Shams: Spurs Trade for Reggie Bullock and Unprotected 2030 First Round Pick Swap

[lmbebo]

Mavs: Grant Williams
Spurs : Reggie bullock and unprotected pick swap from Dallas in 2030
Celtics get multiple 2nd round picks

[spurraider21]

well done!

[spurraider21]

1676729165393829889

[SpursFan86]

Wow - out of left field! Don’t hate it at all - who knows where Dallas will be in 7 years :lol

Assume this takes us out of the running for getting involved in any of these larger deals being discussed lately (Harden/Lillard)?

[LeBowen]

Second rounders coming into play!

Bullock probably gets waived?

[Dejounte]

Frp? Whoa

[Kurik]

Good trade considering 2030 will be post Luka/Irving drama.

[Dejounte]

Seven years from now, spurs are gonna be contending and getting top 5 picks at the same time haha

[timvp]

Unprotected first round pick swap?????????????

If so, that's a grand slam of a trade, tbh.

[NASpurs]

2030 :lol

[BatManu20]

Brian Right at it again tbh.

[lefty20]

Unprotected first round pick swap?????????????

If so, that's a grand slam of a trade, tbh.

Can't be true.

SpursTalk had assured me that Wright was incapable of making such deals because he failed to do so on the first day of Free Agency.

[LeBowen]

Seven years from now, spurs are gonna be contending and getting top 5 picks at the same time haha

Luka on the roster and Mavs pick. Not bad, tbh.

[SpursFan86]

Brian Right :wow

[timvp]

Bullock is on an expiring $10 million contract. That sounds very tradeable at the deadline, especially if he's shooting well. At his best, he's a really good 3-and-D player.

I doubt the Spurs actually got an unprotected first round pick swap from the Mavs in 2030. That'd be too good of a trade.

[baseline bum]

Outfuckingstanding work by Brian Wright. Especially since Bullock is on an expiring contract this year.

[InRareForm]

Accumulation is the equation

[BacktoBasics]

Is it actually a 1st rounder? That tweet didn’t specify 1st or 2nd.

[Mugen]

I would absolutely take an unprotected swap from Dallas in 7 years :lol

Is Bullock getting waived? This probably takes us out of being the 3rd team in a Lillard/Herro deal, yeah?

[baseline bum]

Bullock is on an expiring $10 million contract. That sounds very tradeable at the deadline, especially if he's shooting well. At his best, he's a really good 3-and-D player.

I doubt the Spurs actually got an unprotected first round pick swap from the Mavs in 2030. That'd be too good of a trade.

Do you think it's a second? That would make this pretty meh.

[SpursFan86]

Safe to assume the 2nds in this deal are coming from us?

[Kurik]

Wemby would be what? 26 and hopefully in his prime while Luka will be an old 31.

[Degoat]

We’re accumulating all those expiring deals for Portland baby!!

[timvp]

If this is a first round pick, it has to be the best trade Wright's even made. A pretty decent contract in Bullock for an unprotected first round pick swap? WTF, that can't be real.

This trade is so good that I'd be fine with a second rounder in order to absorb Bullock -- especially because you can probably trade him for 2 or 3 second rounders at the deadline when 3-and-D wings are in highest demand.

[TD 21]

Another nice move. Bullock has legit value (relatively inexpensive/expiring 3 and D wing) and will almost certainly be rerouted.

He's a known Thibodeau favorite and plugs in nicely to my updated fake Quickley trade: Graham, Bullock and draft capital for Quickley and Fournier (would add $500k).

[RC_Drunkford]

These our 2nd rounders. Don’t mind it. That‘s what I wanted to see. Convert those 2nds into first round picks

[timvp]

Hell, I'd trade a second rounder for Bullock just because he'll have good value at the trade deadline :lol

[Leetonidas]

There's no way it's a first. Right?? That would be an insane price to pay for Grant fuckin Williams

[Dejounte]

These our 2nd rounders. Don’t mind it. That‘s what I wanted to see. Convert those 2nds into first round picks

If it’s really our second rounders that turned into a first, a lot of people need to get in line to apologize to Wright tbh

[scott]

Did not see that one coming

[RC_Drunkford]

Boston is getting our least favorable of CHI/NOLA 2024 Second
2025 Toronto second
2028 Miami second

doesn‘t matter though cause you can basically trade Bullock for 3 seconds again. Great move

[Robz4000]

:wow great trade

[Degoat]

So that would mean it’s less likely that Cedi remains a spur right? Because at some point there’s gotta be 15 guys to a roster

[heyheymymy]

Assuming this is trade facilitation with the incentive of converting some seconds into the unprotected first swap that is a very savvy move.

Gotta be additional moves. No way we keep Bullock and Cedi.

Love loading up the draft capital. People who were wanting that big splash on draft night re: Wallace/Bufkin are about to have your feast in years to come with multiple selections and tons of different trade possibilities.

[D-Robinson 50 fan]

Please lord, let this be a 1st round unprotected pick swap!!!!!! If it is Dallas GM is an idiot. Lmao

[RC_Drunkford]

If it’s really our second rounders that turned into a first, a lot of people need to get in line to apologize to Wright tbh

People should understand by now that he‘s using 2nds to flip them into firsts. He already did that with the Thad Young trade

[RC_Drunkford]

We now have 17 Players under contract and a bunch of good role players on expiring deals. Pretty sure Wright ain‘t done flipping

[slick'81]

Not a bad use of those 2nds i guess

[John B]

Bullock is on an expiring $10 million contract. That sounds very tradeable at the deadline, especially if he's shooting well. At his best, he's a really good 3-and-D player.

I doubt the Spurs actually got an unprotected first round pick swap from the Mavs in 2030. That'd be too good of a trade.

When Spurs trade his expiring at the trade deadline, they get even more picks… This is the trade that keeps on getting better

[tonight...you]

2030 :lol
You are literally the only goofball laughing at this trade.
The only one. Lol.

[tonight...you]

Not a bad use of those 2nds i guess
Maybe you'd rather keep them instead?

[lefty20]

We now have 17 Players under contract and a bunch of good role players on expiring deals. Pretty sure Wright ain‘t done flipping

Let him cook!

[CGD]

Now that’s how you reach the floor in style, lol. And who knows, maybe Luka will be on the Spurs by then ha!

[SpursFan86]

Woj now reporting that both Boston and Dallas are receiving two SRPs (so 4 SRPs being sent in total)…wonder if those are all from us?

[Dverde]

Love this trade. I would keep Bullock as trade bait. Might get our 2nd rounders back :lol

[NASpurs]

You are literally the only goofball laughing at this trade.
The only one. Lol.

Probably because I'm the only one who sees 2030 like some far future date. Shit is like 7 years from now :lol

[CGD]

So far we’ve used our capspace to:

- Get Bullock & Cedi
- Waive Stevensons partial deal
- potentially valuable 2030 FRP swap

Not bad.

[Degoat]

We now have 17 Players under contract and a bunch of good role players on expiring deals. Pretty sure Wright ain‘t done flipping

That’s without Considering Dom or Sidy on regular contracts right?

[heyheymymy]

Bullock/Doug/Cedi behind Johnson

That's pretty log jammed so you can imagine Wright might make additional moves.

[Mr. Body]

The SRPs coming from us?

[slick'81]

Probably because I'm the only one who sees 2030 like some far future date. Shit is like 7 years from now :lol


the future is bright:flag:

[Southwest Texas Fan]

Sounds like a great deal but can someone explain it to me and why it’s such a great deal.

[Mr. Body]

Woj now reporting that both Boston and Dallas are receiving two SRPs (so 4 SRPs being sent in total)…wonder if those are all from us?

Four SRPs for a possible swap.

[Chinook]

Hmm... I'm not a huge fan of swaps as the main source of value in a trade. It's way too easy to end up with nothing. It has value in that the Spurs can offer an improved 2030 pick in a future trade. Depending on the timing of that trade, it could add a ton of value. It could also work out really well. Just count me as a person who'd prefer a protected first over an unprotected swap.

That said, this was basically free money for Wright. You can't argue with that, and Bullock is a decent player who could have resale value ala Richardson. I hope they weren't the team that offered more than one second (because again, they may well not end up with a pick), but if they are now willing to deal picks in bunches to facilitate trades, it'll help them upgrade their roster over the next few years.

[Kurik]

the future is bright:flag:

Bwright

[Chinook]

Four SRPs for a possible swap.

Yeah, which is why I'm not as big of a fan of this trade. It's still fine if the Spurs got to pick the seconds, but it's not great.

[Mr. Body]

Hmm... I'm not a huge fan of swaps as the main source of value in a trade. It's way too easy to end up with nothing. It has value in that the Spurs can offer an improved 2030 pick in a future trade. Depending on the timing of that trade, it could add a ton of value. It could also work out really well. Just count me as a person who'd prefer a protected first over an unprotected swap.

That said, this was basically free money for Wright. You can't argue with that, and Bullock is a decent player who could have resale value ala Richardson. I hope they weren't the team that offered more than one second (because again, they may well not end up with a pick), but if they are now willing to deal picks in bunches to facilitate trades, it'll help them upgrade their roster over the next few years.

Agree. It's kind of fool's gold and we haven't seen many of them actually work out across the league afaik. But the 2029 and 2030 swaps are so far out the Boston team could be bad or mediocre.

[JPB]

2030 :lol

Wemby will be 26 tbh.

[heyheymymy]

7 years from now? GREAT!

Victor will be like 26 and peaking with tons of salary around him and Spurs get the option to swap into better positioning to get higher talent to help Vic? That's ideal.

Plus as other said, 7 years is a long time to let Luka rise and fall, so the value might be better then.

Slick deal all around assuming true.

[tonight...you]

Probably because I'm the only one who sees 2030 like some far future date. Shit is like 7 years from now :lol
Do you... Invest?
You know, play the futures, or are you a microwave baby, always wanting things now?
It doesn't matter. You do you.

[exstatic]

So far we’ve used our capspace to:

- Get Bullock & Cedi
- Waive Stevensons partial deal
- potentially valuable 2030 FRP swap

Not bad.

Did the waive Stevenson? The consensus seemed to be that they would, but hadn’t heard that it went down yet.

[DPG21920]

Unprotected first round pick swap?????????????

If so, that's a grand slam of a trade, tbh.

Spurs gave up 4 seconds in the deal too I think. Even if so, don’t mind consolidation of 2nds for a legit swing at a first round upgrade

[NASpurs]

Do you... Invest?
You know, play the futures, or are you a microwave baby, always wanting things now?
It doesn't matter. You do you.

That's not the point of me laughing numbnuts. I'm just laughing at the year because 2030 in my head seems like fake year.

Tough day at work today sweetie?

[Mr. Body]

Dallas has done really well this offseason. I don't think their rookies will be standouts, but they'll help a more defensive gameplan. I didn't like Grant Williams here at all, but he's a nice pickup for the Mavs.

Did we really give up four picks for a trade that helps these teams out?

[Degoat]

I have a feeling this is all leading to a Fournier trade lol

[Robz4000]

Yeah, if the Spurs gave up four seconds for this trade its not as much of a homerun as I thought. Still a low-risk/high reward deal when you consider Bullock should be able to fetch multiple picks at the trade deadline.

[DPG21920]

Spurs have too many 2nds. Sure it’s a lot to give up 4 for nothing guaranteed back, but between Bullock being able to fetch some back and the fact all you want is a shot at something isn’t the first round with how insanely hard its been to rent cap space for anything valuable let alone a decent player who is expiring? This is the type of low risk, high reward creative risk taking I like to see.

Even if they end up with nothing on the swap it was worth a dart throw and likely only end up out 2 2nds for the opportunity to move up in the first round

[SpursFan86]

Assuming we’re the ones sending all four SRPs, this goes from a grand slam to a 2-run homer tbh…still a no brainer IMO, especially considering the possibility we can end up flipping Bullock for another couple of SRPs at the deadline.

[Dejounte]

Why the fuck are people crying about losing seconds? Jesus Christ

[Kurik]

Spurs have what 20 second round picks between now and 2030? Then they will probably get 2 back this year from trading Bullock or someone else so I think it’s fine to gamble on a pick swap.

[slick'81]

Spurs easily replenish that treasure chest of two's with bullock:lol

[objective]

First thing I think of is that Bullock as a minutes eating guy makes Keldon available in a Lillard trade.

Far fetched I know, but I wasn't high on including Keldon in a trade for lillard because of a lack of proven SFs who could play

[Dejounte]

Either

1) people believe the Spurs could have drafted nice players with those seconds

or

2) they could have traded those seconds for something better

anyone who believes either of these are dumb tbh

[DAF86]

Sounds like a great deal but can someone explain it to me and why it’s such a great deal.

Imagine in 2030 coming off a championship parade and getting the first overall pick on the next draft.

[mo7888]

I have a feeling this is all leading to a Fournier trade lol

Im not sure who the player is but, I agree that this is a prelude to another trade.

[Degoat]

Everyone mentioning that Bullock can be traded at the deadline that means he has to make the 15 man roster, do we want to waste a spot and playing time on him?

[John B]

Woj now reporting that both Boston and Dallas are receiving two SRPs (so 4 SRPs being sent in total)…wonder if those are all from us?


And ST bitches complaining what’s up with Wright hoarding all these SRP’s… to flip for FRP unprotected :lol

[DAF86]

First thing I think of is that Bullock as a minutes eating guy makes Keldon available in a Lillard trade.

Far fetched I know, but I wasn't high on including Keldon in a trade for lillard because of a lack of proven SFs who could play

Have you heard of this Champagne guy?

[SpursFan86]

Imagine in 2030 coming off a championship parade and getting the first overall pick on the next draft.

Or the slightly more realistic scenario which is still super valuable: imagine us packaging this 2030 swap a few years from now to help land another proven star next to Wemby.

Multiple ways this can end up paying off such that it’s WAY better than four SRPs.

[Mr. Body]

Spurs have too many 2nds. Sure it’s a lot to give up 4 for nothing guaranteed back, but between Bullock being able to fetch some back and the fact all you want is a shot at something isn’t the first round with how insanely hard its been to rent cap space for anything valuable let alone a decent player who is expiring? This is the type of low risk, high reward creative risk taking I like to see.

Even if they end up with nothing on the swap it was worth a dart throw and likely only end up out 2 2nds for the opportunity to move up in the first round

It's confusing to me. These two teams needed the Spurs to do this deal. Bullock isn't much of a player, so it seems like SAS thought taking on salary to help these teams + a possibility of moving up some in the draft seven years from now is worth four SRPs?

It seems like they gave in too much.

[Mr. Body]

I think, too, I don't know why Dallas gets two SRPs at all, they get easily the best asset in the pile.

[slick'81]

It's confusing to me. These two teams needed the Spurs to do this deal. Bullock isn't much of a player, so it seems like SAS thought taking on salary to help these teams + a possibility of moving up some in the draft seven years from now is worth four SRPs?

It seems like they gave in too much.

its definitely not fantastic but atleast BWright is trying

[heyheymymy]

Yeah this solves the overabundance of 2nds by bundling them into a conversion to a 1st/swap

Consolidation upgrading is preferable to me vs. selling off or actually picking in most cases.

[exstatic]

First thing I think of is that Bullock as a minutes eating guy makes Keldon available in a Lillard trade.

Far fetched I know, but I wasn't high on including Keldon in a trade for lillard because of a lack of proven SFs who could play

Lillard, protestations of respect aside, doesn’t want to come here.

[CGD]

Did the waive Stevenson? The consensus seemed to be that they would, but hadn’t heard that it went down yet.

You’re right. I’m assuming that this trade makes it a foregone conclusion though. I suspect they’ll want to keep the more flippable asset of the two.

[Mr. Body]

Everyone mentioning that Bullock can be traded at the deadline that means he has to make the 15 man roster, do we want to waste a spot and playing time on him?

I wouldn't. He's 31 and falling off.

[objective]

Have you heard of this Champagne guy?

Has he done anything in an nba regular season for a non tanking team?

He might be great, but Bullock is good insurance in case he isn't

[SpursFan86]

I think, too, I don't know why Dallas gets two SRPs at all, they get easily the best asset in the pile.

I’m not sure Grant Williams is “easily” better than an unprotected FRP swap in 2030. Even if you want to argue the median outcome of the swap is worse, the ceiling alone makes it a debate IMO. I’d also argue that Bullock isn’t complete ballast - there’s a somewhat realistic chance he can be flipped for a SRP or two at the deadline.

[tonight...you]

That's not the point of me laughing numbnuts. I'm just laughing at the year because 2030 in my head seems like fake year.

Tough day at work today sweetie?
Didn't take long to break out the names. Must have hit a nerve...
So no, 2030 doesn't exist to you.

Right on.

[RC_Drunkford]

Spurs are setting themselves up with unprotected picks and swaps.
we already got 2025, 2026, 2027, 2028 (top 1 protected) and now 2030. Let just one of them be in the top 5 and it would be a huge boost to a team that’s already in the playoffs

[Big Empty]

Seven years from now, spurs are gonna be contending and getting top 5 picks at the same time haha
🤣💯👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽

[timvp]

Spurs fans complain when trading for second round picks. Spurs fans complain when trading away second round picks. :lol

[Mr. Body]

its definitely not fantastic but atleast BWright is trying

It's not a big deal in the swing of things. I'm not following the breakdown of assets. Like above, I don't get why the Mavs get any draft capital. As for Boston getting SRPs, that makes sense for doing a S&T to help out Dallas, but then the SRPs should all go to Boston... and none from the Spurs.

It's just weird.

[spurraider21]

Have you heard of this Champagne guy?
he played 15 regular season games for us and then 1 summer league game

thats not really proven by any standard

[DesignatedT]

Great trade. Much better than selling 2nds for $$ which was bound to happen.

[slick'81]

Spurs are setting themselves up with unprotected picks and swaps.
we already got 2025, 2026, 2027, 2028 (top 1 protected) and now 2030. Let just one of them be in the top 5 and it would be a huge boost to a team that’s already in the playoffs


one of those rolls have to payoff

[SpursFan86]

Spurs fans complain when trading for second round picks. Spurs fans complain when trading away second round picks. :lol

No kidding. Would’ve been happy to see us trade four SRPs for much less than Bullock and an unprotected swap tbh, if only for the sake of getting rid of those fucking things :lol

[exstatic]

It's confusing to me. These two teams needed the Spurs to do this deal. Bullock isn't much of a player, so it seems like SAS thought taking on salary to help these teams + a possibility of moving up some in the draft seven years from now is worth four SRPs?

It seems like they gave in too much.

It’s not too much when you have 20 of them and literally HAVE to consolidate them at some point. It’s like pulling $4 out of your wallet,and rolling the dice for $1,000.

[RC_Drunkford]

Players like Osman and Bullock can still be used to facilitate the Harden and Lillard trades. Some of those teams will like to add these type of players

[CGD]

Yeah, which is why I'm not as big of a fan of this trade. It's still fine if the Spurs got to pick the seconds, but it's not great.

With all respect, I think you’re overthinking it. It’s an educated bet on our FO versus the checkered track recorded of the Dallas one. Bundled SRP are basically currency these days and considering that for every Tre Jones you get like 6 Wisekampfs, it’s a good use of them here.

[Joseph Kony]

:lol crying over blowing 2nd rounders

Good job by Wright :toast

[timvp]

Just count me as a person who'd prefer a protected first over an unprotected swap.

Hard disagree. Who would rather have that Charlotte pick instead of that Hawks swap? It would have be super lightly protected to be close to the same value, IMO.

Unprotected firsts are the gold standard of trade assets. Unprotected swaps aren't quite as good but they're damn good in their own right.

Seconds have such a low hit rate that you'd come out ahead trading like ten second round picks for an unprotected pick swap.

Trading four second rounders for Bullock and an unprotected first round pick swap is still a ground slam.

[exstatic]

Players like Osman and Bullock can still be used to facilitate the Harden and Lillard trades. Some of those teams will like to add these type of players

Or at the deadline.b

[tonight...you]

It’s not too much when you have 20 of them and literally HAVE to consolidate them at some point. It’s like pulling $4 out of your wallet,and rolling the dice for $1,000.
I don't get people not getting this.
Forgive the double neg.

[Mr. Body]

It’s not too much when you have 20 of them and literally HAVE to consolidate them at some point. It’s like pulling $4 out of your wallet,and rolling the dice for $1,000.

I'm really okay with getting rid of some of them, that's cool. Again, I'm just trying to make sense of the overall deal. Anyway, Tatum and Brown are, what, in their prime seven years from now? Actually... they're 25 and 26, so will be starting a possible decline, not to mention the cap problems the team will have in the meantime.

Now... onto Bullock. I guess he's fine as a platoon guy if they keep him. I'm not sure how valuable expiring contracts are for us anymore, but we'll see.

[timvp]

It's confusing to me. These two teams needed the Spurs to do this deal. Bullock isn't much of a player, so it seems like SAS thought taking on salary to help these teams + a possibility of moving up some in the draft seven years from now is worth four SRPs?

It seems like they gave in too much.

The Spurs gave up too much? Second rounders for an unprotected swap? Huh?

[NASpurs]

Didn't take long to break out the names. Must have hit a nerve...
So no, 2030 doesn't exist to you.

Right on.

No it's just explaining myself because I was laughing at the year. Probably just keep whatever little comment to yourself next time. :tu

[mo7888]

Spurs fans complain when trading for second round picks. Spurs fans complain when trading away second round picks. :lol

It was a great deal without a doubt. If we only had 4 future 2nds to work with and have them all away then maybe the naysayers would have a point, but we the haul we have converting some into swaps is a smart way of playing the odds. Its a chess over checkers sort of move.

[tonight...you]

No it's just explaining myself because I was laughing at the year. Probably just keep whatever little comment to yourself next time. :tu
You do that too, with your little 2030 rant that pretty much nobody cares about from you.

Lol, this guy using the naming game to "explain himself".

[Chinook]

Either

1) people believe the Spurs could have drafted nice players with those seconds

or

2) they could have traded those seconds for something better

anyone who believes either of these are dumb tbh

1) We don't know which seconds those are going to end up being. I mentioned that the swap has more value than it direct conveyance in 2030. But if the Spurs bypass those earlier opportunities to cash in on it and end up getting nothing, it wouldn't be hard for any of those seconds to beat it.

2) Four seconds is a bundle that can get key role-players at the deadline. A future Spurs team might end up making such a move. They don't need these particular seconds to do it, which is just one of the reasons why this isn't a big deal. But yes I do think an important role-player during a contending run is more valuable than a future swap with one of the few teams that also has a young superstar on its roster.

I do think people are underselling Bullock. Rather than worrying about trading him, Bullock can help the team this year. He's fourth mid-sized expiring contract (not counting Graham), and because SA is under the cap, he can be aggregated immediately. There are teams that would've taken him for free if they could. The seconds for the swap is Dallas turning theoretical value into currency, some of which they paid to Boston.

[DAF86]

Has he done anything in an nba regular season for a non tanking team?

He might be great, but Bullock is good insurance in case he isn't


he played 15 regular season games for us and then 1 summer league game

thats not really proven by any standard

Sochan, McDermott, Vassell at the 3. Choose one. Even if it is me playing SF, you have to trade Keldon in a hearbeat if there's a good trade to be had for the Spurs.

[mo7888]

I'm really okay with getting rid of some of them, that's cool. Again, I'm just trying to make sense of the overall deal. Anyway, Tatum and Brown are, what, in their prime seven years from now? Actually... they're 25 and 26, so will be starting a possible decline, not to mention the cap problems the team will have in the meantime.

Now... onto Bullock. I guess he's fine as a platoon guy if they keep him. I'm not sure how valuable expiring contracts are for us anymore, but we'll see.

Isn't the swap with Dallas?

[Mr. Body]

The Spurs gave up too much? Second rounders for an unprotected swap? Huh?

I'm not huge on swaps, but that's not really what I'm getting at. I'm not sure how the trade as a whole shakes out the way it is. And, yeah, I'm not sure why the Spurs had to throw in four seconds to facilitate a trade for two other teams. They're taking on 10 million of basically useless salary to grease the wheels for Dallas. I guess I see it, and then Boston gets a decent exception. I don't know why Dallas gets two seconds from the Spurs and it still feels like the Spurs are paying for everyone's dinner.

[DAF86]

Hard disagree. Who would rather have that Charlotte pick instead of that Hawks swap? It would have be super lightly protected to be close to the same value, IMO.

Unprotected firsts are the gold standard of trade assets. Unprotected swaps aren't quite as good but they're damn good in their own right.

Seconds have such a low hit rate that you'd come out ahead trading like ten second round picks for an unprotected pick swap.

Trading four second rounders for Bullock and an unprotected first round pick swap is still a ground slam.

Would that be at Roland Barros?

[Mugen]

Who gives a fuck about 2nd rounders when they have like 30 left? :lol

[Mr. Body]

Isn't the swap with Dallas?

Aaaahhhh.

Okay, nevermind all the crap I've been saying. Now I'm not sure why we sent two seconds to Boston. :lol

[RedAzSa]

It's interesting that they're acquiring swaps in 2-year increments (2026, 2028, 2030). That would boost the value of a big trade using their own picks those years. They could also be posturing to trade away their picks in the odd years and have more valuable opportunities in between.

[mo7888]

Aaaahhhh.

Okay, nevermind all the crap I've been saying. Now I'm not sure why we sent two seconds to Boston. :lol

:lmao

[CGD]

Reminder: Luka will be an UFA in 2027. If he bolts that team is screwed royally.

[timvp]

If someone told me the Spurs could consolidated cap space and second round draft picks into a future unprotected first round pick swap, I would have scoffed.

And 2030 pick from the Mavs? Damn, that sounds juicy. I don't know if Luka is in the NBA in seven years if he keeps trying to play at 280 pounds. Kyrie will have burned his final NBA bridge long before then.

[BacktoBasics]

If someone told me the Spurs could consolidated cap space and second round draft picks into a future unprotected first round pick swap, I would have scoffed.

And 2030 pick from the Mavs? Damn, that sounds juicy. I don't know if Luka is in the NBA in seven years if he keeps trying to play at 280 pounds. Kyrie will have burned his final NBA bridge long before then.Have we confirmed that it’s a 1st round swap? Brilliant move if true.

[Dirk-41-21-1]

From a Mavs fan thank you my Texas brothers. Thanks for helping the Mavs get better. We need to win with luka and kyrie. Y’all can win in 2032

[timvp]

Have we confirmed that it’s a 1st round swap? Brilliant move if true.

I haven't confirmed it but it has to be, right? The Spurs would't be trading away second round picks for a second round pick.

[Robz4000]

Hard disagree. Who would rather have that Charlotte pick instead of that Hawks swap? It would have be super lightly protected to be close to the same value, IMO.

Unprotected firsts are the gold standard of trade assets. Unprotected swaps aren't quite as good but they're damn good in their own right.

Seconds have such a low hit rate that you'd come out ahead trading like ten second round picks for an unprotected pick swap.

Trading four second rounders for Bullock and an unprotected first round pick swap is still a ground slam.

A ground slam sounds like an out imo.

[timvp]

A ground slam sounds like an out imo.

:lol I'll leave it.

[Monostradamus]

LOL yall really haven’t been watching Bullock if you think he’s a solid 3 and D anymore.

[DPG21920]

Spurs basically traded Josh Richardson for Bullock + Unprotected 1st swap. It’s a no brainer low risk all upside deal.

[BacktoBasics]

I haven't confirmed it but it has to be, right? The Spurs would't be trading away second round picks for a second round pick.

That was my first impression. Makes no sense to trade a bunch of 2nds for a single 2nd swap but I have yet to see that it’s actually a confirmed 1st.

[tonight...you]

From a Mavs fan thank you my Texas brothers. Thanks for helping the Mavs get better. We need to win with luka and kyrie. Y’all can win in 2032
Luka and... Kyrie?
ha ha ha... Ha ha hahahaha... HA! HA HAHAHAHAAAA! HAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!

Oh my goodness. Thank you.

[Dirk-41-21-1]

Mavs got rid of trash ass bullock for 1st pick swap? And spurs fans think they won trade???? Mavs easily won this lol. Nico is turning into a master deal maker. I would have traded bullock for a bag chips. That dude sucks bad. Barely scores. D is overrated. Basically out there running for cardio.

[DPG21920]

It's confusing to me. These two teams needed the Spurs to do this deal. Bullock isn't much of a player, so it seems like SAS thought taking on salary to help these teams + a possibility of moving up some in the draft seven years from now is worth four SRPs?

It seems like they gave in too much.

IMO:

For sure - I think a lot will feel like you. I wont say its something to rave about per se but I look it a few ways:

1)We have SO many 2nds. Think of it this way: Would you trade Josh Richardson for Bullock + unprotected 1st swap? Absolutely right? That’s what Sa just did

2) It’s like buying lotto tickets. If you have plenty of money and you buy a few tickets with pocket money for fun? Then its fun and all upside and no downside. If you are buying lotto tickets trying to pay your rent you are in big trouble….

3) Bullock is not just some throw away player like Cedi. He’s shoots well can play a little Defense and should be able to recoup some of what Sa gave up too which makes it even better IF SA does trade him

[tonight...you]

LOL yall really haven’t been watching Bullock if you think he’s a solid 3 and D anymore.
You really haven't been watching Luka and Kyrie to think they're going anywhere before one of them creates a planetary implosion.

[td4mvp2k]

a 2030 1st for grant benched williams LOL

[jesterbobman]

Potentially, we give up four seconds for nothing. Potentially, we gave up 4 seconds to move up 20 spots in the draft.

Ideally, there's language on that does the equivalent of "The Spurs may exercise the right to swap picks in the 2030 first round, or receive a future Dallas second round pick" which would mitigate the downside, but it's a smart gamble. Upside is hugely valuable, particularly if Luka has gone.

[Mr. Body]

IMO:

For sure - I think a lot will feel like you. I wont say its something to rave about per se but I look it a few ways:

1)We have SO many 2nds. Think of it this way: Would you trade Josh Richardson for Bullock + unprotected 1st swap? Absolutely right? That’s what Sa just did

2) It’s like buying lotto tickets. If you have plenty of money and you buy a few tickets with pocket money for fun? Then its fun and all upside and no downside. If you are buying lotto tickets trying to pay your rent you are in big trouble….

3) Bullock is not just some throw away player like Cedi. He’s shoots well can play a little Defense and should be able to recoup some of what Sa gave up too which makes it even better IF SA does trade him

Yeah, I'm cool with it. My mistake in thinking the swap was with Boston confused me about how the entire deal shook out. I think Bullock is looking kind of cooked; Osman may actually be better at this point. I'm not sure we're keeping both anyway.

[BacktoBasics]

ESPN reporting it’s a 1st. This forum has me groomed to expect the worst.


San Antonio will receive forward Reggie Bullock and an unprotected first-round pick swap in 2030 from Dallas, while both the Celtics -- Williams' former team -- and the Mavericks will receive two second-round picks, sources said.

[Ariel]

I'm not huge on swaps, but that's not really what I'm getting at. I'm not sure how the trade as a whole shakes out the way it is. And, yeah, I'm not sure why the Spurs had to throw in four seconds to facilitate a trade for two other teams. They're taking on 10 million of basically useless salary to grease the wheels for Dallas. I guess I see it, and then Boston gets a decent exception. I don't know why Dallas gets two seconds from the Spurs and it still feels like the Spurs are paying for everyone's dinner.
Boston needed compensation and Dallas didn't have any 2nds to trade I believe. Here come the Spurs with cap space and 20 seconds at their disposal, to give Boston a little incentive to do a S&T. The Spurs consolidated 4 low quality picks into an unprotected '30 swap (that may be gold by then) and took a 10M expiring of a player who may be flipped at the deadline. Don't be surprised if he brings ups a couple 2nds himself. GREAT TRADE.

[Uriel]

Like everyone else, I think this is a good trade, but I don't see it as some amazing move like other people on this thread do. The 2030 pick swap isn't risk-free; it's not a given that we will finish above Dallas in the standings by then, so it's possible we essentially gave up 4 second rounders for Reggie Bullock and nothing else.

Again, I think this is a good trade and I would definitely do it 10 times out of 10, but it's not some kind of miracle move.

[Monostradamus]

I’ll just leave this here. Luka was feeding this guy the most wide open “check the wind” threes nonstop all season, and he was still under 40%.

https://i.ibb.co/2PPWMNx/IMG-2260.jpg

[bluebellmaniac]

Aaaahhhh.

Okay, nevermind all the crap I've been saying. Now I'm not sure why we sent two seconds to Boston. :lol

I'm thinking to make the swap unprotected.

Oh wait, you said Boston.

[spurraider21]

Sochan, McDermott, Vassell at the 3. Choose one. Even if it is me playing SF, you have to trade Keldon in a hearbeat if there's a good trade to be had for the Spurs.
sochan played like 97% of minutes minutes at the 4 per bball ref

[Monostradamus]

You really haven't been watching Luka and Kyrie to think they're going anywhere before one of them creates a planetary implosion.
You haven’t been watching the NBA in the last 50 years if you think some stick skinny 7+ footer is getting 5 years in without debilitating foot injuries.

[thiste]

2030 :lol

Wemby's prime :lol

[Chinook]

Hard disagree. Who would rather have that Charlotte pick instead of that Hawks swap? It would have be super lightly protected to be close to the same value, IMO.

Unprotected firsts are the gold standard of trade assets. Unprotected swaps aren't quite as good but they're damn good in their own right.

Seconds have such a low hit rate that you'd come out ahead trading like ten second round picks for an unprotected pick swap.

Trading four second rounders for Bullock and an unprotected first round pick swap is still a ground slam.

Unprotected firsts are the gold standard. Swaps are not the same. What they do is enhance the Spurs' own unprotected pick that year. A protected pick is a discrete asset a team can trade in both big deals and small. You can turn a protected pick into a swap, albeit a weaker swap than what you're talking about. But you can't go the other way. So any trade involving that swap is going to be much riskier.

But yes, obviously there are protections that can be placed on a pick that would prevent it from having much value at all. Like a heavily protected first that immediately extinguishes may be less valuable than a second-rounder. The Charlotte first is a heavily protected pick from a likely lottery team. It has mediocre (though real) value. The Chicago pick is moderately protected and is much likelier to convey. I'd rather than that than an unprotected swap for the same year. It doesn't have the same highs, but a Spurs team looking to make moves can use the Chicago first to get things done, whereas there are very few possible deals where trading the Spurs unprotected 2025 first with swap rights to Chicago is warranted.

I consider swaps to be more of a spice to be added on top of a trade than the main value. Having three straight years of Atlanta's future is why the swap was valuable. Having the chance to swap with basically any Boston pick in 2028 is just a sweetener, with the pick in 2022 being the main course. With no future years of conveyance, the Dallas swap may be better than a one-and-done protected Dallas first. But it's close, and it would be entirely up to the protections from my point of view.

[tonight...you]

You haven’t been watching the NBA in the last 50 years if you think some stick skinny 7+ footer is getting 5 years in without debilitating foot injuries.
Guess we'll see what happens first, won't we?
I have my bet on fat boy and flat-earther getting Cuban to destroy your team first.
I mean even worse than he has.

They were doing so well before, like right?
Play-ins and shiznozz... and then it's implosion!
Gots to admit to tanking games in public to save that 10th pick.
Have to do it.

[Dejounte]

sochan played like 97% of minutes minutes at the 4 per bball ref

This is just wrong tbh. It’s all how the data is written in the database. My guess is they have KBD listed as SF and assumed Sochan played PF because of that. Majority of the time Sochan was on the floor with KBD, he was guarding the smaller forward.

[timvp]

Yep, the pick swap is an unprotected first rounder from the Mavs in 2030.

Damn good deal :wow

The Spurs literally had 20 second round picks at last count. To turn four of them into an unprotected first pick swap is awesome.

[Dex]

ESPN reporting it’s a 1st. This forum has me groomed to expect the worst.

Same, I've been digging through the thread for confirmation but this should basically seal it.

Unprotected first swap and an asset for a few second picks....sign me the fuck up! :hungry:

[Dirk-41-21-1]

Only reason spurs did this is cause expiring but bullock is straight trash. Horrible player. Sure he might get lucky and hot from 3 every 15th game but other 14. Trash. So happy Mavs got rid that clown.

[spurraider21]

Who gives a fuck about 2nd rounders when they have like 30 left? :lol
the last time we had a premium SRP in a deep draft, it was about 2 weeks ago and we dealt it for 2 distant future SRPs :lol

[Dirk-41-21-1]

Same, I've been digging through the thread for confirmation but this should basically seal it.

Unprotected first and an asset for a few second picks....sign me the fuck up! :hungry:

its not a 1st. It’s a swap!!! No guarantee y’all will be better than us lol

[Joseph Kony]

its not a 1st. It’s a swap!!! No guarantee y’all will be better than us lol
when Luka inevitably demands out after your inept front office fails to surround him with talent your poverty franchise will be gifting us your #1 pick in exchange for our late first :lol

[spurraider21]

LOL yall really haven’t been watching Bullock if you think he’s a solid 3 and D anymore.
https://media1.giphy.com/media/v1.Y2lkPTc5MGI3NjExdDdybHVicGowaWZzNHF0aGo4cWM3M3B rZW9xYTZ4bHRiNzc5YXQwNSZlcD12MV9naWZzX3NlYXJjaCZjd D1n/URI7924u8ybpm/giphy.gif

[Ariel]

Unprotected firsts are the gold standard. Swaps are not the same.
An unprotected swap means you get the better and lose the worst. So the difference between an unprotected pick or swap is whether you keep or lose the worst of the 2, which will likely be a pick in the 20s (Spurs should be contenders by then). Not a huge deal.

[DPG21920]

Yeah, I'm cool with it. My mistake in thinking the swap was with Boston confused me about how the entire deal shook out. I think Bullock is looking kind of cooked; Osman may actually be better at this point. I'm not sure we're keeping both anyway.

Bullock, at least shooting wise, has been much better than Cedi last 3 years.

[DPG21920]

You haven’t been watching the NBA in the last 50 years if you think some stick skinny 7+ footer is getting 5 years in without debilitating foot injuries.

KD? Bullock is not great by any stretch but he’s fine for his role and expiring etc..

[Dex]

its not a 1st. It’s a swap!!! No guarantee y’all will be better than us lol

Forgot to mention the swap part, but it's still a better option than 2RPs

[CGD]

Only reason spurs did this is cause expiring but bullock is straight trash. Horrible player. Sure he might get lucky and hot from 3 every 15th game but other 14. Trash. So happy Mavs got rid that clown.

No, the only reason they did this is because of the good chance Luka leaves the Mavs before 2030.

[BackHome]

Seven years from now, spurs are gonna be contending and getting top 5 picks at the same time haha

Hopefully we don’t do a Golden State with the first pick.

[DAF86]

sochan played like 97% of minutes minutes at the 4 per bball ref

And I played 0% of minutes in the NBA but my point still remains.

[exstatic]

I'm really okay with getting rid of some of them, that's cool. Again, I'm just trying to make sense of the overall deal. Anyway, Tatum and Brown are, what, in their prime seven years from now? Actually... they're 25 and 26, so will be starting a possible decline, not to mention the cap problems the team will have in the meantime.

Now... onto Bullock. I guess he's fine as a platoon guy if they keep him. I'm not sure how valuable expiring contracts are for us anymore, but we'll see.

The swap came from Dallas.

[spurraider21]

And I played 0% of minutes in the NBA but my point still remains.
guy asked about proven SFs and you included a guy who played 15 NBA games and then a guy who has basically never played SF in the nba on your list :lol

[Degoat]

The funny part for Mavs is Grant Williams kinda sucks lol the idea of him is better than he actually is

[mo7888]

its not a 1st. It’s a swap!!! No guarantee y’all will be better than us lol

That's true... Cuban could sell the team, but somehow, I doubt it...

[Mugen]

Yep, the pick swap is an unprotected first rounder from the Mavs in 2030.

Damn good deal :wow

The Spurs literally had 20 second round picks at last count. To turn four of them into an unprotected first pick swap is awesome.

I would literally trade all 20 of those for 5 unprotected 1st round swaps if it was possible :lol

[spurraider21]

I'm really okay with getting rid of some of them, that's cool. Again, I'm just trying to make sense of the overall deal. Anyway, Tatum and Brown are, what, in their prime seven years from now? Actually... they're 25 and 26, so will be starting a possible decline, not to mention the cap problems the team will have in the meantime.

Now... onto Bullock. I guess he's fine as a platoon guy if they keep him. I'm not sure how valuable expiring contracts are for us anymore, but we'll see.
bullock's expiring contract isn't what's meant to be the valuable part of the trade for the spurs. its the pick swap. if we're able to get something for him, thats a bonus. otherwise its a burden we take on that doesnt impact our cap flexibility next offseason

[Ariel]

Like everyone else, I think this is a good trade, but I don't see it as some amazing move like other people on this thread do. The 2030 pick swap isn't risk-free; it's not a given that we will finish above Dallas in the standings by then, so it's possible we essentially gave up 4 second rounders for Reggie Bullock and nothing else.

Again, I think this is a good trade and I would definitely do it 10 times out of 10, but it's not some kind of miracle move.
The salary cap use comes at no cost and those 4 seconds have a very little chance of being worthy of anything, so we got a swap that might mean something substantial (or might not) at the expense of a negligible cost. No risk whatsoever.

[exstatic]

I'm not huge on swaps, but that's not really what I'm getting at. I'm not sure how the trade as a whole shakes out the way it is. And, yeah, I'm not sure why the Spurs had to throw in four seconds to facilitate a trade for two other teams. They're taking on 10 million of basically useless salary to grease the wheels for Dallas. I guess I see it, and then Boston gets a decent exception. I don't know why Dallas gets two seconds from the Spurs and it still feels like the Spurs are paying for everyone's dinner.

It’s NOT useless salary. We’ll probably be able to flip Bullock at the deadline to get at least two of thos SRPs back.

[Uriel]

The salary cap use comes at no cost and those 4 seconds have a very little chance of being worthy of anything, so we got a swap that might mean something substantial (or might not) at the expense of a negligible cost. No risk whatsoever.
Very little risk and no risk are different things.

[Chinook]

An unprotected swap means you get the better and lose the worst. So the difference between an unprotected pick or swap is whether you keep or lose the worst of the 2, which will likely be a pick in the 20s (Spurs should be contenders by then). Not a huge deal.

I am familiar with swaps. What I am saying is that they have completely different implications than protected picks, and different ways of building will benefit from those implications differently. In basically every other avenue besides hoping to draft your stars of hoping to make a huge all-in trade, the difference is substantial.

[Dirk-41-21-1]

Luka just said he’s never leaving the Mavs. Sorry spurs fans

[baseline bum]

Mavs got rid of trash ass bullock for 1st pick swap? And spurs fans think they won trade???? Mavs easily won this lol. Nico is turning into a master deal maker. I would have traded bullock for a bag chips. That dude sucks bad. Barely scores. D is overrated. Basically out there running for cardio.

Spurs needed to hit the salary floor and this trade gets them there. An unprotected first round swap for a couple of the billion second rounders they have is an amazing deal for the team.

[CGD]

Now, aggregate Bollock and Berch expirings, send the CHI for a FRP and Lonzo’s contract.

[CGD]

Luka just said he’s never leaving the Mavs. Sorry spurs fans

So did Dame…

[Dex]

Luka just said he’s never leaving the Mavs. Sorry spurs fans

Beal said he would never leave D.C.

Lillard said he would never leave Portland.

[DPG21920]

Does anyone think, Chinook or timvp , that these deals mean anything regarding SA being in or out on bigger Dame or Harden deals as a third team?

[T Park]

Now, aggregate Bollock and Berch expirings, send the CHI for a FRP and Lonzo’s contract.

why would they want that chump?

[Ariel]

I am familiar with swaps. What I am saying is that they have completely different implications than protected picks, and different ways of building will benefit from those implications differently. In basically every other avenue besides hoping to draft your stars of hoping to make a huge all-in trade, the difference is substantial.
I know you are, I'm saying I don't think those differences are very relevant for practical purposes. You're overthinking this.

[spurraider21]

why would they want that chump?
think he wants the FRP. lonzo is the means to the end

[timvp]

Tbh, the Spurs probably never make that 2030 pick. Before then, it'll likely be used in a star-hunting trade to get more talent around Wemby. And when star-hunting, that asset will hold a ton of value. That's one of the rare assets that's actually more valuable than a regular unprotected first.

[Ariel]

Very little risk and no risk are different things.
So if you buy a Google stock for $1 you could lose $1. Yay.

[Degoat]

Does anyone think, Chinook (https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=37557) or timvp (https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=8) , that these deals mean anything regarding SA being in or out on bigger Dame or Harden deals as a third team?

I mean the spurs could definitely contribute expiring contracts for Portland

[timvp]

Does anyone think, Chinook or timvp , that these deals mean anything regarding SA being in or out on bigger Dame or Harden deals as a third team?

Doubt it means anything either way. This was just a no-brainer of a deal that the Spurs had to do. This type of low-risk, high-reward trade rarely comes along.

The Spurs got lucky because the Mavs are desperate to put talent around Luka and the Celtics were looking at losing Grant Williams for nothing.

[CGD]

why would they want that chump?

I’m trying to think though how best to maximize all these expirings, and it seems like one of the best ways is to take back a contract with money into next season. Lonzo Ball is one, his injury situation is unfortunate, and he’s on a team facing cap challenges if they decide to extend DDR after doubling down on Vuc.

Duncan Robinson is another candidate but I assume MIA will deplete its draft stores in the Dame trade.

[jesterbobman]

I think you could get to a range of values of how much an unprotected swap is worth. Possible Luka is is good that even with only a mediocre supporting cast, they're good enough to be a middling playoff team and be decent. Or Luka leaves. Or We're bad that year cause of injuries.

On the swap vs protected pick idea: Preference ordering varies by team. For instance, I'd rather have swap rights than a protected pick from Charlotte, I'd rather have a protected pick than the Boston Swap in 2028, as Boston is likely still going to be good then with the Jays. Dallas in 2030, I think I'd rather have an unprotected pick Swap than (for instance) a top 20 protected pick, as you get much more possible upside, and the Mavs haven't been a gold standard franchise recently.

I do acknowledge there's a chance this is worth nothing - We could have an injury run ala GS that led to Wiseman, and the swap rights are worthless. Still think it's good thinking.

[Ariel]

Doubt it means anything either way. This was just a no-brainer of a deal that the Spurs had to do. This type of low-risk, high-reward trade rarely comes along.

The Spurs got lucky because the Mavs are desperate to put talent around Luka and the Celtics were looking at losing Grant Williams for nothing.
The reward the Spurs could have reaped from any Lillard or Harden trade was unlikely to be higher than this one, because likely we'd have played a similar or smaller role, plus Miami doesn't have the assets to pay Portland let alone anyone else.

[Mr. Body]

I’m trying to think though how best to maximize all these expirings, and it seems like one of the best ways is to take back a contract with money into next season. Lonzo Ball is one, his injury situation is unfortunate, and he’s on a team facing cap challenges if they decide to extend DDR after doubling down on Vuc.

Duncan Robinson is another candidate but I assume MIA will deplete its draft stores in the Dame trade.

Spurs seem allergic to taking on salary beyond a single season, at least so far.

[Dex]

I mean the spurs could definitely contribute expiring contracts for Portland

Exactly. Lillard was never coming to SA, but if Spurs DO want to get involved in a multi-team trade they still have a boatload of picks, and some other pieces they could easily stand to move (namely McD and Graham) to get some better draft compensation

[DPG21920]

Doubt it means anything either way. This was just a no-brainer of a deal that the Spurs had to do. This type of low-risk, high-reward trade rarely comes along.

The Spurs got lucky because the Mavs are desperate to put talent around Luka and the Celtics were looking at losing Grant Williams for nothing.

Agree there! But holistically like Cedi trade too. That was such a meh deal and thankfully Sa proved it was not just money and did this deal with Dallas too - but do these players and contracts make it any more or less likely? I’d say losing cap spade hurts probably right? Being able to flat out absorb money is big as a third team and can’t do that now

[flox]

Aaaahhhh.

Okay, nevermind all the crap I've been saying. Now I'm not sure why we sent two seconds to Boston. :lol

Maybe the Mavs asked us for 4 seconds for the frp swap + bullock and then rerouted 2 of them to Boston?

[DPG21920]

Tbh, the Spurs probably never make that 2030 pick. Before then, it'll likely be used in a star-hunting trade to get more talent around Wemby. And when star-hunting, that asset will hold a ton of value. That's one of the rare assets that's actually more valuable than a regular unprotected first.

You lost me at the end. How is it more valuable than an unprotected first?! With unprotected first you get the same pick as you would with a swap but keep your own too. What angle am I missing here?

[exstatic]

Luka just said he’s never leaving the Mavs. Sorry spurs fans

Kawhi said he was a Spur for life once.

[td4mvp2k]

Exactly. Lillard was never coming to SA, but if Spurs DO want to get involved in a multi-team trade they still have a boatload of picks, and some other pieces they could easily stand to move (namely McD and Graham) to get some better draft compensation
yeah still possible they aint done

[Chinook]

I know you are, I'm saying I don't think those differences are very relevant for practical purposes. You're overthinking this.

It's not simply the difference you're emphasizing. There are big practical differences. The Spurs cannot trade a swap to another team like they could with a pick. If the Spurs had swaps with Charlotte, Toronto, Atlanta and Chicago instead of their picks, they'd have significantly less draft currency to trade. They'd have to trade their own picks, and if they protected those picks, then they'd be tied to the Stepien rule. Having those separate picks allows for the team to make mid-sized trades while still having the ability to make all-in trades. It also gives them more bites at the apple and a ton more draft-day flexibility.

Swaps are not the same as draft picks, and they don't have the same value. That's why Dallas made the trade. They aren't stupid. This trade increased their ability to make future deals. They can still trade future swap rights to the pick they have in 2030. The Spurs are stupid either. They created a third "double pick" to make an all-in trade easier. But I don't think for a second that Dallas would've been anywhere near as fine to give up their 2027 pick, even in a one-and-done scenario like LAL did. They need to keep that flexibility. Gold standard or not, a swap isn't worth the same to a team in Dallas' position.

[rascal]

Wemby will be 26 tbh.

It's so far out don't even know if Dallas will be worse than the Spurs at that time.

Wemby can be out of the league by then with injuries. We don't know that far out.

But the Spurs had too many 2nds so it's worth the gamble that the Spurs will be better by 2030.

[mo7888]

You lost me at the end. How is it more valuable than an unprotected first?! With unprotected first you get the same pick as you would with a swap but keep your own too. What angle am I missing here?

Our unprotected 2030 + the swap > our 2030 unprotected alone

[Dex]

It's so far out don't even know if Dallas will be worse than the Spurs at that time.

Wemby can be out of the league by then with injuries. We don't know that far out.

But the Spurs had too many 2nds so it's worth the gamble that the Spurs will be better by 2030.

Low-risk, high reward gamble.

If the Spurs do happen to suck, we just don't do the swap.

If Dallas loses Luka and decides to go tank mode, that swap will be like gold (or at the very least, hamstrings their possibilities)

If both are in the middle, well no harm no foul.

[MultiTroll]

https://youtu.be/WNg3DTBQGgk

[rascal]

Tbh, the Spurs probably never make that 2030 pick. Before then, it'll likely be used in a star-hunting trade to get more talent around Wemby. And when star-hunting, that asset will hold a ton of value. That's one of the rare assets that's actually more valuable than a regular unprotected first.

An unprotected first is more valuable as the Spurs would still keep their pick so they would have two first round picks.

[mo7888]

An unprotected first is more valuable as the Spurs would still keep their pick so they would have two first round picks.

Hes not talking about Dallas's 1st vs the swap...hes talking about trading our 2030 pick....Our unprotected 2030 + the swap > our 2030 unprotected alone

[timvp]

Our unprotected 2030 + the swap > our 2030 unprotected alone

Exactly. Maybe I worded it wrong but this is what I meant.

[rascal]

Hes not talking about Dallas's 1st vs the swap...hes talking about trading our 2030 pick....Our unprotected 2030 + the swap > our 2030 unprotected alone

I read it the way he worded it.

Yes, it gives that pick the added chance that it could be Dallas's higher pick.

[exstatic]

It's not simply the difference you're emphasizing. There are big practical differences. The Spurs cannot trade a swap to another team like they could with a pick. If the Spurs had swaps with Charlotte, Toronto, Atlanta and Chicago instead of their picks, they'd have significantly less draft currency to trade. They'd have to trade their own picks, and if they protected those picks, then they'd be tied to the Stepien rule. Having those separate picks allows for the team to make mid-sized trades while still having the ability to make all-in trades. It also gives them more bites at the apple and a ton more draft-day flexibility.

Swaps are not the same as draft picks, and they don't have the same value. That's why Dallas made the trade. They aren't stupid. This trade increased their ability to make future deals. They can still trade future swap rights to the pick they have in 2030. The Spurs are stupid either. They created a third "double pick" to make an all-in trade easier. But I don't think for a second that Dallas would've been anywhere near as fine to give up their 2027 pick, even in a one-and-done scenario like LAL did. They need to keep that flexibility. Gold standard or not, a swap isn't worth the same to a team in Dallas' position.

You can’t directly trade the swap as a quantity of its own, but you can offer to trade the best of the two two picks, which is, de facto, a swap trade.

This is a clip from the real GM future picks page:

2025 - Own or HOU (via HOU swap for BRK)

[exstatic]

It's not simply the difference you're emphasizing. There are big practical differences. The Spurs cannot trade a swap to another team like they could with a pick. If the Spurs had swaps with Charlotte, Toronto, Atlanta and Chicago instead of their picks, they'd have significantly less draft currency to trade. They'd have to trade their own picks, and if they protected those picks, then they'd be tied to the Stepien rule. Having those separate picks allows for the team to make mid-sized trades while still having the ability to make all-in trades. It also gives them more bites at the apple and a ton more draft-day flexibility.

Swaps are not the same as draft picks, and they don't have the same value. That's why Dallas made the trade. They aren't stupid. This trade increased their ability to make future deals. They can still trade future swap rights to the pick they have in 2030. The Spurs are stupid either. They created a third "double pick" to make an all-in trade easier. But I don't think for a second that Dallas would've been anywhere near as fine to give up their 2027 pick, even in a one-and-done scenario like LAL did. They need to keep that flexibility. Gold standard or not, a swap isn't worth the same to a team in Dallas' position.

Uh, no they fucking can’t.

[spurraider21]

so as far as swaps, we've got one every 2 years

2026 from hawks (unprotected)
2028 from celtics (top 1 protected)
2030 from mavs (unprotected)

[spurraider21]

Uh, no they fucking can’t.
he's referring to the "de facto swap" scenario you already outlined above

[rascal]

It's a good trade as the Spurs had too many 2nd's as it was and it increases the value of the 2030 pick that can be used in future trades.

[Chinook]

Tbh, the Spurs probably never make that 2030 pick. Before then, it'll likely be used in a star-hunting trade to get more talent around Wemby. And when star-hunting, that asset will hold a ton of value. That's one of the rare assets that's actually more valuable than a regular unprotected first.

I mean, sort of? Like the Spurs can definitely just trade the best of their 2025 picks rather than wishing that ATL had giving them a swap for them to trade instead. I mean, you can create scenarios where the Spurs would've trade their natural 2024, 2025 and/or 2026 pick already, then they would only be able to trade a single unprotected pick in 2025. But the flexibility of being able to do that prior deal is why getting an unprotected pick is just way more valuable than a swap. I don't know, man. I agreed there are some protections that are worse than a swap. But I'm not sure that a top-5 protected Dallas 2030 first (ignoring that that pick couldn't be traded) along with the Spurs' unprotected natural pick that year would be that much less appealing than a single double pick. I would rate that first package much higher now, though in 2028 or so it might not be the case.

[DPG21920]

Our unprotected 2030 + the swap > our 2030 unprotected alone

Ya but our 2030 + their 2030 > our 2030 +’swap

[spurraider21]

timvp's bad wording all over this thread tbh :lol

he's saying that the swap now gives our 2030 pick more value. in that rather than us merely trading our own unprotected 2030 pick, we now have additional value by being able to offer "the best of our 2030 picks"

he was not saying that it is better to own swap rights with the mavs than it is simply to own the mavs unprotected pick

[Chinook]

Uh, no they fucking can’t.

Yes you can. You trade swap a pick with a pick that already has a swap on it.

Like Dallas can still agree to swap the worst of their pick in 2030 and SA's with another team's first that year. The Spurs basically have such a swap with Indy and Miami in the second round in 2026. (And the Clippers had agreed to swap their pick with OKC in 2023 and still agreed to swap that pick with MKE's with Houston at the deadline.) Right now, it's minor value. It could be major value if both SA and Dallas look to be bad in 2030. But if the Mavericks had actually traded that 2030 pick unprotected, they couldn't swap it at all. For Dallas, there's a huge difference in terms of flexibility.

And I meant that the Spurs AREN'T stupid either, if the context made my typo misleading.

[mo7888]

Ya but our 2030 + their 2030 > our 2030 +’swap

Sure...but that wasn't the comparison he was trying to make

[Degoat]

It may have been discussed already but what happens to the swap if we trade our own 2030 pick lol would get to decide the swap between the two teams

[spurraider21]

It may have been discussed already but what happens to the swap if we trade our own 2030 pick lol would get to decide the swap between the two teams
the way it would be worded is the spurs would trade "the most favorable pick between the 2030 SAS pick and the 2030 DAL pick", whereas if the mavs try to move their pick, they would be trading "the least favorable pick between the 2030 SAS pick and the 2030 DAL pick"

basically nobody would know if they were acquiring the SAS or DAL pick until the draft order is set. but they'd know if theyre getting the better or worse of the two depending on who they traded with

[Chinook]

timvp's bad wording all over this thread tbh :lol

he's saying that the swap now gives our 2030 pick more value. in that rather than us merely trading our own unprotected 2030 pick, we now have additional value by being able to offer "the best of our 2030 picks"

he was not saying that it is better to own swap rights with the mavs than it is simply to own the mavs unprotected pick

I got his specific point about a double pick versus a regular unprotected pick. I think it's valid. But that value gap between those scenarios is so massive that I think it does go against his initial argument that unprotected swaps should be thought of in the same light as unprotected picks. Unprotected picks are in a tier of their own (controlling for whichever team's pick we're talking about), while swaps fall into the nebulous tier below with protected picks to varying degrees.

[scott]

It's interesting that they're acquiring swaps in 2-year increments (2026, 2028, 2030). That would boost the value of a big trade using their own picks those years. They could also be posturing to trade away their picks in the odd years and have more valuable opportunities in between.

Very good observation here.

Swaps greatly increase the value of your own SRP, because now you have two rolls at it being a high pick instead of one. The fact that the Spurs have lined them up this way is indeed quite interesting. A package of the Spurs 2026, 2028 and 2030 FRPs for say, Luka, would be unmatched (in terms of just picks alone) because they all contain free rolls.

[Seventyniner]

I like the trade. While the swap might end up being nothing, Bullock has some marginal standalone value (both as a player and an expiring contract) and having 16 future seconds instead of 20 isn't a huge dropoff. The Spurs were well into diminishing returns territory regarding seconds. If the Spurs only had 7 future seconds over the next 7 years and gave up 4 I would be far less pleased.

As for what it signifies regarding other trades (most prominently getting in on the Blazers/Heat Dame trade), I think it makes the Spurs getting involved somewhat less likely because now they have a lot less cap space to absorb salary.

[spurraider21]

I got his specific point about a double pick versus a regular unprotected pick. I think it's valid. But that value gap between those scenarios is so massive that I think it does go against his initial argument that unprotected swaps should be thought of in the same light as unprotected picks. Unprotected picks are in a tier of their own (controlling for whichever team's pick we're talking about), while swaps fall into the nebulous tier below with protected picks to varying degrees.
i think he's talking about how the spurs can now offer something better than their own 2030 unprotected pick in the search for a better star. he identified an unprotected swapped pick as one of the few single assets with more value than your own protected pick

[exstatic]

Yes you can. You trade swap a pick with a pick that already has a swap on it.

Like Dallas can still agree to swap the worst of their pick in 2030 and SA's with another team's first that year. The Spurs basically have such a swap with Indy and Miami in the second round in 2026. (And the Clippers had agreed to swap their pick with OKC in 2023 and still agreed to swap that pick with MKE's with Houston at the deadline.) Right now, it's minor value. It could be major value if both SA and Dallas look to be bad in 2030. But if the Mavericks had actually traded that 2030 pick unprotected, they couldn't swap it at all. For Dallas, there's a huge difference in terms of flexibility.

And I meant that the Spurs AREN'T stupid either, if the context made my typo misleading.

You’re right, they can, but for someone claiming the initial swap hasn’t much value, it seems bizarre to trumpet the value of the short end of the swap.

[ace3g]

Sidy defense + drop off to Blake for layup!!

[ace3g]

Sidy with the football outlet pass, defender stripped ball off of Blake's leg though.

[baseline bum]

Now, aggregate Bollock and Berch expirings, send the CHI for a FRP and Lonzo’s contract.

Do not want since he has a player option for 2024-25.

[Chinook]

You can’t directly trade the swap as a quantity of its own, but you can offer to trade the best of the two two picks, which is, de facto, a swap trade.

This is a clip from the real GM future picks page:

2025 - Own or HOU (via HOU swap for BRK)

You can trade a swap as a quantity of its own. What is getting swapped is where the conditional language can come in.

Not that it ever comes up, but the description of the trade as the best or worst pick is slightly misleading. A team can decline swap picks as far as I know. So what happens is a team can trade whatever pick they have after the other team decides on the swap. As I mentioned before, they can also trade the swap rights to that pick, but the swap decision would come after the original team made their decision.

[baseline bum]

Doubt it means anything either way. This was just a no-brainer of a deal that the Spurs had to do. This type of low-risk, high-reward trade rarely comes along.

The Spurs got lucky because the Mavs are desperate to put talent around Luka and the Celtics were looking at losing Grant Williams for nothing.

Yeah pretty ridiculous to get an unprotected swap so cheap. The last one was still top 1 protected and cost the Spurs Derrick White.

[Chinook]

You’re right, they can, but for someone claiming the initial swap hasn’t much value, it seems bizarre to trumpet the value of the short end of the swap.

I never said it didn't have much value. I think it has plenty of value. I just think that unprotected picks have significantly more value and picks with some level of protection have more value. I've said over and over that this was a good trade. It being a swap didn't change that. Giving up the seconds meant the Spurs could "lose" the trade. But the downside is pretty small, especially with Bullock having some resale value.

[Chinook]

i think he's talking about how the spurs can now offer something better than their own 2030 unprotected pick in the search for a better star. he identified an unprotected swapped pick as one of the few single assets with more value than your own protected pick

And I think that's true, and I'm probably overlooking the fact that he's talking to a lot of different people rather than just continuing the conversation we're having. As I said, swaps are good. But a fairly 2029 protected pick (from a different team, obviously) would also go down real easy.

[spurraider21]

Yeah pretty ridiculous to get an unprotected swap so cheap. The last one was still top 1 protected and cost the Spurs Derrick White.
spurs also got a 2022 first and josh richardson in that deal (langford too but who cares). richardson then proceeded to net us Graham and 4 SRPs. and we just sent out some SRPs to get this swap

[timvp]

timvp's bad wording all over this thread tbh :lol

:lol My apologies, my guys. Posting during breaks at a summer league game with bad internet is not recommended, tbh.

[timvp]

Did we figure out how many seconds the Spurs gave up? It sounds like the seconds the Celtics got were from the Mavs.

[CGD]

Did we figure out how many seconds the Spurs gave up? It sounds like the seconds the Celtics got were from the Mavs.

Lol, all this bickering here and turns out the Spurs only gave up 2 SRPs??

[exstatic]

I never said it didn't have much value. I think it has plenty of value. I just think that unprotected picks have significantly more value and picks with some level of protection have more value. I've said over and over that this was a good trade. It being a swap didn't change that. Giving up the seconds meant the Spurs could "lose" the trade. But the downside is pretty small, especially with Bullock having some resale value.

We agree on the first, but I’m with LJ that unprotected swaps have more value than most protected picks, outside maybe top 4 only protection. I’d take our swaps over any of our protected picks, even Toronto’s. If Boston, Atlanta, or Dallas draw into the top 4, we’re in clover. If Toronto does, they keep the pick and ultimately we might get some of our SRPs back instead of a first.

[Seventyniner]

Did we figure out how many seconds the Spurs gave up? It sounds like the seconds the Celtics got were from the Mavs.

1676734861535592448

That can only mean that all four seconds came from the Spurs. Unless something strange happened like Boston and Dallas each trading a second to the other?

[timvp]

1676734861535592448

That can only mean that all four seconds came from the Spurs. Unless something strange happened like Boston and Dallas each trading a second to the other?

I'm not in a position to be able to check if it's accurate but someone just told me the Celtics got two picks from the Mavs.

[Darkwaters]

Why the fuck are people crying about losing seconds? Jesus Christ

Seriously. Weren't people complaining that we had too many seconds?

[scott]

In a vacuum, future FRPs would be valued like this:

1. Unprotected FRP attached to an unprotected Swap - OR a "Better of" Unprotected Pick A and Unprotected Pick B (...C, D, etc). These are effectively the same thing
2. Unprotected FRP
3. Unprotected Swap

Where you rank protected picks all depends on the timing and situation. Any unprotected pick swap is going to be better than the CHA pick, for example. But a DEN 2024 unprotected pick swap is not going to be better than the TOR pick.

[DPG21920]

Sure...but that wasn't the comparison he was trying to make

That’s why I asked. I thought he said pick swap rate occurrence that’s more valuable than actual pick

[Marcus Bryant]

Keep those picks coming.

[DPG21920]

Did we figure out how many seconds the Spurs gave up? It sounds like the seconds the Celtics got were from the Mavs.

Mavs got 2 picks too though and Bos got 2 - so why bother having Mavs give up 2 2nds just to get 2 from SA?

[Seventyniner]

I'm not in a position to be able to check if it's accurate but someone just told me the Celtics got two picks from the Mavs.

That's odd. I guess your source and Woj could both be right if the Spurs sent two seconds to the Mavs and then the Mavs sent two different seconds to the Celtics. I doubt the Celtics sent any seconds out.

[scott]

Mavs got 2 picks too though and Bos got 2 - so why bother having Mavs give up 2 2nds just to get 2 from SA?

Only possibility I can think of is that Dallas sends Boston two far out seconds, and SA sends Dallas two near term seconds. That would be a slight value upgrade for Dallas.

[Mr. Body]

I'm not in a position to be able to check if it's accurate but someone just told me the Celtics got two picks from the Mavs.

I heard they don't have any snds to trade but I see 2025 and 2030 available.

[Mr. Body]

But it seems a little strange if Dal sent Bos two picks and Sas sent Dal two picks. More likely I think is Sas sending four picks to Dal and Dal sending two of those to Bos.

[CGD]

I'm not in a position to be able to check if it's accurate but someone just told me the Celtics got two picks from the Mavs.

This makes sense to me. Dallas needed the trade option in order to retain the MLE for Thyblle. Boston knew this and expected to be compensated, and told them if not go ahead try your luck with a RFA offer sheet. Small cost to pay to also land Thybulle.

Spurs, in turn, essentially used 2SRPs to upgrade their picks, while also sending out "something" which is required to make the deal legal.

[Uriel]

It's 2030. The Spurs just won their 5th championship in a row with Victor Wembanyama. The Mavs miss the playoffs for the third straight season but somehow manage to win the draft lottery. And the Spurs exercise their pick swap from a long forgotten trade that happened 7 years ago and secure the rights to the #1 overall pick :lol

[Dex]

If we really got this for 2 second-round picks then somebody on the other side didn't read the Terms & Conditions :lmao

[Cry Havoc]

The Spurs gave up too much? Second rounders for an unprotected swap? Huh?

The Spurs could flip Cedi for two firsts and this board would suddenly be talking him up like he's the 1B to Wemby just to have something to whine about.

You'd think there'd be a bit more positivity around here considering who we just landed in the draft, but nah. Let's be doomers over a couple of 2nds that, if the Spurs kept, every single person talking them up would be laying into the Spurs FO about taking garbage when they actually used those picks anyway.

[spurraider21]

Tre Jones is the only SRP to have cracked the spurs rotation in well over a decade. these SRPs are next to meaningless tbh

[baseline bum]

Glad to be wrong about Wright. He has set this team up with a massive war chest to go out and get that second star in a year or two if Wemby becomes the player scouts and GMs are expecting him to be. And in the worst case that he busts they have a ton of good picks to attempt an OKC style rebuild.

[Darkwaters]

It's 2030. The Spurs just won their 5th championship in a row with Victor Wembanyama. The Mavs miss the playoffs for the third straight season but somehow manage to win the draft lottery. And the Spurs exercise their pick swap from a long forgotten trade that happened 7 years ago and secure the rights to the #1 overall pick :lol

You had me at "5th straight championship"

[Marcus Bryant]

Spurs could end up with 7 lottery picks over the next 7 drafts. Whether they keep all seems doubtful.

I guess ideally at least a second and/or third star emerges from the current roster and you are able to keep the picks, and of course those picks become lotto picks. Then you are adding a lottery pick to a playoff team year after year.