting poor or whatever. It’s about being consistent with your vision, being absolutely steadfast in only securing assets right now alongside development of your youth and making sure you arent being wasteful for no reason.

You can sign lots of players - doesn’t have to be 3-4 year deals that are fully guaranteed especially when you aren’t going to win anyways with said player. That makes no sense. Give Doug 1 year, 40M I don’t care. Just not 3-4 years. That is the point.

I don’t care about the floor, or how much cap space and don’t need to assume anything. Doug does nothing for this team, sucks on defense, doesn’t fit the future and has no place with that contract on this team. Paying Jak, a good player with less risk than Doug in my context, Dougs money and Collins is just smart - there is no way around it. The only path should be signing vets for purposes of flipping them for assets. Youth? Ya, can keep and pay and develop. But I’m sorry, there’s plenty of vets that can mentor and not change win/losses that don’t require you to overpay and add many years to a deal.

If they are not trade assets, don’t use your space period IMO. Trade Josh. Trade Doug. Replace with other mentors - no biggie IMO. Cap space is a weapon, use it wisely to get assets that serve more of a purpose than “mentoring”.

Being able to be lazy because you can does not strike me as a strong argument. It’s just lazy and goes to my point of a FO being fully in tune and razor sharp which is what needs to happen for the Spurs. They have a lot to prove and work to do.

Doubt you make a dent on the salary floor with this method. You would likely end up giving millions in bonuses for the next three years.

[poopbox]

Anyone scoffing a 4 year, $80 million deal on Poetl is nuts. That would be starting around $18 million next year, which is Marcus Morris or Derrick White money. $18 million out of a $134 million cap ain't bad at all for a quality starting center. If he tells the team he wants to be back and they believe him, then it would be retarded to sell low on him for something like one protected first.

What exactly is a "quality starting center"? I don't think Poeltl has even contributed to the spurs winning, on the account that we literally win fewer and fewer games ever year he has been on the team...

[exstatic]

What exactly is a "quality starting center"? I don't think Poeltl has even contributed to the spurs winning, on the account that we literally win fewer and fewer games ever year he has been on the team...

Derozan traded in 2021. DJ traded in 2022. Two consecutive years of offloading an All Star for picks. Jak isn’t the reason we’re losing more each year.

[Kevin]

I agree with the general premise that the Spurs cannot have 65-75 million tied up in Keldon/Dev/Jak/Tre. All those guys are already here and the Spurs are a bottom five team. At the same time letting them walk for nothing also doesn't help. Spurs really should trade Jak at the deadline for picks and cap savings. Not sure what they do with Tre come summer.

[offset formation]

I agree with the general premise that the Spurs cannot have 65-75 million tied up in Keldon/Dev/Jak/Tre. All those guys are already here and the Spurs are a bottom five team. At the same time letting them walk for nothing also doesn't help. Spurs really should trade Jak at the deadline for picks and cap savings. Not sure what they do with Tre come summer.

I have a feeling that Tre's future will heavily depend on which player we end up drafting. If it's Scoot, Black, Wallace or even a high end SG with some ball handling skills like one of the Thompson twins, I could see them moving on. If it's Wembanyama, my guess is they extend him on as team friendly a deal as possible.

[KingKev]

I have a feeling that Tre's future will heavily depend on which player we end up drafting. If it's Scoot, Black, Wallace or even a high end SG with some ball handling skills like one of the Thompson twins, I could see them moving on. If it's Wembanyama, my guess is they extend him on as team friendly a deal as possible.

I think he gets retained regardless so long as he takes a fair deal. His brother just got 29mm over 2yrs so if that is his number I’d bid him adieu. However, at 10-12mm a year he makes sense and hopefully we are in a position to repatriate him back to the bench as a quality backup.

Tre/Vassell/Keldon would make a solid bench mob if we could put together a proper starting lineup :downspin:

[Kevin]

Tre/Vassell/Keldon would make a solid bench mob if we could put together a proper starting lineup :downspin:[/QUOTE]

Sad but true. It sucks the Spurs went the treadmill route after the Leonard disaster. All these years later and it still only year one in a full blown rebuild.

[offset formation]

I think he gets retained regardless so long as he takes a fair deal. His brother just got 29mm over 2yrs so if that is his number I’d bid him adieu. However, at 10-12mm a year he makes sense and hopefully we are in a position to repatriate him back to the bench as a quality backup.

Tre/Vassell/Keldon would make a solid bench mob if we could put together a proper starting lineup :downspin:

That's gonna be one expensive **bench** unit if they extend Tre and Vassell too. We'd have to have most of the starters on rookie deals and MLEs.

[KingKev]

That's gonna be one expensive **bench** unit if they extend Tre and Vassell too. We'd have to have most of the starters on rookie deals and MLEs.

That really is the sweet spot for contention these days. As the years go on the lux tax bill gets higher to keep a squad like that intact.

If we had a max player surrounded by quality vets on exceptions coupled with lottery talent on rookie scale contracts it actually would work. Really I’m just being facetious; pointing out that our young core’s upside is that of a high quality bench.

[DPG21920]

Doubt you make a dent on the salary floor with this method. You would likely end up giving millions in bonuses for the next three years.

Who cares about salary floor? The money is spent one way or other imo.

[DPG21920]

It's been fascinating watching you two go at it... I see what you're saying but I don't agree with it either. I don't see where saving money on Doug and Zach makes any sense at all in our present situation because we don't really 'save' anything. Now if we can turn them in an asset we like, then I'm all for it or if we just want the roster spot for someone else, then that's fine but, I don't see the need.

But interesting discussion anyways...

Moving Doug + Zach is more about getting some picks (prob 2nds) that way it keeps the spending efficient. The money is just back room accounting and side effect imo. It’s more about being efficient, getting picks hopefully and turning vets like Josh & Doug especially into trade assets vs just highly paid mentors (even if their money doesn’t prevent anything at the moment). I want no unnecessary anchors and as many picks as possible personally

It’s all about value and just showing a path where you can do good work and help keep Jak if that’s the goal (to Chinooks point it may not be the goal of the fo. I disagree that it’s “ok” if that’s the case is all. No excuse for being lazy just because you can be)

[DPG21920]

Jak looking like shit lately.

This is my concern. IF this trend continues and Sa is still bad for a year or two (hopefully not more) then Jak getting way more expensive is a negative.

Spurs have to weigh their offers carefully vs prospect of paying him 80m+ and how fast they think this turns around. It’s not an easy situation imo despite agreeing that Jak is very good and definitely has a place and future on this team.

[Mr. Body]

Poeltl is mailing it in. I don't blame him.

[baseline bum]

I agree with the general premise that the Spurs cannot have 65-75 million tied up in Keldon/Dev/Jak/Tre. All those guys are already here and the Spurs are a bottom five team. At the same time letting them walk for nothing also doesn't help. Spurs really should trade Jak at the deadline for picks and cap savings. Not sure what they do with Tre come summer.

What the fuck would you pay Tre Jones for? And Vassell is on a cheap contract for two more years after this one.

[mo7888]

Moving Doug + Zach is more about getting some picks (prob 2nds) that way it keeps the spending efficient. The money is just back room accounting and side effect imo. It’s more about being efficient, getting picks hopefully and turning vets like Josh & Doug especially into trade assets vs just highly paid mentors (even if their money doesn’t prevent anything at the moment). I want no unnecessary anchors and as many picks as possible personally

It’s all about value and just showing a path where you can do good work and help keep Jak if that’s the goal (to Chinooks point it may not be the goal of the fo. I disagree that it’s “ok” if that’s the case is all. No excuse for being lazy just because you can be)

Oh I get where you're coming from... I just don't agree with the premise that moving Doug and Zach for 2nd's, at this time, is an efficient use of money..

[Chinook]

I’m sorry - I get what you are saying but I just see it differently. I am of the belief that just because you have money does not mean you should sign mediocre players (not Jak) or overpay because you can. It’s silly (IMO), wasteful to a degree and carries some risk that are just flat out unnecessary. It’s not about acting poor or whatever. It’s about being consistent with your vision, being absolutely steadfast in only securing assets right now alongside development of your youth and making sure you arent being wasteful for no reason.

This is the issue you keep having. You think the Spurs have this plan you agree with but are for some reason not following it. They aren't on the binary you assign to them. Their goal is not to be the Hinkie Sixers, so they aren't subordinating their roster decisions to that end. They signed McDermott because they wanted him. That's it and that's all. Doug hasn't changed at all over the past two years. So unless the Spurs changed what they want, they're probably still happy with him. It's fine to just not like McDermott, just as it's fine to want to move on from Poeltl. But the Spurs didn't learn something from signing Doug. They are getting exactly what they likely want out of him, and him being on the team isn't preventing them from doing anything else. Just as the Spurs are going to let tens of millions of cap space dollars expire this year, the cap space they used on McDermott this year and next would not have been used. Like not at all, under any circumstances.


You can sign lots of players - doesn’t have to be 3-4 year deals that are fully guaranteed especially when you aren’t going to win anyways with said player. That makes no sense. Give Doug 1 year, 40M I don’t care. Just not 3-4 years. That is the point.

That's so much worse that I don't think you're actually being serious. The only time Doug's contract actually had an opportunity cost was last year. The money they gave him could've gone to someone else to bring in an asset. Just like Westbrook requires an asset for the Spurs to take because it could take up so much of their cap space, that McDermott deal would be awful. Only if it could somehow come with two min years appended it to it that you can even argue it's better.

I think worrying about cap space in three to four years sort of reveals a gap in your understanding of how a rebuilding team's finances work. Even if Wemby or Scoot is a superstar and the Spurs get back on the path of contention, the Spurs are going to have cap space for years simply because the guys who are on their roster aren't going to cost enough to take all of the cap space. The Durant Thunder, Embiid Sixers and Morant Grizzlies all had substantial cap space well after they stopped rebuilding. Especially if the team structed Jakob's contract to be descending, there's not a reasonable scenario where they are hurting for cap in 2027 and are blaming Poeltl's modest salary. That's even more true because if the Spurs do turn things around and have him on the team, he's almost certainly going to be a big part of that. We're talking about a contract on par with what Tiago Splitter got back in 2014, except Poeltl is going to be two years younger and has been healthy. The extent to which this deal is an anchor outside of the scenario where Jakob has career-derailing injury is almost non-existent.


The only path should be signing vets for purposes of flipping them for assets. Youth? Ya, can keep and pay and develop. But I’m sorry, there’s plenty of vets that can mentor and not change win/losses that don’t require you to overpay and add many years to a deal.

This is never and should never be a thing. The present matters. That you're willing to sacrifice an unknown percentage of your life as a fan hoping that the future will be better is a personal choice, I guess. But not only is that not a choice a team can actually make, but there's no rationale for why rebuilding has to mean not having vets that you like and can market and that the others like playing for. Mentoring does not mean merely taking a guy under your wing in a TV-show style. McDermott does certain things well, and having him do those things can develop parts of guys' games that random others can't. Vassell's improvement as a movement shooter might well be thanks to being able to practice with Doug. And because Doug has a multi-year deal and isn't playing for his next contract, he might be more inclined to work with a guy who's not his competition anymore. That the Spurs have seen Murray and Jones have huge leaps in development over the past two years might also be attributable to the people they put around them. The Spurs have a luxury of not having to worry about McD's lack of D hurting them since they don't care about winning games. So they can use all the good and maybe even take advantage of the point differential he's hanging on his team.


If they are not trade assets, don’t use your space period IMO. Trade Josh. Trade Doug. Replace with other mentors - no biggie IMO. Cap space is a weapon, use it wisely to get assets that serve more of a purpose than “mentoring”.

This comes off as obstinance masquerading as principle. If you don't use cap space, you're wasting it. There aren't enough trades or roster spots to use the space. Letting it rot just so they don't sign guys you don't like falls apart if you look at it for more than a second. Instead of settling for "mentors" they don't want in order to try for record floor payments, they use that money to have players they want on the team, while still having plenty to do any trade. Instead of hoping whatever min cast-off for horrible contract dumped from another team is going to care enough to fit in and have skills the young guys need, they are picking guys they want to do that and reaping that value. And they're losing just as you want.


Being able to be lazy because you can does not strike me as a strong argument. It’s just lazy and goes to my point of a FO being fully in tune and razor sharp which is what needs to happen for the Spurs. They have a lot to prove and work to do.

"Being lazy" is a dishonest way to interpret overpaying for guys. They aren't trying to follow your orders and just failing to do so. Them not being the Sixers isn't them being insubordinate. If they want to keep Poeltl, then they shouldn't trade him for anything just to not "risk" him walking. They should have a high price tag and then negotiate this summer. If they think he's helping what they want to do, they should be wiling to outbid teams to keep him. They have that leverage, in the same way that a team with a high pick and reach for the guy they want or a team or a team with more assets can outbid the trade market. The only difference is that the opportunity cost for the Spurs is way lower, since they have more space than they can realistically use. You want them to be smart and diligent, but you also want them to ignore the rest of the tools at their disposal for the one, one-dimensional way of using cap space that you approve of. That's far lazier than them exerting their leverage through multiple avenues.

[spurraider21]

According to BR Bulls want 2 FRPs for Caruso lol

That’s basically what we charged them for DDR and ate Aminu’s contract along the way :lmao
the gobert trade broke the market lol

[Chinook]

What the fuck would you pay Tre Jones for? And Vassell is on a cheap contract for two more years after this one.

Jones is a good player. They should've given him and extension at the beginning of the season when he might've been cheaper. There's a price tag they shouldn't go beyond but a salary that puts him as a well-paid backup or low-end starter would fit given their new PG would probably be a rookie-salary guy.

Vassell is in his third year, not his second. He only has one more year on his rookie contract after this one.

[Thomas82]

Poeltl is mailing it in. I don't blame him.

It definitely looks like it.

[R. DeMurre]

Worrying about how Poeltl potentially fits w Wembanyama seems like wasted energy to me. Even great players like Olajuwon, Jordan, Shaq, LeBron, and Giannis didn't win their first championships until their 7th/8th/9th seasons-- if Victor is able to eventually bring a title to a team starting near the bottom like the Spurs, chances are statistically overwhelming that Poeltl won't be a part of it.

[JPB]

the gobert trade broke the market lol

I'm fairly sure fans around the NBA laugh equally when they hear spurs want 2 FRPs for Poetl.

[CGD]

I'm fairly sure fans around the NBA laugh equally when they hear spurs want 2 FRPs for Poetl.

Exactly!

[Seventyniner]

I'm fairly sure fans around the NBA laugh equally when they hear spurs want 2 FRPs for Poetl.

They were also shocked at the returns Gobert and Dejounte got, and probably with Jrue Holiday too.

2 firsts is a fine opening offer for the Spurs. That doesn't mean they will never accept anything less. It's still almost 3 weeks from the deadline and there is no need to panic sell just yet.

[rankingtear]

Who cares about salary floor? The money is spent one way or other imo.

Then what is the issue here. You want shitier players to be paid the same money as better players? You are fine paying 2 million player 7 million but scoff at your 16 million guy getting 20?.

[KingKev]

Then what is the issue here. You want shitier players to be paid the same money as better players?

It is a tad funny that we weren’t ready to pay DJ on his next contract yet we are about to distribute the difference between what we probably would have offered him and what the market value would be for him in 2024 amongst the roster.

Think about this. DJM’s next deal will probably be 30-35ish a year and I’m sure PATFO would only have wanted to pay him 20-25/yr (despite the fact he well outplayed his current deal) so they moved on. That 10mm difference is what we perennially pay in dead cap. This year that 10mm will go towards bonuses for the worst defensive team in NBA history.

[rankingtear]

It is a tad funny that we weren’t ready to pay DJ on his next contract yet we are about to distribute the difference between what we probably would have offered him and what the market value would be for him in 2024 amongst the roster.

Think about this. DJM’s next deal will probably be 30-35ish a year and I’m sure PATFO would only have wanted to pay him 20-25/yr (despite the fact he well outplayed his current deal) so they moved on. That 10mm difference is what we perennially pay in dead cap. This year that 10mm will go towards bonuses for the worst defensive team in NBA history.

Yeah it's like paying Tre DJ salary this year. The only small difference is the 2 unprotected picks. An unprotected swap and a lottery protected pick.

[JPB]

Yeah it's like paying Tre DJ salary this year. The only small difference is the 2 unprotected picks. An unprotected swap and a lottery protected pick.

And Murray wanted out anyway.

[DPG21920]

Then what is the issue here. You want shitier players to be paid the same money as better players? You are fine paying 2 million player 7 million but scoff at your 16 million guy getting 20?.

I’ve made clear my thoughts tbh

[KingKev]

Yeah it's like paying Tre DJ salary this year. The only small difference is the 2 unprotected picks. An unprotected swap and a lottery protected pick.

I understand the value in the trade and I think it was the right move but we can’t always expect homegrown talent to take money off the table. Especially when we aren’t cash strapped.

[DPG21920]

This is the issue you keep having. You think the Spurs have this plan you agree with but are for some reason not following it. They aren't on the binary you assign to them. Their goal is not to be the Hinkie Sixers, so they aren't subordinating their roster decisions to that end. They signed McDermott because they wanted him. That's it and that's all. Doug hasn't changed at all over the past two years. So unless the Spurs changed what they want, they're probably still happy with him. It's fine to just not like McDermott, just as it's fine to want to move on from Poeltl. But the Spurs didn't learn something from signing Doug. They are getting exactly what they likely want out of him, and him being on the team isn't preventing them from doing anything else. Just as the Spurs are going to let tens of millions of cap space dollars expire this year, the cap space they used on McDermott this year and next would not have been used. Like not at all, under any circumstances.



That's so much worse that I don't think you're actually being serious. The only time Doug's contract actually had an opportunity cost was last year. The money they gave him could've gone to someone else to bring in an asset. Just like Westbrook requires an asset for the Spurs to take because it could take up so much of their cap space, that McDermott deal would be awful. Only if it could somehow come with two min years appended it to it that you can even argue it's better.

I think worrying about cap space in three to four years sort of reveals a gap in your understanding of how a rebuilding team's finances work. Even if Wemby or Scoot is a superstar and the Spurs get back on the path of contention, the Spurs are going to have cap space for years simply because the guys who are on their roster aren't going to cost enough to take all of the cap space. The Durant Thunder, Embiid Sixers and Morant Grizzlies all had substantial cap space well after they stopped rebuilding. Especially if the team structed Jakob's contract to be descending, there's not a reasonable scenario where they are hurting for cap in 2027 and are blaming Poeltl's modest salary. That's even more true because if the Spurs do turn things around and have him on the team, he's almost certainly going to be a big part of that. We're talking about a contract on par with what Tiago Splitter got back in 2014, except Poeltl is going to be two years younger and has been healthy. The extent to which this deal is an anchor outside of the scenario where Jakob has career-derailing injury is almost non-existent.



This is never and should never be a thing. The present matters. That you're willing to sacrifice an unknown percentage of your life as a fan hoping that the future will be better is a personal choice, I guess. But not only is that not a choice a team can actually make, but there's no rationale for why rebuilding has to mean not having vets that you like and can market and that the others like playing for. Mentoring does not mean merely taking a guy under your wing in a TV-show style. McDermott does certain things well, and having him do those things can develop parts of guys' games that random others can't. Vassell's improvement as a movement shooter might well be thanks to being able to practice with Doug. And because Doug has a multi-year deal and isn't playing for his next contract, he might be more inclined to work with a guy who's not his competition anymore. That the Spurs have seen Murray and Jones have huge leaps in development over the past two years might also be attributable to the people they put around them. The Spurs have a luxury of not having to worry about McD's lack of D hurting them since they don't care about winning games. So they can use all the good and maybe even take advantage of the point differential he's hanging on his team.



This comes off as obstinance masquerading as principle. If you don't use cap space, you're wasting it. There aren't enough trades or roster spots to use the space. Letting it rot just so they don't sign guys you don't like falls apart if you look at it for more than a second. Instead of settling for "mentors" they don't want in order to try for record floor payments, they use that money to have players they want on the team, while still having plenty to do any trade. Instead of hoping whatever min cast-off for horrible contract dumped from another team is going to care enough to fit in and have skills the young guys need, they are picking guys they want to do that and reaping that value. And they're losing just as you want.



"Being lazy" is a dishonest way to interpret overpaying for guys. They aren't trying to follow your orders and just failing to do so. Them not being the Sixers isn't them being insubordinate. If they want to keep Poeltl, then they shouldn't trade him for anything just to not "risk" him walking. They should have a high price tag and then negotiate this summer. If they think he's helping what they want to do, they should be wiling to outbid teams to keep him. They have that leverage, in the same way that a team with a high pick and reach for the guy they want or a team or a team with more assets can outbid the trade market. The only difference is that the opportunity cost for the Spurs is way lower, since they have more space than they can realistically use. You want them to be smart and diligent, but you also want them to ignore the rest of the tools at their disposal for the one, one-dimensional way of using cap space that you approve of. That's far lazier than them exerting their leverage through multiple avenues.

I obviously disagree but last thing I’ll say is no where do I think spurs think like me. I literally said that they don’t in a post or two ago.

They think like you and it’s been an issue for me last few years with how lazy they’ve been and how much meat they have left on the bone.

You don’t agree obviously and don’t care about stockpiling assets and love that players just play and you always argue “that’s use enough”. I violently disagree and think it’s a sign of complacent at best and that they are incapable of maximizing assets at worst.

You disagree and that’s fine. But the best FO like GS for example never take their foot off the gas and constantly look to make shrewd moves. SA has just ignored trades for far too long, overpaid character and mentoring to no avail and greatly over value mentoring (not that it’s not important but it shouldn always come with caveat that those players are trade assets imo).

YA, are their own picks the most important thing BIG picture? Yes. Agree. I diverge from you on that making it normal or acceptable to let so many assets just walk for nothing and not being more aggressive and calculated with regards to asset management

I never said I was worried about cap space; that seems like gas lighting (not in a serious way but in an ignorant of my position way). I said Jak can stay and have no issues with it. I’m talking about a nuanced mindset while constantly acknowledging it’s not a huge issue either way.

And not once did I say trade Jak out of fear of walking. Not once. It’s a continued misconstrued view of my take. I said they have to think hard about if THEY want to pay Jak that much. Has nothing to do with fear of him walking.

[scott]

This is the issue you keep having. You think the Spurs have this plan you agree with but are for some reason not following it. They aren't on the binary you assign to them. Their goal is not to be the Hinkie Sixers, so they aren't subordinating their roster decisions to that end. They signed McDermott because they wanted him. That's it and that's all. Doug hasn't changed at all over the past two years. So unless the Spurs changed what they want, they're probably still happy with him. It's fine to just not like McDermott, just as it's fine to want to move on from Poeltl. But the Spurs didn't learn something from signing Doug. They are getting exactly what they likely want out of him, and him being on the team isn't preventing them from doing anything else. Just as the Spurs are going to let tens of millions of cap space dollars expire this year, the cap space they used on McDermott this year and next would not have been used. Like not at all, under any circumstances.



That's so much worse that I don't think you're actually being serious. The only time Doug's contract actually had an opportunity cost was last year. The money they gave him could've gone to someone else to bring in an asset. Just like Westbrook requires an asset for the Spurs to take because it could take up so much of their cap space, that McDermott deal would be awful. Only if it could somehow come with two min years appended it to it that you can even argue it's better.

I think worrying about cap space in three to four years sort of reveals a gap in your understanding of how a rebuilding team's finances work. Even if Wemby or Scoot is a superstar and the Spurs get back on the path of contention, the Spurs are going to have cap space for years simply because the guys who are on their roster aren't going to cost enough to take all of the cap space. The Durant Thunder, Embiid Sixers and Morant Grizzlies all had substantial cap space well after they stopped rebuilding. Especially if the team structed Jakob's contract to be descending, there's not a reasonable scenario where they are hurting for cap in 2027 and are blaming Poeltl's modest salary. That's even more true because if the Spurs do turn things around and have him on the team, he's almost certainly going to be a big part of that. We're talking about a contract on par with what Tiago Splitter got back in 2014, except Poeltl is going to be two years younger and has been healthy. The extent to which this deal is an anchor outside of the scenario where Jakob has career-derailing injury is almost non-existent.



This is never and should never be a thing. The present matters. That you're willing to sacrifice an unknown percentage of your life as a fan hoping that the future will be better is a personal choice, I guess. But not only is that not a choice a team can actually make, but there's no rationale for why rebuilding has to mean not having vets that you like and can market and that the others like playing for. Mentoring does not mean merely taking a guy under your wing in a TV-show style. McDermott does certain things well, and having him do those things can develop parts of guys' games that random others can't. Vassell's improvement as a movement shooter might well be thanks to being able to practice with Doug. And because Doug has a multi-year deal and isn't playing for his next contract, he might be more inclined to work with a guy who's not his competition anymore. That the Spurs have seen Murray and Jones have huge leaps in development over the past two years might also be attributable to the people they put around them. The Spurs have a luxury of not having to worry about McD's lack of D hurting them since they don't care about winning games. So they can use all the good and maybe even take advantage of the point differential he's hanging on his team.



This comes off as obstinance masquerading as principle. If you don't use cap space, you're wasting it. There aren't enough trades or roster spots to use the space. Letting it rot just so they don't sign guys you don't like falls apart if you look at it for more than a second. Instead of settling for "mentors" they don't want in order to try for record floor payments, they use that money to have players they want on the team, while still having plenty to do any trade. Instead of hoping whatever min cast-off for horrible contract dumped from another team is going to care enough to fit in and have skills the young guys need, they are picking guys they want to do that and reaping that value. And they're losing just as you want.



"Being lazy" is a dishonest way to interpret overpaying for guys. They aren't trying to follow your orders and just failing to do so. Them not being the Sixers isn't them being insubordinate. If they want to keep Poeltl, then they shouldn't trade him for anything just to not "risk" him walking. They should have a high price tag and then negotiate this summer. If they think he's helping what they want to do, they should be wiling to outbid teams to keep him. They have that leverage, in the same way that a team with a high pick and reach for the guy they want or a team or a team with more assets can outbid the trade market. The only difference is that the opportunity cost for the Spurs is way lower, since they have more space than they can realistically use. You want them to be smart and diligent, but you also want them to ignore the rest of the tools at their disposal for the one, one-dimensional way of using cap space that you approve of. That's far lazier than them exerting their leverage through multiple avenues.

This is a great point that fans always over look in regard to the draft, the trade market, and free agency.

"We could have picked him at 23, but we took him at 11". No, you couldn't have taken him at 23, because you don't have the 23rd pick, you only have the 11th pick.

"Well we could have traded down and then picked him at 23!" Could we have? Did the team at 23 want to make that trade?

"The Lakers got him for a bench player and a 2nd rounder! We could have done that!" Could we? Did the other team want our bench player?

"The Pacers signed him for $12mm/year! We could have done that!" Could we have? What if dude just likes fucking Indiana for some reason?

"We could have at least gotten him on an offer sheet!" What if he didn't want our offer sheet?

We as fans make assumptions as to what the other party to the transaction should/will do, forgetting that they also have free will and their own interests.

Spurs not only have the luxury of overpaying for what they want, but they often NEED to overpay for what they want, especially while they suck.

[scott]

I obviously disagree but last thing I’ll say is no where do I think spurs think like me. I literally said that they don’t in a post or two ago.

They think like you and it’s been an issue for me last few years with how lazy they’ve been and how much meat they have left on the bone.

You don’t agree obviously and don’t care about stockpiling assets and love that players just play and you always argue “that’s use enough”. I violently disagree and think it’s a sign of complacent at best and that they are incapable of maximizing assets at worst.

You disagree and that’s fine. But the best FO like GS for example never take their foot off the gas and constantly look to make shrewd moves. SA has just ignored trades for far too long, overpaid character and mentoring to no avail and greatly over value mentoring (not that it’s not important but it shouldn always come with caveat that those players are trade assets imo).

YA, are their own picks the most important thing BIG picture? Yes. Agree. I diverge from you on that making it normal or acceptable to let so many assets just walk for nothing and not being more aggressive and calculated with regards to asset management

I never said I was worried about cap space; that seems like gas lighting (not in a serious way but in an ignorant of my position way). I said Jak can stay and have no issues with it. I’m talking about a nuanced mindset while constantly acknowledging it’s not a huge issue either way.

This is an interesting point here. The Spurs have overvalued mentoring, have turned 3 different #29 overall picks into significant contributors/assets, and are known for developing players. Meanwhile, the Warriors have lotto picks like Wiseman and mayybe Kuminga who they are ready to sell because they aren't living up to potential (maybe this is not truly the case with Kuminga, that's just what I've heard... but I like him as a player).

Two different philosophies towards team building, but obviously the Warriors are much better than the Spurs so it's hard to not say the Warrior's approach is better.

[DPG21920]

This is an interesting point here. The Spurs have overvalued mentoring, have turned 3 different #29 overall picks into significant contributors/assets, and are known for developing players. Meanwhile, the Warriors have lotto picks like Wiseman and mayybe Kuminga who they are ready to sell because they aren't living up to potential (maybe this is not truly the case with Kuminga, that's just what I've heard... but I like him as a player).

Two different philosophies towards team building, but obviously the Warriors are much better than the Spurs so it's hard to not say the Warrior's approach is better.

I think the Warriors turned non consensus players into world beaters in Steph, Klay, Dray, Poole etc..into great players too. They are just at a different timeline now so development of their youth is not priority because they are contenders.

Spurs don’t have anything else to focus on but development so they better be good at it and they have. I am not saying that spurs have done poorly at development; there is definitely something to have good vets around so you don’t turn into Rockets. I’m simply saying they have over valued that, over paid for that (I know Chinook doesn’t care about that) and for years with Mills/LMA/Rudy and many others let them walk for nothing for absolutely no reason IMO.

Spurs can both land vets like Doug and get what they want and either 1) not overpay them for no reason to where they apparently have little to no trade value or 2) seek some other guys that may not quite be Doug, but that big picture still accomplish goals without the need to “overpay because they can”. When you are truly competing and you need to overpay for good players? Sure I get that. Overpaying for older role players that have terrible defense and don’t fit the timeline at all or have any upside due to their game/contracts? That does not sound like smart business.

Big picture I am saying mediocre to bad players are always that regardless of circumstances and overpaying because you have margin for errors doesn’t strike me as smart business because it does carry risk (unlike IMO Chinooks assumption that NOT using cap space is wasteful. It’s not because there is always opportunities to use it unlike with Doug type deals where you may find yourself stuck possibly for absolutely no good reason).

It’s like saying because something bad didn’t happen that it justifies the logic when you took a risk. No, you just got lucky or circumstances aided you. Does not make it completely sound logic.

[DPG21920]

I’m hoping that Dougs shooting and now that it’s a 2 year deal vs 4 for teams will allow for them to trade and net picks even if it’s taking on a Westbrook type deal. That would be a great thing and would show that Spurs FO mind is in the right place.

But I will never agree to saying it’s ok to sign terribly flawed players to well above market average long term deals during a rebuild when they have no upside and no place in our future. It doesn’t make sense even if it does not end up harming us.

[scott]

I think the Warriors turned non consensus players into world beaters in Steph, Klay, Dray, Poole etc..into great players too. They are just at a different timeline now so development of their youth is not priority because they are contenders.

Spurs don’t have anything else to focus on but development so they better be good at it and they have. I am not saying that spurs have done poorly at development; there is definitely something to have good vets around so you don’t turn into Rockets. I’m simply saying they have over valued that, over paid for that (I know Chinook doesn’t care about that) and for years with Mills/LMA/Rudy and many others let them walk for nothing for absolutely no reason IMO.

Spurs can both land vets like Doug and get what they want and either 1) not overpay them for no reason to where they apparently have little to no trade value or 2) seek some other guys that may not quite be Doug, but that big picture still accomplish goals without the need to “overpay because they can”. When you are truly competing and you need to overpay for good players? Sure I get that. Overpaying for older role players that have terrible defense and don’t fit the timeline at all or have any upside due to their game/contracts? That does not sound like smart business.

Big picture I am saying mediocre to bad players are always that regardless of circumstances and overpaying because you have margin for errors doesn’t strike me as smart business because it does carry risk (unlike IMO Chinooks assumption that NOT using cap space is wasteful. It’s not because there is always opportunities to use it unlike with Doug type deals where you may find yourself stuck possibly for absolutely no good reason).

It’s like saying because something bad didn’t happen that it justifies the logic when you took a risk. No, you just got lucky or circumstances aided you. Does not make it completely sound logic.

I see things a little bit in reverse, and I think this is Chinook's point as well. The current Spurs (not the Mills/LMA/Rudy/Gasol Spurs) HAVE to overpay, because a vet who provides mentorship value requires that premium in order to be here. And currently, there is no opportunity cost to overpaying them. Having Doug on his deal doesn't prevent us from having any other player, so in the now, overpaying is kind of irrelevant.

On the other hand (to the second bolded portion), when you are truly competing is when you can' afford to overpay for good players, because it comes at an opportunity cost. Overpaying your role playing vet could mean you can no longer keep another role playing vet, so you have to be more diligent in ensuring you are getting good value out of your roster construction.

I definitely see your point about wanting to trade all these vets before they walk for nothing, but that really isn't practical. Sometimes you're just going to lose guys to Free Agency, and that's okay. Of late, it seems like the Spurs have done a better job of extracting some value for those players who have it on the way out as opposed to letting them die on the vine until they reach a buy-out or just vanish as Free Agents. Ideally, we'd trade everyone before they hit FA or do a S&T for them, but that just isn't that realistic.

[spurraider21]

I’m hoping that Dougs shooting and now that it’s a 2 year deal vs 4 for teams will allow for them to trade and net picks even if it’s taking on a Westbrook type deal. That would be a great thing and would show that Spurs FO mind is in the right place.

But I will never agree to saying it’s ok to sign terribly flawed players to well above market average long term deals during a rebuild when they have no upside and no place in our future. It doesn’t make sense even if it does not end up harming us.
mcdermott was never a 4 year deal

mcdermott is the type of guy who will have trade value as an expiring deal, but also might not have been willing to settle for a 1 year deal at his age. given the state of the spurs, they probably did have to overpay to land players.

[scott]

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/10063141-2023-nba-trade-watch-best-available-bigs-and-their-top-landing-spots


Poeltl Can Be Pried from Spurs
3 OF 5

https://media.bleacherreport.com/image/upload/w_800,h_533,c_fill/v1674777252/wlcrxaj8fqdszokjwzqy.jpg

Steph Chambers/Getty Images
The San Antonio Spurs like Jakob Poeltl and would be happy to extend him, but existing rules limit him to $50.5 million over four additional seasons. Several NBA sources peg his asking price in the $17 million to $20 million range in the first year alone as an unrestricted free agent.
While the Spurs can pay that, the team will have to wait until July to do so. And that may be beyond their price range, which could inspire the team to get a deal done before the trade deadline.
The asking price is believed to be a first-round pick and a good young player. Teams linked to Poeltl include the Boston Celtics, Raptors, Lakers, Clippers and Warriors. The Celtics may be a reach, given their tax position and commitment to Al Horford and Robert Williams III.
With the Lakers getting solid minutes from Thomas Bryant, they may be less inclined to chase a big man. The Clippers have Brandon Boston Jr. and Amir Coffey, prospects in demand that could appeal to a rebuilding team like the Spurs. The Warriors don't appear ready to give up on James Wiseman, Jonathan Kuminga or Moses Moody.

[DPG21920]

mcdermott was never a 4 year deal

mcdermott is the type of guy who will have trade value as an expiring deal, but also might not have been willing to settle for a 1 year deal at his age. given the state of the spurs, they probably did have to overpay to land players.

It’s kind of funny how everyone hated the deal like me but now defend it and seem totally ok with it. Doesn’t make sense but I digress

[DPG21920]

I see things a little bit in reverse, and I think this is Chinook's point as well. The current Spurs (not the Mills/LMA/Rudy/Gasol Spurs) HAVE to overpay, because a vet who provides mentorship value requires that premium in order to be here. And currently, there is no opportunity cost to overpaying them. Having Doug on his deal doesn't prevent us from having any other player, so in the now, overpaying is kind of irrelevant.

On the other hand (to the second bolded portion), when you are truly competing is when you can' afford to overpay for good players, because it comes at an opportunity cost. Overpaying your role playing vet could mean you can no longer keep another role playing vet, so you have to be more diligent in ensuring you are getting good value out of your roster construction.

I definitely see your point about wanting to trade all these vets before they walk for nothing, but that really isn't practical. Sometimes you're just going to lose guys to Free Agency, and that's okay. Of late, it seems like the Spurs have done a better job of extracting some value for those players who have it on the way out as opposed to letting them die on the vine until they reach a buy-out or just vanish as Free Agents. Ideally, we'd trade everyone before they hit FA or do a S&T for them, but that just isn't that realistic.

They do not have to over pay for guys like Doug. They do it because they can and they value CREAM too much. It’s why everyone supposedly hated the deal like me right? There is opportunity cost. We may not agree to what degree but having bad contracts you may not be able to trade is a downside imo. It’s less money that can be absorbed in a deal. There’s quite a few unnecessary risks imo which y’all don’t agree with.


I do agree it’s not a “big deal” and I know you can’t trade everyone. But spurs went out and got Doug etc so they need to be focused on those types of deals for trades and more than just CREAM. It’s so much more critical now to maximize every drop of value imo because we are in a rebuild and it’s a perilous journey. Small markets need every chance we can get and the draft is the biggest part. Need picks and as much as we can.

But agree - I am very happy with how FO has done last year or two. Much more active in trades and made much more decisive moves. I’m just making a message board point/general thoughts on the details I want to see to give me full confidence in this FO adapting for the new future.

I had confidence shaking last 5 years but I’m much more optimistic since they traded Derozan and moves since then.

[Mr. Body]

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/10063141-2023-nba-trade-watch-best-available-bigs-and-their-top-landing-spots


[/LIST]

Brings up teams that are interested in Poeltl, supposedly, then shoots each one down. Mentions the Clippers, who already have Zubacs. Who writes this shit?

Also... Amir Coffey is certainly not in 'demand'; he's awful. And Brandon Boston was terrible in college yet got drafted anyhow. He was bad, real bad, last year and has managed to regress.

[spurraider21]

It’s kind of funny how everyone hated the deal like me but now defend it and seem totally ok with it. Doesn’t make sense but I digress
No, i didn’t like it. Still don’t. But he will have trade value next year

[XDT76]

I'm fairly sure fans around the NBA laugh equally when they hear spurs want 2 FRPs for Poetl.

It doesn't matter, we also always laughed at other teams' trade demand. It is all about negotiation, if you starts low you can only get lower return.

[Ariel]

Brings up teams that are interested in Poeltl, supposedly, then shoots each one down. Mentions the Clippers, who already have Zubacs. Who writes this shit?

Also... Amir Coffey is certainly not in 'demand'; he's awful. And Brandon Boston was terrible in college yet got drafted anyhow. He was bad, real bad, last year and has managed to regress.
It's speculation, and bad one at that. A lot of posters here could have written a better piece than that.

[mystargtr34]

Lol at Amir Coffey and Brandon Boston ‘in demand’. Both those guys are 2nd round talents. They are terrible.

[CGD]

In the end do we really think the spurs pass on Wiseman and a lightly protected FRP for Jakob? I get all the Wiseman stuff, but where’s the superior offer coming from?

The only thing that probably nets more is a 3 way where the Spurs are simultaneously sending out Jak and leveraging their dumping ground cap space.

Just trying to be realistic

[exstatic]

In the end do we really think the spurs pass on Wiseman and a lightly protected FRP for Jakob? I get all the Wiseman stuff, but where’s the superior offer coming from?

The only thing that probably nets more is a 3 way where the Spurs are simultaneously sending out Jak and leveraging their dumping ground cap space.

Just trying to be realistic

It’s not about getting a deal done, it’s about getting the right deal done, or rolling into the summer with him.

Everything I’ve heard is that the Spurs want no part of Wiseman or Kuminga. Make of that what you will.

[The Truth #6]

This conversation is all over the place so I’m just gonna chime in randomly with a random thought.

Jones: it makes sense to resign him. It’ll still be mostly affordable. He’s dependable and ok for a tanking team. And if someone wants to become the lead ball handler than they have to at least play better than him, so it sets up some competition.

Yak: just look at it from thousand yards away, really makes no sense to resign him. We suck with him, we can suck without him, and his skill set is much more suited for a quality team who needs a glue guy, not for where we are at right now. So to me, it’s obvious to trade him or let him walk.

DJ: I think the issues are more than just money. I think the issue with him, at least from my interpretation of the front office, at least my best guess, is they didn’t totally trust his character, and also his style of play is dominating, so if you resign him, you’re expecting him to be your best player, and I at least appreciate the Spurs wanting to hold out for someone better than that.

[CGD]

Rereading the piece again, and think it would be great if NOLA got engaged. They all those picks, though, some are bullshit/fake FRPs.

Hayes<>Jakob swap with them sending up two FRP would be nice.

[Ariel]

It’s not about getting a deal done, it’s about getting the right deal done, or rolling into the summer with him.

Everything I’ve heard is that the Spurs want no part of Wiseman or Kuminga. Make of that what you will.
I agree that we shouldn't dump Poeltl at any price. But the reports that we wouldn't take back Kuminga in a package for him don't make much sense to me. Unless there's some really hardcore stuff about him pesonally (like he's on hard drugs, or really toxic personality, or whatever), he's a 20 y.o. forward who's a freak athlete, a good defender, and not a horrible shooter (33% 3PT and 68% FT for his career). I get that he's underwhelmed so far, but that's exactly the kind of player we could make the most profit from, even if he wasn't part of our long term plans. At worst he'd get you a first back down the road, and potentially much more, besides being on a 2nd year of a rookie scale contract, meaning you have control over him for a while before you have to make a decision on him.

[mo7888]

I agree that we shouldn't dump Poeltl at any price. But the reports that we wouldn't take back Kuminga in a package for him don't make much sense to me. Unless there's some really hardcore stuff about him pesonally (like he's on hard drugs, or really toxic personality, or whatever), he's a 20 y.o. forward who's a freak athlete, a good defender, and not a horrible shooter (33% 3PT and 68% FT for his career). I get that he's underwhelmed so far, but that's exactly the kind of player we could make the most profit from, even if he wasn't part of our long term plans. At worst he'd get you a first back down the road, and potentially much more, besides being on a 2nd year of a rookie scale contract, meaning you have control over him for a while before you have to make a decision on him.

I kinda agree with this.... if Kuminga and a very lightly protected or unprotected 1st (depending on the year) are on the table then that's an offer we should seriously consider..

[Mr. Body]

In the end do we really think the spurs pass on Wiseman and a lightly protected FRP for Jakob?

Yes, we pass. I don't think any team in the league would trade for Wiseman.

It's not simply that he's unplayable, he cannot stay healthy even if he was. But the real thing is that he stands to make $12 million next season and that's before the next contract kicks in. The salary track he's on as a top pick is absurd.

[CGD]

Yes, we pass. I don't think any team in the league would trade for Wiseman.

It's not simply that he's unplayable, he cannot stay healthy even if he was. But the real thing is that he stands to make $12 million next season and that's before the next contract kicks in. The salary track he's on as a top pick is absurd.

That's kinda what interests me -- there is no way he commands anywhere near a max extension. Let him go fetch an offer (it'll be low), and get the right to match it if its reasonable. I dont think 12M for one year is that big a deal, thats what Dougie makes and less than what Jakob will command.

[CGD]

I agree that we shouldn't dump Poeltl at any price. But the reports that we wouldn't take back Kuminga in a package for him don't make much sense to me. Unless there's some really hardcore stuff about him pesonally (like he's on hard drugs, or really toxic personality, or whatever), he's a 20 y.o. forward who's a freak athlete, a good defender, and not a horrible shooter (33% 3PT and 68% FT for his career). I get that he's underwhelmed so far, but that's exactly the kind of player we could make the most profit from, even if he wasn't part of our long term plans. At worst he'd get you a first back down the road, and potentially much more, besides being on a 2nd year of a rookie scale contract, meaning you have control over him for a while before you have to make a decision on him.

Agree, though i dont think we ALSO get a pick on top of it for Jak's expiring deal

[JeffDuncan]

We’re hoping the Spurs get fantastically lucky and hit the jackpot with Wemby, so also, how would Wiseman pair with Wemby? For many reasons, I can’t see it.

[CGD]

We’re hoping the Spurs get fantastically lucky and hit the jackpot with Wemby, so also, how would Wiseman pair with Wemby? For many reasons, I can’t see it.

Im not getting my hopes up nor should anyone else. At bests its just at 14% shot at Wemby. It will be a good prblem to have.

[CGD]

I wonder what the Pelicans would be willing to give up for Poeltl? Lots of talent and assets on that roster…

Hayes and two FRPs. Some of those late Milwaukee FRPs may be decent.

[Mr. Body]

That's kinda what interests me -- there is no way he commands anywhere near a max extension. Let him go fetch an offer (it'll be low), and get the right to match it if its reasonable. I dont think 12M for one year is that big a deal, thats what Dougie makes and less than what Jakob will command.

But... he can't even get on the court when healthy right now. Why pay for a player the Warriors have tried and tried and tried to get to play but is so bad they can't?

[exstatic]

I agree that we shouldn't dump Poeltl at any price. But the reports that we wouldn't take back Kuminga in a package for him don't make much sense to me. Unless there's some really hardcore stuff about him pesonally (like he's on hard drugs, or really toxic personality, or whatever), he's a 20 y.o. forward who's a freak athlete, a good defender, and not a horrible shooter (33% 3PT and 68% FT for his career). I get that he's underwhelmed so far, but that's exactly the kind of player we could make the most profit from, even if he wasn't part of our long term plans. At worst he'd get you a first back down the road, and potentially much more, besides being on a 2nd year of a rookie scale contract, meaning you have control over him for a while before you have to make a decision on him.

From what I understand, it isn’t Kuminga’s on court presence, mediocre as that may be. Chances are that Pop and Kerr probably talk regularly.

The Warriors are rapidly aging out of this current core, and if they don’t want him, that speaks volumes.

[Mr. Body]

It's astonishing the Warriors completely blew their lottery picks. They took Wiseman, Kuminga, and Moody.

Wiseman... This might be the worst draft of all time, and I don't see LaMello (a glorified playground baller) as a GSW fit. Best move was trading out. Seriously, that draft suuuucked.
Kuminga... I still like him, but no good basketball instruction (Ignite doesn't cut it) and an apparent bad attitude. Should have taken Franz Wagner.
Moody... Wasn't really that good in college, took him anyway. He's just a rookie, though. Could have had Sengun or Trey Murphy.

[exstatic]

It's astonishing the Warriors completely blew their lottery picks. They took Wiseman, Kuminga, and Moody.

Wiseman... This might be the worst draft of all time, and I don't see LaMello (a glorified playground baller) as a GSW fit. Best move was trading out. Seriously, that draft suuuucked.
Kuminga... I still like him, but no good basketball instruction (Ignite doesn't cut it) and an apparent bad attitude. Should have taken Franz Wagner.
Moody... Wasn't really that good in college, took him anyway. He's just a rookie, though. Could have had Sengun or Trey Murphy.

They got Jordan Poole at 30, though.

[Ariel]

They got Jordan Poole at 30, though.
28, he went one spot ahead of Keldon. But still, they blew it with Wiseman over Lamelo/Haliburton/Vassell/Desmond Bane(Lamelo was a bad fit culture wise, though), Kuminga over Wagner, and Moody over Tre Murphy or Sengun. Overall their drafting as of late has been underwhelming, there's no way around it.

[scott]

I agree that we shouldn't dump Poeltl at any price. But the reports that we wouldn't take back Kuminga in a package for him don't make much sense to me. Unless there's some really hardcore stuff about him pesonally (like he's on hard drugs, or really toxic personality, or whatever), he's a 20 y.o. forward who's a freak athlete, a good defender, and not a horrible shooter (33% 3PT and 68% FT for his career). I get that he's underwhelmed so far, but that's exactly the kind of player we could make the most profit from, even if he wasn't part of our long term plans. At worst he'd get you a first back down the road, and potentially much more, besides being on a 2nd year of a rookie scale contract, meaning you have control over him for a while before you have to make a decision on him.

I recall he also had a lot to say about wanting to get drafted by the Spurs. Weird that we have no interest, apparently.

[scott]

Yes, we pass. I don't think any team in the league would trade for Wiseman.

It's not simply that he's unplayable, he cannot stay healthy even if he was. But the real thing is that he stands to make $12 million next season and that's before the next contract kicks in. The salary track he's on as a top pick is absurd.

Instead of viewing Wiseman as a young asset, we can just view him as a salary dump. Wiseman + one lightly protected FRP + one swap or a protected FRP for Jak and I'm in. If Wiseman turns it around, great, if not, who cares.

[CGD]

I recall he also had a lot to say about wanting to get drafted by the Spurs. Weird that we have no interest, apparently.

I also think it’s bizarre. I’d happily do Josh and that shitty CHA FRP for Kuminga.

[exstatic]

28, he went one spot ahead of Keldon. But still, they blew it with Wiseman over Lamelo/Haliburton/Vassell/Desmond Bane(Lamelo was a bad fit culture wise, though), Kuminga over Wagner, and Moody over Tre Murphy or Sengun. Overall their drafting as of late has been underwhelming, there's no way around it.

Wiseman actually wasn’t awful his rookie year, but his development was derailed by missing all of last year. It’s tough enough finding a developmental curve on a title contender without missing a whole season. He’s worse this year than his rookie season.

[PhantomDashCam]

Hayes and two FRPs. Some of those late Milwaukee FRPs may be decent.

Spurs wouldn’t touch Hayes…

https://www.tmz.com/2022/03/25/nba-jaxson-hayes-sued-assault-battery-sofia-jamora-lapd-arrest-taser/

https://www.tmz.com/2022/01/24/pelicans-jaxson-hayes-charged-los-angeles/

[jjspur]

Just my take, is that the most they can realistically get for Poeltl is 1 middling first and a young middling player. You might get two firsts but those will probably have heavy protections of some sort. Do the spurs really want that for one of their top players ?

Every player is worth a lot now (wink wink), but come the deadline the price comes down due to some team desperately wanting to make a deal. Opinions are all over the place on this subject but in less than 2 weeks, we'll know for sure. Stay tuned.

[DPG21920]

1619454876685336580


May have an impact on Jak both in FA if he stays + on trade deadline if this means Turner is off market

[mo7888]

1619454876685336580


May have an impact on Jak both in FA if he stays + on trade deadline if this means Turner is off market

Here's how the money breaks down from Shams-

Myles Turner and Pacers reach agreement to keep Turner under contract through 2024-25 season, salaries as followed, per sources:

- $35 million this season ($18M salary plus $17M of Pacers’ salary space)
- $20.9M in 2023-24
- $19.9M in 2024-25

Total: 2 additional years, $58M.

[DPG21920]

Here's how the money breaks down from Shams-

Myles Turner and Pacers reach agreement to keep Turner under contract through 2024-25 season, salaries as followed, per sources:

- $35 million this season ($18M salary plus $17M of Pacers’ salary space)
- $20.9M in 2023-24
- $19.9M in 2024-25

Total: 2 additional years, $58M.

Has to mean IND is not trading him - so Jak value in trade market just gets better. But this is a number that will be referenced by Jak in FA some too I am guessing. Not that he will get it

[scott]

Does this really take Turner off the market, or does it now provide the acquiring team more security that he is under contract (or is there a recently signed restriction)? Pacers just using up their cap space that they had to anyway.

Seems odd that the Pacers would take themselves out of the trade market with so much time to go before the deadline.

[scott]

But if it does take Turner off the market, and provide guidance for Jak's market value, that's awesome. Do we peg Jak slightly below Turner due to offensive skillset? $17-18MM/year for Jak?

[BacktoBasics]

Does this really take Turner off the market, or does it now provide the acquiring team more security that he is under contract (or is there a recently signed restriction)? Pacers just using up their cap space that they had to anyway.

Seems odd that the Pacers would take themselves out of the trade market with so much time to go before the deadline.
I don’t see why the Pacers would give up an additional 17 million simply to trade him. The move to me looks like a heavily front loader deal to keep him affordable so they can be aggressive in adding help around him the next two years.

[Robz4000]

Think that takes Turner off the trade market unless they get blown away by an offer. Indy is ahead of schedule on their rebuild and he's young enough to fit their timeline.

[BacktoBasics]

But if it does take Turner off the market, and provide guidance for Jak's market value, that's awesome. Do we peg Jak slightly below Turner due to offensive skillset? $17-18MM/year for Jak?

People will still Jean on the extra 17 million upfront. But I don’t think it does much for Jaks value one way or another. It’s kinda right where he was pegged to begin with.

[mo7888]

Has to mean IND is not trading him - so Jak value in trade market just gets better. But this is a number that will be referenced by Jak in FA some too I am guessing. Not that he will get it

He's easily going to get his 20M.... some team might offer more at this point... I wouldn’t be surprised if the Turner extension doesn't go ahead and push someone to get this trade done quickly for Jak though..

[mo7888]

One other thing...this reduces Indy's cap space this year, so they're out of the running for a Westbrook dump....that could be significant..

[Ariel]

Here's how the money breaks down from Shams-

Myles Turner and Pacers reach agreement to keep Turner under contract through 2024-25 season, salaries as followed, per sources:

- $35 million this season ($18M salary plus $17M of Pacers’ salary space)
- $20.9M in 2023-24
- $19.9M in 2024-25

Total: 2 additional years, $58M.
So he's getting roughly $30M per year he extended, yet still counting as $20M for each of the next 2 years... and apparently allows for him to be traded immediately... hmmm... i wonder if this speaks of Indy simply wanting to raise his trade value to get a much larger return in the short term.

[Ariel]

I don’t see why the Pacers would give up an additional 17 million simply to trade him. The move to me looks like a heavily front loader deal to keep him affordable so they can be aggressive in adding help around him the next two years.
Well... maybe they figure that it's money they'd have to spend anyways, and they'd get better returns by trading an extended Turner (as opposed to an expiring one) vs what they'd get by renting that cap space.

[Ariel]

But if it does take Turner off the market, and provide guidance for Jak's market value, that's awesome. Do we peg Jak slightly below Turner due to offensive skillset? $17-18MM/year for Jak?
He's getting almost 30M per additional year, despite the weird structure. This doesn't drive Poeltl's expectations down by any means.

[Dverde]

One other thing...this reduces Indy's cap space this year, so they're out of the running for a Westbrook dump....that could be significant..

Still open for all your cap-dumping needs!

https://postimg.cc/crNgphfshttps://postimg.cc/crNgphfshttps://i.postimg.cc/PrCW8Fx8/6-BA2-C3-F5-869-C-4910-B728-1-A15-FC65-B564.jpg

[Ignazzz]

Turner can be traded. Hold Your horses. Value is just higher

[Ariel]

So basically it costs Indy 20M per, because that money had to be redistributed regardless, and Turner gets 58M... he gets the money, they either keep him or up his trade value for less than they'd otherwise have to pay. This is too easy and smart not be illegal.

[Chinook]

Turner can be traded. Hold Your horses. Value is just higher

Can't be traded for six months after renegotiating

[DPG21920]

Can't be traded for six months after renegotiating

what are your thoughts on the what this does to the market from Spurs perspective: both Jak and being a team with cap space to absorb a Westbrook type easily

[Ariel]

Can't be traded for six months after renegotiating
1619459327546523648
https://twitter.com/BobbyMarks42/status/1619459327546523648

Here is a breakdown of the Myles Turner renegotiation. Because this was a renegotiation, Indiana was allowed to decrease the salary in the first year of the extension to 40%. Turner is still eligible to be traded by 2/9.

[rankingtear]

It is actually better to sign Jakob for 4 years, you see how contracts are lining up to expire before the cap spike, you don't want cap space in 2026.

[CGD]

One other thing...this reduces Indy's cap space this year, so they're out of the running for a Westbrook dump....that could be significant..

Important point. And just generally I think it just leaves us as the main dumping ground no?

[CGD]

1619454876685336580


May have an impact on Jak both in FA if he stays + on trade deadline if this means Turner is off market

My question is, couldn’t we also do a renegotiation with Jakob given our cap space? That’s the whole reason Indy was able to do it.

[scott]

He's getting almost 30M per additional year, despite the weird structure. This doesn't drive Poeltl's expectations down by any means.

IMO, the proper way to look at this is a two-year, $20/yr deal. The front loading is just Indy spending to the floor that they had to do anyway. Turner probably wanted to hit FA for a bigger deal, so Indy had to basically bribe him to take this and become a more tradable asset, with a contract that should be relatively appealing.

[Ariel]

IMO, the proper way to look at this is a two-year, $20/yr deal. The front loading is just Indy spending to the floor that they had to do anyway. Turner probably wanted to hit FA for a bigger deal, so Indy had to basically bribe him to take this and become a more tradable asset, with a contract that should be relatively appealing.
From the players' perspective, by signing this extension he's under contract for 2 years and 58M (29M per year) than he would have otherwise been. You can't expect Poeltl to ignore that, and he shouldn't. Now maybe you can say that's more than Turner would have gotten per year in free agency, and that's a fair point because surely he wouldn't have accepted less years of guaranteed money unless he had another incentive to do this (extra money per year), but still this drives prices up for Poeltl no doubt. If he was asking for 20M before this, sure as he11 he's not taking less now. This move by Indy is genius, it'd be interesting to know which are the limits to such renegotiation, as applied to Poeltl for instance.

[DPG21920]

IMO, the proper way to look at this is a two-year, $20/yr deal. The front loading is just Indy spending to the floor that they had to do anyway. Turner probably wanted to hit FA for a bigger deal, so Indy had to basically bribe him to take this and become a more tradable asset, with a contract that should be relatively appealing.

Exactly. To Turner it’s huge, but it’s “free” for INDY since that money was going to be spent anyways. Not apples to apples but some sort of point I was making about trading Doug and Zach and how that would make Jakobs first year free too which is a great value (even if not necessary)

[CGD]

From the players' perspective, by signing this extension he's under contract for 2 years and 58M (29M per year) than he would have otherwise been. You can't expect Poeltl to ignore that, and he shouldn't. Now maybe you can say that's more than Turner would have gotten per year in free agency, and that's a fair point because surely he wouldn't have accepted less years of guaranteed money unless he had another incentive to do this (extra money per year), but still this drives prices up for Poeltl no doubt. If he was asking for 20M before this, sure as he11 he's not taking less now. This move by Indy is genius, it'd be interesting to know which are the limits to such renegotiation, as applied to Poeltl for instance.

I don’t see any reason why the spurs can do the same thing with Jakob… if they wanted to that is

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

My question is, couldn’t we also do a renegotiation with Jakob given our cap space? That’s the whole reason Indy was able to do it.

Poeltl isn't eligible for a contract renegotiation because it has to be a 4 or 5-year contract. His is 3 years.

[mo7888]

Important point. And just generally I think it just leaves us as the main dumping ground no?

Yep...if a team needs to shed salary, we are the go to spot..

[CGD]

Poeltl isn't eligible for a contract renegotiation because it has to be a 4 or 5-year contract. His is 3 years.

Ah, ok that make sense. Figured we’d have heard more about this option if it were available

[exstatic]

Just my take, is that the most they can realistically get for Poeltl is 1 middling first and a young middling player. You might get two firsts but those will probably have heavy protections of some sort. Do the spurs really want that for one of their top players ?

Every player is worth a lot now (wink wink), but come the deadline the price comes down due to some team desperately wanting to make a deal. Opinions are all over the place on this subject but in less than 2 weeks, we'll know for sure. Stay tuned.

There’s a value of Jak to a team, and there’s an added value in keeping him off a competitor’s roster, going against you down the stretch. I disagree with your thinking that his value is dropping because nothing has happened yet. Nothing happens almost every year until the last day. The Spurs also aren’t desperate to make a deal. They’ve fielded calls, and have set a price.

[BacktoBasics]

One question that might be interesting for those thinking trade is how does Myles extension compare to Aytons contract. Pacers were hot on Ayton and probably not wanting to give too much.

[offset formation]

There’s a value of Jak to a team, and there’s an added value in keeping him off a competitor’s roster, going against you down the stretch. I disagree with your thinking that his value is dropping because nothing has happened yet. Nothing happens almost every year until the last day. The Spurs also aren’t desperate to make a deal. They’ve fielded calls, and have set a price.

Toronto has supposedly already floated something along the lines of what jjspur mentioned...a middling first with lots of protections and a middling player. Spurs aren't buying. I'm quite doubtful the offers get much better because the Spurs arent getting 2 firsts. And Poeltl is playing down his value like it or not. He simply isn't playing at that level he's had the past 2 years, or really last year especially. Spurs are likely to still have Poeltl after the deadline IMO, UNLESS they decrease their asking price.

[jjspur]

Toronto has been mentioned as a trade partner and we have a bit of a trade history with them.

I was thinking Precious Achuiwa and Otto Porter + a 2nd for Poeltl. A young guy and a vet plus a pick. Don't get two firsts but I see that as a reasonable trade. Porter is a decent role player when healthy and Achuiwa is a young strong PF who fits the spurs timeline. Put together both won't earn what Poeltl is likely to be asking this summer.

Toronto is probably thinking Khem Birch and top 20 protected future first. Spurs say not only no, but hell nah. Come back with a real offer.

[exstatic]

Toronto has been mentioned as a trade partner and we have a bit of a trade history with them.

I was thinking Precious Achuiwa and Otto Porter + a 2nd for Poeltl. A young guy and a vet plus a pick. Don't get two firsts but I see that as a reasonable trade. Porter is a decent role player when healthy and Achuiwa is a young strong PF who fits the spurs timeline. Put together both won't earn what Poeltl is likely to be asking this summer.

Toronto is probably thinking Khem Birch and top 20 protected future first. Spurs say not only no, but hell nah. Come back with a real offer.

They’re not doing a deal with zero FRPs.

[mo7888]

Toronto has been mentioned as a trade partner and we have a bit of a trade history with them.

I was thinking Precious Achuiwa and Otto Porter + a 2nd for Poeltl. A young guy and a vet plus a pick. Don't get two firsts but I see that as a reasonable trade. Porter is a decent role player when healthy and Achuiwa is a young strong PF who fits the spurs timeline. Put together both won't earn what Poeltl is likely to be asking this summer.

Toronto is probably thinking Khem Birch and top 20 protected future first. Spurs say not only no, but hell nah. Come back with a real offer.

No...We'd be much better off signing Jak than taking that..

[Mr. Body]

Yeah, jeeesus. Just extend him at that point. That's silly.

[Robz4000]

Yeah that's a pretty awful trade imo

[The Truth #6]

Hilarious that they renegotiate Turner’s contract and his status is still mired in ambiguity after, what, three years of being on the block. Lol.

[JeffDuncan]

The Mavs need a center, but there’s the question of how to make a trade work with them.

[exstatic]

The Mavs need a center, but there’s the question of how to make a trade work with them.

They’re only able to trade 2027 and 2029 r/n.

[CGD]

The thing that would unlock movement with Dallas is whether we’d be willing to take Bert back. Each year that passed the less shitty that deal looks

[exstatic]

The thing that would unlock movement with Dallas is whether we’d be willing to take Bert back. Each year that passed the less shitty that deal looks

And the more shitty he looks.

[LeBowen]

Tbh, with the cap rising and Spurs having a ton of space, I'd take Bertans for those 2027 and 2029 picks with no protection.

Luka's deal ends in 2027 and Cuban has proven to be incompetent when it comes to building around his stars time and time again.
Luka doesn't seem like he has that Dirk loyalty in him and if they don't improve within the next few seasons, he's surely gone. And their roster situation without him is horrible. Those pick could be gold.

Spurs already somewhat gambled with Hawks being incompetent in DJ trade and it just might work out considering the state of things in Atlanta.

[Dejounte]

Doncic is going to set franchise records in Dallas. That’s a guarantee if he stays. Championships aren’t guaranteed if he leaves. I don’t think he leaves because of those reasons.

[Dverde]

The thing that would unlock movement with Dallas is whether we’d be willing to take Bert back. Each year that passed the less shitty that deal looks

Spurs know Bert and know he won’t be a problem in the locker room. I have no issue taking back that bad contract. The rebuild is going to be at least another couple years and he’ll be long gone by then.

[exstatic]

Tbh, with the cap rising and Spurs having a ton of space, I'd take Bertans for those 2027 and 2029 picks with no protection.

Luka's deal ends in 2027 and Cuban has proven to be incompetent when it comes to building around his stars time and time again.
Luka doesn't seem like he has that Dirk loyalty in him and if they don't improve within the next few seasons, he's surely gone. And their roster situation without him is horrible. Those pick could be gold.

Spurs already somewhat gambled with Hawks being incompetent in DJ trade and it just might work out considering the state of things in Atlanta.

Those are the picks they’re ABLE to trade, not ones they will necessarily part with for Jak. The point of naming the years was that they were the soonest picks they can trade r/n.

[JPB]

Tbh, with the cap rising and Spurs having a ton of space, I'd take Bertans for those 2027 and 2029 picks with no protection.

Luka's deal ends in 2027 and Cuban has proven to be incompetent when it comes to building around his stars time and time again.
Luka doesn't seem like he has that Dirk loyalty in him and if they don't improve within the next few seasons, he's surely gone. And their roster situation without him is horrible. Those pick could be gold.

Spurs already somewhat gambled with Hawks being incompetent in DJ trade and it just might work out considering the state of things in Atlanta.

No way spurs get Dallas 27 and 29 FRPs.

[JPB]

Doncic is going to set franchise records in Dallas. That’s a guarantee if he stays. Championships aren’t guaranteed if he leaves. I don’t think he leaves because of those reasons.

I honestly don't think that would factor into his decision at all. A chip is worth one million franchise records, ask Dirk. And if he believes he has more chance to win somewhere else, he'll leave.

And it's not just about chips but simply,winning. Dude has been a monster for 2 years and Dallas is still a 50-50 team, one or two games away for not even making the play in. If he sees Cuban can't build a contender around him, he's out.

[LeBowen]

Those are the picks they’re ABLE to trade, not ones they will necessarily part with for Jak. The point of naming the years was that they were the soonest picks they can trade r/n.

I know that those are the picks that they are able to trade and that they're not dumb enough to trade them for someone like Jakob. But if there's a chance...


I honestly don't think that would factor into his decision at all. A chip is worth one million franchise records, ask Dirk. And if he believes he has more chance to win somewhere else, he'll leave.

And it's not just about chips but simply,winning. Dude has been a monster for 2 years and Dallas is still a 50-50 team, one or two games away for not even making the play in. If he sees Cuban can't build a contender around him, he's out.

He's already getting extremely frustrated in a lot of games where he has to do it all by himself, he won't spend his entire career being a second round exit at best.
Someone will definitely get those picks because Mavs front office will have to make a big trade this or the next summer to keep him happy.

[exstatic]

I don’t think Jak makes a difference for Dallas. They need scoring, like Lavine or DeRozan if CHI decides to break things up.

[TD 21]

They could definitely use Poeltl, but obviously can't afford to prioritize him over a second star with their limited trade assets.

And Doncic is about as Americanized as they get. He will absolutely be applying pressure to the front office in short order and if they can't deliver, expect him to eventually force his way to a glamor market.

[Thomas82]

No way spurs get Dallas 27 and 29 FRPs.

I just don't see us trading with a division rival period.

[Spursfanfromafar]

Shams thinks a move to the Eastern Conference is imminent -

https://theathletic.com/4136200/2023/01/30/nba-trade-deadline-rumors-raptors-bucks-suns-crowder/


San Antonio SpursSeveral teams are increasing their pursuit of Spurs center Jakob Poeltl (https://theathletic.com/nba/player/jakob-poeltl-wzkpB8YKmxhyMN2h/), and it appears a move to the Eastern Conference could be possible ahead of the deadline. The Raptors and Celtics (https://theathletic.com/nba/team/celtics/) are among the teams expressing interest in Poeltl, sources say. The 27-year-old will be arguably the top unrestricted free agent big man in July (https://theathletic.com/4098049/2023/01/17/nba-trade-deadline-poeltl-collins-vanvleet-shams/).

[exstatic]

Shams thinks a move to the Eastern Conference is imminent -

https://theathletic.com/4136200/2023/01/30/nba-trade-deadline-rumors-raptors-bucks-suns-crowder/

I think when the rubber hits the road, it will be Boston. If you read the article, it states that Toronto isn’t even sure if they will be buyers or sellers at the deadline.

[rascal]

I think when the rubber hits the road, it will be Boston. If you read the article, it states that Toronto isn’t even sure if they will be buyers or sellers at the deadline.

Most likely Boston as they are all in to get a title this year. They might still feel they are a little short on depth to get there.

[JuneJive]

What would the potential deal with BOS look like?

Btw I'm kinda skeptical about BOS as they look pretty set in the frontcourt.

[CGD]

I think when the rubber hits the road, it will be Boston. If you read the article, it states that Toronto isn’t even sure if they will be buyers or sellers at the deadline.

I like BOS as a fit, but Im still confused whether we can receive Gallo's salary as filler since we waived him earlier this year. I dont see how it works otherwise.

[K...]

The writing is on the wall. ..the spurs have a standing offer for purt that is good but not great and have kept things open to get better offers.

[CGD]

The writing is on the wall. ..the spurs have a standing offer for purt that is good but not great and have kept things open to get better offers.

I think that's right

[Mr. Body]

Toronto is in no-man's land. They're not good and it's not really apparent why, especially in a mediocre year, they can't be a playoff team. Do they stop resisting and get a lottery pick in a bad draft year? Or do they swing for another player?

For Boston, there's something missing to this team and I'm not sure exactly what it is. I thought Brogdan would be more punchy off the bench maybe? White a better connector for their samey, iso-happy offense? They're a bad team down the clutch and that could hurt them again. Poeltl doesn't immediately help those things, but he is a passing hub from the high post and good on the roll.

[jjspur]

I like BOS as a fit, but Im still confused whether we can receive Gallo's salary as filler since we waived him earlier this year. I dont see how it works otherwise.

Not sure we can get a waived player back, but the real question is other than for salary balance, why on earth would we want Gallo back ? To waive him again ? To throw salary money away again ? The spurs have to be smarter than that. There has to be a deal out there that doesn't screw us over again by taking on lots of salary and then waiving the player.

Toronto can probably make a deal, the Knicks have a number of picks. Even though Poeltl would fit in Boston, it doesn't seem like a Boston deal would be all that great for us asset wise or financially. Thanks Boston but no thanks. Its probably smarter just to keep Poeltl and pay him more.

[CGD]

Not sure we can get a waived player back, but the real question is other than for salary balance, why on earth would we want Gallo back ? To waive him again ? To throw salary money away again ? The spurs have to be smarter than that. There has to be a deal out there that doesn't screw us over again by taking on lots of salary and then waiving the player.

Toronto can probably make a deal, the Knicks have a number of picks. Even though Poeltl would fit in Boston, it doesn't seem like a Boston deal would be all that great for us asset wise or financially. Thanks Boston but no thanks. Its probably smarter just to keep Poeltl and pay him more.

Gallo's money (plus another small salary) is one of the few ways BOS can match Jakob's 9M salary. Gallo is just ballast.

[exstatic]

Not sure we can get a waived player back, but the real question is other than for salary balance, why on earth would we want Gallo back ? To waive him again ? To throw salary money away again ? The spurs have to be smarter than that. There has to be a deal out there that doesn't screw us over again by taking on lots of salary and then waiving the player.

Toronto can probably make a deal, the Knicks have a number of picks. Even though Poeltl would fit in Boston, it doesn't seem like a Boston deal would be all that great for us asset wise or financially. Thanks Boston but no thanks. Its probably smarter just to keep Poeltl and pay him more.

If a waived player signs with someone else, you’re relieved of paying him that amount of his guaranteed salary. We waived his guaranteed portion of the 2022-2023 salary of $10.4M, and he signed for $6.4M with Boston, leaving us on the hook for $4M.

I don’t believe we can take gallinari back, but if you could find a 3rd team who has a dead/useless contract, Boston could ship him there with another contract, and we could take whatever dead contract the 3rd team has.

[KingKev]

If a waived player signs with someone else, you’re relieved of paying him that amount of his guaranteed salary. We waived his guaranteed portion of the 2022-2023 salary of $10.4M, and he signed for $6.4M with Boston, leaving us on the hook for $4M.

I don’t believe we can take gallinari back, but if you could find a 3rd team who has a dead/useless contract, Boston could ship him there with another contract, and we could take whatever dead contract the 3rd team has.


This is incorrect. Gali cleared waivers therefore we are on the hook for the full agreed upon buyout which I think was 13mm.

Would be different if he was signed during that 48 hour waiver period like when we signed Roby and took him off of OKC’s books entirely.

[R. DeMurre]

28, he went one spot ahead of Keldon. But still, they blew it with Wiseman over Lamelo/Haliburton/Vassell/Desmond Bane(Lamelo was a bad fit culture wise, though), Kuminga over Wagner, and Moody over Tre Murphy or Sengun. Overall their drafting as of late has been underwhelming, there's no way around it.

There was an interesting piece recently on The Athletic site talking about whether or not Bob Myers will be retained as the GM after this season-- it talks about how the owner Joe Lacob and his son have been more involved (some might say more intrusive) in draft decisions. None of the draft debates/decisions have gone public as far as I know, but it would be interesting to know if Myers was actually advocating for different players and got overruled. Clearly, if Golden State had Haliburton and Franz Wagner today, their current problems wouldn't exist...

[JPB]

I know that those are the picks that they are able to trade and that they're not dumb enough to trade them for someone like Jakob. But if there's a chance...



He's already getting extremely frustrated in a lot of games where he has to do it all by himself, he won't spend his entire career being a second round exit at best.
Someone will definitely get those picks because Mavs front office will have to make a big trade this or the next summer to keep him happy.

Maybe, but precisely then. Dallas won't waste those two picks for Jak and getting rid of a bad contract or whatever. they need another star scorer, not a role player.

[Dejounte]

New shams article says increasing pursuit for Poeltl and that the Spurs are interested in Jalen McDaniels in free agency

[Mr. Body]

There was an interesting piece recently on The Athletic site talking about whether or not Bob Myers will be retained as the GM after this season-- it talks about how the owner Joe Lacob and his son have been more involved (some might say more intrusive) in draft decisions. None of the draft debates/decisions have gone public as far as I know, but it would be interesting to know if Myers was actually advocating for different players and got overruled. Clearly, if Golden State had Haliburton and Franz Wagner today, their current problems wouldn't exist...

Ah a rich guy believing he's a genius because of what everyone around him did. What a new story! Add a bit of nepotism, too.

[Chinook]

If a waived player signs with someone else, you’re relieved of paying him that amount of his guaranteed salary. We waived his guaranteed portion of the 2022-2023 salary of $10.4M, and he signed for $6.4M with Boston, leaving us on the hook for $4M.

I don’t believe we can take gallinari back, but if you could find a 3rd team who has a dead/useless contract, Boston could ship him there with another contract, and we could take whatever dead contract the 3rd team has.


This is incorrect. Gali cleared waivers therefore we are on the hook for the full agreed upon buyout which I think was 13mm.

Would be different if he was signed during that 48 hour waiver period like when we signed Roby and took him off of OKC’s books entirely.

Gallo wasn't claimed on waivers, but that's not what Ex was talking about. He was talking about set-off rights the Spurs had to reduce their guarantee if Gallo signed elsewhere. It's not the full amount, though. It's half of whatever the new salary is minus the min. So it would've been like $2 Million, not $6.4 Million. However, buyouts usually include the team waiving their set-off rights as part of the player agreeing to reduce the guaranteed amount. This wasn't a buyout, but Gallo did have to agree to amend the guarantee date. My guess is that that included the Spurs waiving those rights.

There's not a restriction to reacquiring a player you've waived unless you stretch them, and as far as I know, the Spurs did not do that. They should be able to trade for him on a new contract without issue.

[mo7888]

Gallo wasn't claimed on waivers, but that's not what Ex was talking about. He was talking about set-off rights the Spurs had to reduce their guarantee if Gallo signed elsewhere. It's not the full amount, though. It's half of whatever the new salary is minus the min. So it would've been like $2 Million, not $6.4 Million. However, buyouts usually include the team waiving their set-off rights as part of the player agreeing to reduce the guaranteed amount. This wasn't a buyout, but Gallo did have to agree to amend the guarantee date. My guess is that that included the Spurs waiving those rights.

There's not a restriction to reacquiring a player you've waived unless you stretch them, and as far as I know, the Spurs did not do that. They should be able to trade for him on a new contract without issue.

Similar to waiving Dieng and then resigning him...

[KingKev]

Gallo wasn't claimed on waivers, but that's not what Ex was talking about. He was talking about set-off rights the Spurs had to reduce their guarantee if Gallo signed elsewhere. It's not the full amount, though. It's half of whatever the new salary is minus the min. So it would've been like $2 Million, not $6.4 Million. However, buyouts usually include the team waiving their set-off rights as part of the player agreeing to reduce the guaranteed amount. This wasn't a buyout, but Gallo did have to agree to amend the guarantee date. My guess is that that included the Spurs waiving those rights.

There's not a restriction to reacquiring a player you've waived unless you stretch them, and as far as I know, the Spurs did not do that. They should be able to trade for him on a new contract without issue.

Everything I’ve read indicated this was a negotiated buyout. Gallo extended the deadline and got paid for his cooperation. Regardless he is on our books for 10m or more.

[Chinook]

Everything I’ve read indicated this was a negotiated buyout. Gallo extended the deadline and got paid for his cooperation. Regardless he is on our books for 10m or more.

A buyout in NBA terms typically means a player reducing their guaranteed money in order to sign elsewhere ala Dragic last year and Aldridge the year before. What Gallo did was similar but not technically the same thing, but as you said it's very possible that was negotiated into the amendment agreement, and he should be on the books for that full guarantee amount.

Ex's interpretation is closer to what happens when an NFL team releases a player with guaranteed base salary.

[CGD]

Gallo wasn't claimed on waivers, but that's not what Ex was talking about. He was talking about set-off rights the Spurs had to reduce their guarantee if Gallo signed elsewhere. It's not the full amount, though. It's half of whatever the new salary is minus the min. So it would've been like $2 Million, not $6.4 Million. However, buyouts usually include the team waiving their set-off rights as part of the player agreeing to reduce the guaranteed amount. This wasn't a buyout, but Gallo did have to agree to amend the guarantee date. My guess is that that included the Spurs waiving those rights.

There's not a restriction to reacquiring a player you've waived unless you stretch them, and as far as I know, the Spurs did not do that. They should be able to trade for him on a new contract without issue.

Helpful thanks -- so player part of the framework is probably Jakob for Gallo + Kornet. And then the teams are fighting over the draft capital piece.

[KingKev]

A buyout in NBA terms typically means a player reducing their guaranteed money in order to sign elsewhere ala Dragic last year and Aldridge the year before. What Gallo did was similar but not technically the same thing, but as you said it's very possible that was negotiated into the amendment agreement, and he should be on the books for that full guarantee amount.

Ex's interpretation is closer to what happens when an NFL team releases a player with guaranteed base salary.

Cheers. All sunk costs regardless.

The bigger issue is whether we can take him back in a deal for Jak and it sounds like we ca so it makes it much easier to facilitate a direct trade. Eating Galo for Jak is worth an unprotected far out FRP but I’d hope they could sweeten the pot with a few more SRPs

[scott]

If we could lean heavily on TOR to make their offer a Top-2 or even Top-4 protected FRP for Jak, I think that's the ideally scenario. They obviously aren't doing unprotected, but if this is a weak class outside of the top two, they may be willing. Throw in the CHA or CHI FRP to sweeten it.

Can teams conditionally trade a pick? For example:

Jak and CHA FRP for TOR top-4 protected FRP this year, rolling to Top-3 the next two years if it does not convey this year.

*IF TOR pick does not convey this year, Spurs keep CHA pick?

[mo7888]

If we could lean heavily on TOR to make their offer a Top-2 or even Top-4 protected FRP for Jak, I think that's the ideally scenario. They obviously aren't doing unprotected, but if this is a weak class outside of the top two, they may be willing. Throw in the CHA or CHI FRP to sweeten it.

Can teams conditionally trade a pick? For example:

Jak and CHA FRP for TOR top-4 protected FRP this year, rolling to Top-3 the next two years if it does not convey this year.

*IF TOR pick does not convey this year, Spurs keep CHA pick?

It's not a weak class outside the top 2....there are a couple people on this board that think that but its not the case nor do they media scouts think that.

[Mr. Body]

It's not a weak class outside the top 2....there are a couple people on this board that think that but its not the case nor do they media scouts think that.

It's not even a strong class outside the top 1. Scoot, dunno. The rest? Media is gonna hype every draft class they get to because they want the clicks. But have you actually watched these players? It's a heap of late lottery and 14-20 guys at best.

[scott]

Opinions appear to be quite divided :lol

[Mr. Body]

Opinions appear to be quite divided :lol

It's a sort of survivorship bias mixed with a gambler's fallacy. Somewhere along those lines. Spurs fans are desperate to have this awful year matter, so they've intoxicated themselves with a draft class they swear must be superior because their hearts demand it.

[scott]

To that end, however, we were told last year was not a great draft class - and it is looking pretty tasty at this point.

[Mr. Body]

To that end, however, we were told last year was not a great draft class - and it is looking pretty tasty at this point.

No one said last year wasn't a great draft class. I don't know where you or anywhere else got that.

[jjspur]

Cheers. All sunk costs regardless.

The bigger issue is whether we can take him back in a deal for Jak and it sounds like we ca so it makes it much easier to facilitate a direct trade. Eating Galo for Jak is worth an unprotected far out FRP but I’d hope they could sweeten the pot with a few more SRPs

I like the direction in your thinking with the 2nd rounders, but Boston sees the predicament we're in and isn't offering all that much of equal value for Poeltl. He could be a real difference maker for the C's, what we get back not so much. I think they know they have a bit of an advantage here and its a waiting game to see who blinks first.

[RC_Drunkford]

Boston might just send us Robert Williams III back with pick(s) attached. They don't really need him if they get Poeltl, since they go small with Horford at the 5 once he subs out. They don't need 2 centers

[scott]

No one said last year wasn't a great draft class. I don't know where you or anywhere else got that.

There was lots of chatter about the 2022 being "top heavy" and weak, but like all other opinions, they were just opinions. Just like we have two very conflicting opinions in the last few posts of this thread. Evidence, you say no one said last year wasn't a great class but this year's is weak... but mo had previously pointed out that some sites had the top 6 in this class ahead of the entire class last year. I don't agree with these opinions, but they are out there.

The point being, ever year has some expectations pre-draft that usually end up being way off base. I don't care what year it is, if you are rebuilding, collect high picks and make the picks.

[CGD]

Boston might just send us Robert Williams III back with pick(s) attached. They don't really need him if they get Poeltl, since they go small with Horford at the 5 once he subs out. They don't need 2 centers

Nah man. They WILL send us Luke Kornet though, since he’s useless with Jakob there.

[exstatic]

If we could lean heavily on TOR to make their offer a Top-2 or even Top-4 protected FRP for Jak, I think that's the ideally scenario. They obviously aren't doing unprotected, but if this is a weak class outside of the top two, they may be willing. Throw in the CHA or CHI FRP to sweeten it.

Can teams conditionally trade a pick? For example:

Jak and CHA FRP for TOR top-4 protected FRP this year, rolling to Top-3 the next two years if it does not convey this year.

*IF TOR pick does not convey this year, Spurs keep CHA pick?

Toronto hasn’t even decided if they’re buyers or sellers yet. They’ll let us know, apparently. Very disappointing year for them when so many teams aren’t even trying to win.

[KingKev]

Toronto hasn’t even decided if they’re buyers or sellers yet. They’ll let us know, apparently. Very disappointing year for them when so many teams aren’t even trying to win.

It really is and they need to be sellers.

[exstatic]

To that end, however, we were told last year was not a great draft class - and it is looking pretty tasty at this point.

2022 Not looking great, outside of the top 10, which qualifies in my mind as top heavy. AJ Griffin made some noise, early, but haven’t heard much recently, and Walker Kessler, Mr. 7 and 7, media darling.

[mo7888]

It's not even a strong class outside the top 1. Scoot, dunno. The rest? Media is gonna hype every draft class they get to because they want the clicks. But have you actually watched these players? It's a heap of late lottery and 14-20 guys at best.

We all know that's your personal view, which is why I didn't mention you... it's not worth debating... you may end up being correct on that island...but you are on it with very few others...

I do respect your conviction though..

[Mr. Body]

We all know that's your personal view, which is why I didn't mention you... it's not worth debating... you may end up being correct on that island...but you are on it with very few others...

I do respect your conviction though..

It's not a conviction. I'm just amazed people will be so fired up about a blatantly mediocre class other than the top guy. Hope springs eternal! I hope you guys don't wind up bawling your eyes out.

But let's not keep lying about a few things, alright?

1. Media always, always talk a draft class up.
2. Last year's was never sold as a down year.

Okay?

[mo7888]

It's not a conviction. I'm just amazed people will be so fired up about a blatantly mediocre class other than the top guy. Hope springs eternal! I hope you guys don't wind up bawling your eyes out.

But let's not keep lying about a few things, alright?

1. Media always, always talk a draft class up.
2. Last year's was never sold as a down year.

Okay?

Lol... I hope they gave you a nice tropical drink out there on that island...

And it is just a conviction...

Last years class was sold as a down year overall leading up to it(good at the very top)... on this site there were many (self included) that thought it was pretty good through the top 8-12 picks or so and then had a considerable drop off.. your revisionist history is amusing...

[Leetonidas]

I distinctly remember there being a lot of chatter about how the 2022 draft was weak and didnt even have a clear cut #1. this isnt something made up after the fact, and multiple posters here remember it

that said, it doesnt matter because the media is usually wrong and the draft is a gamble regardless. every year we here about how X player is going to be a surefire pick and he ends up being a huge bust. or Y player has no business going in the first round and lo and behold he becomes the steal of the draft. i generally dont buy into any scouting opinions because they tend to be consisntelty wrong anyway

[Mr. Body]

I distinctly remember there being a lot of chatter about how the 2022 draft was weak and didnt even have a clear cut #1. this isnt something made up after the fact, and multiple posters here remember it


The mainstream, 'top' guys were confused about the draft. They failed to accept that Keegan Murray was actually good, the same as they overrated Jabari Smith, Jr. It's because they don't know what they're talking about, most of them. They failed to recognize that Mathurin was an exceptional talent. They were confused about Shaeden Sharpe.

But they weren't saying it was a weak draft. They were just confused about the top, because like most of the media they suck at evaluation. If they didn't know whether Holmgren or Banchero deserved the top spot, then they got all wonky.

The actual draft gurus? A different story.

[Leetonidas]

The mainstream, 'top' guys were confused about the draft. They failed to accept that Keegan Murray was actually good, the same as they overrated Jabari Smith, Jr. It's because they don't know what they're talking about, most of them. They failed to recognize that Mathurin was an exceptional talent. They were confused about Shaeden Sharpe.

But they weren't saying it was a weak draft. They were just confused about the top, because like most of the media they suck at evaluation. If they didn't know whether Holmgren or Banchero deserved the top spot, then they got all wonky.

The actual draft gurus? A different story.

Not necessarily disagreeing. curious who you consider "Draft gurus" though. But yeah the mainstream top guys are who a lot of people listen to, so the weak draft stuff because fairly common rhetoric. Just saying, i like some others here definitely remember the "this a weak draft" talk last season

[JPB]

Not necessarily disagreeing. curious who you consider "Draft gurus" though. But yeah the mainstream top guys are who a lot of people listen to, so the weak draft stuff because fairly common rhetoric. Just saying, i like some others here definitely remember the "this a weak draft" talk last season

Or it's just that it's impossible to really know the value of all these young guys until they actually start to play in the NBA... For some, yeah you can see, others, you just have to wait to see if their defaults were something fixable or how if they'll mentally respond to the pressure of the NBA...

We're talking about young players who are not finished and a few months can make a huge difference. Some reveal themselves entering the NBA, others don't meet expectations. This isn't an exact scienc, that would be too easy... I mean some #1 picks were total busts, so...

[TD 21]

The Celtics probably are interested in Poeltl, but given the conflicting reports about it, I wonder if the Spurs are using the threat of that to get the Craptors or some mystery team to meet or at least come closer to their asking price?

Not only are the Celtics and Spurs clearly on good terms, but why wouldn't the former want a fellow Eastern Conference team attempting to "compete" to splurge?

[Ariel]

Not necessarily disagreeing. curious who you consider "Draft gurus" though. But yeah the mainstream top guys are who a lot of people listen to, so the weak draft stuff because fairly common rhetoric. Just saying, i like some others here definitely remember the "this a weak draft" talk last season
I can vouch for this. I followed last draft closely, because the Spurs had so much invested in it, more than pretty much any other draft in recent history. And the consensus (among most draft people) was that it was a weaker class than that of '21 (incredibly overrated), which was stupid to me as I watched pretty much every prospect and it seemed like a talented and deep class all the way to the 2nd round. I also never understood how people could rank anyone but Banchero no. 1, and wanted us to take Sochan, Mathurin or Daniels, and wanted and extra pick to get Eason as well, so it wasn't too far off. :D
This time around I'm not so confident in my assessment because I have yet to watch as many games as I did last year, which hopefully I'll start doing shortly. But so far I've tried to get myself acquainted with the most talked about prospects via clips and highlights, check stats and so forth, and judging from that (admittedly insufficient) evidence, I haven't really seen many "high ceiling, can't miss" prospects outside the top 2.
The closest is probably Cam Whitmore and I like Brandon Miller's combination of size and shooting (although he's a bit older and doesn't seem explosive or polished enough for a future star), but Keyonte George seems like a bit of an undersized chucker, Nic Smith has not performed according to expectations and to boot injured his knee, the Thompson brothers have awesome athleticism and seem plenty skilled but can't shoot to save their lives (especially Amen), have not proven themselves at any reliable level, and they'll be 20 by the time they get drafted (they're the '23 version of Sharpe in that regard), and that's the top guys in the draft.
If we were to lump together last year and this one (with what we knew pre draft, at least with my take on it), I think at the top it could go something like this:
1) Wemby 2) Banchero 3) Scoot 4) Chet 5) Cam Whitmore
So I don't really agree with the view that the top 6 this year would go no. 1 last year at all. I'll be watching more and I'm open to changing my mind if these guys prove me wrong, but like I said, I'm not super confident we can land the kind of player we need unless we land a top 2 pick.

[KingKev]

Not necessarily disagreeing. curious who you consider "Draft gurus" though.

Himself

[Ariel]

1620161758655832066
https://twitter.com/TheSteinLine/status/1620161758655832066

Pacers coach Rick Carlisle on Myles Turner: "Yes he's off the trade block"
Good news for us.

[heyheymymy]

like others have suggested, love to see the Spurs appear to initiate a bidding war for poeltl.

Now it could come down to a team taking Peoltl just to keep him off another teams roster they may face in the playoffs.

Spurs could get another slick deal out of this.

[MultiTroll]

like others have suggested, love to see the Spurs appear to initiate a bidding war for poeltl.

Now it could come down to a team taking Peoltl just to keep him off another teams roster they may face in the playoffs.

Spurs could get another slick deal out of this.
:lol

Were that fantasy to come true would be great.

[KingKev]

like others have suggested, love to see the Spurs appear to initiate a bidding war for poeltl.

Now it could come down to a team taking Peoltl just to keep him off another teams roster they may face in the playoffs.

Spurs could get another slick deal out of this.

I think this is wishful thinking. Also Jak‘s play has slowly deteriorated these last 6 weeks and I have to think there is a recency bias even with the smartest GMs.

It is great that Turner is out of play but but that also just upped the ante in terms of retaining Jak come free agency. Take what you can now and move on. No room to bluff.

[CGD]

I’m sure they’re holding out for more, but I think it will be hard to get more than a Celtic offer of Gallo + Kornett + clean 28FRP.

[heyheymymy]

I do agree that the last few weeks have seen some subdued performances from Poeltl.

Tbh I'd do that gallo kornet and 28FRP no strings attached, seems realistic.

[JPB]

Yeah, spurs not budging for anything else than 2 FRPs was clearly smoke.

[CGD]

I do agree that the last few weeks have seen some subdued performances from Poeltl.

Tbh I'd do that gallo kornet and 28FRP no strings attached, seems realistic.

FWIW, Boston has two decent-ish 23 SRP that could help sweeten the pot: Portlands outright and Houston’s but only if it’s not 31-32 (so that’s risky).

[CGD]

Yeah, spurs not budging for anything else than 2 FRPs was clearly smoke.

Yeah but it’s the correct posture to take at this time. The hope is someone gets desperate the day before.

I wonder what TOR’s standing offer is?

[heyheymymy]

Seriously, not saying it'll happen and yes it's wishful thinking to want the best possible most advantageous scenario to play out for SA.

I'm saying it's the right play to run with hoping to catch someone on the verge to get desperate and again I do see a dynamic where someone pulls the trigger on Poeltl more to keep him out of a competitors war chest than direct impact to their own team, albeit not likely. Just the mood coming down the strech to this deadline and I like the Spurs strategy. Obvs don't want the risk of Poeltl walking for nothing, but inside the franchise surely they have certain understandings about the likelihood of that risk if not outright assurances/deals in place to mitigate that altogether. I could see Peotl being happy in SA and wanting to re-sign so if that's the case it's not playing with fire as much as it appears to resist towards the deadline.

[JeffDuncan]

I do agree that the last few weeks have seen some subdued performances from Poeltl.

Tbh I'd do that gallo kornet and 28FRP no strings attached, seems realistic.


The losing is probably getting to Poeltl more than the younger players. I’m sure he knows the situation, but still, it’s bound to get tedious. A trade to a contender would probably perk him up instantly.

Gallo and Kornet?? Puke. Pardon my nausea. Do. Not. Want.

We’ve got kids to develop and we’re supposed to waste a roster spot on the twenty-seven year old, eternal backup Kornet? Phooey. Bring up Bassey, if he can play, or Barlow.

I don’t like Gallo, because he can’t run around to help the kids work out in practice. He’s done for the year with that knee.

With kids to develop we absolutely don’t need a two-for-one player trade, anyway.

Just clearing the ‘28 draft pick isn’t good enough, either.

[KingKev]

The losing is probably getting to Poeltl more than the younger players. I’m sure he knows the situation, but still, it’s bound to get tedious. A trade to a contender would probably perk him up instantly.

Gallo and Kornet?? Puke. Pardon my nausea. Do. Not. Want.

We’ve got kids to develop and we’re supposed to waste a roster spot on the twenty-seven year old, eternal backup Kornet? Phooey. Bring up Bassey, if he can play, or Barlow.

I don’t like Gallo, because he can’t run around to help the kids work out in practice. He’s done for the year with that knee.

With kids to develop we absolutely don’t need a two-for-one player trade, anyway.

Just clearing the ‘28 draft pick isn’t good enough, either.

Gallo would be waived immediately. We have 3 fringe NBA players to consider waiving in KBD, Roby and Johnson for any trade that makes long term sense.

[CGD]

The losing is probably getting to Poeltl more than the younger players. I’m sure he knows the situation, but still, it’s bound to get tedious. A trade to a contender would probably perk him up instantly.

Gallo and Kornet?? Puke. Pardon my nausea. Do. Not. Want.

We’ve got kids to develop and we’re supposed to waste a roster spot on the twenty-seven year old, eternal backup Kornet? Phooey. Bring up Bassey, if he can play, or Barlow.

I don’t like Gallo, because he can’t run around to help the kids work out in practice. He’s done for the year with that knee.

With kids to develop we absolutely don’t need a two-for-one player trade, anyway.

Just clearing the ‘28 draft pick isn’t good enough, either.

Btw I’m just listing those players as salary matching, not value. Figure we’d get another big back instead of the corpse of Griffin but whatever.

Re picks I want more too, but having BOS’s fully unprotected 28FRP while keeping our own (as opposed to the current swap) may not be a terrible outcome. You could see a world where they are both late lotto type picks. 5 years is a life time.

[BackHome]

I am cool with Bost...28 FRP and a second round pick also thrown in 2027

[Mr. Body]

Raptors lose again, six games under. 500. I'm not sure what the cause is, but at this point they should just roll into the lottery and consider blowing it up.

[offset formation]

Raptors lose again, six games under. 500. I'm not sure what the cause is, but at this point they should just roll into the lottery and consider blowing it up.

100% I would never trade away picks for Poeltl were I in their front office. Especially not two. Picks are the only way they're digging themselves out of a really bad run. And thats too bad cause fuck the raptors.

Looks like Boston and LA are the only remaining landing spots. And neither of those will do more than 1 FRP plus player(s). I'm guessing Poeltl isn't going anywhere if PATFO is adamant about those 2 FRPs.

[CGD]

100% I would never trade away picks for Poeltl were I in their front office. Especially not two. Picks are the only way they're digging themselves out of a really bad run. And thats too bad cause fuck the raptors.

Looks like Boston and LA are the only remaining landing spots. And neither of those will do more than 1 FRP plus player(s). I'm guessing Poeltl isn't going anywhere if PATFO is adamant about those 2 FRPs.

Of the decent playoff teams, i think DEN and NOLA would be wise to take a look. I was surprised to see how shockingly thin at C the former is.

[XDT76]

FWIW, Boston has two decent-ish 23 SRP that could help sweeten the pot: Portlands outright and Houston’s but only if it’s not 31-32 (so that’s risky).

At this moment can't see Houston's SRP as anything but 31.

[Mr. Body]

I'd caution against another draft pick for this year. There's only so many 1st and 2nd year guys you can handle without cannibalize development. This is a problem OKC is facing, for example. Pokusevki is hurt. Ousmane Dieng was a guy they coughed up three FRPs for. James Robinson-Earl is pretty good and coming back from a sprain. They'll get Holmgren next summer.

I get the idea of packaging young players to get other talent, but I don't see many of those players drawing a huge amount of interest. They stand to have three FRPs in each of the next two drafts ('24, '25). Fair play to them! But what the hell do you do? Gotta trade out some of these guys pre-development or package those picks up for a player.

We're not at that point. I can't see us drafting three players this year. We have three rookies this year already.

[Ocotillo]

4 if you count Barlow.

[Ariel]

I'd caution against another draft pick for this year. There's only so many 1st and 2nd year guys you can handle without cannibalize development. This is a problem OKC is facing, for example. Pokusevki is hurt. Ousmane Dieng was a guy they coughed up three FRPs for. James Robinson-Earl is pretty good and coming back from a sprain. They'll get Holmgren next summer.

I get the idea of packaging young players to get other talent, but I don't see many of those players drawing a huge amount of interest. They stand to have three FRPs in each of the next two drafts ('24, '25). Fair play to them! But what the hell do you do? Gotta trade out some of these guys pre-development or package those picks up for a player.

We're not at that point. I can't see us drafting three players this year. We have three rookies this year already.
The thing is, if there's ever a moment to do that, this is it. You can't wait until you have a core set and you're trending up to develop multiple players, it's when you suck that you do it. I think we can easily accommodate 2/3 draft picks a year for the next couple of years. Not mandatory of course, if you can't find a player you like at your spot or trade do get one, then pass, sure. But we're just starting the process that OKC is years into, we're not comparable to them right now.
I think the danger comes not with allotting too many young players, but too many "projects", as in guys who are years away and may end up not NBA players at all. Right now I'd say we have 3: Blake Wesley (whose potential is high on either direction, boom or bust), Barlow (interesting traits but a long way from contributing) and Bassey. Branham could also be lumped into this category, but I see him more as needing adjustments (mainly mindset) than polishing, at least on a basic level on offense. I'm confident he'll be productive next season already, the question is to what capacity (if he can carry a significant load of the offense, or he's a good option off the bench -he'll be this at least IMO-).
As opposed to that, you have guys like Sochan, who obviously is far from his potential but he's already proven he belongs and warrants playing time even in a competing team. So basically it's not the Sochans, the Vassells, the Keldons that clog up the pipeline, but the Primos, the Blake Wesleys, the Barlows. We just need to be wary of stacking up too many of the latter type, because you need to invest years in them before you can even make a decision and that comes with a high cost of opportunity, in terms of other interesting players you're passing up because you can't make room for them. This is where OKC went wrong IMO, with the Pokus and Diengs, not the Jalen Williams or Giddeys.
We might want to speed up the rotation, which you can do by avoiding too many of these total projects in favor of guys who you know you can at least count on at some basic level (physically, skill wise, etc.). And if you go for a project, at least make sure they're truly high ceiling and don't come at a high cost (i.e., don't pull a Primo ever again). That way at worst you know in a couple of years where you stand and you can move on faster to another prospect.

[The Truth #6]

The Ringer had an unexpected trade scenario where Yak goes to OKC to help in the pnr with their multiple point guards and we dip into their war chest. It was mostly just the Ringer dweebs slobbering over OKC again for some stupid reason, but Sam does have a lot of draft picks he has has to do something with at some point.

[Ariel]

https://theathletic.com/4136200/2023/01/30/nba-trade-deadline-rumors-raptors-bucks-suns-crowder/

Across the NBA, it’s no secret the Toronto Raptors are viewed as a swing team in this year’s trade market. Raptors vice chairman and president of basketball operations Masai Ujiri and general manager Bobby Webster have what’s seen as a talented core of attractive pieces in Pascal Siakam, O.G. Anunoby and Gary Trent Jr. Because of the Raptors’ disappointing season thus far (they are currently 23-28 and in 12th place in the East), rival teams have been informed that the franchise will make a decision about being a buyer or seller – or standing pat – near deadline day, according to league sources
At this time, they may be closer to selling than buying TBH :depressed

[mo7888]

The Ringer had an unexpected trade scenario where Yak goes to OKC to help in the pnr with their multiple point guards and we dip into their war chest. It was mostly just the Ringer dweebs slobbering over OKC again for some stupid reason, but Sam does have a lot of draft picks he has has to do something with at some point.

It does make sense from an OKC perspective... they gave up, what 3 picks for ousmane... giving up a couple mid to late lottery picks probably helps them and Jak fits next to Chet long term.

[Ariel]

The Ringer had an unexpected trade scenario where Yak goes to OKC to help in the pnr with their multiple point guards and we dip into their war chest. It was mostly just the Ringer dweebs slobbering over OKC again for some stupid reason, but Sam does have a lot of draft picks he has has to do something with at some point.
If anything, that trade is loopsided in favor of the Spurs:
https://www.theringer.com/nba/2023/1/30/23576923/nba-trade-rumors-og-anunoby-jakob-poeltl

Oklahoma City gets: Jakob Poeltl
San Antonio gets: Mike Muscala, OKC’s lottery-protected 2023 first-round pick, and LAC’s unprotected 2024 first-round pick

At a stunning 24-25, 0.5 games out of the play-in, and 9-4 in January, the Thunder are low-key coming up to a major crossroads on February 9. Do they stand pat? Do they add to their war chest of assets? Or, you know, do they try to win some games, make the playoffs, and let Shai Gilgeous-Alexander cook on a stage that befits his immaculate skill set?

For a team that’s struggled to grab defensive rebounds and may need a long-term interior presence who can help streamline Chet Holmgren’s responsibilities and free him from taxing dirty work as a full-time center, the 27-year-old Poeltl makes a ton of sense. His poise as a pick-and-roll partner will make life easier for SGA, Josh Giddey, and Jalen Williams. His rim protection and reliable drop coverage will also help OKC limit attempts at the rim and the corners (where they currently bleed shots).

The Thunder can go one of a few ways. But coming off a January in which they led the league in net rating, it might be time for them to take a step forward and reenter the competitive landscape.

[mo7888]

https://theathletic.com/4136200/2023/01/30/nba-trade-deadline-rumors-raptors-bucks-suns-crowder/

At this time, they may be closer to selling than buying TBH :depressed

I'd be selling if I were them too... I'd especially be looking to move Fred and Trent Jr. I wouldn't want to pay them what they're looking for on this team. I could also 'squint' and see them going after Jak in a larger deal moving fvf and tj elsewhere and sending the picks acquired in that deal to us and not including their own 1st this year.

[Ariel]

The risk with OKC is that their situation would allow them to generate the necessary cap space to sign Poeltl outright, without the need for a S&T. I'd say they're probably our biggest threat of losing Poeltl for nothing.

[mo7888]

If anything, that trade is loopsided in favor of the Spurs:
https://www.theringer.com/nba/2023/1/30/23576923/nba-trade-rumors-og-anunoby-jakob-poeltl

Oklahoma City gets: Jakob Poeltl
San Antonio gets: Mike Muscala, OKC’s lottery-protected 2023 first-round pick, and LAC’s unprotected 2024 first-round pick

At a stunning 24-25, 0.5 games out of the play-in, and 9-4 in January, the Thunder are low-key coming up to a major crossroads on February 9. Do they stand pat? Do they add to their war chest of assets? Or, you know, do they try to win some games, make the playoffs, and let Shai Gilgeous-Alexander cook on a stage that befits his immaculate skill set?

For a team that’s struggled to grab defensive rebounds and may need a long-term interior presence who can help streamline Chet Holmgren’s responsibilities and free him from taxing dirty work as a full-time center, the 27-year-old Poeltl makes a ton of sense. His poise as a pick-and-roll partner will make life easier for SGA, Josh Giddey, and Jalen Williams. His rim protection and reliable drop coverage will also help OKC limit attempts at the rim and the corners (where they currently bleed shots).

The Thunder can go one of a few ways. But coming off a January in which they led the league in net rating, it might be time for them to take a step forward and reenter the competitive landscape.

I don't see that being very lopsided. The OKC pick is protected and the Clippers pick is likely to be in the mid to late 20's. That seems like appropriate value to me.

[Ariel]

I'd be selling if I were them too... I'd especially be looking to move Fred and Trent Jr. I wouldn't want to pay them what they're looking for on this team. I could also 'squint' and see them going after Jak in a larger deal moving fvf and tj elsewhere and sending the picks acquired in that deal to us and not including their own 1st this year.
Yeah, me too. In any case, I wouldn't rule out them wanting Poeltl even if they're sellers, because they're not burning everything to the ground, but more likely taking a few steps back, and Poeltl would still make sense in that scenario. Bad news is, that scenario should lower Poeltl's price.
I think Koloko + a protected first (with decreasing protections, something like 14, 10, 8) could be a reasonable middle ground for both.

[Ariel]

I don't see that being very lopsided. The OKC pick is protected and the Clippers pick is likely to be in the mid to late 20's. That seems like appropriate value to me.
The Clippers pick would likely be around 20, with a chance of striking gold given Kawhi & PG's injury history; I'll take that pick alone if you ask me. Also, even if OKC's pick is protected, if they land Jakob it means they're no longer tanking, and in the short term they should be good enough to make the playoffs, but not so much to make a top seed, so that pick should convey in the 15-20 range either in '24 or '25. That's 2 picks in the 15-20 range, IMO, with a chance of one of them falling into the lottery. I'd take that offer so fast their head would be spinning.

[mo7888]

The Clippers pick would likely be around 20, with a chance of striking gold given Kawhi & PG's injury history; I'll take that pick alone if you ask me. Also, even if OKC's pick is protected, if they land Jakob it means they're no longer tanking, and in the short term they should be good enough to make the playoffs, but not so much to make a top seed, so that pick should convey in the 15-20 range either in '24 or '25. That's 2 picks in the 15-20 range, IMO, with a chance of one of them falling into the lottery. I'd take that offer so fast their head would be spinning.

I'd take that too. The clippers pick is the plum there... it's probably in the 20's, but like you pointed out, it could strike gold. That's a risk worth taking...

[JPB]

I hope I'm wrong but I have a real hard time believing Jak is worth 2 FRPs, protected or not, for any team... I'll only believe it when I see it, because so far there's no indication at all that's the case, only spurs expecting (and probably not even) that...

Would I enter a trade as another team where spurs get 2FPRs for Poetl? No way.

[mo7888]

I hope I'm wrong but I have a real hard time believing Jak is worth 2 FRPs, protected or not, for any team... I'll only believe it when I see it, because so far there's no indication at all that's the case, only spurs expecting (and probably not even) that...

Would I enter a trade as another team where spurs get 2FPRs for Poetl? No way.

Well we'll both find out in just a little over a week.

[jjspur]

You know Poeltl's trade is all over the place. Some say he's worth 2 first rounders while others think he's worth only a 1st. I'm kinda in the middle, a first rounder probably protected plus a decent player (not Kornet from Boston) is probably what he's worth. The knicks have a few picks to throw around. Id be calling them rather than Boston even if we don't like their front office. They have their own picks or the the ability to swap picks for the next several years, plus some halfway decent talent on their roster. The Boston deals don't seem to bring back very much real value for a player who does have real value.

[Mr. Body]

I don't see Presti/OKC going for Poeltl at all.

1. Presti is addicted to drafting. I legit believe this. He doesn't know how to actually construct a team as much as he loves rolling the dice.

2. They aren't in win-now mode. Presti is proud and wants to create a team that wins under his own terms. Also, if he wanted a big to pair with his team of skinny dudes, he could have traded to get Duren instead of Dieng. (That would have been a much, much better move.)

As for Poeltl's worth, I do think he's worth 2 FRPs, it's just that no one contending has them.

[mo7888]

I don't see Presti/OKC going for Poeltl at all.

1. Presti is addicted to drafting. I legit believe this. He doesn't know how to actually construct a team as much as he loves rolling the dice.

2. They aren't in win-now mode. Presti is proud and wants to create a team that wins under his own terms. Also, if he wanted a big to pair with his team of skinny dudes, he could have traded to get Duren instead of Dieng. (That would have been a much, much better move.)

As for Poeltl's worth, I do think he's worth 2 FRPs, it's just that no one contending has them.

"They aren't in win-now mode"- That's the question though... at some point they have to pivot and they sure haven't tanked this year. Jak could be a relatively cheap way to increase their shot at getting in the play in (only 1 game out at this point) and a nice long term fit with Chet.

I'm not predicting that they trade for Jak, just that it's feasible with where they are in the standings and where they will be next season. There are other teams that probably want him more but OKC is a realistic destination.

[Dverde]

OKC just drafted Chet. I can’t see them wanting anything we have.

[spurraider21]

with poeltl playing like shit i doubt the spurs will getting the offers theyve been holding out for

[JPB]

I don't see Presti/OKC going for Poeltl at all.

1. Presti is addicted to drafting. I legit believe this. He doesn't know how to actually construct a team as much as he loves rolling the dice.

2. They aren't in win-now mode. Presti is proud and wants to create a team that wins under his own terms. Also, if he wanted a big to pair with his team of skinny dudes, he could have traded to get Duren instead of Dieng. (That would have been a much, much better move.)

As for Poeltl's worth, I do think he's worth 2 FRPs, it's just that no one contending has them.

I've no doubts some spurs fans think Poeltl is worth 2 FRPs, that's natural. Now, ask fans from any other team what they think, and I'm farily sure few to no one thinks he is... just like I believe most spurs fans thinking he is wouldn't give 2 FRPs for Poetl as a GM.. 1 FRP + a player is indeed the most spurs would be offered IMHO...

But I'd be glad being proven wrong.

[Mr. Body]

I've no doubts some spurs fans think Poeltl is worth 2 FRPs, that's natural. Now, ask fans from any other team what they think, and I'm farily sure few to no one thinks he is... just like I believe most spurs fans thinking he is wouldn't give 2 FRPs for Poetl as a GM.. 1 FRP + a player is indeed the most spurs would be offered IMHO...

But I'd be glad being proven wrong.

Other fans pay no attention to the Spurs. They were surprised Derrick White was as good as he was. They were flabbergasted that Murray received what he did. They literally have no idea what Spurs players are.

[Mr. Body]

with poeltl playing like shit i doubt the spurs will getting the offers theyve been holding out for

I'm not sure how many times this needs to be said -- other FOs know who these players are. They weren't hatched out of an egg in the last few days, or last few weeks, or even just last summer. Thad Young was desired by Toronto last year despite not playing much or well for the Spurs. Like, literally a few games on a bad team is not going to sway anybody.

[K...]

Imagine playing for a tank team knowing you could be playing for the celtics any day now....youd half ass it too.

[KingKev]

Imagine playing for a tank team knowing you could be playing for the celtics any day now....youd half ass it too.

I can see that. When it comes to Jak he is missing what DJM brought to this team. He was getting spoon fed last year on offense and had someone else who could rebound the ball.

He also knows he is getting 65-80mm over 4 yrs come this offseason regardless.

We definitely missed the boat on selling high but hopefully we can work a sign and trade come July if we can’t get something at the deadline. I see few reasons in retaining him however

[Dverde]

Matisse Thybulle would be an interesting return. We all know Morey has to make a trade every deadline, it’s in his contract.

[spurraider21]

I'm not sure how many times this needs to be said -- other FOs know who these players are. They weren't hatched out of an egg in the last few days, or last few weeks, or even just last summer. Thad Young was desired by Toronto last year despite not playing much or well for the Spurs. Like, literally a few games on a bad team is not going to sway anybody.
toronto didnt trade for Thad because he thought he would be a big difference maker on the court. guy was playing 15mpg in the playoffs for them. he wasnt any more productive for toronto than he was for us. if anything the thad young trade is a cautionary tale for other teams (thad and poeltl are in very different parts of their career, i recognize that)

a team that wants to make a trade to "win now" is definitely going to be concerned with a player's current level of play

[Chinook]

toronto didnt trade for Thad because he thought he would be a big difference maker on the court. guy was playing 15mpg in the playoffs for them. he wasnt any more productive for toronto than he was for us. if anything the thad young trade is a cautionary tale for other teams (thad and poeltl are in very different parts of their career, i recognize that)

a team that wants to make a trade to "win now" is definitely going to be concerned with a player's current level of play

Yes, in the sense that they'd care if he were bad all year. But they aren't looking at the last week to make their judgment, in the same way that they would likely not add a first-round pick for Richardson if he had a couple of 30-point games before the deadline.

[KingKev]

Spurstalk doesn’t realize how administrative the trade for Thad Young actually was.

1. We didn’t get an FRP for him, it was merely a pick swap from 33 to 20.

2. The Raptors dumped Dragic (who did not want to play in TO) and moved under the lux tax threshold so they could partake in a record redistribution of lux tax bonuses for the non payers.

3. By acquiring Thad’s bird rights rhe Raptors were able to stay under the cap in the 2022 off-season, retain Thad AND sign Otto Porter to an exception.

That was a reciprocal dealing at the time. I truly doubt the Raps will pay fair value for Jak at this juncture given how bad they are year over year unless they can turn FVV/GTJ into into an immediate win now player. At that point Jak makes
more sense.

[The Truth #6]

Makes sense. I’m still glad we got Branham—there’s hope for him. But I don’t see T Dot jumping back in on Yak right now. I agree with that.

[spurraider21]

Spurstalk doesn’t realize how administrative the trade for Thad Young actually was.

1. We didn’t get an FRP for him, it was merely a pick swap from 33 to 20.

2. The Raptors dumped Dragic (who did not want to play in TO) and moved under the lux tax threshold so they could partake in a record redistribution of lux tax bonuses for the non payers.

3. By acquiring Thad’s bird rights rhe Raptors were able to stay under the cap in the 2022 off-season, retain Thad AND sign Otto Porter to an exception.

That was a reciprocal dealing at the time. I truly doubt the Raps will pay fair value for Jak at this juncture given how bad they are year over year unless they can turn FVV/GTJ into into an immediate win now player. At that point Jak makes
more sense.
good point tbh

[TD 21]

Spurstalk doesn’t realize how administrative the trade for Thad Young actually was.

1. We didn’t get an FRP for him, it was merely a pick swap from 33 to 20.

2. The Raptors dumped Dragic (who did not want to play in TO) and moved under the lux tax threshold so they could partake in a record redistribution of lux tax bonuses for the non payers.

3. By acquiring Thad’s bird rights rhe Raptors were able to stay under the cap in the 2022 off-season, retain Thad AND sign Otto Porter to an exception.

That was a reciprocal dealing at the time. I truly doubt the Raps will pay fair value for Jak at this juncture given how bad they are year over year unless they can turn FVV/GTJ into into an immediate win now player. At that point Jak makes
more sense.

:lmao At the spin job.

It was an incredibly stupid/arrogant trade by the Craptors (who like to act like big shots but have always been cheap) and one without precedent.

A non contender, already poised to be one and done in the playoffs, acquiring a veteran player who had no path to significant minutes or ability to alter their ceiling, for the right to move back significantly in the draft.

[JPB]

Other fans pay no attention to the Spurs. They were surprised Derrick White was as good as he was. They were flabbergasted that Murray received what he did. They literally have no idea what Spurs players are.

Ok, so you have no idea either what players from other teams are, and have no idea what Poeltl could bring home then, and basically no idea what you're talking about here, right? Or only spurs fans know the NBA and can talk about any other teams players like we spend our time doing here...?

I don't know where you've seen fans were surprised by White and Murray trades and don't know spurs players (and then the NBA), but there are plenty of very educated fans thoughout the NBA who perfectly knew them, starting by Boston and Atlanta fans..

Go on other teams fan boards, like I do sometimes, and you'll see many peeps know the spurs even better than some spurs "fans" here do. I remember chatting with celtics fans when White was on the block and they knew every aspect of his game, qualities and defaults...

[Chinook]

Spurstalk doesn’t realize how administrative the trade for Thad Young actually was.

1. We didn’t get an FRP for him, it was merely a pick swap from 33 to 20.

2. The Raptors dumped Dragic (who did not want to play in TO) and moved under the lux tax threshold so they could partake in a record redistribution of lux tax bonuses for the non payers.

3. By acquiring Thad’s bird rights rhe Raptors were able to stay under the cap in the 2022 off-season, retain Thad AND sign Otto Porter to an exception.

That was a reciprocal dealing at the time. I truly doubt the Raps will pay fair value for Jak at this juncture given how bad they are year over year unless they can turn FVV/GTJ into into an immediate win now player. At that point Jak makes
more sense.


:lmao At the spin job.

It was an incredibly stupid/arrogant trade by the Craptors (who like to act like big shots but have always been cheap) and one without precedent.

A non contender, already poised to be one and done in the playoffs, acquiring a veteran player who had no path to significant minutes or ability to alter their ceiling, for the right to move back significantly in the draft.


It's somewhere in the middle. Moving up from 33 to 20 is probably about a very-late first's worth of value. I think both semantically and spiritually it's appropriate to say the Spurs got a first for Young. It's also true, though, that the trade had more benefits to the salary-strapped Raptors than just their on-the-court performance. It saved a lot of money and added flexibility under the tax. We've seen the Spurs make moves for less incentive before. I think the Spurs got good value, but I also think Ujuri is really happy with that deal. Koloko seems like a guy Masai would covet, and I actually think he would've picked him at 20 ala Cabocolo back in the day. So he saved more money to get his guy. Most likely, he thought the draft was flat after the lottery and saw little value in having moved back. The Spurs seemed to think the value of the draft lay in the second half of the first round. For them, it was worth quite a bit to move up to draft Branham and Wesley. Unlikely Ujuri, I think SA needed to make the move to secure their guy, though we won't know who "won" for a few years still.

I think the Thad trade shows good will between the front offices that could help with the Poeltl trade. I don't the Raptors will pay fair value too because of direction, but I also think they could see a trade that moves Trent for value that results in them getting Jakob's Bird rights as a move still worth doing if they truly see Poeltl as a part of their future. Insofar as that trade is possible, maybe SA can get some compensation they want by taking on bad salary. But I don't think PATFO has the Raptors over a barrel on this.

[DPG21920]

Ya - I agree with that sentiment Chinook

I don’t think SA has anyone over a barrel. Now, Jakob is a valuable piece to a winning team and their arent many Centers capable of providing non-scoring legit impact who still have reasonable salaries so I can see him being valued.

But not like a bidding war. BOS makes sense, TOR makes sense and all the trades they have done together have to increase the odds that they are willing to get things done. Especially for BOS who should be willing to pay a fair price since they can legit win it all and Jak has familiarity with Derrick already. That is a key factor IMO since fit matters and comfort matters and Jak can definitely play with White and reap benefits maybe quicker

[Chinook]

Ok, so you have no idea either what players from other teams are, and have no idea what Poeltl could bring home then, and basically no idea what you're talking about here, right? Or only spurs fans know the NBA and can talk about any other teams players like we spend our time doing here...?

I don't know where you've seen fans were surprised by White and Murray trades and don't know spurs players (and then the NBA), but there are plenty of very educated fans thoughout the NBA who perfectly knew them, starting by Boston and Atlanta fans..

Go on other teams fan boards, like I do sometimes, and you'll see many peeps know the spurs even better than some spurs "fans" here do. I remember chatting with celtics fans when White was on the block and they knew every aspect of his game, qualities and defaults...

There were plenty of fans who didn't like the White deal. I had many arguments with RGMers who thought he wasn't worth a first. Murray, I think, was well liked last summer but wasn't much before then. His stock exploded with the All-Star appearance. I think now, the Spurs are judged pretty fairly. Poeltl is basically a lock for a first from most folks I've read talk about him. Keldon and Vassell are both on the "don't ask" list. Richardson is a solid journeyman. The only issue I have is folks thinking the Spurs would pay or take back less value to get rid of McDermott. I think that's out of touch, but we have posters here who may agree with that, so I don't know.

[JeffDuncan]

Spurstalk doesn’t realize how administrative the trade for Thad Young actually was.

1. We didn’t get an FRP for him, it was merely a pick swap from 33 to 20.

2. The Raptors dumped Dragic (who did not want to play in TO) and moved under the lux tax threshold so they could partake in a record redistribution of lux tax bonuses for the non payers.

3. By acquiring Thad’s bird rights rhe Raptors were able to stay under the cap in the 2022 off-season, retain Thad AND sign Otto Porter to an exception.

That was a reciprocal dealing at the time. I truly doubt the Raps will pay fair value for Jak at this juncture given how bad they are year over year unless they can turn FVV/GTJ into into an immediate win now player. At that point Jak makes
more sense.


Correct about the trade, with perhaps the only point to add, it’s also how the Spurs got rid of Eubanks. He left with Thad.

As to any trade with the Raps now, it all depends on which way they decide to go, and when they decide. And like you say, who else they might be able to get.

It’s said that the Raps have an interest in moving both FVV and OG, which would look suspiciously like a blowup, at least a minor one. If they’ve decided to light the fuse, I don’t know that they’d want Poeltl. But nothing is clear yet.

[KingKev]

Correct about the trade, with perhaps the only point to add, it’s also how the Spurs got rid of Eubanks. He left with Thad.

As to any trade with the Raps now, it all depends on which way they decide to go, and when they decide. And like you say, who else they might be able to get.

It’s said that the Raps have an interest in moving both FVV and OG, which would look suspiciously like a blowup, at least a minor one. If they’ve decided to light the fuse, I don’t know that they’d want Poeltl. But nothing is clear yet.

I think we could swing a Thad like deal for JRich tbh. Not with the Raps but another playoff team potentially.

The Raps season is done. They have two decisions to make. Trade one of GTJ/FVV and one of Siakim/Barnes/OG to balance out their roster. Not a rebuild but a re-tool. I don’t see how Jak really helps that.

[JeffDuncan]

I think we could swing a Thad like deal for JRich tbh. Not with the Raps but another playoff team potentially.

The Raps season is done. They have two decisions to make. Trade one of GTJ/FVV and one of Siakim/Barnes/OG to balance out their roster. Not a rebuild but a re-tool. I don’t see how Jak really helps that.


The Raps won’t trade Barnes on that draft-scale contract. When a player is any good, which Barnes is, those draft contracts are the best bargain in the game. Ujiri would never let it go now.

I think the Nets could use Josh Richardson, for Joe Harris, but their draft picks are a mess.

If the Celtics are serious about a title run, and not just dorking around, they need to find a way to get Poeltl. I still think so.

[Big Empty]

I got 10 bucks cash app that sais we dont move Purtle

[TD 21]

^ I think they do. He's slowly being phased out recently and is clearly not fully engaged.

Just like Jones' role increased leading up to the White trade, Collins' has increased recently too.

[Dverde]

^ I think they do. He's slowly being phased out recently and is clearly not fully engaged.

Just like Jones' role increased leading up to the White trade, Collins' has increased recently too.

It could be the Spurs trying to keep his FA value down. What incentive do they have to play him during a tank when they want to re-sign him next year. You can’t piss him off by benching him or playing him little minutes.

[John B]

^ I think they do. He's slowly being phased out recently and is clearly not fully engaged.

Just like Jones' role increased leading up to the White trade, Collins' has increased recently too.

If anybody bites the 2FRP’s, then he gets moved and Collins start, who is increasingly getting bigger role and playing well. If no takers, then Poeltl stays and gets resigned maybe on a S&T like Demar. I don’t see the Spurs desperately trading Poeltl for peanuts.

[TD 21]

It could be the Spurs trying to keep his FA value down. What incentive do they have to play him during a tank when they want to re-sign him next year. You can’t piss him off by benching him or playing him little minutes.

Nothing short of a significant injury is going to do that at this point. He's going to command 4/$70-80M (probably towards the lower end).

Playing him less minutes likely would piss him off unless he was working with them on concert, which is likely the case.


If anybody bites the 2FRP’s, then he gets moved and Collins start, who is increasingly getting bigger role and playing well. If no takers, then Poeltl stays and gets resigned maybe on a S&T like Demar. I don’t see the Spurs desperately trading Poeltl for peanuts.

The Thunder loom as serious threats to sign Poeltl outright, but otherwise sure the Spurs would have sign-and-trade leverage, but that would prolong the risk of his getting a significant injury and why would the offers change by then?

Short of the Celtics, anyone who trades for him will do so with the intent of re-signing him and should have little to no trouble doing so.

[jjspur]

If anybody bites the 2FRP’s, then he gets moved and Collins start, who is increasingly getting bigger role and playing well. If no takers, then Poeltl stays and gets resigned maybe on a S&T like Demar. I don’t see the Spurs desperately trading Poeltl for peanuts.

The spurs got lucky in getting 3 firsts for Murray and I think the league noticed. Atlanta and Minnesota gave away a lot of draft capital and those teams aren't doing all that great right now. So yeah, NBA teams have taken notice and some of them are pretty saavy or at least cautious about trading away multiple draft picks. The spurs won't get that lucky again.

He's definitely worth more than peanuts, but probably not two firsts - at least not two non lottery protected firsts. We'll see in about a week. if they do get two decent firsts (fingers crossed) don't wait, don't ask questions , just say ok and take the deal, then quietly walk away.

[Mr. Body]

The problem with trading Poeltl - and I'm for trading Poeltl - is the question of replacing him. Collins is good, but slight, foul-prone, etc. Jakob Poeltl was a #9 draft pick and, I'd say, has fulfilled that promise. So where do we get a starting level center?

Zach Collins was a #10 draft pick, by the way. That's what it costs to go for these sorts of players.

[CGD]

The problem with trading Poeltl - and I'm for trading Poeltl - is the question of replacing him. Collins is good, but slight, foul-prone, etc. Jakob Poeltl was a #9 draft pick and, I'd say, has fulfilled that promise. So where do we get a starting level center?

Zach Collins was a #10 draft pick, by the way. That's what it costs to go for these sorts of players.

Get ready to hear some Euro big name we’re never heard of come over next summer

[Mr. Body]

Get ready to hear some Euro big name we’re never heard of come over next summer

Robertas Javtokas.

[jjspur]

Get ready to hear some Euro big name we’re never heard of come over next summer

That would be funny except that its a real possibility with the spurs.

[CGD]

That would be funny except that its a real possibility with the spurs.

That or get ready for a Robin Lopez type

[mo7888]

The problem with trading Poeltl - and I'm for trading Poeltl - is the question of replacing him. Collins is good, but slight, foul-prone, etc. Jakob Poeltl was a #9 draft pick and, I'd say, has fulfilled that promise. So where do we get a starting level center?

Zach Collins was a #10 draft pick, by the way. That's what it costs to go for these sorts of players.

I guess it depends on when we'd want to replace him? If we're talking about finishing this season we're looking at Zollins, Dieng maybe...possibly a G League guy...if we're talking about next season it's probably Zollins, a FA, and our 2nd rd pick used on one of the bigs that always falls in the draft.

[offset formation]

I think we could swing a Thad like deal for JRich tbh. Not with the Raps but another playoff team potentially.

The Raps season is done. They have two decisions to make. Trade one of GTJ/FVV and one of Siakim/Barnes/OG to balance out their roster. Not a rebuild but a re-tool. I don’t see how Jak really helps that.

Completely agree Poeltl to Raptors for what Spurs are asking makes zero sense for them. They clearly need to decide on a complete reboot or a more modest re-shuffling.

And I assume that comes down to what they think of their primary players and their economics to a rebuilding team.

If they are trading away one or more of Siakim, Barnes, or even OG, the only way they're planning on going is an initial reboot with high draft picks. Acquiring Poeltl under that scenario only kneecaps their stockpile.

Poeltl looks to be staying on the Spurs at this point since I don't see Boston or the Lakers (two other most discussed landing spots) meeting PATFO's asking price, or really anything even close to it.

I think PATFO has played this one poorly, quite frankly, by so publicly letting it be known what they expect for him because if they end up trading him for less, it'll be an immediate self-own humiliation. And no one will offer it.

[Robz4000]

I guess it depends on when we'd want to replace him? If we're talking about finishing this season we're looking at Zollins, Dieng maybe...possibly a G League guy...if we're talking about next season it's probably Zollins, a FA, and our 2nd rd pick used on one of the bigs that always falls in the draft.

Forgot about Bassey tbh. If Poeltl/Collins get traded his contract gets converted imo.