The Spurs' Draft Going Forward: Theory and Practice

[Mr. Body]

With our lottery position beginning to firm and a year nearly over of pain but some promise, I thought to put some thoughts together on this draft and those to come, along with the roster. These are intended as meta-level thoughts, not on a 'what specific player should we pick' level.

There are three major problems the team faces in its rebuild toward relevance. These overlap a bit, and these are generally good problems to have, but mark some minefields:

1. Handling player salaries
2. Player development
3. Too many draft picks?

Back in the day, there was discussion about whether the Spurs might be more interested in early second round picks rather than late first round picks. Reason why? With international players in that era often requiring buyouts, the SRP lack of salary structure gave more room to work with.

We often get caught up in acquiring players but not in how much they cost.

The problem with rookie salaries. A hidden thing that kills a lot of struggling and bad franchises is how much top draft picks cost. Here (https://basketball.realgm.com/nba/info/rookie_scale) is a rundown of how much each pick generally costs once they are signed. You can immediately see how a whiff on a high pick starts screwing a team pretty quickly. Add another couple of non-top pick stars and you're in a heap of trouble. Houston already pay Jalen Green and Jabari Smith, Jr., nearly $9,000,000 a year. Soon they'll need to decide whether to pay out their next contracts. (Sengun, at pick 16, makes a third of that.)

We saw how Phoenix struggled with paying Deandre Ayton what he was 'due' as a #1 pick. It's hard to say he's worth the chunk of the cap he receives. Also wonder if drafting a center that high makes sense at all.

Off-the-wall query: I kinda wonder if the Spurs are going to take their 12%-14% chance at Wemby/Henderson and, failing to get them, would actually be happier drafting at 5-7 than 3-4. For this theory to be true, they would have to feel confident they can get one of their Tier 2 guys and won't be on the hook for as much seasonally for them.

Managing salaries overall. There's been talk about how good Derrick White is (in the WSJ?) and how Poeltl is turning out for the Raptors. Inevitably, there's going to be grief that we gave up on these players. The frustration is fair, but I think misses the point of the trades wasn't only to gain future assets for these players, but to get off their salaries. White makes something like $17.5 million a year. Poeltl will make over $20 million.

Those are fine for contending teams, but costly for players that don't enable a struggling team to win. Again, like the cost of rookie wages, these are things the front office really seems to care about in detail.

I'd say it's open whether Keldon will be moved, and I think so. He's not quite on the same development curve and doesn't appear to be a first/leader guy, although he would be killer on a team like Denver or Boston, etc., where he could feast on the gravity of other players. I think the Spurs understand this; their philosophy seems to get these guys paid, and be overjoyed when someone else is paying them.

Too many puppies? A major issue coming up is who of these bustling little creatures to feed. Already we saw it in a win against Indiana -- Tre and Vassell coming back causes immediate issues with who gets the ball, where players are expecting shots, how they fit in. After an awful 2021 draft, with Primo nor Wieskamp even on the team, they seemed to have three promising rooks in Sochan, Branham, and Wesley this year. Then they signed undrafted Dominic Barlow and signed Philly's castoff Charles Bassey. All five players look pretty good!

And then we have three draft picks this year, and next year they may have five!!

This is clearly a problem, albeit a good problem to have. One, I might mention, OKC is facing. They were gifted a lot of picks by trades that fell into their lap, have loads of picks upcoming, and a lot of young players already. They burned three FRPs just to get Ousmane Dieng alone.

When mismanaged, these picks appear to lead to an unproductive churn. The Thunder are barely better than they were last year. Granted, they've been without their top pick from this draft, but even the absurd FT advantages their one superior player in SGA receives cannot push them into the playoffs. They will have to decide about players like Pokushevski and Jeremiah Robinson-Earl. Guys who -- okay, Pokushevski kind of sucks, but JRE seems like one of those workmanlike guys who can be in the league for a while.

While I wouldn't resist trading the Spurs' cache of picks for the Thunders', I truly don't know what they're going to do. Packaging players and picks for a star is an obvious strategy, but does Presti have the guts to pull the trigger? Picking in the draft is fairly easy, building a team is hard.

Strategies with too many picks: What are different approaches to handling gobs of picks? Well...

1. Respect the churn. Draft players, see how they work, draft other players, get rid of the first players. This seems... okay? Obviously you want to move on from players who aren't working out, but you don't want to do this because you don't have room for decent players.
2. Consolidate picks. This seems harder than you'd think, but you can package picks and move up. In fact, this may become easier now that fewer teams are controlling more picks.
3. Trade picks for players. Not even the star player, but the near-star, a Mikel Bridges type who can cement a good, young team. But then you'd have to change from a fancy-pants drafter into an actual team builder.
4. Start picking for need. Possibly an unintentional result of logjams at guard or suchlike, you start drafting for positions of need. For example, the Spurs drafting purely wings this draft because they only have Keita Bates-Diop.
5. Kick picks down the road. To me a great idea, even for surplus FRPs. If you have players coming along, you don't want to take too many swings to pile new guys on top of them. If the Spurs become a playoff team in three to five years, for example, then getting more picks along to help out is a massive boost. Adding talent to near-contending teams is remarkably hard.

The Spurs' current surplus dudes: By now it feels like we're seeing the near future of the roster. Putting Keldon and Devin aside, and Graham is someone who is fitting in, the near bit is Sochan, Branham, Wesley, Bassey, and possibly Barlow, plus the new rook(s). See what they can do. Dougie, who knows. But Langford and Roby are likely gone. What is important is to retain a veteran host to help out.

tl/dr: we have to consider salary in the Tetris-game of assembling a near-contender, and this plays a role in our drafts, and having too many picks needs to be addressed because it's a powerful, but easily squandered position.

[heyheymymy]

Great point how the same grim market outlook that prob cost SA FRPs this deadline may then boost SAs chances at a pick bundle trade pack on the draft night. Who else has the assets? Spurs could very well tilt the leverage back in their favor?

Would rather load up with players from picks vs. trading picks for players to get a mid-tier established value contributor/ near star like a Bridges. SA has already shed established guys like JR and Poeltl so I don't see them going back that route unless they just need some meat on the bones experience wise to balance off all the newer 1-3 year guys. You need *some* established guys to keep the play tight enough to positively develop new kids. SA has been getting results with 1-3 year new kids so far, touches = results enough for me to say let's keep trying that instead imo.

[The Truth #6]

Nice work.

[cjw]

The rookie scale thing is real - especially in year four. The fifteenth pick makes half of what the fifth pick does.

Unless they have a must-draft grade in someone outside of the top two, I’d be perfectly happy trading back and keeping flexibility. They already have significant draft capital, but that’s not all that can be obtained trading back. Top two this year, and you obviously stay put.

Punting picks down the road has some risk, but also avoids the salary / roster spots and has massive upside if a team you trade with ends up stinking. If you can turn a late lottery pick into a pick in the 20s and a future first? You have to consider it.

[JuneJive]

Good stuff.

[tonight...you]

Wow. Great post OP. Very thoughtful and insightful.

[scott]

Excellent ST 20th Anniversary Post

[intlspurshk]

Once Spurs drafts it’s cornerstone player, it can trade some picks plus existing player to get the second star like Lamello Ball or Scottie Banes or whoever not happy with his current team. Spurs can then sign the 3rd star in FA market to form the core big 3.

[CGD]

Good post.

Re draft: for the late picks, it’s the churn and turn game for the foreseeable future + more Kennedy Chandler type trades to kick the can down the road and improve the quality of later picks. On the decent picks, you gotta trust the quality of the spurs team.

Current players: Keldon is on the clock; his deal feels designed to be traded. Question soon will be what comes of Devon.

[scott]

Looking more and more like trading out of pick 3-5 might be a viable option. Maybe someone emerges during March Madness to change that, but I'm not even feeling that excited about anyone after Wemby.

[CGD]

Looking more and more like trading out of pick 3-5 might be a viable option. Maybe someone emerges during March Madness to change that, but I'm not even feeling that excited about anyone after Wemby.

Yeah, right now it feels like the 3rd pick is the shittiest pick to have if 3-7 are all at the same level.

[BackHome]

Yea will see if any new players jump out during playoffs but not really excited about anyone in the 3 to 6 range. I wood not mind trading back if we could pick up Black or Wallace or Dick and grab another late mid first.

For other pick would look at Bilal Coulibaly SG, Azuolas Tubelis PF, Leonard Miller SF, Jordan Hawkins SG

[exstatic]

Once Spurs drafts it’s cornerstone player, it can trade some picks plus existing player to get the second star like Lamello Ball or Scottie Banes or whoever not happy with his current team. Spurs can then sign the 3rd star in FA market to form the core big 3.

LaMelo Ball is a clown, and his family is a circus.

[BackHome]

Yeah Spurs are not building through free agency - Maybe if we get Wimb. or Scoot we could try adding pieces in two years but if we do not land them we going to need to tank easily two more years to add cornerstone players. Our turn around is not going to be easy or painless

[Stump]

Yeah, right now it feels like the 3rd pick is the shittiest pick to have if 3-7 are all at the same level.
I get that you have to pay more money with the 3rd pick, but you still get to scout and interview all five of those guys at that tier and decide which one is most likely to develop into a leader and All-Star. If you're a competent organization, it's worth the extra money.

[CGD]

I get that you have to pay more money with the 3rd pick, but you still get to scout and interview all five of those guys at that tier and decide which one is most likely to develop into a leader and All-Star. If you're a competent organization, it's worth the extra money.

Fair. I would just be open to trade it and hope that someone at 5 ends up falling in love with someone to the point they want to deal.

[JPB]

Yeah, right now it feels like the 3rd pick is the shittiest pick to have if 3-7 are all at the same level.

That's possible but I'm not sure we really have that great of a perception of that draft right now. I'm sure of the opposite actually... We're mainy guessing or rehashing vague media opinions on players most of us never even saw play and taking for granted posters (respectful) takes as if it was facts or common knowledge.

We just don't know honestly and I won't have the pretention to affirm for example that we should trade down because a few pundits said in February and we take for granted that there's no difference between 3-7 or there's a huge cliff after 2 with players we barely know or properly judge...

I'm sure comes draft day that there WILL be a difference, as there is every year. Tournament hasn't even started. There's no doubt players will emerge and 3-7 or so will clear until up the draft, the cliff maybe not being that big after 2 (we agree after 1)...

[Mr. Body]

Yeah, I have no idea how the Spurs will regard the lottery pick. Doesn't matter until the lottery really.

I'm as curious about the two SRPs. The one will be somewhere like 33 or 34, which has some value. And then that Toronto pick will be around 44, which isn't terrific.

[John B]

Nice read and a good problem for the PATFO. Making #9 pick Sochan even more great with more bang for the money. Hopefully Spurs get either Wemby or Scoot who are potentially All-NBA, then fairly high SRP’s are very ideal salary wise. Next year will be potential two lottery picks with Spurs own and a rebuilding Raptors’s pick, will most likely trade McD, Graham to make room. Then I think Spurs get competitive after next season, but will get Hawks’ FRP who I’m hoping will be lottery (I see Hawks moving either Tre/Murray). I think Spurs picks situations are ideal, plus a dash of future lotteries in Hawks and Bulls. If Spurs get Wemby, I’d consider trading those picks in acquiring disgruntled AS players to run with.

[Ocotillo]

Good write up Body, and a fresh thread. I had been wanting to do something like this as well but while your's is a bit different from the direction I would have done, you did a better job than I would have.

Anyway, one thing that sticks in my craw is when someone says such and such player is not in the timeline (DJ, Jak, etc..) A team is not ideally all the same age. Once we get "the" player(s), you will want a mix of age/experience and salary levels to be competitive. Everyone being the same age is churn and burn because if you were to hit on most of them, you end up not being able to keep them all salary wise unless Holt Cat is changing their behavior and luxury tax be damned.

Another thing is it appears a lot of these posters are approaching this rebuild like an old Soviet era 10 year plan. Depsite Wemby being available this draft, losing like this is miserable and a long term fix is not going to cut it. We don't have the fan base to be consistent lottery players.

[cjw]

Teams that go through ten year rebuilds aren’t actually going through ten year rebuilds. They just have no plan and are incompetent.

This is the first year the Spurs have outright tanked (they made play in last two years, and were part of bubble in 2020). They’ll come out of this draft with either a possible generational player, or a pretty darn good talent. I would put money on this year being the absolute depth of the rebuild, and part of that has been due to injuries + trading away guys for future assets. They’ll be back in the play-in mix before too long, and playoff mix soon enough too. Too many west teams have outright mortgaged their futures for it not to come back around.

[Dejounte]

Good write up Body, and a fresh thread. I had been wanting to do something like this as well but while your's is a bit different from the direction I would have done, you did a better job than I would have.

Anyway, one thing that sticks in my craw is when someone says such and such player is not in the timeline (DJ, Jak, etc..) A team is not ideally all the same age. Once we get "the" player(s), you will want a mix of age/experience and salary levels to be competitive. Everyone being the same age is churn and burn because if you were to hit on most of them, you end up not being able to keep them all salary wise unless Holt Cat is changing their behavior and luxury tax be damned.

Another thing is it appears a lot of these posters are approaching this rebuild like an old Soviet era 10 year plan. Depsite Wemby being available this draft, losing like this is miserable and a long term fix is not going to cut it. We don't have the fan base to be consistent lottery players.

Make your thread. This board needs fresh takes and I appreciate Body for making this thread even though I give him shit for being a wild character sometimes. But that’s what makes him him. So kudos to you, Body.

[mo7888]

Good stuff... we need more thoughtful things like this..

[Sugus]

Teams that go through ten year rebuilds aren’t actually going through ten year rebuilds. They just have no plan and are incompetent.

This is the first year the Spurs have outright tanked (they made play in last two years, and were part of bubble in 2020). They’ll come out of this draft with either a possible generational player, or a pretty darn good talent. I would put money on this year being the absolute depth of the rebuild, and part of that has been due to injuries + trading away guys for future assets. They’ll be back in the play-in mix before too long, and playoff mix soon enough too. Too many west teams have outright mortgaged their futures for it not to come back around.

I'm of this thinking, too. Especially if they get Wemby, but Scoot as well. The tanking mindset that the Spurs have shown this season likely won't be there in those scenarios next season, which is a big difference. This year's team perfectly could've won 5-10 more games if they weren't actively sabotaged.

Then you look for that Kyrie, Porzingis, KD type of player and situation, and capitalize, or try to. The ATL picks, plus our own if need be, are more than enough for a disgruntled star. Throw in Keldon or some other player as well and...

I'd like to see what a Vassell, Sochan, Wemby, Star player + complimentary pieces team could get to do.

[K...]

if we do it right, are lowest result would be utah, a series of short tanks and pretender playoff teams. High point is memhis, a young hungry team that can grow into a 5 year window. The odds of having a star drag you to a chip are too low to care about. You have to plan for these abortive cycles and rebuilds and steadily churn through prospects and psuedo stars.

[DPG21920]

I'm of this thinking, too. Especially if they get Wemby, but Scoot as well. The tanking mindset that the Spurs have shown this season likely won't be there in those scenarios next season, which is a big difference. This year's team perfectly could've won 5-10 more games if they weren't actively sabotaged.

Then you look for that Kyrie, Porzingis, KD type of player and situation, and capitalize, or try to. The ATL picks, plus our own if need be, are more than enough for a disgruntled star. Throw in Keldon or some other player as well and...

I'd like to see what a Vassell, Sochan, Wemby, Star player + complimentary pieces team could get to do.

Spurs have cap space, tons of extra picks and good young core. They can go to really bad to solid quickly with some luck this draft. Flip side is with bad luck, it may take longer. But even if you land Wemby or Scoot or Miller and they pan out, you are still probably 2-3 years out from cashing in your chips to trade for someone to make the leap a la CLE.

To me, that MEM/CLE plan is the one, but it starts with landing that star/higher upside core via a couple years in top 5

[Dejounte]

Spurs have cap space, tons of extra picks and good young core. They can go to really bad to solid quickly with some luck this draft. Flip side is with bad luck, it may take longer. But even if you land Wemby or Scoot or Miller and they pan out, you are still probably 2-3 years out from cashing in your chips to trade for someone to make the leap a la CLE.

To me, that MEM/CLE plan is the one, but it starts with landing that star/higher upside core via a couple years in top 5

Not so sure about Memphis now as Ja is tearing it down with his stupidity as the weeks go by.

[DPG21920]

Not so sure about Memphis now as Ja is tearing it down with his stupidity as the weeks go by.

Well ya, lol, that is seriously scary stuff going on there. But I was saying their path….if you do what they did its amazing just have to hope you dont land an immature player like Ja is coming off.

[RobinsontoDuncan]

I'm really struggling to understand why so many people seem so eager to trade Keldon Johnson. He's only 23 years old and will inevitably improve (for reference, that's how old Derrick White was when we drafted him). You dont build contenders by trading away good players you've painstakingly developed. Also, this team already has a pretty good core:

2x proven 20ppg wing scorers in Vessel and KJ
2x potential star players in Branham and Sochan (I could see either or both developing into 20ppg players in the future)
A guaranteed top 10 pick in this year's draft


All of these guys will continue improving over the next 6 or 7 seasons. Consider this, Nephew was 23 when he had his big breakout in the '14 finals. Before that, we all mostly assumed he was a high, high level role player.

[Mr. Body]

I'm really struggling to understand why so many people seem so eager to trade Keldon Johnson. He's only 23 years old and will inevitably improve (for reference, that's how old Derrick White was when we drafted him). You dont build contenders by trading away good players you've painstakingly developed. Also, this team already has a pretty good core:

2x proven 20ppg wing scorers in Vessel and KJ
2x potential star players in Branham and Sochan (I could see either or both developing into 20ppg players in the future)
A guaranteed top 10 pick in this year's draft


All of these guys will continue improving over the next 6 or 7 seasons. Consider this, Nephew was 23 when he had his big breakout in the '14 finals. Before that, we all mostly assumed he was a high, high level role player.

I'd say the suspicion is that he's not a lead scorer and also not a great defender. More to the point, his extention is kicking in. So you have the same situation as with White, Murray, and Poeltl, players who are good, who may be tailing off as the next rank of players are getting better, and cost money versus production you're not getting or needing due to the team situation.

Moving these players ostensibly lets others move in and develop. White moving let Murray grow into himself. Poeltl moving looks like it has opened up Collins.

[talkspurs]

One thing I dont understand is why people want to trade for a disgruntled player once we get going. Looking at most of them it has not worked out so well. LA got AD but look how they are now and dont have much of a future. Nets got KD and Kyrie and Harden and all of them are gone. Kawhi and PG to LAC. They have not done much since they got there. Yes Kawhi won in Toronto so they may consider it a win but had to kind of rebuild when he left the next year. KP to the Mavs lasted a year or so? It looks like DJM and Tre pairing is not working so great. I think this is more on Tre though and DJM was not trying to force his way out.

What I am saying is usually these players that act like this and want out are players that cause problems where they go. If we bring player like this in it could hurt our team long term. I would rather build like Milwaukee, Boston, Denver.

[RobinsontoDuncan]

KJ doesn’t have to be a lead scorer to be super valuable. Consider how valuable he’d be in a 6th man role in the playoffs. I also don’t think he’s done developing offensively, and certainly he can still improve defensively, especially if the talent around him improves.

[KingKev]

KJ doesn’t have to be a lead scorer to be super valuable. Consider how valuable he’d be in a 6th man role in the playoffs. I also don’t think he’s done developing offensively, and certainly he can still improve defensively, especially if the talent around him improves.

Because he’s a high usage tweener who can’t can’t guard a single position. If his 3 ball isn’t dropping he’s a consistent net negative player.

Given we won’t be competitive for years to come if/when the opportunity to sell high is available I’m hitting that bid every time. If we actually were able to turn this around in 2-3 years he might have a role off the bench.

[TD 21]

We saw how Phoenix struggled with paying Deandre Ayton what he was 'due' as a #1 pick. It's hard to say he's worth the chunk of the cap he receives. Also wonder if drafting a center that high makes sense at all.

Managing salaries overall. There's been talk about how good Derrick White is (in the WSJ?) and how Poeltl is turning out for the Raptors. Inevitably, there's going to be grief that we gave up on these players.

The Thunder are barely better than they were last year.

1. The strict rim runner/protector archetype are obviously not worth a high pick since we've seen numerous examples of ones ranging from late 1sts to undrafted becoming anywhere from quality starters to good backups.

Despite the league/media brainwashing the masses otherwise, now that bigs have adjusted to this era, a great one is as important as ever which is why they're the ones battling it out for MVP and mostly dominating the playoffs in recent years.

2. I've noticed that every time White, Murray or Poeltl has a big counting stat game it inexplicably gets brought up, yet the same conveniently doesn't happen with the picks the Spurs received from prominent trades.

3. The Thunder went from 29th in expected record to 10th this season, with probably their second highest impact player not playing a second.



Spurs have cap space, tons of extra picks and good young core. They can go to really bad to solid quickly with some luck this draft.

They don't have a single player who looks capable of so much as being the second best player on a good team.

So can virtually any team.

[Mr. Body]

1. The strict rim runner/protector archetype are obviously not worth a high pick since we've seen numerous examples of ones ranging from late 1sts to undrafted becoming anywhere from quality starters to good backups.

Despite the league/media brainwashing the masses otherwise, now that bigs have adjusted to this era, a great one is as important as ever which is why they're the ones battling it out for MVP and mostly dominating the playoffs in recent years.

3. The Thunder went from 29th in expected record to 10th this season, with probably their second highest impact player not playing a second.


There are literally only two great bigs in the league, and one was had with a SRP. You might find another one, maybe.

OKC can't even make the playoffs in one of the worst years for the Western Conference in memory. They're generally good because they were gifted SGA, who also derives a grotesque number of points because of chintzy, crapass fouls the league calls for the benefit of players like him. I don't doubt Silver is going to slide a top 4 pick over to them this year, though.

[Ed Helicopter Jones]

Back in the day, there was discussion about whether the Spurs might be more interested in early second round picks rather than late first round picks. Reason why? With international players in that era often requiring buyouts, the SRP lack of salary structure gave more room to work with.

We often get caught up in acquiring players but not in how much they cost.

The problem with rookie salaries. A hidden thing that kills a lot of struggling and bad franchises is how much top draft picks cost. Here (https://basketball.realgm.com/nba/info/rookie_scale) is a rundown of how much each pick generally costs once they are signed. You can immediately see how a whiff on a high pick starts screwing a team pretty quickly. Add another couple of non-top pick stars and you're in a heap of trouble. Houston already pay Jalen Green and Jabari Smith, Jr., nearly $9,000,000 a year. Soon they'll need to decide whether to pay out their next contracts. (Sengun, at pick 16, makes a third of that.)

We saw how Phoenix struggled with paying Deandre Ayton what he was 'due' as a #1 pick. It's hard to say he's worth the chunk of the cap he receives. Also wonder if drafting a center that high makes sense at all.

Off-the-wall query: I kinda wonder if the Spurs are going to take their 12%-14% chance at Wemby/Henderson and, failing to get them, would actually be happier drafting at 5-7 than 3-4. For this theory to be true, they would have to feel confident they can get one of their Tier 2 guys and won't be on the hook for as much seasonally for them.

Managing salaries overall. There's been talk about how good Derrick White is (in the WSJ?) and how Poeltl is turning out for the Raptors. Inevitably, there's going to be grief that we gave up on these players. The frustration is fair, but I think misses the point of the trades wasn't only to gain future assets for these players, but to get off their salaries. White makes something like $17.5 million a year. Poeltl will make over $20 million.

Those are fine for contending teams, but costly for players that don't enable a struggling team to win. Again, like the cost of rookie wages, these are things the front office really seems to care about in detail.

I'd say it's open whether Keldon will be moved, and I think so. He's not quite on the same development curve and doesn't appear to be a first/leader guy, although he would be killer on a team like Denver or Boston, etc., where he could feast on the gravity of other players. I think the Spurs understand this; their philosophy seems to get these guys paid, and be overjoyed when someone else is paying them.

Too many puppies? A major issue coming up is who of these bustling little creatures to feed. Already we saw it in a win against Indiana -- Tre and Vassell coming back causes immediate issues with who gets the ball, where players are expecting shots, how they fit in. After an awful 2021 draft, with Primo nor Wieskamp even on the team, they seemed to have three promising rooks in Sochan, Branham, and Wesley this year. Then they signed undrafted Dominic Barlow and signed Philly's castoff Charles Bassey. All five players look pretty good!

And then we have three draft picks this year, and next year they may have five!!

This is clearly a problem, albeit a good problem to have. One, I might mention, OKC is facing. They were gifted a lot of picks by trades that fell into their lap, have loads of picks upcoming, and a lot of young players already. They burned three FRPs just to get Ousmane Dieng alone.

When mismanaged, these picks appear to lead to an unproductive churn. The Thunder are barely better than they were last year. Granted, they've been without their top pick from this draft, but even the absurd FT advantages their one superior player in SGA receives cannot push them into the playoffs. They will have to decide about players like Pokushevski and Jeremiah Robinson-Earl. Guys who -- okay, Pokushevski kind of sucks, but JRE seems like one of those workmanlike guys who can be in the league for a while.

While I wouldn't resist trading the Spurs' cache of picks for the Thunders', I truly don't know what they're going to do. Packaging players and picks for a star is an obvious strategy, but does Presti have the guts to pull the trigger? Picking in the draft is fairly easy, building a team is hard.

Strategies with too many picks: What are different approaches to handling gobs of picks? Well...

1. Respect the churn. Draft players, see how they work, draft other players, get rid of the first players. This seems... okay? Obviously you want to move on from players who aren't working out, but you don't want to do this because you don't have room for decent players.
2. Consolidate picks. This seems harder than you'd think, but you can package picks and move up. In fact, this may become easier now that fewer teams are controlling more picks.
3. Trade picks for players. Not even the star player, but the near-star, a Mikel Bridges type who can cement a good, young team. But then you'd have to change from a fancy-pants drafter into an actual team builder.
4. Start picking for need. Possibly an unintentional result of logjams at guard or suchlike, you start drafting for positions of need. For example, the Spurs drafting purely wings this draft because they only have Keita Bates-Diop.
5. Kick picks down the road. To me a great idea, even for surplus FRPs. If you have players coming along, you don't want to take too many swings to pile new guys on top of them. If the Spurs become a playoff team in three to five years, for example, then getting more picks along to help out is a massive boost. Adding talent to near-contending teams is remarkably hard.

The Spurs' current surplus dudes: By now it feels like we're seeing the near future of the roster. Putting Keldon and Devin aside, and Graham is someone who is fitting in, the near bit is Sochan, Branham, Wesley, Bassey, and possibly Barlow, plus the new rook(s). See what they can do. Dougie, who knows. But Langford and Roby are likely gone. What is important is to retain a veteran host to help out.

tl/dr: we have to consider salary in the Tetris-game of assembling a near-contender, and this plays a role in our drafts, and having too many picks needs to be addressed because it's a powerful, but easily squandered position.



Good points in there.

I think your 3rd point under strategies could come to fruition if we land Wemby. My thought is that the Spurs will want to pretty quickly try to build some traction should they win the lottery, so I could certainly see them trying to convert some of their picks back into decent rotational players. Get some middle tier stars to surround him, maybe even grabbing someone in free agency, and suddenly the Spurs are back in business.

Converting those rookies deals into long-term contracts does become costly. Makes you realize that climbing out of the rebuild is harder than it looks. You definitely need some luck, like Denver in drafting the Joker. The stars definitely need to align in order for a team to rebuild and be elite. Lots of teams have gotten to be good again, but you can't point to too many rebuilds producing championships.

[TD 21]

There are literally only two great bigs in the league, and one was had with a SRP. You might find another one, maybe.

OKC can't even make the playoffs in one of the worst years for the Western Conference in memory. They're generally good because they were gifted SGA, who also derives a grotesque number of points because of chintzy, crapass fouls the league calls for the benefit of players like him. I don't doubt Silver is going to slide a top 4 pick over to them this year, though.

:lmao Presuming you mean Jokic and Embiid, that would mean you're implying Antetokounmpo (despite the ball skills, basically a C on offense since he can't shoot) and Davis aren't great? The first three are MVP caliber, the fourth is borderline, while Towns, Sabonis and Adebayo are All-NBA caliber (Gobert hasn't been this season).

Jumping 19 spots in expected record indicates they're much more than barely improved.

[Mr. Body]

:lmao Presuming you mean Jokic and Embiid, that would mean you're implying Antetokounmpo (despite the ball skills, basically a C on offense since he can't shoot) and Davis aren't great? The first three are MVP caliber, the fourth is borderline, while Towns, Sabonis and Adebayo are All-NBA caliber (Gobert hasn't been this season).

Jumping 19 spots in expected record indicates they're much more than barely improved.

Yep, Embiid and Jokic. Giannis isn't a center. Anthony Davis is a fucking soft piece of junk. Towns is terrible. Adebayo is a PF. Gobert is great on one side of the ball.

[TD 21]

Yep, Embiid and Jokic. Giannis isn't a center. Anthony Davis is a fucking soft piece of junk. Towns is terrible. Adebayo is a PF. Gobert is great on one side of the ball.

Antetokounmpo is a terrible shooting, C sized type who occasionally defends the position, Davis is still a top 10 player when healthy, Towns is still a top 20 player when healthy, Adebayo is clearly a C and Gobert might be on the decline.

The point is, there's about as many great or very good bigs now as at virtually any time, so don't buy into this nonsense that they try to sell the masses.

[Mr. Body]

Antetokounmpo is a terrible shooting, C sized type who occasionally defends the position, Davis is still a top 10 player when healthy, Towns is still a top 20 player when healthy, Adebayo is clearly a C and Gobert might be on the decline.

The point is, there's about as many great or very good bigs now as at virtually any time, so don't buy into this nonsense that they try to sell the masses.

Whatever you want to say.

[rascal]

Because he’s a high usage tweener who can’t can’t guard a single position. If his 3 ball isn’t dropping he’s a consistent net negative player.

Given we won’t be competitive for years to come if/when the opportunity to sell high is available I’m hitting that bid every time. If we actually were able to turn this around in 2-3 years he might have a role off the bench.

Spurs need to add more talented players and not hope payers develope into these type of players.

[scott]

This thread, an intellectual masterpiece, deserves more than just two pages. Maybe it needs more Sandro Mamusfdhjsfkdsfville or Primo’s junk to catch fire.

Either way, love reading this thread. ST’s finest.

[scott]

Good points in there.

I think your 3rd point under strategies could come to fruition if we land Wemby. My thought is that the Spurs will want to pretty quickly try to build some traction should they win the lottery, so I could certainly see them trying to convert some of their picks back into decent rotational players. Get some middle tier stars to surround him, maybe even grabbing someone in free agency, and suddenly the Spurs are back in business.

Converting those rookies deals into long-term contracts does become costly. Makes you realize that climbing out of the rebuild is harder than it looks. You definitely need some luck, like Denver in drafting the Joker. The stars definitely need to align in order for a team to rebuild and be elite. Lots of teams have gotten to be good again, but you can't point to too many rebuilds producing championships.

100%

I keep going back to what I call the 1989 model. With you’re rookie superstar established along with one other centerpiece (who could have been considered either Sean or Willie going into the 1989 season), it’s time to consolidate your other young assets and build a real team. While there isn’t an exact parallel, if we land Wemby I’d like to see the Spurs package up some combination of Keldon/Vassell/Bran (two of the three) and/or picks for our 2023 version of Terry Cummings to give veteran presence and leadership to Wemby, Sochan and the rest.

[Thomas82]

100%

I keep going back to what I call the 1989 model. With you’re rookie superstar established along with one other centerpiece (who could have been considered either Sean or Willie going into the 1989 season), it’s time to consolidate your other young assets and build a real team. While there isn’t an exact parallel, if we land Wemby I’d like to see the Spurs package up some combination of Keldon/Vassell/Bran (two of the three) and/or picks for our 2023 version of Terry Cummings to give veteran presence and leadership to Wemby, Sochan and the rest.

I'm right there with you on this one!!

[spurraider21]

Not reading all that.

But I’m happy for you.

Or sorry that happened

[Silverheart80]

If the Spurs get the #1 pick in this summer's draft, it's a dream come true. But if not, then the question becomes, "How do you win a championship against a team with Wembanyama?"

Depending on what team gets him (that's the big 'if, right?), I think Wembanyama's arrival triggers an increased demand for NBA players to be able to rotate on all five positions on D, handle the ball, initiate offense, create their own shots when needed, and shoot threes with efficiency. I think a design like that could nullify and overcome a team built around Wembanyama, but it would take a team with length and quickness with no short players or tweeners. In the past, Golden State has come *somewhat* closest, but no team has accomplished that exact design yet.

The traditional center who can't shoot the three and can't defend on the perimeter is virtually an extinct NBA species (at least for winning a championship). But to make that design work, then the next endangered species will be the undersized guard. We've seen an evolution of NBA bigs that can shoot the three, but I think the next evolution is NBA forwards that can handle the ball and initiate offense, along with shoot from distance -- which is already happening obviously. But the shift is that ballhandling to initiate offense becomes a virtually mandatory skillset *across the entire lineup* in order to compete for championships. And that's where shorter point guards and 'tweener-sized wings would become obsolete on defense. They become impossible to hide. I think that's the effect Victor is gonna have, both on the NBA and globally.

He's the next evolutionary step from KD. So as far as how the Spurs draft from here -- I'm not particularly high on the team's current abundance of 6'4" to 6'6" wing players in that kind of world, and building around a 6'2" point guard like Scoot Henderson feels risky in that scenario, if the Spurs score the #2 pick. On the other hand, Brandon Miller makes sense toward that kind of design, but I can't see the Spurs risking a pick on him. So beyond Wembanyama at #1, there are really no surefire answers, but long-term, that's the design I would aim for. League-wide change won't happen overnight or even in one or two seasons. It'll be gradual, but I think it'll happen -- we're headed to a truly positionless NBA future.

<lights another Manu candle for the Spurs to score that #1 pick>

[Vince Carter's ankle]

"How do you win a championship against a team with Wembanyama?"
He hasn't played a single game in the NBA.
Keep calm.

[Ocotillo]

These generational type of players do not typically come in and march their new NBA team to a championship. Duncan pulled it off pretty quickly but he had a strong line up around him that had been injured the year he was drafted. Lebron took quite a bit of time. Curry did not turn them around right away. If Wemby lands on the Spurs or say Charlotte, Detroit or Houston, he isn't ringing his first season. Maybe if a team like New Orleans lucks into winning the lottery with the LA pick swap, they might pull something off if Zion can play a full season.

All this is saying, however good a rook is, it still takes time unless there are extraordinary circumstances.

[exstatic]

If the Spurs get the #1 pick in this summer's draft, it's a dream come true. But if not, then the question becomes, "How do you win a championship against a team with Wembanyama?"

Depending on what team gets him (that's the big 'if, right?), I think Wembanyama's arrival triggers an increased demand for NBA players to be able to rotate on all five positions on D, handle the ball, initiate offense, create their own shots when needed, and shoot threes with efficiency. I think a design like that could nullify and overcome a team built around Wembanyama, but it would take a team with length and quickness with no short players or tweeners. In the past, Golden State has come *somewhat* closest, but no team has accomplished that exact design yet.

The traditional center who can't shoot the three and can't defend on the perimeter is virtually an extinct NBA species (at least for winning a championship). But to make that design work, then the next endangered species will be the undersized guard. We've seen an evolution of NBA bigs that can shoot the three, but I think the next evolution is NBA forwards that can handle the ball and initiate offense, along with shoot from distance -- which is already happening obviously. But the shift is that ballhandling to initiate offense becomes a virtually mandatory skillset *across the entire lineup* in order to compete for championships. And that's where shorter point guards and 'tweener-sized wings would become obsolete on defense. They become impossible to hide. I think that's the effect Victor is gonna have, both on the NBA and globally.

He's the next evolutionary step from KD. So as far as how the Spurs draft from here -- I'm not particularly high on the team's current abundance of 6'4" to 6'6" wing players in that kind of world, and building around a 6'2" point guard like Scoot Henderson feels risky in that scenario, if the Spurs score the #2 pick. On the other hand, Brandon Miller makes sense toward that kind of design, but I can't see the Spurs risking a pick on him. So beyond Wembanyama at #1, there are really no surefire answers, but long-term, that's the design I would aim for. League-wide change won't happen overnight or even in one or two seasons. It'll be gradual, but I think it'll happen -- we're headed to a truly positionless NBA future.

<lights another Manu candle for the Spurs to score that #1 pick>

The problem with that supposition is that the bell curve of humans has a 'bell' that gravitates towards normal sized humans. There will be a fuck ton more 6'2" guys who can handle, pass, and shoot at a high NBA level than 6'8" guys with those same skills. The 6'8" guys will be infinitely more valuable AND more rare, meaning the 6'2" guys aren't going anywhere. I think what you will see is that guys under maybe 6'4" who aren't knockdown shooters will vanish, or almost vanish.

[Silverheart80]

The problem with that supposition is that the bell curve of humans has a 'bell' that gravitates towards normal sized humans. There will be a fuck ton more 6'2" guys who can handle, pass, and shoot at a high NBA level than 6'8" guys with those same skills. The 6'8" guys will be infinitely more valuable AND more rare, meaning the 6'2" guys aren't going anywhere. I think what you will see is that guys under maybe 6'4" who aren't knockdown shooters will vanish, or almost vanish.

Yeah, I think 6'4" NBA guards who aren't knockdown shooters are already undesirable. Agree there. I'm saying that to win championships in an era where teams are all trying to get bigger across the roster, I think that kind of design is gonna be mandatory. You're right that we're gonna have plenty of shorter NBA players and tweeners for a long time, but those teams won't be competing for championships, once the model shifts. There's not gonna be enough supply of those players for all 30 teams in the short run. So we'll see a much more stratified 'haves and have-nots' league. The need to shift could very well happen overnight if Wembanyama goes to the right club with the right GM, but the manifestation of that shift.....that's gonna take a while. I'm saying I would like to see the Spurs be a leader toward that model, rather than a follower. We shall see. But in the meantime, Sochan is absolutely the kind of player that fits that future. :)

[Silverheart80]

These generational type of players do not typically come in and march their new NBA team to a championship. Duncan pulled it off pretty quickly but he had a strong line up around him that had been injured the year he was drafted. Lebron took quite a bit of time. Curry did not turn them around right away. If Wemby lands on the Spurs or say Charlotte, Detroit or Houston, he isn't ringing his first season. Maybe if a team like New Orleans lucks into winning the lottery with the LA pick swap, they might pull something off if Zion can play a full season.

All this is saying, however good a rook is, it still takes time unless there are extraordinary circumstances.

Yeah, I don't think he's ringing upon his first season either. But player movement is so much more fluid now that it used to be. Even back in the day, Charlotte drafts Kobe Bryant with the 13th pick and he never plays a day as a Hornet, despite the team wanting him. His agent forced a trade to the Lakers and the league allowed it to happen. I can see those player demands happening even more in today's climate, especially in favor of bigger media markets. Wherever he goes, I can see major free agent vets wanting to join up with him, especially if it's a major market OR if it's a team that's well-constructed and has a savvy GM. It wouldn't take long in today's NBA to build a championship team around him, if he's in the right scenario.

So back to my point, if we have to compete against him, what I'm suggesting can't be accomplished in one season, nor does it need to be. But what I'm seeing is the long-term effect he's gonna have, if he stays healthy, and what the Spurs would need to do in the draft going forward, if we wanna compete for championships.

[wildbill2u]

To Silverhart90: You bring up an interesting point(s). The league, advertisers and possibly the player and his agents may well be against him signing with the Spurs or any city perceived to be less than optimal for their own selfish desires. What then? If we get him, are we going to be pressured from all sides to give him up? If not early (after the draft) or after one season? I can see that happening.

The problem is evident. Any team that would meet the approval from the above interests either doesn't have current assets we'd want in a trade or would run into a problem giving up multiple first round drafts choices that would be acceptable to us, if for no other reason than his new team would likely improve to the point where their FRPs would progressively get worse as he moves them up in the standings. We can get screwed even if our unicorn dreams come true.

[exstatic]

From everything I’ve read, all of the conjecture and speculation, SA would be a very desirable landing spot for Wemby. Let’s not buy trouble before we’ve even won the lottery. Euros tend to be less large market oriented, most of today’s contenders are aging out and out of draft picks, besides which any team he goes to will be a contender in a few years.

[slick'81]

Kawhi giving spur fans ptsd with yama:nope

[Silverheart80]

To Silverhart90: You bring up an interesting point(s). The league, advertisers and possibly the player and his agents may well be against him signing with the Spurs or any city perceived to be less than optimal for their own selfish desires. What then? If we get him, are we going to be pressured from all sides to give him up? If not early (after the draft) or after one season? I can see that happening.

The problem is evident. Any team that would meet the approval from the above interests either doesn't have current assets we'd want in a trade or would run into a problem giving up multiple first round drafts choices that would be acceptable to us, if for no other reason than his new team would likely improve to the point where their FRPs would progressively get worse as he moves them up in the standings. We can get screwed even if our unicorn dreams come true.

We're all so focused on the draft odds, but in the end, no one knows what happens with those ping pong balls, behind closed doors. I can't imagine the league isn't gonna be heavily wanting Wembanyama to go to a major media market, such as Chicago. I'm hoping the lottery isn't rigged, but in the end, none of us really know, do we?

Thankfully, I haven't seen or heard anything yet from Wembanyama's camp that indicates he wouldn't play in a small market like SA. I guess we'll know shortly after May 16th, if the Spurs were to score the #1.

[Silverheart80]

From everything I’ve read, all of the conjecture and speculation, SA would be a very desirable landing spot for Wemby. Let’s not buy trouble before we’ve even won the lottery. Euros tend to be less large market oriented, most of today’s contenders are aging out and out of draft picks, besides which any team he goes to will be a contender in a few years.

From what info is out there so far -- I would agree. No firm indication he wouldn't play for a small market, as of yet. And definitely agree that wherever he goes, that team is on the fast track toward ring contention.

[exstatic]

We're all so focused on the draft odds, but in the end, no one knows what happens with those ping pong balls, behind closed doors. I can't imagine the league isn't gonna be heavily wanting Wembanyama to go to a major media market, such as Chicago. I'm hoping the lottery isn't rigged, but in the end, none of us really know, do we?

Thankfully, I haven't seen or heard anything yet from Wembanyama's camp that indicates he wouldn't play in a small market like SA. I guess we'll know shortly after May 16th, if the Spurs were to score the #1.

It’s run by one of the BigX accounting firms, and each team has an observer in the draw room. It’s not ping pong balls, either. It’s groups of number sequences randomly assigned to the teams.

[Silverheart80]

It’s run by one of the BigX accounting firms, and each team has an observer in the draw room. It’s not ping pong balls, either. It’s groups of number sequences randomly assigned to the teams.

I've never heard about in-room observers. Good one, if true. Also didn't know it's now groups of number sequences. Nice. Thanks.

[Mr. Body]

It’s run by one of the BigX accounting firms, and each team has an observer in the draw room. It’s not ping pong balls, either. It’s groups of number sequences randomly assigned to the teams.

Why are we thinking accounting firms are on the level? Like, there's literally no accreditation for 'ensuring drafts are free and fairly conducted for these sports cartels.'

I'm not saying they aren't honest, but their presence is pure theater. They're the same industry where Bear Stars imploded for fraud and there have been many other examples of high profile fraud throughout the business.

[exstatic]

Why are we thinking accounting firms are on the level? Like, there's literally no accreditation for 'ensuring drafts are free and fairly conducted for these sports cartels.'

I'm not saying they aren't honest, but their presence is pure theater. They're the same industry where Bear Stars imploded for fraud and there have been many other examples of high profile fraud throughout the business.

Bear Stearns was an investment/hedge firm, not an accounting firm. Accounting is one of the few industries that haven’t been deregulated to hell, and is operating pretty much as it did 100 years ago. Not perfect, but not as bad as you paint it.

[ambchang]

Arthur Andersen. Auditing is not as fool proof as people make it out to be.

That said, I’m quite confident the nba draft is conducted fairly.

[exstatic]

Arthur Andersen. Auditing is not as fool proof as people make it out to be.

That said, I’m quite confident the nba draft is conducted fairly.

Right, but their involvement in Enron’s downfall, and their own subsequent downfall is a cautionary tale for other accounting firms not to fuck around, or they’ll find out. AA primarily failed because no one trusted them from that point.

[ambchang]

Right, but their involvement in Enron’s downfall, and their own subsequent downfall is a cautionary tale for other accounting firms not to fuck around, or they’ll find out. AA primarily failed because no one trusted them from that point.

I felt bad for the other partners, one rogue guy and the entire practice crumbled overnight.

[Mr. Body]

Updating this with needless further thoughts. This came up in another thread, about who owns their own picks late in first round.

https://www.tankathon.com/

Cleveland
Denver
Philly
Boston
Milwaukee

Their picks belong to Indiana, Charlotte, Utah, etc. Only Milwaukee's belongs to a LAC, another playoff-oriented/non-rebuilding team.

Sacramento and Memphis do own their own picks.

The thought was that moving into the late first round using one or both of our SRPs or future capital might be good. I agree, but think it will be very hard. Maybe one of those teams wants to kick out -- Indiana has two of those late FRPs plus their lottery pick -- but if anything they'd likely want to leave the draft at that point rather than move into the SRP.

So, the Spurs have a tasty SRP with their own, currently 33, and an iffy one with Toronto's. It's hard to see the Spurs using both SRPs on themselves.

My feeling, based on nothing whatsoever, is that the Spurs will come out of the draft with two players. One, obviously, will be their lottery pick. The other is up for question. Say, if they traded their top pick to Orlando for their two later lottery picks (just saying), then those will be the two rookies and they'll move the last two SRPs. Or, if the Spurs select their lottery, then they'll look to only use one later pick, whether they combine the SRPs to move up somehow or use one, deal the other.

I just don't see three rookies given how many squawling baby chicks they have already.

[scott]

To the point above, the Spurs have so many upcoming draft picks that they are going to quickly run into the point where there is not enough developmental bandwidth for all this youth, and perhaps not even enough roster spots, assuming you’ll want to pair this youth with a veteran core and not go full OKC/HOU mode where it is all youth (this has worked out better for OKC than it has HOU).

So to that end, we must assume the developmental leash gets shorter, and the window for a player to show something is condensed before they must be moved to make way for the next promising talent. No longer will the Spurs be able to extend the kind of developmental timeline that, say, Lonnie Walker got. It’s going to have to be 1-2 year looks for some of these guys before you move on.

So given that… I wonder if Blake Wesley has shown enough to continue on the development path, or if it already time to think of him as an asset that can sweeten other deals. Branham is likely just beyond the event horizon of this point (but by no means would you not move him for the right deal as well).

[scott]

Of all the bad takes rascal has preferred on this board, I liked his idea of looking at that TOR pick from next year and using it to perhaps get MIN’s pick from UTA (If MIN falls into the lottery. I’m not interested if MIN is the #6 seed). Ainge would likely prefer one less pick next year to get one for next year. Sure, the TOR could be as high as #7, but it could theoretically be as low as #30. Say MIN ends up around #12-14, that is probably pretty fair value for that TOR pick.

[exstatic]

Of all the bad takes rascal has preferred on this board, I liked his idea of looking at that TOR pick from next year and using it to perhaps get MIN’s pick from UTA (If MIN falls into the lottery. I’m not interested if MIN is the #6 seed). Ainge would likely prefer one less pick next year to get one for next year. Sure, the TOR could be as high as #7, but it could theoretically be as low as #30. Say MIN ends up around #12-14, that is probably pretty fair value for that TOR pick.

On the face of it, I don't like it, but I'll wait to see where they finish this year. My feeling is that Toronto is headed for the abyss. I think they've taken the remnants of their 'chip team plus a few picks as far as they can. I also want to see where Orlando, Chicago, and the Spurs end up, post lottery. We may be able to finagle a second lottery pick without depleting future assets.

Blake seems to be rounding back into his pre-injury form. He had a real stat suffer last night, 11p/6a/4r/3st. He's the fastest player we've had since TP9.

[Mr. Body]

To the point above, the Spurs have so many upcoming draft picks that they are going to quickly run into the point where there is not enough developmental bandwidth for all this youth, and perhaps not even enough roster spots, assuming you’ll want to pair this youth with a veteran core and not go full OKC/HOU mode where it is all youth (this has worked out better for OKC than it has HOU).

So to that end, we must assume the developmental leash gets shorter, and the window for a player to show something is condensed before they must be moved to make way for the next promising talent. No longer will the Spurs be able to extend the kind of developmental timeline that, say, Lonnie Walker got. It’s going to have to be 1-2 year looks for some of these guys before you move on.

So given that… I wonder if Blake Wesley has shown enough to continue on the development path, or if it already time to think of him as an asset that can sweeten other deals. Branham is likely just beyond the event horizon of this point (but by no means would you not move him for the right deal as well).

OKC has trouble with the churn of players. Ousmane Dieng sort of replaces Pokushevski, who has been hurt (but has been lousy, so just pull the plug). Isaih Roby was cut to make room for Jeremiah Robinson-Earl who might get replaced by Jaylin Williams. At some point you're just picking guys to replace guys you already have.

They have three studs (SGA, who was gifted to them, Giddey, Jalen Williams), a probable stud in Holmgren, some nice role players like Dort, and they still can't get out of the lottery in one of the easiest years to get out of the lottery -- all you had to do was not be mediocre.

They still get tons of picks, but at some point they're just drafting over the same types of players. The Spurs could be in a similar situation, but seem to be better (so far) at sending players on their way when they don't fit.

I definitely think Wesley has shown enough to keep going. He won't gain anything in trade, though.

[XDT76]

OKC has trouble with the churn of players. Ousmane Dieng sort of replaces Pokushevski, who has been hurt (but has been lousy, so just pull the plug). Isaih Roby was cut to make room for Jeremiah Robinson-Earl who might get replaced by Jaylin Williams. At some point you're just picking guys to replace guys you already have.

They have three studs (SGA, who was gifted to them, Giddey, Jalen Williams), a probable stud in Holmgren, some nice role players like Dort, and they still can't get out of the lottery in one of the easiest years to get out of the lottery -- all you had to do was not be mediocre.

They still get tons of picks, but at some point they're just drafting over the same types of players. The Spurs could be in a similar situation, but seem to be better (so far) at sending players on their way when they don't fit.

I definitely think Wesley has shown enough to keep going. He won't gain anything in trade, though.

Spurs need to stop drafting players who needs the ball in their hands, with some many picks they need to look at players who fights for rebounds, play defend and do catch and shoot.

[Mr. Body]

Spurs need to stop drafting players who needs the ball in their hands, with some many picks they need to look at players who fights for rebounds, play defend and do catch and shoot.

That gets into questions of selecting best player available or drafting more for fit.

But, yeah, high usage players don't seem like a Spursy thing, especially as guards.

[heyheymymy]

Realistically I see the Spurs selling that TOR 2RP much like they outbounded K. Chandler to MEM last draft. Love any idea to bundle the 2RPs and possibly future draft capital for a late first though.

Just hard to find who would be a willing trade partner and I'm not really enamored with many likely late first talents enough to justify the deal. But it would be awesome to bundle say Doug while trading up and use the deal to move up, plus dump Doug/open a roster slot in the process, plus boost the selection value of SAs second choice(s) after the lottery pick. Doug + #33 + #41 for someone's late FRP + a future unprotected second?

But realistically I agree with taking two picks, the lottery and the #33 as a catch net for any first round fallers.

[heyheymymy]

Tough finding a team that needs Dougs established shooting, has been toggled into win-now mode by virtue of a top talent from the 23 draft and doesn't have "development bandwidth" to take on a new baby bird vs. using that slot for a reliable established player that requires no training resources really.

Someone like DET if they land Wemby and don't keep Diallo, and already have Wemby/Duren/Jade and to a lesser extent Cade still in the oven so to speak, would they bring on Doug for the #31 swap to #41 (plus another future 2RP)? Helps to show they were serious about keeping the new talent loyal. Doug is 2 years younger than Bojan in a similar player template so it resets the clock on the established wing shooter and Doug is a hawkeye who will no doubt feast in a system where other players are filling the plate on opposing defenses. Plus Wemby/Duren would create so many fast breaks with blocks, affecting shots, and Rebs that Doug would get lots of looks from that.

Plus #41 brings a less expectant of mins player to DET and could even be a draft stash to retain the rights of and next year cycle off whatever they don't need anymore to be replaced by the stash rights. Terrible idea but just trying to crack the facade of mutual interest in a deal here.

[rankingtear]

Our rebuild would look a lot like OKC, building the team of the future with large humans with guard/wing skills.

[exstatic]

Spurs need to stop drafting players who needs the ball in their hands, with some many picks they need to look at players who fights for rebounds, play defend and do catch and shoot.

Nope. We don’t have our franchise guy yet. You have to keep rolling the dice.

[exstatic]

That gets into questions of selecting best player available or drafting more for fit.

But, yeah, high usage players don't seem like a Spursy thing, especially as guards.

Devin: 20, 20.2
Keldon: 22.7
Jeremy 19.6
Malaki 24.1
Blake 31.3

Of those, only Blake would be considered high usage.

[CGD]

Realistically I see the Spurs selling that TOR 2RP much like they outbounded K. Chandler to MEM last draft. Love any idea to bundle the 2RPs and possibly future draft capital for a late first though.

Just hard to find who would be a willing trade partner and I'm not really enamored with many likely late first talents enough to justify the deal. But it would be awesome to bundle say Doug while trading up and use the deal to move up, plus dump Doug/open a roster slot in the process, plus boost the selection value of SAs second choice(s) after the lottery pick. Doug + #33 + #41 for someone's late FRP + a future unprotected second?

But realistically I agree with taking two picks, the lottery and the #33 as a catch net for any first round fallers.

Wouldn’t be sad about selling 41 for a better quality pick in the future, but 33 is basically a late FRP already. Don’t trade that one.

[rascal]

On the face of it, I don't like it, but I'll wait to see where they finish this year. My feeling is that Toronto is headed for the abyss. I think they've taken the remnants of their 'chip team plus a few picks as far as they can. I also want to see where Orlando, Chicago, and the Spurs end up, post lottery. We may be able to finagle a second lottery pick without depleting future assets.

Blake seems to be rounding back into his pre-injury form. He had a real stat suffer last night, 11p/6a/4r/3st. He's the fastest player we've had since TP9.

There is no finagling going to happen. You aren't getting something of value in a trade without giving up something of value.

[exstatic]

There is no finagling going to happen. You aren't getting something of value in a trade without giving up something of value.

You’re pretty thick, so I’ll explain it to you. When I refer to us, Orlando, and Chicago, I’m talking about trading back from either 2 or 3, one lottery pick for two. That doesn’t involve future assets. Get it? It also leaves that lightly protected Toronto pick in our pocket.

[XDT76]

Nope. We don’t have our franchise guy yet. You have to keep rolling the dice.

Not every draft has a franchise player if you keep rolling the dice then you will forever be wasting draft. We need to set a good base so that a franchise player comes along we can quickly becomes a competitive team like w did with Duncan else even when we get a franchise player we will get nowhere like the Cavs with lebron first time round and now Mavs with Lucas..

[exstatic]

Not every draft has a franchise player if you keep rolling the dice then you will forever be wasting draft. We need to set a good base so that a franchise player comes along we can quickly becomes a competitive team like w did with Duncan else even when we get a franchise player we will get nowhere like the Cavs with lebron first time round and now Mavs with Lucas..

Not a clear one, but if you just draft only role players, you’ll never get one. You’re also wrong about the Spurs only drafting guys who need the ball in their hands. Of the five FRPs on our squad, only Wesley was a high usage player in college. No one else had a USG% over 25, and the only one close to that was Malaki at around 24. The other three were around 20.

[XDT76]

Not a clear one, but if you just draft only role players, you’ll never get one. You’re also wrong about the Spurs only drafting guys who need the ball in their hands. Of the five FRPs on our squad, only Wesley was a high usage player in college. No one else had a USG% over 25, and the only one close to that was Malaki at around 24. The other three were around 20.

You just over simplified it using USG% for example KJ might be in the low 20% in USG but nowadays if he doesn't have the ball he doesn't really effect the game, low rebounds, no spacing feeble defensive, he doesn't even create or run into space.

[exstatic]

You just over simplified it using USG% for example KJ might be in the low 20% in USG but nowadays if he doesn't have the ball he doesn't really effect the game, low rebounds, no spacing feeble defensive, he doesn't even create or run into space.

He’s clearly shown in his first 3 years that he can effectively play off of a primary ball handler, first DeRozan, then Dejounte. So, you’re using one failed season when he’s being asked to do way too much to debunk the entire USG% stat. Good job, dude. Ride that exception hard.

[Mr. Body]

Dragging this back after seeing more of Barlow and Champagnie coming on.

The team now has five rookies and two second-year players to consider going into the summer.

Rookies
Sochan
Branham
Wesley
Barlow
Champagnie

Sophomores
Bassey
Mamukelashvili

It's not too controversial to say the FO has made some nice acquisitions from Eastern Conference teams dumping players. At this point I'd be surprised if any of the players listed above is not on the squad next November. I know some would debate Wesley's inclusion, but he's young, only a rookie, and has characteristics that are hard to find.

So... this means the team will have seven players straight-away who have not played much, are still growing, and very nicely have very different skill-sets. In fact, the only real overlap I see among them is that Sochan and Mamu are swift, good-handling PFs who can facilitate in transition and possibly halfcourt sets. That's only a good thing.

Which leads us to this draft. I am still of the mind that the team should look to come away with two good rookie prospects, whether Wembanyama is one of them or not. The lottery pick will likely be BPA, although there's debate about who this means. I feel like the second pick may be more targeted to a position/type, since there will be some variety available.

But we are approaching the problem of potentially cannibalizing the development of existing players. Like, I would not take a Jarace Walker if it means stunting the growth of Sochan (probably unlikely). I was once keen on Trayce Jackson-Davis, but he now feels redundant with the young big corps we already have.

[Ariel]

But we are approaching the problem of potentially cannibalizing the development of existing players. Like, I would not take a Jarace Walker if it means stunting the growth of Sochan (probably unlikely). I was once keen on Trayce Jackson-Davis, but he now feels redundant with the young big corps we already have.
In the case of Jarace Walker, I wouldn't say he cannibalizes the development of Sochan, so much as we couldn't get the most out of both of them. Walker is probably a very heavy 6'7", in the NBA that will likely translate to an undersized 5 or 4. He can hit it from outside somewhat, but I'm not sure he'll be everything he's expected defending on the perimeter with the more agile NBA wings. I can see him as a 5 alongside Sochan on some small ball lineups, but both of them together plus a center, I'm not so sure about. So picking up Walker when we have a better prospect already on the roster whose minutes compete with him, doesn't sound like the best use of such a high pick. I think this is a bigger problem than the overlap between Cam Whitmore and Keldon Johnson, which IMO isn't such since I see Cam as the far higher upside prospect, and if things go right Keldon can eventually come off the bench or be moved to balance the roster. Same considerations could be made about any prospect we draft, other than at PG or C.
At the moment, I'm leaning towards something like this:
1) Wemby
2/3) If we're keeping the pick, whichever performs better on workouts + interviews / they like better out of Scoot & Brandon Miller. But if some team is desperate and wants to move up and we get a good enough pick to get Cam Whitmore + something nice (additional lottery pick whether current or future / good prospect) I'm ok with it as well.
4-7) Cam Whitmore if available: highest upside with high floor, super young and athletic, the rest you figure out later. If unavailable, my next candidates are Anthony Black, Hendricks -you were right, I checked him out further and he's a solid 3&D prospect already with the potential to be more than that, I like him- and Jarace Walker. But I'd also be open to trading down, as long we get one of the 3 + future pick/good prospect.

[The Truth #6]

Champagnie: supposedly has the single game scoring record for a Two Way contract player. Nice.

[scott]

This thread continues to deliver. Great stuff.

[CGD]

I’m not concerned about cannibalizing. Even if the spurs land Wemby next year will still likely be a down year again, so it’s about finding as much talent as possible from every corner of the league as possible. The upshot of building a stable is that, if you can’t keep a Bassey or Barlow long term, the good players become valuable small add ins in bigger trades later.

For me the biggest question heading into next year is Keldon’s future. I think he’s on the clock starting this summer, as much as a love him. I suppose it all depends what happens in the draft, and whether the Spurs really think Sochan at PG is a viable long term thing.

[The Truth #6]

Yeah, with Keldon it feels like they tried Skinny Keldon to see if he could guard smaller players but by the end he bulked back up to Big Body and seemed to feel more confident perhaps? He could still be a solid complementary piece, or he might be traded if/when we don’t get Wemby.