Random Thoughts on Vic, Defense and Draft

[timvp]

https://www.spurstalk.com/victor-wembanyama-random-thoughts-nba-awards/

[couchman]

Everyone eagerly anticipating combine measurements for the UK guards.
I still have Sheppard over Dillingham for now.

[Chinook]

Defense is something the Spurs could attack in this draft, but they don't have to worry about specifically drafting good defenders. They need good prospects who can become good players. They can cross the contender bridge when they get to it. It's far better to draft an offense-first guard who succeeds and you have to contemplate trading later that passing on him for a defense-first wing who fails. BPA.

That said, there are multiple ways a player can contribute to a defense, and a guy Dillingham's size seems to have the agility to harass a player at the point of attack. He doesn't have to be able to one-on-one a guy up and down the court. Patty Mills, for all his flaws, defended well at the head of a zone scheme when asked to just pressure the opposing team as they tried to get into their sets. Dillingham -- especially early in his career when he's not being asked to be a main scoring option -- should have a similar task. I think the Spurs would get more value out of that and finding some wing star power than by drafting a wing, expecting them to be a 1-4 defender who can check the best PGs and then spending big to bring in a vet PG who at best is hiding on guys Vassell should be hiding on.

[RC_Drunkford]

Dillingham is perfect next to Wemby. You can afford to have a weak defender at PG as long as it‘s the only one in the line up

[JPB]

Defense is something the Spurs could attack in this draft, but they don't have to worry about specifically drafting good defenders. They need good prospects who can become good players. They can cross the contender bridge when they get to it. It's far better to draft an offense-first guard who succeeds and you have to contemplate trading later that passing on him for a defense-first wing who fails. BPA.

That said, there are multiple ways a player can contribute to a defense, and a guy Dillingham's size seems to have the agility to harass a player at the point of attack. He doesn't have to be able to one-on-one a guy up and down the court. Patty Mills, for all his flaws, defended well at the head of a zone scheme when asked to just pressure the opposing team as they tried to get into their sets. Dillingham -- especially early in his career when he's not being asked to be a main scoring option -- should have a similar task. I think the Spurs would get more value out of that and finding some wing star power than by drafting a wing, expecting them to be a 1-4 defender who can check the best PGs and then spending big to bring in a vet PG who at best is hiding on guys Vassell should be hiding on.

If you remove "high" offensive prodution, Dillingham's value considerably drops.

We can hope for, and like we do every year, project on those kids all the things we need and would like them to have or develop, but Dilly is perceived as a poor defenser and chances are he'll never even be neutral. And we don't even know if he'll actually be able to be a main scoring option in the NBA. There's a fair chance he might not even be a starter on a winning team.

Not directly addressed to you Chinook (I include myself) but we should hold our horses a bit regarding these kids, specially this year.. This draft is perceived as one of the weakiest in history by scouts and FO guys thoughout the league, but reading different fanbases, it's suddenly filled (here again, like every year getting closer to the draft) with talented prospects who could be perfect for THEIR team.

Probability is few of this year's rookies, including lottery guys, will end up as actual NBA stars, or even starters for most.

[TheChillFactor]

i don't want trae young bc he's so fucking bad on defense. but its hard not to be intrigued by dillingham's offensive potential.

he would have been the second best perimeter creator/shot maker on the Spurs roster last year.

[Mr. Body]

Defense is something the Spurs could attack in this draft, but they don't have to worry about specifically drafting good defenders. They need good prospects who can become good players. They can cross the contender bridge when they get to it. It's far better to draft an offense-first guard who succeeds and you have to contemplate trading later that passing on him for a defense-first wing who fails. BPA.

That said, there are multiple ways a player can contribute to a defense, and a guy Dillingham's size seems to have the agility to harass a player at the point of attack. He doesn't have to be able to one-on-one a guy up and down the court. Patty Mills, for all his flaws, defended well at the head of a zone scheme when asked to just pressure the opposing team as they tried to get into their sets. Dillingham -- especially early in his career when he's not being asked to be a main scoring option -- should have a similar task. I think the Spurs would get more value out of that and finding some wing star power than by drafting a wing, expecting them to be a 1-4 defender who can check the best PGs and then spending big to bring in a vet PG who at best is hiding on guys Vassell should be hiding on.

I've contended that Dillingham was dogshitin great part because he didn't know how to play defense. Almost at all. In December and January, he was blowing assignments, missing rotations, didn't know how to guard basic inbound up-screens. He would do things that looked like he was a kid at a YMCA.

But then slowly some of these problems started going away. Calipari, who in retrospect was pretty checked out as a coach, got some of this out of his system. Dillingham was still making bad mistakes, but he was active, calling switches, communicating. This was a player who actively wanted to play good defense. Crucially, he was the only player on the team with the quickness to keep up with the shooter who was killing them in the tournament. He was still making mistakes then, but there was marked improvement.

Anyway, I keep repeating myself on that score. I also agree that he has the tools to be better than he is (with very poor high school coaching). What matters to me is that he bought into trying to get better there.

[R. DeMurre]

Often one of the added benefits of hitting on a defensive ace is that they become relative bargains salarlywise after their rookie contracts are up. Guys like Herb Jones, OG Anunoby, Alex Caruso, Draymond, etc. don't command the max contracts of scorers like Trae Young, Bradley Beal, Zach LaVine, etc... In this day & age, with the harsher salary cap penalties, every team can use a couple of guys like that on their roster.

[rankingtear]

Defense is something the Spurs could attack in this draft, but they don't have to worry about specifically drafting good defenders. They need good prospects who can become good players. They can cross the contender bridge when they get to it. It's far better to draft an offense-first guard who succeeds and you have to contemplate trading later that passing on him for a defense-first wing who fails. BPA.

That said, there are multiple ways a player can contribute to a defense, and a guy Dillingham's size seems to have the agility to harass a player at the point of attack. He doesn't have to be able to one-on-one a guy up and down the court. Patty Mills, for all his flaws, defended well at the head of a zone scheme when asked to just pressure the opposing team as they tried to get into their sets. Dillingham -- especially early in his career when he's not being asked to be a main scoring option -- should have a similar task. I think the Spurs would get more value out of that and finding some wing star power than by drafting a wing, expecting them to be a 1-4 defender who can check the best PGs and then spending big to bring in a vet PG who at best is hiding on guys Vassell should be hiding on.

I think it is a requirement nowadays to spend and waste draft picks in order to get a young starter level wing. I rather brute force one while we still can than spend every off season and trade deadline being one of several teams calling BKN for Mikal Bridges.

[Chinook]

Young wings aren't so super valuable that you can waste assets trying to get them. Very view of the elite ones are top picks. If the Spurs were simply going gambling, they could trade down and take multiple shots rather than waste what could be the last two top-10 picks they have in Wemby's career.

[TD 21]

By god, that's Castle's (Williams? Salaun?) music . . . gulp.

[CGD]

Castle > McCain > Topic > Carter> UK guards

Tbh.

Folks are forgetting that the Spurs have invested heavily in Vassell as the #2 option. For this version of the Spurs we don’t need a little no-D, huntable, chucker, whether Trae or Dillingham. This team needs another Derrick White (which maybe more upside), Defensive versatility, reliable shooting, setup guy, and smarts.

[JPB]

Castle > McCain > Topic > Carter> UK guards

Tbh.

Folks are forgetting that the Spurs have invested heavily in Vassell as the #2 option. For this version of the Spurs we don’t need a little no-D, huntable, chucker, whether Trae or Dillingham. This team needs another Derrick White (which maybe more upside), Defensive versatility, reliable shooting, setup guy, and smarts.

I believe we would all love "a Derrick White with more upside". Fairy sure the whole NBA would.

Anyway, I don't believe we should rely too much on this draft to find Wemby's future co-star or sidekick. A quality role player would be a win. And I wouldn't mind using the picks for a major move, There's so many guys to develop or improve already on this team.

[CGD]

^ Sure, was thinking of more Spurs Derrick. I more mean more the archetype: someone that doesn’t need the ball to be effective, is a connector, and smart. We don’t need 25 ppg from the point so long as the Spurs are committed to Vassell as the 2nd option (which they are).

[Chinook]

You don't pass up a top 10 pick because you are worried about Wesley, Branham, Cissoko, Champ, Bassey or Barlow not getting minutes. The team has three prospects of consequence and has plenty of room to develop outside of that.

[Mugen]

The Spurs had great defenses with Porky at PG. The Wolves are elite now with 35yo Mike Conley starting at point.

I have a slight preference to Topic but you don't pass on Dillingham because of his defense. If you think he's an elite pairing with Wemby offensively then you draft him, plain and simple tbh.

[onechance87]

reed,dilly,topic,castle all cool to draft.They would all be upgrades over tre.

[Chinook]

The Spurs could open up enough cap space to sign a first- or second-tier max contract more easily than they can if they have to get all the way up to a third-tier max. People talk about signing George, but OG could be signed just by paying to get out of Graham and dumping Johnson, or Quickley could be obtained by moving Collins.

[baseline bum]

The Spurs could open up enough cap space to sign a first- or second-tier max contract more easily than they can if they have to get all the way up to a third-tier max. People talk about signing George, but OG could be signed just by paying to get out of Graham and dumping Johnson, or Quickley could be obtained by moving Collins.

I'd love OG and badly wanted to trade for him, but now that New York has his Bird Rights I can't see him signing anywhere but there. Quickley is restricted so would take a massive overpay most likely. Maybe KCP would be gettable since re-signing him would surely put Denver over the second apron.

[scott]

Castle > McCain > Topic > Carter> UK guards

Tbh.

Folks are forgetting that the Spurs have invested heavily in Vassell as the #2 option. For this version of the Spurs we don’t need a little no-D, huntable, chucker, whether Trae or Dillingham. This team needs another Derrick White (which maybe more upside), Defensive versatility, reliable shooting, setup guy, and smarts.

I don't find this necessarily true. Vassell's contract doesn't dictate that he must be the #2 option lest it be an overpay - in fact, it's very much in-line with the contract of a #3 guy on a team. Hopefully the Spurs aren't so stubborn as to feel compelled to continually force Vassell as the #2 option, when most signs currently point to him not being that guy.

[Mr. Body]

It seems pretty clear Vassell struggles with self-creation, and this may continue to be a problem. Wembanyama is also not a great creator from the perimeter. He may learn to take better shots, etc., but the team could use a dynamic number one perimeter threat. This could be in the Parker mold - if not his skillset - in someone dedicated to stirring the defense around or providing another point of trouble for the defense.

Optimally it's someone who can feast off the attention Wemby will get, whether as a playmaker or scorer. Both would be best. This would slot Vassell in more of a third scorer position where he seems to fit best, to me.

[CGD]

I don't find this necessarily true. Vassell's contract doesn't dictate that he must be the #2 option lest it be an overpay - in fact, it's very much in-line with the contract of a #3 guy on a team. Hopefully the Spurs aren't so stubborn as to feel compelled to continually force Vassell as the #2 option, when most signs currently point to him not being that guy.

It’s not just the $$, but the role they’ve carved for him and trust they’re given him. I dont see that changing during this first iteration of the Wemby teams, unless there is a coaching change.

I totally agree that he’s best a 3rd option, though. But as someone else said elsewhere, we shouldn’t be expecting them to draft their number 2 in this draft.

[The Truth #6]

It feels like the Spurs gave him a big contract then used this season to see what they have with him in a big role. To menot ideal, but not horrible. I can see the team changing his role, but will he be ok with it? I'm not sure.

[Chinook]

It’s not just the $$, but the role they’ve carved for him and trust they’re given him. I dont see that changing during this first iteration of the Wemby teams, unless there is a coaching change.

I totally agree that he’s best a 3rd option, though. But as someone else said elsewhere, we shouldn’t be expecting them to draft their number 2 in this draft.

Vassell was the number-one guy before Wemby. Roles change. The Spurs aren't going to avoid getting a better second option because for one season Devin played that role. That would be purposefully hamstringing the team for no reason. If Dillingham is drafted and develops that way, he'll get the ball. If they acquire a guy like Young or George, he'll get the ball. The Spurs of all teams have a history of fluid transition from one option to another. I don't think it makes sense to accuse them of being so rigid here.

[JPB]

^ Sure, was thinking of more Spurs Derrick. I more mean more the archetype: someone that doesn’t need the ball to be effective, is a connector, and smart. We don’t need 25 ppg from the point so long as the Spurs are committed to Vassell as the 2nd option (which they are).

I'm afraid they are too, but really don't believe Devin is a long term 2nd option for a wannabee competitive/contending spurs team. They might need the connector you're mentioning but also more direct playmaking, creativity and simply talent in the backcourt. A Vassell/D-White-like-player backcourt wouldn't do it for me. It would lack more explosivity, penetration power and yeah, talent. I'd rather have a D-White/creative PG combo ideally, and a Devin/creative PG one more realistically.

But you can also have that connector as a wing (Sochan was supposed to be a bit of that, before disappointing a bit in his second year).

[Chinook]

Just to add: Johnson went from the face of the franchise and first option to sixth man within two years. Vassell's status isn't going to exceed his relative talent or production, and the team will look to add more talent.

[JPB]

You don't pass up a top 10 pick because you are worried about Wesley, Branham, Cissoko, Champ, Bassey or Barlow not getting minutes. The team has three prospects of consequence and has plenty of room to develop outside of that.


A top 10 pick in a very weak draft who might correspond to a 15-20-ish pick in most others... maybe you do for the right deal. There's no univeral rules that say you do or don't do that in all eternity, that's not good business. Every situation is different and you have to anlyse all the paramaters:

- Wemby and the (real) quick help he needs, not a prospect who might take 4 years to develop (or not).

- the quality of your roster (bad, outside of Wemby).

- The quality of the draft. Don't expect Dilly or Sheppard to come and kick ass, or maybe even start, from day 1, iff they ever do. Wish the kid the best but not sure Sarr crack top 5 at very best in most other drafts. "Mobile but raw rim protector" is a pretty low bar for #1 pcik. So imagine the rest of the pool.

- Giving top 5 pick money for 4 years to a kid who might a bench a bench guy at best.

- All the prospects you already have (Wesley, Branham, Sochan, Sidy) not to mention the "bargain bin" guys (Champ, Barlow, Mamu) who can also be consdered as guys to develop gving their little NBA experience...

- Two years of terrible sucking.

- The moves you could make. If you add one or two rooikies, obviously, that's playing time you can't give to experienced vets you could sign.

Now if you ask me if I'd like around the same roster than last year + one or two rookiees... Well that's another awful year in perspective...

Tre/Dilly/Wesley
Devin, Branham, Champ
Keldon/Sochan/Mamu/Sidy/Cedi?
Wemby/Zollins/Barlow/Bassey?
A second rookie?

That's like 7 or 8 guys who have nothing to do here you'll have to give time in hope they develop into something.

[Snaq O'Meal]

Castle > McCain > Topic > Carter> UK guards

Tbh.

Folks are forgetting that the Spurs have invested heavily in Vassell as the #2 option. For this version of the Spurs we don’t need a little no-D, huntable, chucker, whether Trae or Dillingham. This team needs another Derrick White (which maybe more upside), Defensive versatility, reliable shooting, setup guy, and smarts.

Check out the respective stats of Castle and Carter when they went head-to-head, and see who's the closer facsimile of Derrick White.

[CGD]

^ my point is not to Stan for Devin or suggest the Spurs are incapable of moving, but more so to look at where the offense is going to be coming from over the next two years or so. Right now that is Wemby and Vassell. If folks are thinking the Spurs should prioritize a PG this draft (I’m not one of those), I’m not convinced that an undersized volume guard is the need. I’d be pleased with a high bbiq type with size that doesn’t need the ball, and can help set up people. They’re all flawed, but it’s why my preference is more in the Topic or Castle hue if they’re gonna go PG with the draft.

[Chinook]

A top 10 pick in a very weak draft who might correspond to a 15-20-ish pick in most others... maybe you do for the right deal. There's no univeral rules that say you do or don't do that in all eternity, that's not good business. Every situation is different and you have to anlyse all the paramaters:

- Wemby and the (real) quick help he needs, not a prospect who might take 4 years to develop (or not).

- the quality of your roster (bad, outside of Wemby).

- The quality of the draft. Don't expect Dilly or Sheppard to come and kick ass, or maybe even start, from day 1, iff they ever do. Wish the kid the best but not sure Sarr crack top 5 at very best in most other drafts. "Mobile but raw rim protector" is a pretty low bar for #1 pcik. So imagine the rest of the pool.

- Giving top 5 pick money for 4 years to a kid who might a bench a bench guy at best.

- All the prospects you already have (Wesley, Branham, Sochan, Sidy) not to mention the "bargain bin" guys (Champ, Barlow, Mamu) who can also be consdered as guys to develop gving their little NBA experience...

- Two years of terrible sucking.

- The moves you could make. If you add one or two rooikies, obviously, that's playing time you can't give to experienced vets you could sign.

Now if you ask me if I'd like around the same roster than last year + one or two rookiees... Well that's another awful year in perspective...

Tre/Dilly/Wesley
Devin, Branham, Champ
Keldon/Sochan/Mamu/Sidy/Cedi?
Wemby/Zollins/Barlow/Bassey?

that's like 7 or 8 guys who have nothing to do here you'll have to gove time to hope they develop into something.

People might be confusing what it means to be a weak draft. It's not that the players are worse. It's that we don't know who is going to be good. I'm not ignoring Wemby being a generational talent, but he alone wasn't the reason why last year's class was considered so great. It was also because of Scoot, Miller and the Thompsons. This draft lacks a Wemby, but it doesn't necessarily lack prospects to match those other guys. A top-10 pick from this draft is not equivalent to a top-20 pick last year. It's more like two top-10 picks this year have the same success rate as a single top-10 from last year. The talent is hard to spot, so it takes more tries. It's not like last year where the talent went pretty unambiguously at the very top. Straight up a 15-20 pick in this draft is better than the equivalent pick last year for precisely that reason. You're more likely to snag a Kawhi., George or Giannis because their talent wasn't being appropriately valued by the consensus. Holland has as much of a chance at being the best player in this draft than Risacher, and he's a mid-lotto guy. Collier came into the year as the favorite to go first-overall but he may slip out of the lottery entirely.

So no, I can't agree that these picks have to worry about competing with scrubs for minutes. Those guys do not deserve time they don't earn. That is good business, not letting old mediocre prospects linger.

[LeBowen]

Just to add: Johnson went from the face of the franchise and first option to sixth man within two years. Vassell's status isn't going to exceed his relative talent or production, and the team will look to add more talent.

True, but him being offered and taking a team friendly deal made it clear what the Spurs' intentions were.
On the other hand, Devin got a max extension.

[Chinook]

True, but him being offered and taking a team friendly deal made it clear what the Spurs' intentions were.
On the other hand, Devin got a max extension.

Devin didn't get close to a max extension. His contract is much closer to what Keldon got than what Maxey will get. Devin got $146M/5 including bonuses as far as I can recall. Maxey will get $204M/5.

[skin27]

Everyone eagerly anticipating combine measurements for the UK guards.
I still have Sheppard over Dillingham for now.
Lmao sheppard is like new version of korver

[R. DeMurre]

I'd love OG and badly wanted to trade for him, but now that New York has his Bird Rights I can't see him signing anywhere but there. Quickley is restricted so would take a massive overpay most likely. Maybe KCP would be gettable since re-signing him would surely put Denver over the second apron.


I read an interview with Quickley after that trade went through and was really surprised to hear him say that he knew nothing of it before it happened. I would've guessed that Toronto might have at least tried to put out feelers to his agent about the chances of re-signing, since he'll be a free agent, but there was no communication between them at all.

[LeBowen]

Devin didn't get close to a max extension. His contract is much closer to what Keldon got than what Maxey will get. Devin got $146M/5 including bonuses as far as I can recall. Maxey will get $204M/5.

Wait, isn't that because of the new CBA and cap increase?
Anyhow, Devin got paid on the level of someone who should become a legit second option, he better deliver.

[Chinook]

Wait, isn't that because of the new CBA and cap increase?
Anyhow, Devin got paid on the level of someone who should become a legit second option, he better deliver.

No. He just got paid a flattish contract at what is definitely not second-option money. He'd only be making about half of what George would make on a new contract, for example.

[jesterbobman]

On Vic: I think he got to a point of being the best defender in the NBA, but he wasn't the best over the course of the season, and I'd guess (without being courtside / in the right hemisphere, or listening to isolated audio) he's still got room to grow in communication from the back line / the teamwork of defending. That's a really important skill, and part of why Tim was so great. Those skills are a big part of his room to grow.

On the draft...
I think there's so much variety in the draft this year, and no clear star that you can go whatever way you want at the top. In most drafts, I've got pretty clearly informed opinions on who I think we should take, though I'm less certain this year.

The strong stats based prospects I'm normally inclined to like (Reed, Clingan) don't seem that sexy in terms of role (While I think they'll be a bit better, Reddick and Poeltl, as comps, aren't inspiring as top 5 picks and Clingan, at least, would strictly be a reserve unless you go huge), a lot of the wings are big question marks in shooting, and PGs have defense / shooting questions.
I don't think there's anyone other than Vassell and Wemby that you should plan around (Sochan is close, and you don't want to have that many non shooters), and those shouldn't impact your choices (E.g, I still think Clingan is an option, as looking at Embiid's Sixers playoff runs show how valuable a competent backup 5 can be).

[scott]

Wait, isn't that because of the new CBA and cap increase?
Anyhow, Devin got paid on the level of someone who should become a legit second option, he better deliver.

Nope. The max would have been 5/204. Edwards, Ball, Halliburton all signed this deal from the same draft class as Vassell. Devin got a lesser deal because he's a lesser player. Definitely don't view his contract as a "you'd better be a second option" kind of deal.

[objective]

Watching the success of Minnesota and OKC to a degree and their relative long term outlooks based on youth has definitely altered my view.

I now don't want any bums on defense that can be targeted and don't at least create deflections and events to make up for it. That means Branham needs to get lost.

Spurs need to be able to swarm and suffocate like Minnesota does and having Wemby should make that possible, but too many clueless guys looking around after a score confused on what just happened like Keldon.

And no elderly injury prone vets to be targeted. Conley might qualify but his IQ makes up for a lot plus his extension is for less than the mle and his backup in NAW is sensational. So he's an exception, but it means I don't want a Middleton, or harden or Tobias. Older vets acquired need to be plus defenders and mle or less.

Youth, athleticism and energy are going to matter more with shooting. I was on the Trae train, but I've come around to a lot of the anti-trae views

So I am now all in on Reed Shepperd. He can execute much of what Trae would have with better shooting and better defense for a lot less money. Not the lob passer Trae is but he can shoot probably as well as anyone in the league plus his hands make for a great addition to an attacking defense. Small but can be hidden on a Conley or NAW or Dort.

Shepperd's knack for getting the ball on strips is something I can really see being a plus as people struggle with the Wemby conundrum. Add in his great full court passing and I can see a bright future.

And of course I want them to get Patrick Williams in free agency either straight up or in a sign and trade. He can function as a defender at the 4, plenty of videos out there breaking down his defensive pluses. And he can shoot 40%+ from three reliably. Add in some synergy with Devin, and the recent history of Bulls picks having delayed development ... I could see it being a huge problem for other teams

Wemby-Williams-Sochan-Vassell-Shepperd makes a lot of sense to me as a lineup with multiple 40%+ 3 point shooters, length and swarming activity on defense, transition attacks, and all focused on a Wemby-centric offense. Rebounding might be a little weak, and some people might not believe in Shepperd as a point guard, but I think that lineup competes and competes very very well

[LeBowen]

Nope. The max would have been 5/204. Edwards, Ball, Halliburton all signed this deal from the same draft class as Vassell. Devin got a lesser deal because he's a lesser player. Definitely don't view his contract as a "you'd better be a second option" kind of deal.

Haliburton playing injured to get extra 40 million more misled me, I thought it was 200 million if he gets all-NBA, but that's just the regular max. Crazy.

[skin27]

Watching the success of Minnesota and OKC to a degree and their relative long term outlooks based on youth has definitely altered my view.

I now don't want any bums on defense that can be targeted and don't at least create deflections and events to make up for it. That means Branham needs to get lost.

Spurs need to be able to swarm and suffocate like Minnesota does and having Wemby should make that possible, but too many clueless guys looking around after a score confused on what just happened like Keldon.

And no elderly injury prone vets to be targeted. Conley might qualify but his IQ makes up for a lot plus his extension is for less than the mle and his backup in NAW is sensational. So he's an exception, but it means I don't want a Middleton, or harden or Tobias. Older vets acquired need to be plus defenders and mle or less.

Youth, athleticism and energy are going to matter more with shooting. I was on the Trae train, but I've come around to a lot of the anti-trae views

So I am now all in on Reed Shepperd. He can execute much of what Trae would have with better shooting and better defense for a lot less money. Not the lob passer Trae is but he can shoot probably as well as anyone in the league plus his hands make for a great addition to an attacking defense. Small but can be hidden on a Conley or NAW or Dort.

Shepperd's knack for getting the ball on strips is something I can really see being a plus as people struggle with the Wemby conundrum. Add in his great full court passing and I can see a bright future.

And of course I want them to get Patrick Williams in free agency either straight up or in a sign and trade. He can function as a defender at the 4, plenty of videos out there breaking down his defensive pluses. And he can shoot 40%+ from three reliably. Add in some synergy with Devin, and the recent history of Bulls picks having delayed development ... I could see it being a huge problem for other teams

Wemby-Williams-Sochan-Vassell-Shepperd makes a lot of sense to me as a lineup with multiple 40%+ 3 point shooters, length and swarming activity on defense, transition attacks, and all focused on a Wemby-centric offense. Rebounding might be a little weak, and some people might not believe in Shepperd as a point guard, but I think that lineup competes and competes very very well

Sheppard isnt a point guard. He is a SG more like a korver type of player

[Dejounte]

Watching the success of Minnesota and OKC to a degree and their relative long term outlooks based on youth has definitely altered my view.

I now don't want any bums on defense that can be targeted and don't at least create deflections and events to make up for it. That means Branham needs to get lost.

Spurs need to be able to swarm and suffocate like Minnesota does and having Wemby should make that possible, but too many clueless guys looking around after a score confused on what just happened like Keldon.

And no elderly injury prone vets to be targeted. Conley might qualify but his IQ makes up for a lot plus his extension is for less than the mle and his backup in NAW is sensational. So he's an exception, but it means I don't want a Middleton, or harden or Tobias. Older vets acquired need to be plus defenders and mle or less.

Youth, athleticism and energy are going to matter more with shooting. I was on the Trae train, but I've come around to a lot of the anti-trae views

So I am now all in on Reed Shepperd. He can execute much of what Trae would have with better shooting and better defense for a lot less money. Not the lob passer Trae is but he can shoot probably as well as anyone in the league plus his hands make for a great addition to an attacking defense. Small but can be hidden on a Conley or NAW or Dort.

Shepperd's knack for getting the ball on strips is something I can really see being a plus as people struggle with the Wemby conundrum. Add in his great full court passing and I can see a bright future.

And of course I want them to get Patrick Williams in free agency either straight up or in a sign and trade. He can function as a defender at the 4, plenty of videos out there breaking down his defensive pluses. And he can shoot 40%+ from three reliably. Add in some synergy with Devin, and the recent history of Bulls picks having delayed development ... I could see it being a huge problem for other teams

Wemby-Williams-Sochan-Vassell-Shepperd makes a lot of sense to me as a lineup with multiple 40%+ 3 point shooters, length and swarming activity on defense, transition attacks, and all focused on a Wemby-centric offense. Rebounding might be a little weak, and some people might not believe in Shepperd as a point guard, but I think that lineup competes and competes very very well

This guy has watched the tape. His timing on his passes and overall vision is incredible. One of the best in the draft.

[ginobilized]

Watching the success of Minnesota and OKC to a degree and their relative long term outlooks based on youth has definitely altered my view.

I now don't want any bums on defense that can be targeted and don't at least create deflections and events to make up for it. That means Branham needs to get lost.

Spurs need to be able to swarm and suffocate like Minnesota does and having Wemby should make that possible, but too many clueless guys looking around after a score confused on what just happened like Keldon.

And no elderly injury prone vets to be targeted. Conley might qualify but his IQ makes up for a lot plus his extension is for less than the mle and his backup in NAW is sensational. So he's an exception, but it means I don't want a Middleton, or harden or Tobias. Older vets acquired need to be plus defenders and mle or less.

Youth, athleticism and energy are going to matter more with shooting. I was on the Trae train, but I've come around to a lot of the anti-trae views

So I am now all in on Reed Shepperd. He can execute much of what Trae would have with better shooting and better defense for a lot less money. Not the lob passer Trae is but he can shoot probably as well as anyone in the league plus his hands make for a great addition to an attacking defense. Small but can be hidden on a Conley or NAW or Dort.

Shepperd's knack for getting the ball on strips is something I can really see being a plus as people struggle with the Wemby conundrum. Add in his great full court passing and I can see a bright future.

And of course I want them to get Patrick Williams in free agency either straight up or in a sign and trade. He can function as a defender at the 4, plenty of videos out there breaking down his defensive pluses. And he can shoot 40%+ from three reliably. Add in some synergy with Devin, and the recent history of Bulls picks having delayed development ... I could see it being a huge problem for other teams

Wemby-Williams-Sochan-Vassell-Shepperd makes a lot of sense to me as a lineup with multiple 40%+ 3 point shooters, length and swarming activity on defense, transition attacks, and all focused on a Wemby-centric offense. Rebounding might be a little weak, and some people might not believe in Shepperd as a point guard, but I think that lineup competes and competes very very well

I agree wholeheartedly that we should avoid aging vets right now.

Reed Sheppard definitely has his merits and could be a fit. He'd provide improved shooting and would fit well with the ball movement that Pop espouses.

The Wemby-Williams-Sochan-Vassell-Sheppard lineup sounds like a strong SL for where we are now. If we could offload KJ and Branham for 2 3&D types, I'd be ecstatic.

[objective]

Basically with regards to point guard defense the instinct is that the presence of Wemby provides an excuse to have a questionable/bad defender because Wemby will be back there to clean it up (Trae Young, Darius Garland, Rob Dillingham)

Instead i see Wemby now as a mandate to be aggressive on defense to leverage how good Wemby is rather than passively accept a lame give up on defense.

Attack attack attack. Exhaust teams before they even get to Wemby. The more tired and harried they are when they get to Wemby the more Wemby will be able to feast on them. The shorter the shot clock is when they finally get in their sets the more pressure will load as the clock ticks down and Wemby looms while long arms and quick hands are lurking.

No more no-defense clowns to shoe wipe their way into disadvantages.

[Seventyniner]

I don't like the idea of trying to specifically emulate teams like the Wolves or Thunder just because they look good now. Would it have been worth trying to emulate the Warriors or Mavs from two years ago?

Wemby is the most unique superstar the league has seen in a long time. There are many ways to build around him that will result in a contender because he will just be that good. Yes he will need to have talented supporting players with a good mix of shooting, playmaking, and defense, but there's a lot more than one way to skin that cat.

[objective]

I don't like the idea of trying to specifically emulate teams like the Wolves or Thunder just because they look good now. Would it have been worth trying to emulate the Warriors or Mavs from two years ago?

Wemby is the most unique superstar the league has seen in a long time. There are many ways to build around him that will result in a contender because he will just be that good. Yes he will need to have talented supporting players with a good mix of shooting, playmaking, and defense, but there's a lot more than one way to skin that cat.

For me it's not so much trying to copy or emulate, more of a revelation of what can still happen in the NBA on defense.

That's how the Spurs used to play with the rotations and speed and disruption but it's been gone for years and I like many probably just accepted it as what the rules of the NBA are now with the bad defense. I was conditioned to accept confusion and slow rotations and missed rotations and guys not watching ball and man and getting backdoored and pouting and show wipes etc

But some of those Minnesota sequences were such a breath of fresh air. And what the Spurs can do again with the right personnel. Relying on Wemby to save a bad defense is what got Gobert cooked in Utah. Now that he's in a team with other good defenders plus guys who might not be good but have good tools like KAT and the defense is so hot that even when he sits they're cooking. Unlike the Spurs who without Wemby were pure trash

I appreciate not wanting to overreact or focus on one team ... There's drawbacks to being too match up crazy. Teams in the west all signed big ass centers to handle Shaq, but then he's traded out east and everyone is stuck with their own Rasho and no use for him.

That's not what I'm hoping for. I'm hoping for a commitment to defense that's both achievable and beneficial to Wemby in results and also not putting too much of a burden on him.

[Chinook]

I don't like the idea of trying to specifically emulate teams like the Wolves or Thunder just because they look good now. Would it have been worth trying to emulate the Warriors or Mavs from two years ago?

Wemby is the most unique superstar the league has seen in a long time. There are many ways to build around him that will result in a contender because he will just be that good. Yes he will need to have talented supporting players with a good mix of shooting, playmaking, and defense, but there's a lot more than one way to skin that cat.

Moreover, I don't get this idea that the Wolves and Nuggets didn't have vets. I've talked specifically about Paul Millsap and his importance to getting the Nuggets started on the right path. The Wolves player credit Conley and Gobert for establishing their identity. The Bucks and Celtics were laden with vets not just in the years that they won but in the years leading up to it. It's just such a bizarre claim.

The Spurs in Wemby's absolute prime should feat him and guys near his age or younger as the prominent players while older guys support him. But we are years away from that. The way you build the younger guys up is first by drafting them. All this talk about how Wemby can't wait for a guy to develop is bullshit. Dude's a rookie. Second is you bring in vets who can teach the young guys.

Take advantage of these picks to bring in talent. Add legit vet starters to build the guys up. Face the reality that the Spurs aren't going to win a championship over the next year or two. Stop conflating being unrealistic with having high standards. Take advantage of this time when Wemby's still somewhat mortal to build. Make guys earn minutes through their play rather than gifting them minutes. Let the chips fall where they may until it's actually time to hit the gas. If you want to take any lesson from the Wolves and Nuggets it should be that.

Who cares if a guy is targeted on defense? First, that's not really a thing in the modern NBA. Yes, you exploit mismatches, but the game isn't one-on-one anymore. Secondly, the Spurs are not going to win a title. They don't have to make their roster moves based on that season's WCF. They won't be there.

Finally, where does this idea that Sheppard isn't weak defensively come from? He's good at getting steals, but I'd argue he's harder to project in a good defensive scheme than Dillingham is. You can account for Dillingham being small if he's pesky ala Mills. You can't account nearly as much for a guy who has to gamble to have his defensive value and who isn't switchable at all. Sheppard seems like a guy who can feast in an elite defense where he has no actual responsibilities. That's not an impossible role to play in SA, but it's a luxury that works best after a very specific series of moves sets it up.

[ginobilized]

Moreover, I don't get this idea that the Wolves and Nuggets didn't have vets. I've talked specifically about Paul Millsap and his importance to getting the Nuggets started on the right path. The Wolves player credit Conley and Gobert for establishing their identity. The Bucks and Celtics were laden with vets not just in the years that they won but in the years leading up to it. It's just such a bizarre claim.

The Spurs in Wemby's absolute prime should feat him and guys near his age or younger as the prominent players while older guys support him. But we are years away from that. The way you build the younger guys up is first by drafting them. All this talk about how Wemby can't wait for a guy to develop is bullshit. Dude's a rookie. Second is you bring in vets who can teach the young guys.

Take advantage of these picks to bring in talent. Add legit vet starters to build the guys up. Face the reality that the Spurs aren't going to win a championship over the next year or two. Stop conflating being unrealistic with having high standards. Take advantage of this time when Wemby's still somewhat mortal to build. Make guys earn minutes through their play rather than gifting them minutes. Let the chips fall where they may until it's actually time to hit the gas. If you want to take any lesson from the Wolves and Nuggets it should be that.

Who cares if a guy is targeted on defense? First, that's not really a thing in the modern NBA. Yes, you exploit mismatches, but the game isn't one-on-one anymore. Secondly, the Spurs are not going to win a title. They don't have to make their roster moves based on that season's WCF. They won't be there.

Finally, where does this idea that Sheppard isn't weak defensively come from? He's good at getting steals, but I'd argue he's harder to project in a good defensive scheme than Dillingham is. You can account for Dillingham being small if he's pesky ala Mills. You can't account nearly as much for a guy who has to gamble to have his defensive value and who isn't switchable at all. Sheppard seems like a guy who can feast in an elite defense where he has no actual responsibilities. That's not an impossible role to play in SA, but it's a luxury that works best after a very specific series of moves sets it up.

Great points, all of them.

I wonder, though, if that applies under a coach like Pop who seems like the ultimate vet. At this stage, I think he is handling the bulk of the teaching.
Who are some ideal vets for this squad in your eyes?

[scott]

the Spurs are not going to win a title.

Well, not with that attitude.

[Chinook]

Great points, all of them.

I wonder, though, if that applies under a coach like Pop who seems like the ultimate vet. At this stage, I think he is handling the bulk of the teaching.
Who are some ideal vets for this squad in your eyes?

Pop is the elder statesman, but he's not close to the only vet coach out there. They only do so much. It takes actual players on the court to implement those lessons and to provide a standard for the young guys to meet. It's why the token vets on small contracts don't make sense. They need starters and key bench players.

If I had my way, the Spurs rotation would look like the following:

Blue-Chip PG, Jones, Wesley
Vassell, Vet Play-Making SG, Branham
Vet Play-Making SF, Johnson, Blue-Chip Forward
Sochan, Vet PF, Cissoko
Wembanyama, Rim-Running Vet Center, Rim-Running Center Prospect With Size

In Scott's "Ideal Off-Season" thread, I proposed an off-season which met the biggest of these wishes. The results were as follows:

Blue-Chip PG = Rob Dillingham
Vet Play-Making SF = Khris Middleton
Vet Play-Making SG = No one. I didn't fill this hole and instead let the Blue-Chip Forward play with Johnson
Blue-Chip Forward = Ron Holland
Vet PF = Royce O'Neale
Rim-Running Vet Center = Bobby Portis (who doesn't meet that description but is a flex big that would let Wemby play in a big lineup while also being a good single big)
Rim-Running Center Prospect With Size = Tyler Smith, who isn't a center and not much of a rim-runner but is a strong big prospect who should work his way into the rotation and might eventually become the starting PF.

[jesterbobman]

Moreover, I don't get this idea that the Wolves and Nuggets didn't have vets. I've talked specifically about Paul Millsap and his importance to getting the Nuggets started on the right path. The Wolves player credit Conley and Gobert for establishing their identity. The Bucks and Celtics were laden with vets not just in the years that they won but in the years leading up to it. It's just such a bizarre claim.

The Spurs in Wemby's absolute prime should feat him and guys near his age or younger as the prominent players while older guys support him. But we are years away from that. The way you build the younger guys up is first by drafting them. All this talk about how Wemby can't wait for a guy to develop is bullshit. Dude's a rookie. Second is you bring in vets who can teach the young guys.

Take advantage of these picks to bring in talent. Add legit vet starters to build the guys up. Face the reality that the Spurs aren't going to win a championship over the next year or two. Stop conflating being unrealistic with having high standards. Take advantage of this time when Wemby's still somewhat mortal to build. Make guys earn minutes through their play rather than gifting them minutes. Let the chips fall where they may until it's actually time to hit the gas. If you want to take any lesson from the Wolves and Nuggets it should be that.

Who cares if a guy is targeted on defense? First, that's not really a thing in the modern NBA. Yes, you exploit mismatches, but the game isn't one-on-one anymore. Secondly, the Spurs are not going to win a title. They don't have to make their roster moves based on that season's WCF. They won't be there.

Finally, where does this idea that Sheppard isn't weak defensively come from? He's good at getting steals, but I'd argue he's harder to project in a good defensive scheme than Dillingham is. You can account for Dillingham being small if he's pesky ala Mills. You can't account nearly as much for a guy who has to gamble to have his defensive value and who isn't switchable at all. Sheppard seems like a guy who can feast in an elite defense where he has no actual responsibilities. That's not an impossible role to play in SA, but it's a luxury that works best after a very specific series of moves sets it up.

Good points.

On getting Vets and team building, I'm on your side. Like sure, the ideal is that you find your core guys immediately, then you have a contending roster built around a trio for 15 years. That's unrealistic, and we're probably going to build around Wemby multiple times, as people age, move into / out of their primes and move in (and out) in free agency. In some cases, that'll take picks to acquire people, or overpaying in free agency (or getting lucky with someone like Donte DiVincezo...Jesus Christ that's a good contract).
I think your Middleton suggestion is good as that guy is awesome and he's the kind of culture builder that you want. There's a debate on what you'd be willing to give up, and what it'd take to get someone like that (basically, as in your post, squeeze into a 3 team deal), but the concept is good.
In about a year I think we'll be a free agent destination, but I don't think you want to wait and just hope you can make a splash, and the right type of good vet is worth giving up pi assets for even if they won't be part of the future title core.

The weakness of players defensively varies. Most players have weaknesses defensively, either being slow, or weak, or ball watchers off ball. Sheppard is definitely weak as a 1:1 defender, and a bit of a gambler, though he creates so many events that gambling is OK in the right circumstance. I'd be OK with Sheppard as his shooting is so good (and I think he has upside of being good enough with the ball to have Mark Price type upside), but do think it's pretty clear he'll be targeted, and you need good defensive infrastructure to cover him. I think the question if whether Wemby / Vassel / Sochan / future forward is (or will be) good enough to cover him, so the help gambling can work, and you get a piece that should fit with whatever the future build is.

[PhantomDashCam]

Anybody else worried about Dillingham’s often awkward landings on jumpers and layups?
I’d be interested to see what a biomechanist thinks when breaking down the tape and watching him in a live setting.

[thiste]

Dillingham is perfect next to Wemby. You can afford to have a weak defender at PG as long as it‘s the only one in the line up

You mean like Trae Young :lol

[skin27]

I have only 5 pointers for this team to make the playoffs next season

1. Increase Wemby's minutes from 29mpg to 35mpg
2. Teach Victor on how avoid being a tunrover machine
3.Draft a good pg dillingham/topic
4. Learn how not to choke big leads especially in the 3rd Quarter
5 Improve basketball IQ

Iif the team acomplish these 5 pointer this offseason i guarantee ya'll this team will make the playoffs next season.

[rankingtear]

Victor would have monster responsibility on offense moving forward, you just have to make it easier for him on the other end. Victor does not have to cover for anybody he is your top guy on offense.

[poopbox]

Vassell was the number-one guy before Wemby. Roles change. The Spurs aren't going to avoid getting a better second option because for one season Devin played that role. That would be purposefully hamstringing the team for no reason. If Dillingham is drafted and develops that way, he'll get the ball. If they acquire a guy like Young or George, he'll get the ball. The Spurs of all teams have a history of fluid transition from one option to another. I don't think it makes sense to accuse them of being so rigid here.


Huh? This is a team who wouldn't play Derrick and Dejounte together because Pop wanted to give Bryn Forbes minutes?

This is a team who wouldn't play Lonnie Walker because Pop wanted to let Patty, Marco, and Rudy gun and be terrible on defense when he knew they were all leaving next season? Consequently, and regardless of how you feel about it, Lonnie left literally within seconds of free agency.

This is a team that played Sochan at point TWO YEARS IN A ROW because the head coach thinks he's smarter than everyone else and has to prove it.

I cannot stress this enough, the Spurs FELL into Victor playing at center and being dominate. It wasn't anything that Pop actually set out to achieve. Sochan started at point so Victor could play the 4. Bassey got hurt and was out for the season. Collins hurt his ankle and was out. We were only down to two "bigs". Victor and Barlow. Barolow HAD to be the backup. Victor HAD to be the center. Sochan HAD to go back to power forward because Victor had to go to center. All of this happened 100% due to injury and not because the head coach thought it was the best thing to do for the team. All the way up until Collins got hurt it didn't matter how much we lost Pop was hellbent on playing Sochan at point. He literally set the franchise record for most consecutive losses doing it. That's how rigid the spurs are. The spurs are so rigid that even when they are about to set a franchise record for losing, they still won't switch it up, they will just march on doing the same dumb thing and they will set that franchise consecutive losses record.

For years were sending 1st round picks like Dejounte and Derrick to the g league, and then making them "earn" their minutes on the main club, which effectively only gave us 2 and a half years to know if our 1st round picks were actually good, where the rest of the league was just playing 1st round guys like SGA from day one, because they understood the faster we find out if a young player can play the faster we can trade an older veteran player for something more useful or to free up cap space. The spurs were doing dumb shit like having Bryn Forbes and Patty Mills on the same team. Two players who play the same way and do the same thing with the same limitations. That's stupid. That's redundant. No other team in the league was doing that dumb shit.

Imagine if when the 76ers drafted Maxey they told him you got to spend your rookie year in the g league. And then imagine in his second year they said you got to prove you better than Matisse Thybulle, instead of being like holy fucking shit, this guy is pretty good. Tyrese, here is 35 minutes a game and here is the ball, figure out how to play with the big fella.

[Chinook]

Huh? This is a team who wouldn't play Derrick and Dejounte together because Pop wanted to give Bryn Forbes minutes?

This is a team who wouldn't play Lonnie Walker because Pop wanted to let Patty, Marco, and Rudy gun and be terrible on defense when he knew they were all leaving next season? Consequently, and regardless of how you feel about it, Lonnie left literally within seconds of free agency.

This is a team that played Sochan at point TWO YEARS IN A ROW because the head coach thinks he's smarter than everyone else and has to prove it.

I cannot stress this enough, the Spurs FELL into Victor playing at center and being dominate. It wasn't anything that Pop actually set out to achieve. Sochan started at point so Victor could play the 4. Bassey got hurt and was out for the season. Collins hurt his ankle and was out. We were only down to two "bigs". Victor and Barlow. Barolow HAD to be the backup. Victor HAD to be the center. Sochan HAD to go back to power forward because Victor had to go to center. All of this happened 100% due to injury and not because the head coach thought it was the best thing to do for the team. All the way up until Collins got hurt it didn't matter how much we lost Pop was hellbent on playing Sochan at point. He literally set the franchise record for most consecutive losses doing it. That's how rigid the spurs are. The spurs are so rigid that even when they are about to set a franchise record for losing, they still won't switch it up, they will just march on doing the same dumb thing and they will set that franchise consecutive losses record.

For years were sending 1st round picks like Dejounte and Derrick to the g league, and then making them "earn" their minutes on the main club, which effectively only gave us 2 and a half years to know if our 1st round picks were actually good, where the rest of the league was just playing 1st round guys like SGA from day one, because they understood the faster we find out if a young player can play the faster we can trade an older veteran player for something more useful or to free up cap space. The spurs were doing dumb shit like having Bryn Forbes and Patty Mills on the same team. Two players who play the same way and do the same thing with the same limitations. That's stupid. That's redundant. No other team in the league was doing that dumb shit.

Imagine if when the 76ers drafted Maxey they told him you got to spend your rookie year in the g league. And then imagine in his second year they said you got to prove you better than Matisse Thybulle, instead of being like holy fucking shit, this guy is pretty good. Tyrese, here is 35 minutes a game and here is the ball, figure out how to play with the big fella.

Bro, the point of the word "here" is to differentiate it from other elements. They aren't rigid on who their top options are. They've never been so under Pop. They went from Aldridge to DeRozan to Murray/White to Johnson to Vassell to Wemby in literally four years. Get on your soapbox about other things, but the Spurs do not mandate that certain players are top options year in and year out. That's basically the opposite of Pop's philosophy.

[Robz4000]

I still say trade both picks tbh. I like Chinook's idea of bringing in Middleton (don't see the Spurs wanting Portis but wouldn't hate him either) so I'd offer both and Keldon/Collins for Middleton + someone like Connaughton to add a vet presence then trade a group of their stockpiled seconds to get back into the first round to take someone who might fall (Collier?).

[John B]

I doubt the PATFO would trade both FRP’s plus Keldon/Collins for Middleton. Then try to swing several SRP’s for Collier?? I’d expect them to stand pat, draft BPA’s, keep Tre at starting PG until whoever they drafted PG is ready, observe the players development as far as their chemistry with Wemby, and make moves by trade deadline, possibly a number of top caliber players could be available Mitchell, Markkanen, Naz Reid, nobody knows who would try to opt out if they could force their way playing alongside Wemby for years. I’d expect Wemby would be so much better attracting even more players to have a chance to play alongside him. Then continue the big moves in Summer next year to complete the roster.

[CGD]

I still say trade both picks tbh. I like Chinook's idea of bringing in Middleton (don't see the Spurs wanting Portis but wouldn't hate him either) so I'd offer both and Keldon/Collins for Middleton + someone like Connaughton to add a vet presence then trade a group of their stockpiled seconds to get back into the first round to take someone who might fall (Collier?).

Jeesh, could you imagine throwing two FRPs at Middleton and his injury history?

“Dating back to the 2022 playoffs, when he sprained the MCL in his left knee in the first round, Middleton has been a regular on the injured list. He's dealt with a myriad of upper and lower body problems and has undergone two surgeries -- one on his wrist and another on his knee last summer. So far this season he has missed 13 games and played in both ends of a back-to-back just once.”

https://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/khris-middleton-injury-update-bucks-star-leaves-loss-to-suns-on-crutches-and-in-walking-boot/amp/

[tbdog]

I haven't see a rumour that Middleton might be on the block after another Bucks disappointing playoff series. I think Brook Lopez is likely mandatory to stay because he just fits Giannis like a glove. Other than Vassell, I don't see any players the Bucks would like. Johnson/Jones/Collins are likely our other best players that a winning team might add as a deep bench piece, but not as a replacement for Middleton. Johnson is the only one who would start out of those 3. I just don't see it. Unless for example Bucks get into talks with the Nets for Bridges, but Net's want more draft capital. Would they trade Middleton to the Spurs for Collins, Johnson and some draft capital, then move Lopez and draft capital for Bridges? Then use their own draft capital to go for Caruso. Thereby restructure their team with switch defence schemes and play Giannis more at center?

The only other scenario is if Bucks tear it down. They would require Giannis to request a trade and a fire sale begins.

[Dejounte]

Finally, where does this idea that Sheppard isn't weak defensively come from? He's good at getting steals, but I'd argue he's harder to project in a good defensive scheme than Dillingham is. You can account for Dillingham being small if he's pesky ala Mills. You can't account nearly as much for a guy who has to gamble to have his defensive value and who isn't switchable at all. Sheppard seems like a guy who can feast in an elite defense where he has no actual responsibilities. That's not an impossible role to play in SA, but it's a luxury that works best after a very specific series of moves sets it up.

Sheppard’s defense doesn’t rely on gambling for steals. He’s actually good at staying in front of his man and not constantly being moved from his position. Why knock Sheppard for not being switchable (not a matter of fact, by the way) and not Dillingham? Weird that we can say that Dillingham can be effective “if he’s pesky ala Mills” when Reed does that already. I don’t even dislike Rob, but this paragraph reeks of ignorance tbh.

[JPB]

I don't like the idea of trying to specifically emulate teams like the Wolves or Thunder just because they look good now. Would it have been worth trying to emulate the Warriors or Mavs from two years ago?

Wemby is the most unique superstar the league has seen in a long time. There are many ways to build around him that will result in a contender because he will just be that good. Yes he will need to have talented supporting players with a good mix of shooting, playmaking, and defense, but there's a lot more than one way to skin that cat.

Right on point. Your model is Wemby, and the possibilites/opportunites you have (or not) to improve the teams around him.

And people overract too easily, too quickly, with in mind MIN's model included selling the farm and the secondary home for a defensively great but otherwise limited 40M/year player who has yet to be all star as a Wolve...

[Allan Rowe vs Wade]

Use the lotto to go for that special offensive player, anything else be damned. Focus on athleticism and defense everywhere else including FA

[Chinook]

Sheppard’s defense doesn’t rely on gambling for steals. He’s actually good at staying in front of his man and not constantly being moved from his position. Why knock Sheppard for not being switchable (not a matter of fact, by the way) and not Dillingham? Weird that we can say that Dillingham can be effective “if he’s pesky ala Mills” when Reed does that already. I don’t even dislike Rob, but this paragraph reeks of ignorance tbh.

No. It may reek of having a different opinion than yours, but Sheppard's ability to defend elite point-guards due to questionable agility has been noted in other scouting reports. I don't claim to be a scout myself. I am not dedicated enough to the process nor so self-important as to think my random eye-test evaluation should trump those of folks who do put in the work. Maybe scouts are assuming a lack of physical ability due to racism. That's legit an issue for white players coming over to the NBA. But from what I read or watched, Sheppard looks to be a single-position defender who may struggled to defend that one position if he has to guard the point of attack against real offensive talent. My assumption is he's probably closer to DeJounte Murray that way in that he isn't a one-on-one guy but can be part of a disruptive defense. Issue is DJM is longer and more able to hide on 1-3 to let his off-ball skills shine. Sheppard isn't likely to be able to guard anyone else.

I don't dislike Sheppard, but as I said, his mix of strengths and weaknesses seem harder to account for when building a defense. Assuming the reports about his lack of agility against NBA athletes bears out to be true, you have to account for that if you don't want to waste the good things he does on that end. As I said in the earlier post, modern defense doesn't work in the way it did 10 years ago. Teams are not going to exploit a weak defender on the perimeter up and down the court if that player is willing to put in the effort. It's just not efficient for the opponent to bend their gameplan so far. It's far more important for the Spurs to have a scheme that the guys learn and follow than it is that everyone individually is a big, talented defender. Sheppard can be a part of that, but so could Dillingham, Collier, Castle, etc. That Dillingham's defensive issues are so more apparent makes them easier to account for rather than Sheppard's who might fail in a number of ways depending on the matchup. Drafting Rob for his offense and building a defensive role for him is an easier play than drafting Reed for his defense and hoping things carry over.

[Dejounte]

No. It may reek of having a different opinion than yours, but Sheppard's ability to defend elite point-guards due to questionable agility has been noted in other scouting reports. I don't claim to be a scout myself. I am not dedicated enough to the process nor so self-important as to think my random eye-test evaluation should trump those of folks who do put in the work. Maybe scouts are assuming a lack of physical ability due to racism. That's legit an issue for white players coming over to the NBA. But from what I read or watched, Sheppard looks to be a single-position defender who may struggled to defend that one position if he has to guard the point of attack against real offensive talent. My assumption is he's probably closer to DeJounte Murray that way in that he isn't a one-on-one guy but can be part of a disruptive defense. Issue is DJM is longer and more able to hide on 1-3 to let his off-ball skills shine. Sheppard isn't likely to be able to guard anyone else.

I don't dislike Sheppard, but as I said, his mix of strengths and weaknesses seem harder to account for when building a defense. Assuming the reports about his lack of agility against NBA athletes bears out to be true, you have to account for that if you don't want to waste the good things he does on that end. As I said in the earlier post, modern defense doesn't work in the way it did 10 years ago. Teams are not going to exploit a weak defender on the perimeter up and down the court if that player is willing to put in the effort. It's just not efficient for the opponent to bend their gameplan so far. It's far more important for the Spurs to have a scheme that the guys learn and follow than it is that everyone individually is a big, talented defender. Sheppard can be a part of that, but so could Dillingham, Collier, Castle, etc. That Dillingham's defensive issues are so more apparent makes them easier to account for rather than Sheppard's who might fail in a number of ways depending on the matchup. Drafting Rob for his offense and building a defensive role for him is an easier play than drafting Reed for his defense and hoping things carry over.

No one’s drafting Reed for his defense. That’s absurd. Rob’s advantages over Reed on offense doesn’t neglect Reed’s strengths on offense and his appeal on that end for teams to draft him. That’s where your stance on this crumbles. You apply a lot of things to Rob on the basis that Reed won’t provide enough value on offense that you focus on Reed’s defense while making all the excuses for Rob on defense.

[JPB]

Dude's a rookie



It's pretty clear, I beliieve,for the way you've been talking about or mentioning Wemby for weeks that you don't to see any difference with him than any "rookie dude" but your entire argumentation is undermined by that.

No Vic isn't "a dude" but a generational player years ahead of the curve. Ignoring that is making a major mistake as far as team construction and timeline. You'll have at least top 10, maybe top 5, DPOTY and who knows MVP candidate, two way player next year on your team. As a FO, you have to build their strategy entirely on that reality, not losing time and focusing on develoing freaking Wesleys, Branhams, Sheppards or Dillys, (the later ones may not even be better than the former ones) Sochan at the point, or whatever... Its not about randos, it's about wemby.

Wth all due respect, no one godam cares about these guys. spurs have to start being competitive and make the PO next year already. We have Wemby in front of us, and that's him we should be loking at first , not prospects who won't be here or matter that much, which probably include this year rookies.. There's a big chance spurs won't find a starting PG in this draft filled with meh prospects, not one in a winning team anyway, or players who will move that much the needle.

This team is a freaking desert around Wemby, bottom of the league for 2 years, not winning more with one more year of development and adding Vic. The time to add real, proven talent is now, not fantasizing on the future or Dillingham, Sheppard or Castle, who suddenly marvels at this or that, to really change anything to that state of fact. None of them, nor the current youngsters are gonna make this team better n the near future, if they ever do (they probably won't). And just adding a couple random vets won't do it either...

Where is that team going? What's the plan? Trusting the development program while Pop seemed caught by surprise this year by how bad the players were. Or is the plan striking gold again in the draft these next 2 years and contend in 5 years?

I believe they've been, and some people are, way too optimistic and wishfully thnking in general, and trustful in this franchise front office/coach who have been faling for years now then just lucked into Wemby. Now what are they gonna do with that?,

[Mr. Body]

No. It may reek of having a different opinion than yours, but Sheppard's ability to defend elite point-guards due to questionable agility has been noted in other scouting reports. I don't claim to be a scout myself. I am not dedicated enough to the process nor so self-important as to think my random eye-test evaluation should trump those of folks who do put in the work. Maybe scouts are assuming a lack of physical ability due to racism. That's legit an issue for white players coming over to the NBA. But from what I read or watched, Sheppard looks to be a single-position defender who may struggled to defend that one position if he has to guard the point of attack against real offensive talent. My assumption is he's probably closer to DeJounte Murray that way in that he isn't a one-on-one guy but can be part of a disruptive defense. Issue is DJM is longer and more able to hide on 1-3 to let his off-ball skills shine. Sheppard isn't likely to be able to guard anyone else.

I don't dislike Sheppard, but as I said, his mix of strengths and weaknesses seem harder to account for when building a defense. Assuming the reports about his lack of agility against NBA athletes bears out to be true, you have to account for that if you don't want to waste the good things he does on that end. As I said in the earlier post, modern defense doesn't work in the way it did 10 years ago. Teams are not going to exploit a weak defender on the perimeter up and down the court if that player is willing to put in the effort. It's just not efficient for the opponent to bend their gameplan so far. It's far more important for the Spurs to have a scheme that the guys learn and follow than it is that everyone individually is a big, talented defender. Sheppard can be a part of that, but so could Dillingham, Collier, Castle, etc. That Dillingham's defensive issues are so more apparent makes them easier to account for rather than Sheppard's who might fail in a number of ways depending on the matchup. Drafting Rob for his offense and building a defensive role for him is an easier play than drafting Reed for his defense and hoping things carry over.

I actually agree with this generally. Sheppard's absurd defensive metrics are really weird to me. So much so that I keep thinking of them as anomalies. He definitely had great hands, got deflections and steals. In certain circumstances he's extremely good, blowing up transition and sometimes on help defense. But then he wasn't anything close to a shutdown defender at all. Not even close, and it's impossible to think of him as becoming one in the NBA. Not only did he get wrecked trying to guard bigger, athletic players (Knecht, Gohlke), he would die on screens, totally poop out. He's a defensive playmaker on occasion, but even in college I never saw him transforming a game beyond a few possessions.

No mistake, Dillingham is an issue, but at least he's quick. That's something to possibly mold. Hopefully.

[jjspur]

When talking about Reed Sheppard, I think about Austin Reaves, and how people on this board were salivating about trying to sign him for like 20 million last summer. It didn't happen last year but we could have a chance to draft a Reaves-like player this year. I'd go for it.

If he didn't just replace Trey, he could easily be his backup. Either way, it would improve the team by adding a quality player and dropping a second or third unit scrub. At least he can make a layup fairly easily.

[Pauleta14]

When talking about Reed Sheppard, I think about Austin Reaves, and how people on this board were salivating about trying to sign him for like 20 million last summer. It didn't happen last year but we could have a chance to draft a Reaves-like player this year. I'd go for it.

If he didn't just replace Trey, he could easily be his backup. Either way, it would improve the team by adding a quality player and dropping a second or third unit scrub. At least he can make a layup fairly easily.


Austin Reaves is 6'5 with a 6'6 wingspan

Sheppard is 6'3 with a 6'3 wingspan (at best bc datas from schools aren't reliable)

I like his shooting a lot but worry about his physical limitations even if he has shown a good defensive IQ

[Chinook]

No one’s drafting Reed for his defense. That’s absurd. Rob’s advantages over Reed on offense doesn’t neglect Reed’s strengths on offense and his appeal on that end for teams to draft him. That’s where your stance on this crumbles. You apply a lot of things to Rob on the basis that Reed won’t provide enough value on offense that you focus on Reed’s defense while making all the excuses for Rob on defense.

People are 100-percent drafting Reed for his defense. If he were just a small guard with a shot, he'd be much lower in the draft. He and Dillingham are very different players offensively. None of the scouting I've seen questions if Dillingham can be an NBA point guard. They question Sheppard's PG capacity constantly. The difference in that projection is why Sheppard's size and agility matter so much. Rob is in line to play the 1, so offensive fit isn't much of a question. If Reed is a small two, then his offensive fit is much more questionable. Like for example, I don't think most people would be okay with Jones/Sheppard/Vassell/Sochan/Wembanyama as the starting unit next year. But if Sheppard isn't a PG, then you can't just run him there or else you get the same issues the team had last year before Tre returned to the first unit. On the other hand, if you have Dillingham/Vassell/(wing)/Sochan Wembanyama, you can get more size on the court and maybe some defense.

If you believe Sheppard is a legit PG prospect, more power to you. I'm not predicting the future here. If the Spurs draft him, I want Reed to be the best he can be. However, it doesn't make sense to charge folks for being ignorant for deferring to scouting reports talking about the strong possibility that Sheppard has to play the two and the challenges that has for the team going forward. It's also not irrational to talk about how a PG with a bad defensive track record can be accounted for while a guy who's profile is riding so high because of his defense has a lot more uncertainty in what kind of value he can provide on that end against NBA competition.

[Ariel]

I'm with Mr. Body and Chinook on this. Sheppard is probably AT LEAST ok-ish to good pretty much all accross the board, with shooting and iq being off the charts. But I fear he might be oversold on account of being so smart and picky within his role.

Like Mr. Body said, it wasn't rare watching him get beat one on one on defense, and that isn't going to get better in the NBA with more space and much better athletes; he just seems to fall short on some key tools required to be a great defender at the next level (length, lateral speed), at the College level he makes up for it being deceptively athletic and so damn smart, but to me he doesn't project to be a difference maker on that end at the NBA level.

On offense, he's undisputably a sniper who will murder any defender who dares to go under a screen, but doesn't look quick enough with the ball in his hands or skilled enough of a ball handler to project as an elite shot creator (like IMO Dillingham does) and doesn't have the burst or craftiness to get to the rim with ease (that Collier, Topic or even Castle show, with Dillingham rating better here as well).

The risk with Sheppard is he tops at 6'1" secondary ball handler and stationary shooter with decent (but not outstanding) defense (better team defender than man to man defender), and that isn't a valuable enough archetype to warrant that high a pick. That's probably too rough a label, he has ample chance to be better than that and I have no doubts he is going to be a very good and productive NBA player for a long time, but the question to me is just how high of a ceiling does he have.

Among the bunch of top potential PG prospects (which also includes Dillingham, Topic, Collier, and to a lesser extent Castle and McCain) he might be the one with the least obvious path towards stardom, although it's very possible no one gets there and he might still end up the best of the lot.

All in all, at this point I'm more in the Dillingham camp, or maybe even Topic who has been growing on me as he's been falling elsewhere. I believe more in Topic as a playmaker that I did before, and given his FT% and the fact that he never needed to develop his 3 to be effective where he plays, he might not have focused on it thus having the highest potential for improvement there.

You could say I prefer more of a swing, but if you want to play it safer, then Sheppard is definitely a good choice.

[Chinook]

No Vic isn't "a dude" but a generational player years ahead of the curve.

Look, I know that you an individual and that you don't have some magical knowledge of every time I've had this exact same conversation with other folks. But come on. First, put away your straw man. No, Victor isn't just "a dude". No one said that. No one has to pretend like it was said. Second, Victor can be exceptional and have an accelerated timeline and all that and still be years away. Pop said that guys like Jokic and Jordan took seven or eight years to become true centerpieces. Believing the Spurs have three years of runway rather than eight IS acknowledging how special Wemby is. Pretending like last year was a failure because Wemby didn't play in the playoffs is not helpful to him or to the psyche's of the fans who push that idea.

This thread and others are us ruminating over the future of the team, which none of us know. You can choose to be pessimistic and vociferous about that pessimism if you wish. ST has had that element to its dialog for years. But not talking about that anxiety constantly isn't a sign of not being a Wemby fan or a "true Spurs fan" as one poster asserted previously. I've been extremely clear on how I want the team to proceed. So when I don't show distress at them being more conservative, it's not because I don't have a contradicting opinion. It's just that I'm not going to invest my mental well-being into how a billionaire and bunch of execs choose manage an entertainment product. Life's too short for that.

[Mr. Body]

Sheppard would be a great pick for Charlotte or Houston, where he can play off a bigger lead guard like LaMello or Amen.

[poopbox]

Bro, the point of the word "here" is to differentiate it from other elements. They aren't rigid on who their top options are. They've never been so under Pop. They went from Aldridge to DeRozan to Murray/White to Johnson to Vassell to Wemby in literally four years. Get on your soapbox about other things, but the Spurs do not mandate that certain players are top options year in and year out. That's basically the opposite of Pop's philosophy.

You know what else this did going from all those players? Losing more and more every year. And you know why they lost more and more every year as they transitioned from all of those players ever year? Cause Pop has an exceptionally rigid coaching style, offense, and basketball philosophy that when perfect players don't fit into it, Like Tony Timmy and Manu did, that no only can he not win, he will actually start losing at a rate that only 2 or 3 coaches can beat.

The fortunate thing for us, is that we actually did draft a guy who has "a team" and so some of the basketball decisions to be made in the future will be made solely to satisfy Victor and his team, Victor himself has a desire and passion to be great and as long as he is here will drag this franchise to greatness, and the media has such a desire to see him be great ( they fucking voted him ROY unanimously and they voted him runner up for DPOY while playing on one of the 5 worst teams in the league) that they are going to fire up the propaganda machine to force players to want to play with Victor (reports already saying Lil Dilli wants to play in San Antonio). As long as Pop and Brian dont just stand around and shit themselves, even they can't fuck this up. But they might stand around and shit themselves, so who knows.

Also you listed all those players like they a good thing:rollin . LMA never got out the second round until he got here. Demar team won a title as soon as he left and he got the bulls in purgatory. Keldon is a one trick pony coming off the bench now with his name in any trade rumor involving the spurs. Mentioning those players isn't a flex. Actually just reminds me how poor an eye we have had for talent the last several years until literally the most talent player in 25 years fell into our lap. And even after he did the basketball gods had to injure two other players on our team before we could put said player in the best position possible. Holy shit :rollin

[jjspur]

We hear some positives and some negatives about all the top draft picks, but what we should concentrate on are the intangibles. Sure two players can be 6 foot 5, but one will shoot just a bit better or one will play defense a bit better. However no player does it all.

What I look for is which player can help this team now, not two to three years from now when the team will probably have a totally different look. My example in this draft is Sheppard. Sure he's a tad smaller with a slight build but he has important skills like a good court sense, decent shooting and above average defense. A guard or two may be taken before him, but that might be a mistake. For example, Stef Curry and Rick Brunson, both small slight guys. Both had guards taken before them, but look where they are now, and how truly skilled they are now. Bet the spurs would have liked to have drafted either one of them in retrospect. I know Curry was drafted like 7th, but Brunson was a second rounder and Dallas just didn't want to pay him.

[TD 21]

Pop said that guys like Jokic and Jordan took seven or eight years to become true centerpieces.

Jordan was MVP caliber by his second season and the best player in the league by his third season, while Jokic was MVP caliber by his fourth season and the best player in the league by his sixth season.

They didn't win championships until later because their teams weren't good enough.

[CorrectCrusader]

Jordan was MVP caliber by his second season and the best player in the league by his third season, while Jokic was MVP caliber by his fourth season and the best player in the league by his sixth season.

They didn't win championships until later because their teams weren't good enough.

MJ was sixth in MVP voting averaging almost 29 ppg as a rookie. Allstar rookie too. He came into the league a top 10 player