State Of The Spurs

[TD 21]

Vassell: A 4-5 year, $80-100M extension seems likely. Well on his way to being a long term fixture and solid starter.

Johnson: Slim chance he gets traded now, but unlikely to be a long term fixture either and trends closer to a high end backup.

Jones: Probably extended for 3 years and MLE-ish money, with solid chance to be long term fixture. Same as it ever was: Needs a credible 3 to be a high end backup.

Collins: Will undoubtedly have third year fully guaranteed (stealth extension candidate?). Fringe starter, with rare malleability, versatility.

Sochan: Seems destined to be a long term fixture and is a credible shot away from being on track to solid starter.

Branham: Looks the part of a classic sixth man, though obviously has to improve from 3. Solid chance to be a long term fixture.

McDermott: More likely to be traded by the deadline.

Graham: More likely to be traded by the deadline.

Bassey: Well on his way to being a quality backup.

Bates-Diop: Unlikely to be retained, but has solidified spot in the league.

Langford: Unlikely to be retained, remains on fringe of the league.

Wesley: Needs a quantum leap just to reach replacement player threshold.

Mamukelashvili: Likely to be retained and is probably a more reliable 3 away from solidifying spot in the league.

Champagnie: Likely to be retained/converted. If he can more or less maintain, he'll solidify spot in the league.

Barlow: Likely to be retained. Has to carve out a niche to have a chance to eventually solidify spot in the league.

Dieng: Suspect he retires and joins front office or coaching staff in some capacity.

Birch: If salary isn't utilized as ballast in trade, bought out/waived (medical retirement?).

[Ariel]

I agree with almost everything, with a few caveats:
Vassell is likely to command more than 20M per year on average. If they can put together a front loaded deal in Keldon's mode, that'd be fantastic for future flexibility.
Keldon Johnson: There's no rush to trade him, it's a matter of the right opportunity presenting itself. His value may increase with time, with a better supporting cast where he's not forced to take on a larger role than he's suited for he'll be more efficient, and his decreasing contract will do the rest.
Sochan: he's already on his way to solid starter, even if his shot stays at current level. If he can shoot even 32% from 3 at a decent enough volume to keep things honest, he's a future all star.
The rest I mostly agree on.

[Mr. Body]

I have better feelings about some of these players than you do.

Keldon I think will be traded, though I think it'll be harder to find a team than for Poeltl and DJM. He's done the 'good soldier' bit, but his extension kicks in and he's not a great fit. He doesn't circulate the ball well. Great guy and great attitude. On a team like Denver where he can be a third or fourth option and play off better players, he could be a menace.

Zach Collins to me is very clearly a great starter in this league. He's very good, way better than I thought. Often the best player on the team or even the best player on the court.

Tre Jones is a very good backup in this league even without a comfortable 3, although that's already coming along. When he's healthy he does a lot of stuff you want a backup PG to do. He's also money with his drives and floaters.

Sochan is already a solid starter. He's like this bountiful, unknown wild card. He's already a big problem for teams and he's barely scratching the surface. If he can get that jumper down, hoo boy.

Branham I want to see if his scoring can scale. He's not as efficient as I'd like and drawing fouls will help that. Can he start demanding the ball and score when necessary, or just in the flow? Of course he's just a rook and is way ahead of where we thought he'd be.

[Chinook]

Vassell: No way in hell he gets a five-year extension, but $85M-$100M/4 does feel like what he'll get.

Johnson: Unless he's asking out, I can't imagine the Spurs would deal him. They'd want to see what he could do with a fully healthy team and a better-spacing center. If the Spurs draft a guard or center, he's in no danger of losing his spot for a while. If they pick Miller, then we could see something happen, though Pop seems to be okay bringing Vassell off the bench anyway. I could see Pop trying Jones/Johnson/Miller/Sochan/Collins or something.

Jones: He'll likely get interest around the MLE, but I also expect the Spurs to offer him a big contract ala Mills. Even if he's getting $60M/4, they just aren't realistically going to need his salary over the course of those years. If he gets supplanted by a guy like Scoot, it's still a decent amount to spend on guards who can play together and will probably take up a quarter of the team's minutes every game.

Collins: I don't think they'll be anything "stealth" about this extension offer. I haven't heard what the MLE will be at, but it should be pretty close to the 40-percent bump anyway, so I could totally see them wanting to lock him down for that amount. Unless they trade him during the draft, getting him on a longer deal is just good practice. His stats are better than his performance in my mind.

Sochan: Hopefully he's not actually hurt and Pop has been popping off with the rest. The Spurs can't have gimpy young guys as they try to build chemistry with who's hopefully going to be their new best player from the draft.

Branham: I like him, but I could see a scenario where he falls out of the rotation this season. I wonder if there's anyone who might give decent value for him. From a purely selfish perspective, they don't have to move him. But we'll see.

McD: I could see McDermott traded, but I don't think the team actually has anyone who could fill his role yet. He has value to the club, and if other teams aren't willing to pay that value, they won't get him.

Graham: He's one of the reasons why Branham might not be on the team. He shouldn't be higher up in the rankings than Mal, but with him, Champ, Wesley and the potential to draft another guard at the top of the draft, the team has options.

Bassey: I don't think he's in the rotation next year. He'll be on the team given how cheap he is, but he's going to have fight for a spot. He would've been "the future" 10 years ago. Now he's an afterthought.

Bates-Diop: I think he has a solid chance to come back unless he just doesn't want to. He has that "cultural centerpiece" vibe about him, and he's been serviceable in wearing different hats. The right sequence of events could push him out of the rotation, but he still seems to have a role in the likelier draft scenarios.
Langford: Low-key negative value that made the White trade meh. Shouldn't even get the QO. Just take the loss and move on.

Wesley: Will dominate the summer league this year along with Barlow and Mamu. He needs to put it together, but you can argue he's "carrying the fire" on the team right now.

Mamu: He's overrated on this board, but he's only guy who might be able to replace McDermott on the roster. They're difference players, but literally he'll take Doug's spot in the rotation if he sticks. I don't think he acquitted himself well enough as a center to give me a ton of hope for his future, but maybe he'll show more in the summer.

Champ: The Spurs have RFA rights on Champ, so I think he's almost assured to be back. I think he'll be part of a strong SL contingent come July. He might even sit most of the games if he keeps this up.

Barlow: Like Champ but with a harder path to the roster, let alone the rotation. Bassey is taking up the "flier" spot in the front court. I like Barlow a ton, and I think the Spurs will bring him into camp on a regular deal. But I don't think he's making it out of camp unless he shows a long of growth. Good prospect, but this Spurs team needs great prospects.

Dieng: I could see him stick on if they have a 15th spot again, but I agree he seems to be transitioning.

Birch : If he can be waived in a way that gives SA their cap back, do it. Otherwise, bring him into camp if he's trying to come back. He was good enough to earn that awful contract at one point. The team needs a credible backup center unless they draft Wemby.

[Mr. Body]

Branham: I like him, but I could see a scenario where he falls out of the rotation this season. I wonder if there's anyone who might give decent value for him. From a purely selfish perspective, they don't have to move him. But we'll see.


Hunh?

[CGD]

Vassell’s next contract will average closer to 25M a year than 20. That’s what RJ Barret and Hunter got and Vassell is better than both those guys.

[Ariel]

Yeah, completely disagree on Branham there. In fact Brian Wright specifically said after the draft that they were following Malaki and that they explored trading up to get him when he fell into their lap. They've had inside scoop on him because an assistant coach at Ohio State was a former teammate of Wright's, so they knew pretty damn well where his weaknesses laid, it's not that all of a sudden they realized he's a bad defender or his range doesn't extend to the NBA 3 pt line yet. He's been pretty much everything expected, only better. So I would be shocked if they traded him (barring some crazy opportunity) now that he's proven to be the guy they were targeting and then some.

[Mr. Body]

Yeah, completely disagree on Branham there. In fact Brian Wright specifically said after the draft that they were following Malaki and that they explored trading up to get him when he fell into their lap. They've had inside scoop on him because an assistant coach at Ohio State was a former teammate of Wright's, so they knew pretty damn well where his weaknesses laid, it's not that all of a sudden they realized he's a bad defender or his range doesn't extend to the NBA 3 pt line yet. He's been pretty much everything expected, only better. So I would be shocked if they traded him (barring some crazy opportunity) now that he's proven to be the guy they were targeting and then some.

I disagree with a lot of the take, but good Lord. Branham already has a special skill that could become lethal. And then claiming they could get maybe something decent for him, like he's a used tissue box cats might play in? Any team in the NBA would snap him up. They're absolutely not trading him. He's literally the sort of player teams dream of getting in the draft and right now he has like top 8 potential of the class. We don't even know. I'm serious. He has a scoring ability that can be a terror in this league.

[duncan2150]

Agreed about pretty everything( TD21 post) except Bates Diop. Imo he's a lock to come back as an end of the bench player.

I was not high on him the first months of the season but he provided some good value, he progresses really well at the 3 pt line : 2 3 attempted per game with a good 39%.

Except if he has a good offer i see him as a lock for next year roster. End of the roster btw.

[DPG21920]

Keldon is a clear starter - nothing like a high end back up

[Dejounte]

Mamu has played the C position maybe 5% of his entire time here. This sounds like the whole “Zach is a PF” nonsense again. Regardless of how we feel about what positions these players should play, the coaching staff clearly shows us what position they want them to play by who is on the floor with them and who they’re defending.

Anyway,

Typing on my phone so this is a pain.

Sochan - Clearly the team has big things in mind for him. Sure starter next season, important summer for him to improve on several things.

Keldon - Either he or Vassell could be pushed out of the starting line-up, or maybe neither if Sochan remains a PF. I feel like with the right fast-impact top prospect we draft (Wemba or Scoot), Keldon will actually thrive (as a high end role player who can give you 20 when your stars don’t have it that night).

Vassell - With his skillset, he’s suited best as a starter. He’s a scorer but I think he works too hard for his points for him to become a star caliber player. Contrast that with Sochan who had 10+ in the first quarter alone in multiple games and making it look easy.

Mamu - One of the most talented players on the team. Take that for what you will. He’s a keeper and has value because you can play him with anybody.

Tre - Needs to be relegated to a bench role. Team needs a starting PG badly. Replacing Tre in the starting line up will increase the team’s floor in the win column, IMO.

Zach - Same comment from Tre. Zach has improved a lot on the offensive end, but he is a traffic cone on defense. Opposing teams have their way with us because Zach provides zero interior presence (blocks are different than presence). He bites on too many fakes. The good thing here is that he is a stat stuffer, so I hope he gets traded soon.

Barlow - more patience needed but glimpses of a decent player

Wesley - more patience needed. Not looking good, almost looks like Lonnie out there IQ wise. The good thing is I don’t think he’s as soft as Lonnie so I think he’ll go into summer with a chip on his shoulder.

KBD - he gone

Bassey - backup big or third string C

[Allan Rowe vs Wade]

kbd could be gone tomorrow or retire as a spurs in 15 seasons as a career 13th man

[Chinook]

Yeah, completely disagree on Branham there. In fact Brian Wright specifically said after the draft that they were following Malaki and that they explored trading up to get him when he fell into their lap. They've had inside scoop on him because an assistant coach at Ohio State was a former teammate of Wright's, so they knew pretty damn well where his weaknesses laid, it's not that all of a sudden they realized he's a bad defender or his range doesn't extend to the NBA 3 pt line yet. He's been pretty much everything expected, only better. So I would be shocked if they traded him (barring some crazy opportunity) now that he's proven to be the guy they were targeting and then some.

The Spurs apparently went all CIA with Chimezie Metu to avoid tipping their hand. Yes, they loved him, and I don't think they have any reason to believe they were wrong. It's misreading my point to assume I mean that he's been a bust or anything. But they might well be in a position where they draft another SG with their first pick and can acquire a second pick with Branham and another assets. Like is Branham going to start in a healthy rotation next year? So let's say the Spurs draft a Thompson:

Jones, Vassell, Johnson, Sochan, Collins
Wesley, (Branham), Thompson, McDermmot, Mamu
Graham, Champ, Bates-Diop, Barlow, Bassey

Sure, some of those guys may not be on the roster, but the Spurs might also have decent guys they took as ballast on the roster as well ala Graham. I look at that that roster and think the spots that are going to get the most competition are backup SG and backup C. Unless the Spurs are going to be sabotagingly tanking again, I don't think they're going to not let the guys who are playing the best get minutes. That means Branham's going to have to show he's overall better, and Champ, KBD, Barlow, Bassey and Graham would have something to say about who gets the nod. The team's top-two scorers were injured most of the year as is. There aren't necessarily going to be the same opportunities available in the first place, which might make playing defense more important.



I disagree with a lot of the take, but good Lord. Branham already has a special skill that could become lethal. And then claiming they could get maybe something decent for him, like he's a used tissue box cats might play in? Any team in the NBA would snap him up. They're absolutely not trading him. He's literally the sort of player teams dream of getting in the draft and right now he has like top 8 potential of the class. We don't even know. I'm serious. He has a scoring ability that can be a terror in this league.

Yes, in the sense that if they had an option to sign him to a team-friendly deal, most teams would want him. But get out of your time machine. This isn't 2010 anymore. Most NBA players, even the fringe ones, have "special talent". That's not to say Branham can't be a good scorer, but it is to say the team is going to be letting good players go as they churn though talent. That's what having a bunch of picks means. How many true keepers are on this team? For a club that was so horrible this year, it can't be more than two or three. No, I expect most players back, and I even think the Spurs have 15 guys who'll be on NBA rosters next year. But the team is looking for high-end talent, and no, they aren't likely to have gotten that at the 20th pick or as a waiver pickup or whatever. Yes, good players come from all over the draft, but the Spurs have already had far better players who were non-keepers that they've moved. But to act like a guy who's not even in the top-three most important players on an awful team is "untouchable" is out of touch.

And no, "something decent" doesn't mean a second-rounder or something. This is the age where the Spurs have a bunch of minor assets for the rest of the decade. We're talking about a situation where there are numerous teams at the bottom of the lottery who are trying to win now and who might well be talked out of their pick as part of a deal to get them the pieces they desire. Hopefully the Spurs have their favorites from this draft as well, and whether they'd prefer those favorites to the ones they had last year is anyone's guess. That's why it's a possibility and not a prediction.

[Chinook]

Mamu has played the C position maybe 5% of his entire time here. This sounds like the whole “Zach is a PF” nonsense again. Regardless of how we feel about what positions these players should play, the coaching staff clearly shows us what position they want them to play by who is on the floor with them and who they’re defending.

Mamu has played center 77 percent of his time with the Spurs, according to BBall Ref. I don't think it's been that much. I'd say probably around 35-45 percent. But he's definitely played there. It wouldn't be a surprise to hear the Spurs don't want him there outside of certain situations. That's why the backup center position is the one that I expect to receive the most competition outside of a scenario where the Spurs draft Wemby. I do think barring a major change (and I do expect major changes), he'll go into camp as the backup center, and if he can shore up some things there, his talents would work best.

[Ariel]

The Spurs apparently went all CIA with Chimezie Metu to avoid tipping their hand. Yes, they loved him, and I don't think they have any reason to believe they were wrong. It's misreading my point to assume I mean that he's been a bust or anything. But they might well be in a position where they draft another SG with their first pick and can acquire a second pick with Branham and another assets. Like is Branham going to start in a healthy rotation next year? So let's say the Spurs draft a Thompson:

Jones, Vassell, Johnson, Sochan, Collins
Wesley, (Branham), Thompson, McDermmot, Mamu
Graham, Champ, Bates-Diop, Barlow, Bassey

Sure, some of those guys may not be on the roster, but the Spurs might also have decent guys they took as ballast on the roster as well ala Graham. I look at that that roster and think the spots that are going to get the most competition are backup SG and backup C. Unless the Spurs are going to be sabotagingly tanking again, I don't think they're going to not let the guys who are playing the best get minutes. That means Branham's going to have to show he's overall better, and Champ, KBD, Barlow, Bassey and Graham would have something to say about who gets the nod. The team's top-two scorers were injured most of the year as is. There aren't necessarily going to be the same opportunities available in the first place, which might make playing defense more important.
Lets see:
Chimezie Metu was taken with a 49th pick (if you're super interested in a guy, you find a way not to let teams 48 chances to snatch your target), whereas with Branham (no. 20) the Spurs admitted to exploring options of trading into the late lottery to grab him because they feared he wouldn't be available. That speaks of a very different level of interest in each.
On top of that, Chimezie Metu played about 5 MPG as a Spurs, scoring less than 2 points his first season at 21 years old. Meanwhile, Branham is one of the fastest rising rookies, scoring over 10 PPG on good efficiency (44% FG, 83% FT). That speaks of how much each measured up relative to their expectations.
All in all, I don't think the interest level and subsequent performance of each merits using Chimezie as a reference for anything regarding Branham. Furthermore, it'd seem nonsensical to me to put his future with the franchise in question because he's competing for minutes with a guy who's about certainly on his way out of the franchise by the trade deadline at most like Graham. If Branham doesn't meet the required standards at 19, then you keep working with him until he does. Spurs don't give up on first rounders like that unless they're basically bums too lazy to run at 20 (Samanic), or start a penis flash parade in each city they go to (Primo).
In the proposed scenario where we draft a Thompson (I'd be shocked, but can't rule it out), actually I don't see Branham losing the nod at all, because he'd be a good complement of him. I could see it if, for instance, we took Keyonte George, Hawkins, or someone in that mold, whose skill sets are redundant. If you take someone like that and they clearly overtake Branham, then yes I could see one of them being moved, in the same way that I could see the Spurs taking any talent they deem better than who they currently have at whatever position, as it should be when rebuilding. So I wouldn't key in on Malaki in that regard, since he's as susceptible as any other youngster to being moved in the right circumstances (but not dumped).
In short, provided there's some coherence and stability in the thought process of the FO (no reason to doubt it), you don't trade (for the first decent offer) a guy you were recently willing to pay a high price for and exceeded expectations.

[Mr. Body]

Mamu has played center 77 percent of his time with the Spurs, according to BBall Ref. I don't think it's been that much. I'd say probably around 35-45 percent. But he's definitely played there. It wouldn't be a surprise to hear the Spurs don't want him there outside of certain situations. That's why the backup center position is the one that I expect to receive the most competition outside of a scenario where the Spurs draft Wemby. I do think barring a major change (and I do expect major changes), he'll go into camp as the backup center, and if he can shore up some things there, his talents would work best.

Mamu played center because he had to. The other option was almost literally just Giorgiu Dieng.

[Mr. Body]

Yes, in the sense that if they had an option to sign him to a team-friendly deal, most teams would want him. But get out of your time machine. This isn't 2010 anymore. Most NBA players, even the fringe ones, have "special talent". That's not to say Branham can't be a good scorer, but it is to say the team is going to be letting good players go as they churn though talent. That's what having a bunch of picks means. How many true keepers are on this team? For a club that was so horrible this year, it can't be more than two or three. No, I expect most players back, and I even think the Spurs have 15 guys who'll be on NBA rosters next year. But the team is looking for high-end talent, and no, they aren't likely to have gotten that at the 20th pick or as a waiver pickup or whatever. Yes, good players come from all over the draft, but the Spurs have already had far better players who were non-keepers that they've moved. But to act like a guy who's not even in the top-three most important players on an awful team is "untouchable" is out of touch.

And no, "something decent" doesn't mean a second-rounder or something. This is the age where the Spurs have a bunch of minor assets for the rest of the decade. We're talking about a situation where there are numerous teams at the bottom of the lottery who are trying to win now and who might well be talked out of their pick as part of a deal to get them the pieces they desire. Hopefully the Spurs have their favorites from this draft as well, and whether they'd prefer those favorites to the ones they had last year is anyone's guess. That's why it's a possibility and not a prediction.

What? No.

Your take on Branham is completely baffling and I have very very little doubt that you'll see how wrong you are by the end of next year if not sooner. There's a reason commentators for opposing teams always always talk about Branham and how much they like him. He has innate scoring skills that a load of the NBA would love to have. He's already showing something really special and you seem to not only ignore it, you seem to think he's a finished product.

And if the Spurs draft a Thompson, he won't be anywhere as good as Branham is for a while. I don't mean on offense - they probably never will be, because they're trash shooters - but just being coachable and understanding what to do.

[Mr. Body]

I'll finish those thoughts.

Malaki Branham is younger than the Thompson twins. (He's also younger than Jordan Hawkins, btw.)

Charles Bassey will get plenty of run as backup C, which he would be playing at the end of the season had he not gotten hurt. The team clearly values him.

[Chinook]

Lets see:
Chimezie Metu was taken with a 49th pick (if you're super interested in a guy, you find a way not to let teams 48 chances to snatch your target), whereas with Branham (no. 20) the Spurs admitted to exploring options of trading into the late lottery to grab him because they feared he wouldn't be available. That speaks of a very different level of interest in each.
On top of that, Chimezie Metu played about 5 MPG as a Spurs, scoring less than 2 points his first season at 21 years old. Meanwhile, Branham is one of the fastest rising rookies, scoring over 10 PPG on good efficiency (44% FG, 83% FT). That speaks of how much each measured up relative to their expectations.
All in all, I don't think the interest level and subsequent performance of each merits using Chimezie as a reference for anything regarding Branham. Furthermore, it'd seem nonsensical to me to put his future with the franchise in question because he's competing for minutes with a guy who's about certainly on his way out of the franchise by the trade deadline at most like Graham. If Branham doesn't meet the required standards at 19, then you keep working with him until he does. Spurs don't give up on first rounders like that unless they're basically bums too lazy to run at 20 (Samanic), or start a penis flash parade in each city they go to (Primo).
In the proposed scenario where we draft a Thompson (I'd be shocked, but can't rule it out), actually I don't see Branham losing the nod at all, because he'd be a good complement of him. I could see it if, for instance, we took Keyonte George, Hawkins, or someone in that mold, whose skill sets are redundant. If you take someone like that and they clearly overtake Branham, then yes I could see one of them being moved, in the same way that I could see the Spurs taking any talent they deem better than who they currently have at whatever position, as it should be when rebuilding. So I wouldn't key in on Malaki in that regard, since he's as susceptible as any other youngster to being moved in the right circumstances (but not dumped).
In short, provided there's some coherence and stability in the thought process of the FO (no reason to doubt it), you don't trade (for the first decent offer) a guy you were recently willing to pay a high price for and exceeded expectations.

We have no idea how badly the Spurs wanted to move up from 48. We know they didn't do so just as we know they didn't move up from 20. As to their interest, we know the Spurs had four picks in the draft and few posters believed they'd make all of the first-rounders. But as often happens when a team has a bunch of selections, the Spurs likely weren't able to move them in a deal that made sense. Them having interest is not a mark against Branham or Wesley, but it is the likelier explanation for their trade interest in my mind.

I was probably the biggest Chim-hater on this board. You don't have to tell me he wasn't good. I do think talking about performance while ignoring the different opportunities their situations afforded them is disingenuous, as is your framing of their impact to some extent.

This is a new year. The Spurs may have loved Branham but are absolutely creaming themselves over like Keyonte George or whomever is there at 10-15, or they might be in love with the SGs in the 3-7 range they're slated to draft way more than Branham. Are they? I honestly don't know. I'd actually suggest they were so aggressive acquiring picks last year because they specifically did love the talent there. Me saying there's a scenario where Braham is slated to be the fifth guard because of their first pick and might fetch an asset worth moving him is not me saying I want him gone. I said twice in that same line that I liked him and that I think the Spurs could be selfish (although I think greedy is more the word I meant) and keep Braham even if they draft another two-guard and just try to figure it out. But I'd put Branham's likelihood of being moved as way higher when compared with Sochan or Wesley. None of them are high, but Branham's is clearly the highest.

[Chinook]

Mamu played center because he had to. The other option was almost literally just Giorgiu Dieng.

That's not the point of what I was saying. Why Mamu played the five is irrelevant. I don't care if the Spurs want him to play there or not. My point was tying back to the previous comments I made about his ceiling (in my opinion) being tied to his ability to play center. I think his limitations at PF are going to be way more obvious and his pluses less noticeable if he has to play there in competitive minutes. I'm hoping he shows an improved ability at one of the positions in the summer league. You can be a stark net-negative on the floor on a tanking team and get by on intrigue, but at some point he's going to have to be a positive stat-wise. He has a lot of improving to do.


What? No.

Your take on Branham is completely baffling and I have very very little doubt that you'll see how wrong you are by the end of next year if not sooner. There's a reason commentators for opposing teams always always talk about Branham and how much they like him. He has innate scoring skills that a load of the NBA would love to have. He's already showing something really special and you seem to not only ignore it, you seem to think he's a finished product.

And if the Spurs draft a Thompson, he won't be anywhere as good as Branham is for a while. I don't mean on offense - they probably never will be, because they're trash shooters - but just being coachable and understanding what to do.

Who knows? I'm not particularly interested in nitpicking the specific prospect right now. I am saying the Spurs are guaranteed to have their highest pick since Duncan, and that player might either play Branham's position or push other guys into Branham's position. Mal might well win that competition and keep getting minutes. But he might also lose it. The NBA is has plenty of role-players who beat out younger and more highly regarded prospects on rebuilding teams. I'm not sure Branham would get the backup spot over Champ right now. He might, or Wesley might lose a competition for his spot with Mal moving over. We don't know. There's a lot up in the air rigt now.


I'll finish those thoughts.

Malaki Branham is younger than the Thompson twins. (He's also younger than Jordan Hawkins, btw.)

Charles Bassey will get plenty of run as backup C, which he would be playing at the end of the season had he not gotten hurt. The team clearly values him.

Eh, I think Bassey will get run for sure, but I don't think the team is married to him at all. The point of a Hinkie special is you get commitment from the player without having the same required investment from the team. I'm sure they like him fine, but if they could only protect five players in an expansion draft, he's not on the list. He'll I don't know that he'd be in the list of 10.

[scott]

Everyone is sleeping on Bassey (everyone meaning, the entire league, not just this board). Give my man a full off-season to learn and develop, and he'll be a solid role player in this league, IMO, assuming he is healthy.

[Mr. Body]

Everyone is sleeping on Bassey (everyone meaning, the entire league, not just this board). Give my man a full off-season to learn and develop, and he'll be a solid role player in this league, IMO, assuming he is healthy.

Yeah, this board is nuts. It always has to find its pet players to despise. Tre Jones is horrible. Charles Bassey doesn't have a chance.

Neither is true.

[Dejounte]

For the record, I never said Tre is a bad player. I just don’t think he’s good enough to be a starter.

A team with a starting line-up of role players (at least in this stage of their career) can still be an average team winning around .500 at its best.

the starting line up did not do great and whether that’s because of injuries, players still learning, I don’t know.

if I was to pick one player out of the current starting five for the team to be replaced in order for the team to improve— it would have to be Tre.

[rjv]

branham ain'g going anywhere (anytime soon, that is) as long as this current coaching staff and FO is around. and i think that's a good thing.

[JPB]

- Also disagree with Collins as a "fringe starter". He's a certified starter now that he's proved he can be what people hope he could before his issues...

- Not sure spurs would trade Keldon. He's culture now and a solid young player who can give you 20 a night if needed and as others mentioned, a cool dude. Don't know if many guys could bring you that for a frendlier salary. And he's stiill room to improve.

- Yeah, Branham is a keeper with a lot of upside. When given the chance this year, he's proved he can deliver. He had stints where he was really confident and fluid for a rook.

Add Wemby to the current core and it could be fun.

[Dverde]

Keldon is the leader of the team on a good contract. I can’t see him being traded soon. Mamu going to be a fan favorite like Matt Bonner, he isn’t going anywhere.

[ginobilized]

Any scoop on the Spurs exit interviews?

[The Truth #6]

Only player that could be a star imvho is Sochan. Maybe Branham could be considered that by the media in that he could be a 24ppg scorer and be on the level of a CJ McCollum.

I think the team has great role players, which is super important. Obviously we just need some game changing talent. Though, Im also ok with the team growing organically and whatever happens happens. I see us as opposite Of Dallas in that sense.

Just rambling…

[LeBowen]

Nothing major will happen over the summer, we just need to get lucky with a top3 pick and then play the next season out at full strength, without any needless DNPs.

Sochan, Vassell and Branham could take another step in their development, maybe Mamu becomes a legit role-player, but that's about it.
Jones will be a solid backup, Graham and Doug need to go asap. I guess that depends on who gets drafted.

Keep the cap space, take some more gambles with players like Bassey and Mamu, then make a big move in 2024.

Keldon seems to be a great presence and a good leader, but he'll never get to all-star level. Still, I'd keep him unless there's a good deal to be made.

[spurraider21]

keldon:

i think keldon gets moved eventually but closer to the end of his deal. its not like the spurs have a way to upgrade at the position with the guys they have, and barring some catastrophic injury, he'll have good trade value 3 years from now as well, so its not like they're on a timer to get anything done.

in the meantime he is a good scorer and has a leadership role on the team. most teams that would want keldon aren't exactly flush with an excess of first round picks at the moment anyway, so theres little point in shopping him around at this point.


branham: yes he has that "natural scorer" feel to him with good touch, but he's going to have to make big improvements as to at least 2 of the following attributes to really make himself a viable long term piece:

1) 3 point shooting (his percentage was bad, and his release point is very bad)
2) defense
3) combo guard duties (ball handling, passing)

the league simply doesnt have space for a 2 point scoring specialist at guard


graham: not sure who would want to trade for him, or what we could realistically get for him at this point. 1, maybe 2 seconds at his current value. he's not even a true expiring contract with about 3 mil guaranteed for 24-25

[The Truth #6]

The weird thing about the season is, I have really no idea who is actually injured and who is just sitting. It looks like Jones might’ve actually been injured because he’s looks better lately though, I still wanted him to make more of an improvement this year from his solid work last year. I agree he’s our weak link as for starters.

[spurraider21]

Sochan: Hopefully he's not actually hurt and Pop has been popping off with the rest. The Spurs can't have gimpy young guys as they try to build chemistry with who's hopefully going to be their new best player from the draft.
i could see benching and load management here and there but the guy played 56/82 games

[exstatic]

The weird thing about the season is, I have really no idea who is actually injured and who is just sitting. It looks like Jones might’ve actually been injured because he’s looks better lately though, I still wanted him to make more of an improvement this year from his solid work last year. I agree he’s our weak link as for starters.

The only real injuries were Devin's meniscus and Blake's MCL. Everything else was just players getting banged up and being held out for unreasonable amounts of time. I once joked that if your shoe came untied during play on the court, you would be held out the next game, and it almost came to that.

Edit: Add one more legit injury: Bassey's fractured patella (non-displaced)

[Ed Helicopter Jones]

Do the Spurs only have their own draft picks this off season? Too much movement there for me to keep track.

[TXstbobcat]

Do the Spurs only have their own draft picks this off season? Too much movement there for me to keep track.

Spurs have their own 1st and 2nd and Toronto’s 2nd.

[Ed Helicopter Jones]

Spurs have their own 1st and 2nd and Toronto’s 2nd.

:tu

Thank you!

[scott]

For the record, I never said Tre is a bad player. I just don’t think he’s good enough to be a starter.

A team with a starting line-up of role players (at least in this stage of their career) can still be an average team winning around .500 at its best.

the starting line up did not do great and whether that’s because of injuries, players still learning, I don’t know.

if I was to pick one player out of the current starting five for the team to be replaced in order for the team to improve— it would have to be Tre.

This spurred a couple of thoughts for me:

1) what are the thoughts on what the spurs record would have been had our current assumed starting line up (Tre, Devin, Keldon, Sochan, Collins) had played a “normal” amount this year together. I’m guessing we move from 22-60 to something more like 30-35 wins.

2) This might be a hot take, but I’d actually say Keldon is the one player to be replaced for the team to improve, in large part because of the role our SF needs to play as opposed to being a reflection on Keldon’s talent. I feel like Tre is capable of being a low level starter, whereas Keldon is not really capable of being the first or second option.

[scott]

With that said, I’m by no means shopping Keldon this offseason because I feel like I must move him. I like Keldon and think he can be a very solid role player, he just isn’t the “future all star” some on this board proclaimed. He’s not suitable as a go-to guy.

With that said, depending on how the lotto balls bounce, I would consider moving Keldon under some circumstances, such as:

We land #1 and get Wemby. At that point, I’m probably looking to build around him faster. I’d look to try and package Keldon and Devin for a more potent scoring guard. An example would be (without trying to evaluate the appeal of these moves for the other team or how realistic they are) someone like Jordan Poole, Benn Mathurin, Jaden Ivey. Starting 5 would be: Tre, Poole/Ivey/Mathurin, Sochan, Wemby, Collins.

[spurs10]

FWIW finally tried the Tankathon and we got #1 two out of 8. Meanwhile, Keldon will be here and Vassell hopefully will remain healthy. Highlight of the year was Sochan, but also digging Mamu, Champagne, Branham, Tre, and Collins. Fingers crossed for May 16th.

[Dejounte]

With that said, I’m by no means shopping Keldon this offseason because I feel like I must move him. I like Keldon and think he can be a very solid role player, he just isn’t the “future all star” some on this board proclaimed. He’s not suitable as a go-to guy.

With that said, depending on how the lotto balls bounce, I would consider moving Keldon under some circumstances, such as:

We land #1 and get Wemby. At that point, I’m probably looking to build around him faster. I’d look to try and package Keldon and Devin for a more potent scoring guard. An example would be (without trying to evaluate the appeal of these moves for the other team or how realistic they are) someone like Jordan Poole, Benn Mathurin, Jaden Ivey. Starting 5 would be: Tre, Poole/Ivey/Mathurin, Sochan, Wemby, Collins.

Tbh Spurs would be the last team to trade two locker room fixtures like KJ and Vassell right away like that. It would send a bad message. I would expect less loyalty from Wemba come contract time if that happens.

[scott]

Tbh Spurs would be the last team to trade two locker room fixtures like KJ and Vassell right away like that. It would send a bad message. I would expect less loyalty from Wemba come contract time if that happens.

I understand your point, and perhaps it is a different time now - but this is basically the 1989 model. We had Sean and David coming in, so we shipped out some of our other promising youth for the right pieces to surround them with.

However, I do see your point. I’m a little down on Devin given how his defense has somewhat regressed and he can’t seem to stay healthy, but maybe he makes the jump to a reliable #2 to Wemby (assuming Sochan isn’t the guy who develops into that #2).

Of course, no need to really worry about this until that #1 ping pong ball is ours, just full filler talk while we wait for a coin flip and then a game of bingo in a month.

[CGD]

Tbh Spurs would be the last team to trade two locker room fixtures like KJ and Vassell right away like that. It would send a bad message. I would expect less loyalty from Wemba come contract time if that happens.

Agree, they’d have to be wowed. It’s have to be something big like the Blazers panicking after Dame’s most recent comments and offering the #8 pick for Keldon.

[Ocotillo]

Agree, they’d have to be wowed. It’s have to be something big like the Blazers panicking after Dame’s most recent comments and offering the #8 pick for Keldon.
I did see a story today Portland wants to trade the pick if it’s not number one.

[exstatic]

I did see a story today Portland wants to trade the pick if it’s not number one.

Considering how they shit the bed last year, I don’t blame them.

[Ariel]

We land #1 and get Wemby. At that point, I’m probably looking to build around him faster. I’d look to try and package Keldon and Devin for a more potent scoring guard. An example would be (without trying to evaluate the appeal of these moves for the other team or how realistic they are) someone like Jordan Poole, Benn Mathurin, Jaden Ivey. Starting 5 would be: Tre, Poole/Ivey/Mathurin, Sochan, Wemby, Collins.
I wouldn't rush things at all. That's what leads to Luka like scenarios down the road, when you actually do need to put together a competitive team (3 years down the road). In any case, I wouldn't trade Vassell unless he's got unreasonable extension demands that make him unlikely to stay with the team. Otherwise, he's probably our most likely future 2nd / 3rd option on offense, while being capable of not being a liability on the other end (if he puts in the effort).
Also, if I'm trading for someone, it's not a one way guy like Poole who's got a star like contract (around 4 years 140 million), or Mathurin (big scoring potential but not 2 way player). Ivey has been disappointing IMO, he's been underwhelming defensively and not as efficient on offense or as a creator as expected. I would put together an offer in the right circumstances (say Detroit lands no. 2 and wants Scoot or one of the Thompsons, then I'd do Keldon + Charlotte's first + a few seconds for Ivey). But I'd only trade when there's a clear benefit ahead in terms of talent or fit, and IMO here there's not.

[Philthemage]

With that said, I’m by no means shopping Keldon this offseason because I feel like I must move him. I like Keldon and think he can be a very solid role player, he just isn’t the “future all star” some on this board proclaimed. He’s not suitable as a go-to guy.

With that said, depending on how the lotto balls bounce, I would consider moving Keldon under some circumstances, such as:

We land #1 and get Wemby. At that point, I’m probably looking to build around him faster. I’d look to try and package Keldon and Devin for a more potent scoring guard. An example would be (without trying to evaluate the appeal of these moves for the other team or how realistic they are) someone like Jordan Poole, Benn Mathurin, Jaden Ivey. Starting 5 would be: Tre, Poole/Ivey/Mathurin, Sochan, Wemby, Collins.

If there is a chance I'd love to trade some assets to grab Jaylen Brown instead.

[The Truth #6]

I wouldn’t trade Keldon for the #8 pick this year. That’s my initial thought. I guess if they were really high on Anthony Black or Hendricks or Keyonte, but seems like a bad draft to trade Keldon for a likely worse player.

[exstatic]

If there is a chance I'd love to trade some assets to grab Jaylen Brown instead.

Why give up even a SRP when he's a UFA in 2024? Makes no sense.

[LeBowen]

Why give up even a SRP when he's a UFA in 2024? Makes no sense.

There's no chance he walks, Celtics aren't that dumb.

Either he signs an extension or they trade him before the deadline. Or S&T.

[exstatic]

There's no chance he walks, Celtics aren't that dumb.

Either he signs an extension or they trade him before the deadline. Or S&T.

Celtics don't have a choice. It's his call, since he's unrestricted. Any trade they try will be selling low, since 29 other teams know he's unrestricted in a year.

[LeBowen]

Celtics don't have a choice. It's his call, since he's unrestricted. Any trade they try will be selling low, since 29 other teams know he's unrestricted in a year.

Better to sell low, than to let him walk.

[exstatic]

Better to sell low, than to let him walk.

RE GARD LESS

He will be unrestricted in 2024. If they trade him to Orlando, he'll be unrestricted. If they trade him to OKC, he will be unrestricted. And so on.

[Dex]

I wouldn’t trade Keldon for the #8 pick this year. That’s my initial thought. I guess if they were really high on Anthony Black or Hendricks or Keyonte, but seems like a bad draft to trade Keldon for a likely worse player.

Yeah, I don't see Keldon being traded anytime soon.

I've gone on record as stating that I don't think he is a true #1 option on a contending team...but he could be a good #3 or even #2. That said, he is committed to the organization, the locker room seems to love him, and he is one of Pop's current golden boys so I don't see him going anywhere while Pop is here unless some team throws out a deal the Spurs can't refuse.

[JPB]

Just read an ESPN article reminding that spurs have 31 picks (12 FRPs and 19 SRPs) in the next seven years.

[The Truth #6]

19SRPs. Damn. I’m sure there are some fat guys with skills we can target in there somewhere. Ha.

[Chinook]

RE GARD LESS

He will be unrestricted in 2024. If they trade him to Orlando, he'll be unrestricted. If they trade him to OKC, he will be unrestricted. And so on.

For someone who's acting like your point is so simple, you're missing a pretty straightforward point. Brown isn't necessarily going to hit free agency. He can get a max extension with the new CBA. If a team he wants to go to does not have cap space, then trading for him and extending him is a viable option. Even if he does hit free agency, if a team he'd prefer to stay at has his Bird rights, he can just stay there and not lose the money he'd give up taking SA's cap space. If SA wanted him, then they'd probably need to either trade for him or have a plan to trade for someone while hitting the lotto to set up a "big three" situation to entice him to sign over other teams. The Spurs don't have leverage over marquee free agents right now. They don't even have as much cap space as some other teams now. They can and should be willing to wade in a bit and use that space to improve their position. But they would have to be proactive to bring in talent, which means trading for guys and trying to extend them rather than assuming they'll even get a meeting next summer.

[Ariel]

I don't think Jaylen Brown extends. The main benefit to trading for him is that you'd eliminate the threat of teams without cap space. If you're feeling confident he's unlikely to choose any other team with cap space, that means you pretty much guarantee he resigns, or at least you can recoup your assets via S&T. As long as you didn't pay something ridiculous, it may be a worthwhile gamble.

[Ariel]

Just read an ESPN article reminding that spurs have 31 picks (12 FRPs and 19 SRPs) in the next seven years. That figure is misleading: besides our own we have 5 extra firsts (Charlotte '24 protected 14-14, Toronto '24 protected 6-6-6, Chicago '25 protected 10-8-8, Atlanta '25 & '27), the 2 swaps (Atlanta '26 unrestricted, Boston '28 protected 1) aren't additional picks. Also, the 2nd rounders will largely be crap that's only usable as a trading chip (trading up in the draft, round up a deal, move an unwanted contract, etc), that number probably translates to 1 pick per year when we have a single pick, or maybe none if we have multiple firsts. We should probably be rotating players faster, meaning making a decision faster and not get enamored with too many players that take too much time to develop (Wesley, Barlow), and not get too attached to players without high ceiling (Mamu, Champagnie). A season or 2 is enough to get a sense of their trajectory, and then move. That would help avoid clogging the roster.

[exstatic]

I don't think Jaylen Brown extends. The main benefit to trading for him is that you'd eliminate the threat of teams without cap space. If you're feeling confident he's unlikely to choose any other team with cap space, that means you pretty much guarantee he resigns, or at least you can recoup your assets via S&T. As long as you didn't pay something ridiculous, it may be a worthwhile gamble.

He's definitely second banana, and Boston's media never fails to let him know that. A new contract is also more lucrative than an extension, and most players want to hit UFA at least once to do the tour and dog and pony show.

[exstatic]

That figure is misleading: besides our own we have 5 extra firsts (Charlotte '24 protected 14-14, Toronto '24 protected 6-6-6, Chicago '25 protected 10-8-8, Atlanta '25 & '27), the 2 swaps (Atlanta '26 unrestricted, Boston '28 protected 1) aren't additional picks. Also, the 2nd rounders will largely be crap that's only usable as a trading chip (trading up in the draft, round up a deal, move an unwanted contract, etc), that number probably translates to 1 pick per year when we have a single pick, or maybe none if we have multiple firsts. We should probably be rotating players faster, meaning making a decision faster and not get enamored with too many players that take too much time to develop (Wesley, Barlow), and not get too attached to players without high ceiling (Mamu, Champagnie). A season or 2 is enough to get a sense of their trajectory, and then move. That would help avoid clogging the roster.

So in the next 7 years, we have 5 extra FRPs, plus our own 7. How is their figure of 12 in any way misleading? Last time I checked, 5 + 7 = 12.

[JPB]

That figure is misleading: besides our own we have 5 extra firsts (Charlotte '24 protected 14-14, Toronto '24 protected 6-6-6, Chicago '25 protected 10-8-8, Atlanta '25 & '27), the 2 swaps (Atlanta '26 unrestricted, Boston '28 protected 1) aren't additional picks. Also, the 2nd rounders will largely be crap that's only usable as a trading chip (trading up in the draft, round up a deal, move an unwanted contract, etc), that number probably translates to 1 pick per year when we have a single pick, or maybe none if we have multiple firsts. We should probably be rotating players faster, meaning making a decision faster and not get enamored with too many players that take too much time to develop (Wesley, Barlow), and not get too attached to players without high ceiling (Mamu, Champagnie). A season or 2 is enough to get a sense of their trajectory, and then move. That would help avoid clogging the roster.

Yeah, I believe everyone understands that. But that 31 potential picks is still a pretty impressive number that reflects the state of the spurs and the possibilties and flexibility they could have in their rebuild.

[Ariel]

So in the next 7 years, we have 5 extra FRPs, plus our own 7. How is their figure of 12 in any way misleading? Last time I checked, 5 + 7 = 12.
I meant that 31 picks sounds like a lot, but almost all those 2nds won't translate into players on the roster, and even those firsts aren't that many when you consider that any team gets 7 firsts in the same time frame. So it's essentially 5 more firsts than the norm, plus a bunch of chips to play with. But thanks for the math lesson, whenever I have a doubt on the matter I'll be sure to check with you.

[Mr. Body]

That figure is misleading: besides our own we have 5 extra firsts (Charlotte '24 protected 14-14, Toronto '24 protected 6-6-6, Chicago '25 protected 10-8-8, Atlanta '25 & '27), the 2 swaps (Atlanta '26 unrestricted, Boston '28 protected 1) aren't additional picks. Also, the 2nd rounders will largely be crap that's only usable as a trading chip (trading up in the draft, round up a deal, move an unwanted contract, etc), that number probably translates to 1 pick per year when we have a single pick, or maybe none if we have multiple firsts. We should probably be rotating players faster, meaning making a decision faster and not get enamored with too many players that take too much time to develop (Wesley, Barlow), and not get too attached to players without high ceiling (Mamu, Champagnie). A season or 2 is enough to get a sense of their trajectory, and then move. That would help avoid clogging the roster.

These SRPs will be interesting to watch, not just for the Spurs but league-wide. 1) Teams went wild trading picks for players and so few teams have a greater concentration of FRPs, 2) The trade deadline was wild with the number swapped around, 3) The new CBA makes it sound like teams over that doulbe luxury tax line will have difficulty adding pieces to their squads.

Potentially SRP could be useful for teams who have traded off their FRPs and cannot easily add talent because of being choked up in salaries. But it's hard to really see this to be the case. The Second Round is still a den of iffy and barely passable talents. There is a chance that the round becomes more enticing with older players as the first round increasingly loads up on babies, but I dunno. I suspect no one in the NBA really knows.

That said, the Spurs have done an excellent job of loading the coffers with picks while moving players to playoff teams. The big questions involve roster management and asset management.

[exstatic]

I meant that 31 picks sounds like a lot, but almost all those 2nds won't translate into players on the roster, and even those firsts aren't that many when you consider that any team gets 7 firsts in the same time frame. So it's essentially 5 more firsts than the norm, plus a bunch of chips to play with. But thanks for the math lesson, whenever I have a doubt on the matter I'll be sure to check with you.

:lol Fair enough. However, 5 extra FRPs is a lot when there is a shortage of them available for trade league-wide. It's not just the ones that have been traded, but the year before and the year after are off limits by the CBA, and on multi year opportunities like Chicago, they have 3 years blocked, plus the year before and the year after. Once the pick conveys, those block offs go away, but there are a lot of them out there.

[Seventyniner]

:lol Fair enough. However, 5 extra FRPs is a lot when there is a shortage of them available for trade league-wide. It's not just the ones that have been traded, but the year before and the year after are off limits by the CBA, and on multi year opportunities like Chicago, they have 3 years blocked, plus the year before and the year after. Once the pick conveys, those block offs go away, but there are a lot of them out there.

Good point. Whether or not 5 extra firsts seems like a lot, the fact is that the Spurs have the flexibility to trade up to 9 first round picks starting on draft night (keeping a pick in each of 2025/2027/2029 to say in compliance with the Stepien Rule). And that's not even including the Hawks 2026 and Celtics 2028 swap rights, which I'm pretty sure could also be included in a trade.

With so many teams prevented from trading any firsts at all, the Spurs control a large part of the supply of firsts. If the demand for those starts to pick up the Spurs stand to benefit.

It would be funny if the Stepien Rule ever gets extended to cover second round picks. I don't see a reason to do it though. Most seconds don't stick anyway.

[CGD]

My hope is that we have multiple picks in the years that there aren’t multiple teams that also own 3 picks (like last year). It’s harder to play those teams off each other to make moves.

[scott]

Back to Jaylen Brown, idk about anyone else but I'd sure as hell be down a team that looked like:

PG / Tre / Blake
Devin / Bran / Grizzled Vet Shooter
Jaylen / Keldon / Champagnie
Wemby / Sochan /Mamu
Collins / Bassey / Young Backup Big

Assuming you could get Jaylen Brown for some of our draft capital in a S&T next off-season or (more unlikely) sign and extend before then. Then it really leaves PG as the glaring weak spot on the roster. Tre could be a passable starter, with Devin, Jaylen, Bran and Sochan getting some minutes as ballhandler as well.

One can dream.

[TD 21]

Vassell: Fair enough on the contract, though keep in mind Johnson came in lower than expected and though the former is better than the likes of Barrett and Hunter, they have something (draft pedigree + the latter plays a premium position) he doesn't. You can debate the merits of that, but not the reality.

Johnson, Collins and Jones: When I said role, I mean more so in an ideal setting, how does this archetype fit. The former can't create for himself or others efficiently and isn't a 3 and D type, so he's more of a backup in that scenario.

Sochan: He's not already a solid starter. He can't create efficient offense, shoot at all, rebound and his defense wasn't as impactful as it was hyped. I see the ceiling as more so Gordon (Aaron), which is elite role player.

Bates-Diop: Lack of roster space and the reality that he'll likely be relatively in demand by good or aspiring to be (premium position, won't break the bank) teams is why I don't see him returning.

[ace3g]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SptSaV-3hvU

[CGD]

^ interesting reminder that spurs still have cap room to take on a trash contract for a pick on draft night.

[Seventyniner]

^ interesting reminder that spurs still have cap room to take on a trash contract for a pick on draft night.

I'm pretty sure the Spurs can't absorb a contract that's about to expire into cap space, but they should be able to take back a player who is under contract for next season or beyond. I don't expect the Spurs to be in the hunt for any major free agents so using the cap space on draft night, rather than later in the summer, should be perfectly fine.

One thing I learned from that video is that team and player salaries "freeze" on the last day of the regular season when it comes to calculating luxury tax payments and the salary floor, so the Spurs could absorb a player into cap space on draft night without it taking money out of the pockets of the players that finished the season on the roster.

[rascal]

Considering how they shit the bed last year, I don’t blame them.

Portland is happy with Sharpe and see big things from him in the future.

They are looking to add a veteran and keep sharpe if they don't get a top two or three pick which is the smart play for this year.

[Biggems]

Vassell: A 4-5 year, $80-100M extension seems likely. Well on his way to being a long term fixture and solid starter.

Johnson: Slim chance he gets traded now, but unlikely to be a long term fixture either and trends closer to a high end backup.

Jones: Probably extended for 3 years and MLE-ish money, with solid chance to be long term fixture. Same as it ever was: Needs a credible 3 to be a high end backup.

Collins: Will undoubtedly have third year fully guaranteed (stealth extension candidate?). Fringe starter, with rare malleability, versatility.

Sochan: Seems destined to be a long term fixture and is a credible shot away from being on track to solid starter.

Branham: Looks the part of a classic sixth man, though obviously has to improve from 3. Solid chance to be a long term fixture.

McDermott: More likely to be traded by the deadline.

Graham: More likely to be traded by the deadline.

Bassey: Well on his way to being a quality backup.

Bates-Diop: Unlikely to be retained, but has solidified spot in the league.

Langford: Unlikely to be retained, remains on fringe of the league.

Wesley: Needs a quantum leap just to reach replacement player threshold.

Mamukelashvili: Likely to be retained and is probably a more reliable 3 away from solidifying spot in the league.

Champagnie: Likely to be retained/converted. If he can more or less maintain, he'll solidify spot in the league.

Barlow: Likely to be retained. Has to carve out a niche to have a chance to eventually solidify spot in the league.

Dieng: Suspect he retires and joins front office or coaching staff in some capacity.

Birch: If salary isn't utilized as ballast in trade, bought out/waived (medical retirement?).

Aren't we allowed to have 17 contracts now, with 2 of them being 2-way deals? If so, I want to keep the top 15 players on your list. Then, my dream scenario is to win the lottery and draft Victor. Then, I want to trade back into the lottery, using both of our 2nds this draft, plus one or two future 1sts in order to draft Kris Murray.

Now our team is ready to build a winning foundation again.

PG - Jones, Graham
SG - Vassell, McDermott, Branham, Champagnie, Langford, Wesley
SF - KJ, Bates-Diop, Murray
PF - Sochan, Mamu, Barlow
C- Wemby, Collins, Bassey

But, if we had to let go of anyone......Langford and McDermott

[mo7888]

Aren't we allowed to have 17 contracts now, with 2 of them being 2-way deals? If so, I want to keep the top 15 players on your list. Then, my dream scenario is to win the lottery and draft Victor. Then, I want to trade back into the lottery, using both of our 2nds this draft, plus one or two future 1sts in order to draft Kris Murray.

Now our team is ready to build a winning foundation again.

PG - Jones, Graham
SG - Vassell, McDermott, Branham, Champagnie, Langford, Wesley
SF - KJ, Bates-Diop, Murray
PF - Sochan, Mamu, Barlow
C- Wemby, Collins, Bassey

But, if we had to let go of anyone......Langford and McDermott

I don't think you'll have to get into the lottery to get Murray.

[Chinook]

Aren't we allowed to have 17 contracts now, with 2 of them being 2-way deals? If so, I want to keep the top 15 players on your list. Then, my dream scenario is to win the lottery and draft Victor. Then, I want to trade back into the lottery, using both of our 2nds this draft, plus one or two future 1sts in order to draft Kris Murray.

Now our team is ready to build a winning foundation again.

PG - Jones, Graham
SG - Vassell, McDermott, Branham, Champagnie, Langford, Wesley
SF - KJ, Bates-Diop, Murray
PF - Sochan, Mamu, Barlow
C- Wemby, Collins, Bassey

But, if we had to let go of anyone......Langford and McDermott

Teams were allowed 17 contracts before the new CBA. They will be allowed 18 going forward.

[CGD]

I'm pretty sure the Spurs can't absorb a contract that's about to expire into cap space, but they should be able to take back a player who is under contract for next season or beyond. I don't expect the Spurs to be in the hunt for any major free agents so using the cap space on draft night, rather than later in the summer, should be perfectly fine.

One thing I learned from that video is that team and player salaries "freeze" on the last day of the regular season when it comes to calculating luxury tax payments and the salary floor, so the Spurs could absorb a player into cap space on draft night without it taking money out of the pockets of the players that finished the season on the roster.

Yeah I was thinking more about something like absorbing Lowery’s deal for MIA’s FRP while also sending out Graham. I think it amounts to 15M savings next year for Miami.

[mo7888]

Yeah I was thinking more about something like absorbing Lowery’s deal for MIA’s FRP while also sending out Graham. I think it amounts to 15M savings next year for Miami.

I like that and it's the kind of deal that could be on the table..

[pad300]

Teams were allowed 17 contracts before the new CBA. They will be allowed 18 going forward.

Is that 16 roster players and 2 two-way contracts, or did they add a third two-way?

[Philthemage]

The new CBA will allow teams to carry three players on two-way contracts to their active rosters.

[exstatic]

Is that 16 roster players and 2 two-way contracts, or did they add a third two-way?

3rd 2way.

[JPB]

The new CBA will allow teams to carry three players on two-way contracts to their active rosters.

Good news for the spurs.

[Gagnrath]

That figure is misleading: besides our own we have 5 extra firsts (Charlotte '24 protected 14-14, Toronto '24 protected 6-6-6, Chicago '25 protected 10-8-8, Atlanta '25 & '27), the 2 swaps (Atlanta '26 unrestricted, Boston '28 protected 1) aren't additional picks. Also, the 2nd rounders will largely be crap that's only usable as a trading chip (trading up in the draft, round up a deal, move an unwanted contract, etc), that number probably translates to 1 pick per year when we have a single pick, or maybe none if we have multiple firsts. We should probably be rotating players faster, meaning making a decision faster and not get enamored with too many players that take too much time to develop (Wesley, Barlow), and not get too attached to players without high ceiling (Mamu, Champagnie). A season or 2 is enough to get a sense of their trajectory, and then move. That would help avoid clogging the roster.

A team with a 17 man roster needs 5 to 7 players with limited ceilings and are just basically replacement level players or even slightly below. That is the injury reserves and 8 minute per game guys that help eat up regular season games and give guys a night off on back to backs, and when they turn an ankle. Your top 5 to 7 guys are what decides where your team fits talent wise in the league and the next 3 to 5 guys are all guys with high ceilings.

[Ariel]

A team with a 17 man roster needs 5 to 7 players with limited ceilings and are just basically replacement level players or even slightly below. That is the injury reserves and 8 minute per game guys that help eat up regular season games and give guys a night off on back to backs, and when they turn an ankle. Your top 5 to 7 guys are what decides where your team fits talent wise in the league and the next 3 to 5 guys are all guys with high ceilings.
That changes depending on what stage your team is, if you're a contender then you might have a couple prospects at the most, and if you're rebuilding you can afford much more than 3/5 players with high ceilings. I'd classify our guys something like this:
Core (5): Wemby (of course), Sochan and Branham (already proven NBA players even if rookies), Vassell and Keldon (young starters with upside).
Long term role players (2): Tre Jones and Zach Collins, short term starters, ideally both quality backups
Short term role players (2): McDermott, Graham. Both expiring (or almost in Granham's case) and likely trade fodder.
Rotation players (3): Mamu, KBD, Champagnie
Projects (3): Barlow, Bassey, Wesley
Dead men walking (3): Langford, Birch, Dieng
All in all I don't think anyone not in the first 2 groups should prevent us from pursuing higher ceiling guys. Of course you're not going to have 10 guys who might not end up NBA players, but players with limited ceilings isn't an elusive category, find 3/4 truly high ceiling guys and the rest you figure out later.

[Extra Stout]

Superstar: Wembanyama
Other stars: Yet to be acquired
Other starters: Sochan, Vassell
Other rotation players: Collins, Johnson, Jones, McDermott
Replacement-level players or less: Everyone else